There’s only one way we’re going to unravel this mystery:
Consult the Great Queen Spider!
Well, let’s look at each one of these statements. JPII “overshadowed” JPI for a few reasons. First, JPI was pope a grand total of one month before his death…not much time to make a strong impression on the world. Second, JPII was from Poland (a then Soviet-Communist controlled country), an incredible departure from the previous how-many popes who had been nothing but Italian (including JPI). This made an extremely strong impression on people of the Catholic Church and the whole world. Third, JPII appeared to be a pope of the people, just like JPI had been throughout his priesthood. JPII looked like a good bet…he even took his predecessor’s name out of respect. What a guy!
tomndebb , you also stated that the death of JPI wasn’t that strange as to foster conspiracy theories. If Yallop’s book “In God’s Name” can be given any credence, your statement is totally inaccurate. JPI was a man who exercised regularly and watched his diet. He was a very fit man by all accounts. Apparently he had undergone a thorough physical several days before his death and got a complete bill of health. How interesting that this exceptionally healthy man suddenly drops dead in his sleep right after this. And 66 is hardly old, especially a man who was in such fine shape.
JPI probably was not ready for the Papacy. But he was a Cardinal and this put him in a position to potentially assume the Papacy. He was a very humble man, a priest of his people who never aspired to church politics. However, his mentors encouraged him to become involved in church politics because he worked so closely with the poor of Italy. He knew their life problems, and was an especially strong advocate of birth control…in direct opposition to the Catholic Church’s official stance. He also saw a lot of corruption in the Vatican Bank and wanted to bring respectibility back to it, according to Yallop’s research. Both of these “projects” JPI put onto his agenda within a few short weeks of assuming the Papacy. Do you think these viewpoints might have threatened some older Italian cardinals who surrounded him, acted as his advisors and probably have the maintenance of the status quo of the Church as their primary interest? Hmmmm…
According to Yallop’s research, after JPI’s death, the Vatican refused to permit an autopsy, stating that it was official Vatican policy to never allow an autopsy on a deceased Pope. (Strange, but there supposedly had been an autopsy on Pius XII.) Gee, if an extremely healthy YOUNG (by typical Vatican standards) Pope had suddenly croaked for no apparent reason, I would think would have been it in the Vatican’s best interest to order an autopsy. But it never happened.
People forget that the Vatican is primarily a political organization. And a wealthy, powerful one at that. It could reasonably order done whatever it decided was in “its” best interest, claiming it would have been in the “Church’s” or the “world’s” best interest.
Any evidence for this, owlstretchingtime ? I have never heard this from any source. All I have read contradicts this completely.
It’s been quite some time since I read “A Thief in the Night,” but Cornwall seemed to believe that the problems was not so much malevolence in the Church as incompetence.
More specifically, if you rise to a high position in a major bureaucracy, it often has VERY little to do with how capable or competent you are, and MUCH to do with how well-connected you are, and how good you are at schmoozing the higher-ups.
That’s as true at the Vatican as anywhere else, and it’s as true of doctors as it is of clergymen.
That is, if you rise to the position of chief physician at the Vatican (or the Pentagon, or the White House, or the Kremlin, or ANY other major institution), you’re more likely to be a loyal hack than a brilliant doctor! As a result, many of the world’s most prominent, important people (people you’d THINK would have the best possible medical care) are often atended to by incompetent quacks.
Cornwall indicated that John Paul I was in poor health, but SHOULD have survived had he been treated by competent doctors. Instead, Cornwall, believed, he was done in by bad doctors.
Afraid not, but I posted it in good faith. I got this from an English broadsheet some years after JPI’s death.
I cant find any reference to it.
Afraid not, but I posted it in good faith. I got this from an English broadsheet some years after JPI’s death.
I cant find any reference to it.
TheLadyLion, I have not commented on the likelihood of a conspiracy. The OP asked why Albino Luciano’s death did not trigger more conspircy theories. I suspect that the reasons I gave have had a serious effect on suppressing such conspiracies. (We can’t even get everyone in this thread to agree whether he was or was not in good health at the time of his death (and even professional athletes are reported to have died of heart attacks shortly after physicals in which they were given a “clean bill of health”). )
I do not suggest that there could have been no foul play (or, as Cornwall suggested, incompetence). I have only noted the reason why conspiracies are not more popular regarding the death.
While the OP noted that In God’s Name was first published in 1984, your link to a BBC story makes clear that the collapse of the Banco Ambrosiano and the death of Calvi took place in 1982. And, even in Britain, these stories (and their P2 angle) had been major stories at the time. Hindsight is always the best precondition for prescience.