03 Apr 05
1 edit
Originally posted by pcaspianThis is a very healthy Christian attitude, one which I find rare.
Sad as it is, I see his death more as a celebration. A devout Christian finishing his last days on Earth.
Not that I am a catholic either, but he really did come across as the real deal.
pc
Within the context of Christian theology, death is not an ending,
but a transformation; through it, the devout go back to God.
Given that being with God is better than being here, one ought
to celebrate. Indeed, the vernacular of the Roman Rite no longer
has a 'dirge-like' feel to the funeral; the dramatic Requiems which
we know through music are long gone. It is a Mass in celebration
of the Life and Resurrection of the decedant.
When a person cries at a funeral, it is because they have had to
surrender someone that they cared about. It is a natural, but selfish
action. It is based on a corporeal understanding of life. Christianity
(and most other faiths) teaches a Spiritual understanding of life, that
death is merely a transfer of medium for earthly to heavenly, that life
has not ended, it has merely been changed. Their faith should remind
them of this and give them strength during the difficult times ahead.
Of course, you, PCaspian, have a certain detachment to the situation
that Ivanhoe does not have. You have not followed his words, teachings
and actions over the years with the intensity of a Roman Catholic like
Ivanhoe. This is a very tumultuous time for the Church and I'd like to
think that all of the theistic world, Christian and non-Christian alike,
would pray for a Spirit-filled Conclave and a wise new Pope. And, I'd
further hope that people would pray for all of the RCs, that their grieving
might be lessened by a comfort in their own faith's teaching.
That he was devout cannot be questioned. That he was misguided is,
has been, and will be the subject of debate for decades to come.
Nemesio
03 Apr 05
Originally posted by AThousandYoungHis corporeal 'self' certainly no longer exists. But immortality doesn't restrict itself
I don't think he is with God. I think he no longer exists. He is freed from pain (is this what you mean by 'redeemed'?), this is true, and from all pleasure.
to a soul-based construct. His teachings, his influence, his inspiration to those play
a role in the continuum of existance. As such, he does and will continue to exist (as
will us all), even when people have forgotten his name.
Nemesio
03 Apr 05
Originally posted by NemesioYou have just looked that up in the Bible sunshine. It is not big and it is not clever.
His corporeal 'self' certainly no longer exists. But immortality doesn't restrict itself
to a soul-based construct. His teachings, his influence, his inspiration to those play
a role in the continuum of existance. As such, he does and will continue to exist (as
will us all), even when people have forgotten his name.
Nemesio
03 Apr 05
Originally posted by JezuUfamTobieHow much pain did he inflict on the world. Can we have some balance in this debate please? No man or woman is perfect or all good. Even God's representative on earth. How many people has Karol Wojtyla condemed to death by AIDS for his ludicrous views on condom use?
He's with God now. Karol Wojtyla is redeemed from all this pain in the world
Who knows. Millions or tens of millions?
03 Apr 05
Originally posted by MaustrauserNot being a devout christian or Roman Catholic I don't know much about the Pope, but he did seem capable of uniting millions of people, and was instrumental in freeing Poland from communism. I'm kinda sad that he's gone, seemed such a sweet old man.
How much pain did he inflict on the world. Can we have some balance in this debate please? No man or woman is perfect or all good. Even God's representative on earth. How many people has Karol Wojtyla condemed to death by AIDS for his ludicrous views on condom use?
Who knows. Millions or tens of millions?
I tend to agree with you on his views on birth control, although he himself would probably have advocated complete abstinence from sex outside marriage, rather than unprotected sex. Even worse is the notion bing proposed by at least one bishop in South Africa, that condoms don't stop the AIDS virus from spreading...
03 Apr 05
2 edits
Originally posted by MaustrauserDidn't know he had a Woman's name like, thought he got Christened the Pope. pfffft.
How much pain did he inflict on the world. Can we have some balance in this debate please? No man or woman is perfect or all good. Even God's representative on earth. How many people has Karol Wojtyla condemed to death by AIDS for ...[text shortened]... views on condom use?
Who knows. Millions or tens of millions?
Ps. Homosexual club for him.
03 Apr 05
1 edit
Originally posted by MaustrauserThis is silly. Long before the Pope or the Church spoke of contraception it spoke out against adultery (the Sixth Commandment). It's ridiculous to blame the Pope for reiterating Church policy on condoms when people are blatantly rejecting other Church teachings (like fidelity) that go with it.
How much pain did he inflict on the world. Can we have some balance in this debate please? No man or woman is perfect or all good. Even God's representative on earth. How many people has Karol Wojtyla condemed to death by AIDS for ...[text shortened]... views on condom use?
Who knows. Millions or tens of millions?