For all those who consider John Paul II a hopeless reactionary

[hedgehog]

do you realize that many of the changes from Vatican II were enacted during his papacy? I was stunned myself when this was pointed out to me. I really wonder whether John Paul II changed direction after the assassination attempt or if he became less open to new ideas as he aged. Maybe he saw so many changes that he couldn't bring himself to go any further. Comments?

[Malva Zebrina]

1. well, I do have a lot to say about it

but will not succumb to this flame bait.

[hedgehog]

4. It's not meant to be flame bait.

A lot of people including myself consider John Paul II very conservative, but I remember when he was thought to be liberal. You can't imagine the excitement at a non-Italian Pope. He did preside over the church as the changes that came down from Vatican II were instituted. Was there a change in attitude? If so , what caused it?

[Malva Zebrina]

27. I have no idea

and the shift toward the right, it's causes and it's history, is a subject for more than one thread if anyone can stand it. However, historically, there is a lot of information on how the religion went over to the right or went over willingly to fascism. I would suspect there is something inherent in the religion that would encourage that, but I am not a university scholar well versed or well read in these matters. Nor am I a Jesuit. (only men get to be Jesuits) :-)

It is obvious that the Vatican is above all, mostly political as well as dictatorial. It certainly is not democratic. Democracy is something we cherish here in this country, and something that, according to the fascist Bush, he wants to bring to the entire world, but, that does not include the state of the Vatican of course. Imagine if we as a country, waged war on the Vatican because we want to bring democracy to it!

I think, imho, that what may have caused it was the quest for maintaining power,and as a result,we have seen the loss of sincere spirituality as a introspective, personal spiritual means of uplifting the human spirit in favor of, and the teaching of, a knee jerk reaction toward a more authoritarian policy in order to get the pew sitters in line and all thinking the same way. That is a quest for power over the people and an attempt to quash individual thinking. "Obedience" is stressed, but that is only for the little guy contributing his money in the Sunday basket.

The newest shift of right wing Catholics are now saying that "action" is preferable to introspection, meditation, examination and that means they, as a group of fattened, self satisfied men who wear the cloth, will take to organizing further the humiliation of women going into clinics to take care of their health concerns their family concerns, and their concerns for their own lives because they, as men who have never known or loved a woman sexually or have ever had a family to support,(presumably) have decided that picking on women and their rights to determine their life, is an easy target and a win for them.

I fear, from what we have seen in Florida, that it will go that way because of the fear of the loss of the human beings who choose to leave that totalitarianism, who are way ahead of the Vatican when it comes to morality and who, it is obvious are involved in a significant split with their own right leaning religion.

That authoritarian approach is what this Pope as a young man, emerged from and despised and spoke out against, only to see his religion, under his tutelage, shift more toward totalitarianism, the thing he despised. I am not one for magical thinking so I will not try to attribute any motives or excuses to him---he presided over this, much as Bush presides over totalitarianism and fascism.

Under this regime in the Vatican we have come to see homophobia that has caused great harm to the souls of human beings and we have seen unbridled misogeny, (although that is not new), as we observe fat old dusty robed men, well versed in the preachings of Paul and Augustine, who have, presumably, never ever known or loved a woman, nor known the natural love expressed between a man and woman sexually,telling women, in this modern day and age, their body belongs to them the hierophants like it was and has been always by the will of a god, who prance about in their traditional dress, confident they know it all and have enough authority to lord it over women.

Meanwhile the scandals of the church are abhorent lapses of morality.

It is a pity. They fear women.

My two cents

[UCLA Dem]

2. he is of another, many times less tolerant generation

my grandparents, though progressive in many ways are still raciest. I think if he was raised in this generation, he would have been more progressive.

If you think about what was going on in the world at the time of his birth in this country, segregation was still in full swing and it women didn't even consider working outside of the home.

Just my thoughts...

[hedgehog]

10. Considering that he was raised by a widowed father

and that I never heard of anyone who stood in for his mother like an aunt or family friend, it's amazing that he could relate to women at all.

[Dookus]

3. huh?

the second Vatican council ended 13 years before John Paul II became Pope.

[hedgehog]

That's what I always thought, but apparently the institutional

changes proceeded later. I do recall a lot of experimentation back then. Does anyone remember when the altars were turned around and the Mass put into English? When was the kiss of Peace added? How about parish councils?

[Dookus]

9. I know the

Vulgate mass, sharing of peace and priests facing the celebrants happened in the 60s. I was born in 61 and I can't remember a mass that wasn't like that.

I think you were misinformed.

[hedgehog]

11. I was born in 1954 and actually made it to Confirmation in Latin

That would have been in 1964. I was probably one of the last 10 year olds confirmed. (It's reserved for kids 16 or older in most places now).

[Dookus]

12. so yeah

'64 would be about right. I wouldn't remember a latin mass at 3 years old.

[hedgehog]

14. There were several stages of changing the Mass

First a direct translation and later a modification of the rite and later a newer translation if I remember properly. I can remember when every Mass ended with a reading of the last gospel and included a prayer to St. Michael to save Russia.

[Warren DeMontague]

5. Yes, total opposition to ALL forms of birth control is truly a progressive

point of view.

Especially on a planet with 10 Billion people, many of them dirt-poor and overcrowded.

Puh-leeez.

[Renew Deal]

8. This does nothing to advance the discussion.

The poster is discussing a specific topic. Nice hijack attempt.

[Warren DeMontague]

15. What are you, the thread police?

I happen to be one of those people who DOES consider the pope a, quote, "hopeless reactionary". Therefore my point is a relevant rebuttal to the primary assertion of the thread. Oh, I guess we're not allowed to challenge that, however.. only wax enthusiastic about the wonderful reforms of Vatican II, which as near as I can understand it meant that priests could molest little boys in English as opposed to Latin.

