In what maybe the last words spoken by Pope John Paul II last night there is some debate as to what he is refering too.
"I have looked for you. Now you have come to me. And I thank you."
Some people seem to think he is thanking the countless people he has touched over the years, who are now making the pilgrimage to the Vatican to pay final respects to the dying Pontiff.
Others are convinced he is having a conversation with God.
I was born and raised a Roman Catholic, and I have some differing views then what the Church teaches… But I try to follow it’s teachings as closely as possible.
I don’t believe that the Pope, Bishops, Cardnials, Preists, or Nuns talk with God. Don’t misunderstand me, they talk to God, and God answers in mysterious ways. I believe their life is a life long search for our Maker.
I think this statement is the dying words of a servant who has finally been answered by God and who is having his first true conversation with the Higher Power he has saught for so long.
Sorry, I didn’t realize yellow was so hard to see on this board. This was the quote.
“I have looked for you. Now you have come to me. And I thank you.”
That’s an interesting perspective on the Pope’s words. Some had interpreted them as a reference the the number of young people who had gathered outside. (He had been told.) Goodness, how he loved the young!
But I like your take on it. I even like the shining yellow unreadable letters which somehow seem perfect for when a Pope is speaking to God.
I’m a Protestant. The last time I saw Pope Jean Paul II on television was on Easter Sunday when he came to his window and tried to speak. I knew then that it might be the last that I saw of such a good man and I unexpectedly teared up.
May his own sense of joy help you through the coming days.
In what language was he speaking? Unlike English, most European languages distinguish between 2nd person singular and plural. That should help to clear things up.
From the moment the words were announced, commentators were interpreting it as his words to the throngs outside- especially the turnout by the young people.
According to the Onion, the Pope’s last words were “Pope Sled”.
Seriously, though, I do have a Pope related question. Recently someone told me that they admired the fact that the Pope chose not to go to the hospital, instead preferring to die in his own residence. Reading a couple of news stories, this indeed seems to be the case. However, is my friend correct in assuming that this means the Pope was giving up and stopping the fight to live? If so, I’d be surprised. That certainly isn’t the position of the Catholic Church as I know it.
Sure it is. Over fifty years ago Pope Pius XII noted that there is no compulsion to prolong life simply for the sake of prolonging life. With (at minimum) Parkinsons, respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, and kidney failure along with variously reported other problems such as (unreliably) reported heart failure in an 84 year old man, any efforts to keep him alive would have been for no purpose other than to keep the body functioning. The RCC allows people to die. (There are differences of opinion regarding the rules that the church does or should follow when making that determination–a point that can be better discussed in another thread–but the pope’s decision was very much consistent with Catholic teaching.)
I admit I’m no expert on the Church or it’s teachings or policy on the matter. It’s just very surprising to learn this, especially in wake of the Terri Shiavo ordeal. Most of those fighting for her to stay on the feeding tube were religious types, and they seemed to think that the Church and it’s teachings were on their side.
shrug
Wouldn’t be the first time that people were wrong about the intents of the Church, but it does surprise me.
No all “religious types” are Catholics. In fact, in America, odds are that the majority are not.
In addition, there are legitimate differences to be drawn between artificial aid for a person who is unable to breathe or process blood poisons on his own and someone whose body (though not brain) is working completely fine, and needs only to be fed.
The difference is that the first case requires external means to take care of what is otherwise a natural process…a physically healthy person wouldn’t need to be on dialysis or in an iron lung…so dialysis or an iron lung are “extraordinary means” of keeping someone alive. On the other hand, everyone needs to eat, so feeding someone, even if they need to use a feeding tube to do it, can’t be considered extraordinary means of keeping a person alive. Whatever her mental condition, Mrs. Schiavo was physically healthy.
Everyone needs to breathe too. What’s the difference between artificially pumping oxygen into a body or pumping water and nutrients into it? There’s nothing “natural” about a feding tube. A physically healthy person doesn’t need to be fed through a tube.
The difference is that, in the case of the artificial lungs, the body has broken down to the point where it can’t breathe on its own, but in the case of the feeding tube, the body hasn’t…the stomach can still digest the food. The only thing that’s been done to the food is that it’s been turned into liquid form, and pumped down there, because the person can’t chew or swallow.
By analogy, lets say you break your jaw. You’re unable, in that case, to feed yourself, and you have to be fed through a straw or a feeding tube. But it wouldn’t be ok for the hospital not to feed you, even though, while your jaw is broken, you can’t chew food. They still have a responsibility to provide food you’re able to eat to you, just like they are to all of their patients.
A person on a respirator can still process oxygen into his blood. He just can’t suck it into his lungs. That’s precisely analogous with not being able to swallow food. Resporators and feeding tubes are both artificial methods of pumping substances into the body that the body then processes on its own. I see no difference whatsoever.
Well, but if your jaw is wired shut, a straw is also an artificial method of getting substances into your body that it then processes on its own. You might not see the difference between a respirator and a feeding tube, but obviously the Catholic church does.
I think it’s pretty clear that he’s talking to God. After all the Pope has been surrounded by crowds for much of his tenure, so it doesn’t make sense that he would have looked for them. They were right there!
Depends what you mean by “talk with” vs. “talk to”. Part of prayer can be being quiet and listening and the revelations and clarity of thought could be termed “God talking to you”.
Not taking “heroic measures” to preserve life is not the same as knowing when it’s over, and thus choosing to forgo steps that would have only prolonged it, probably in pain and discomfort, for a short time. The Pope knew it was his time to move on up to the Deluxe Papal Apartment in the Sky and finally get his piece of the pie.