Give it a rest... Feh.

[Warpy]

20. He was only a hopeless reactionary to the 50% of the world that

happens to be female. He was actually quite progressive on male issues of economic fairness, distribution of wealth, and rejection of things like war and the death penalty.

Like all other human beings, he was a mixed bag.

[hedgehog]

21. I always enjoyed watching conservatives explain that that we

needn't listen to the Pope or Bishops on issues regarding war or economics, because they just didn't have the expertise to discuss those things.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. Same with the church.

The wing driving, say, social justice activities in Central America in the 80s did some brave and good work and they continue today. However, it's impossible for me to have a discussion of this particular Pope without referencing the fact that, yes, his steadfast black-and-white opposition to birth control has added untold problems to our planet's crap-ledger, and if we're going to talk about how wonderfully "progressive" the Church has been for the past several decades, I'm not sure how people can expect to get around the subject of widespread covering up and protecting of pedophile priests.

And an organization that takes half a millenium to 'pardon' someone like Galileo can be called many things, but I'm not sure "progressive" is one of them.

[Renew Deal]

28. Lets look at it closer

The poster asked:

do you realize that many of the changes from Vatican II were enacted during his papacy? You didn't answer that.

Maybe he saw so many changes that he couldn't bring himself to go any further. Comments? "Yes, total opposition to ALL forms of birth control is truly a progressive point of view."

How that logically answers the question asked, I don't know. You can challenge anything you want and I can challenge anything I want. That's a beutiful thing.

BTW, I am not a Catholic and have little direct interest in this.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Good. I'm not a Catholic and have NO direct interest in this.

Although I do know people whose lives were destroyed because they were abused by priests, and as an inhabitant of the Planet Earth my life and the potential lives of my descendents are certainly indirectly impacted by the wrong-headed birth control policies of one of the largest religions on Earth.

And that's not even touching on their direct, current involvement in American politics.

You want to sit here and dissect Vatican II, be my guest. I'm done with this. Have fun! :hi:

[mcscajun]

6. I think you may have misheard...

...he actually rolled the Church back from many of the Vatican II positions.

The Catholic Church is far more conservative now than when Pope John XXII was running the show.

[hedgehog]

13. John XXII opened the windows, but he died before the Council 's

2nd session. Paul VI led the second council and started the changes, but he blew it by going against the advice of his own panel of experts ( theologians, doctors and married people) by hardening a ban on birth control.

[mcscajun]

16. and JP II did nothing to reverse the hardening trend; on the contrary,

he increased it.

[TheModernTerrorist]

7. It is my personal opinion

that Pope John Paul II, despite the shortcomings that everyone seems to point out in this forum, has done a wonderful job. He is THE POPE, so when it comes to issues such as abortion, gay rights, etc etc, he has a duty to speak about these things from the viewpoint of the church. Let me remind everyone that this is THE Catholic Church we're talking about... Now, to rail against him for his obvious shortcomings in those areas whilst ignoring all the humanitarian things he HAS been able to do... one person earlier bio'ed him as doing more to halt communism than any one person had ever done, not to mention many of the other humanitarian areas he has also helped with... well I dont' think it's fair to him. Yes, there were areas that I as a progressive, liberal thinker wish he would've stepped up to the plate and said "we as the Catholic Church should NOT be doing this..." but I can understand why he may not have. Yes, there have been numerous missed opportunities to make the world a better place (ie- Rwanda, Darfur, etc), but he is ONE MAN, and granted he weilds great power, he can only do so much, before people try to kill him, that is.
Personally, as a non-Christian, I think he did a fine job. I'm willing to bet that as he aged, it became harder to put up a fight, and he may have just fallen in step with the more commonly-held Catholic beliefs of the day.

[hedgehog]

18. It took a while, but at least he allowed female altar servers

as well as lay readers. There seems to have been a recent threat to these changes. did the drive to turn back the clock come from John Paul or did people in the bureaucracy take advantage of a weakening old man?

[TheModernTerrorist]

30. I'm willing to bet

it was the bureaucracy, but then again I'm not Catholic.

[wickywom]

17. As I see it..he has done what was necessary for his time.

The church is facing a choice now, regress or progress...
Only the latter will keep the catholic church alive...without a reformation... unless history is wrong.

[hedgehog]

19. Absolutely , and the suituation varies wildly from diocese to

diocese and parish to parish. Even so, the people teaching kids the Faith week after week are there because of Vatican II. I don't see how we can go back. As I noted above, I'm probably one of the youngest Catholics with any memeory of the old days, and I'm 51 years old. That's a long time

[Eloriel]

23. You REALLY want to hear my comments?

Until women can be priests and using birth control isn't some sort of sin, whoever sits in that chair or any other aligned with the Church is, IMO, a hopeless reactionary. Or worse.

[hedgehog]

24. Well, is there such a thing as a semi-hopeless reactionary?

I think you'd find yourself agreeing with John Paul on some issues, war and peace among them.

[Dookus]

25. What did he do about war?

Did he have his bishops threaten to excommunicate politicians who supported it? Did he have his priests speak out against it from the pulpit, and urge the congregation to vote only for anti-war candidates?

No he did not.

If the church spent one tenth the energy on the war as it does on abortion, they may well have stopped it.

[hedgehog]

26. Good point

too many bishops worry about disturbing the faithful. on the other hand, the press has never been too excited about covering those comments because they don't fit conventional wisdom.

[Scout]

29. to be honest

I don't consider him much at all.

And I'm about of sick of pope threads as I am of Schiavo threads.

I'd ignore 'em all, but I still have to go through the forums, read the thread titles, click on 'em to ignore....