I saw one interview with some priest who said how this Pope had a truly amazing way of connecting with people. One time, the Pope walked into a crowded room, looked at this one priest, and gave a slight nod.
That’s it? He looked at you? Wow! Amazing!
Yeah, the stories are wearing thin.
Heck, even NPR is turning into National Papal Radio. Between this and the pledge breaks…
Oh, how true this is.
My biggest problem is, of course, in the end he’s just a person. Like any of us. I don’t believe in his religion, so of course I don’t believe he’s God’s emissary or anything like that.
-Anaamika, hoping for the day we revere our scientists, mathemeticians, and great thinkers in higher esteem than religious leaders. Oh, and great spellers, too. :rolleyes: 
I toddled down to my local convenience store yesterday to buy a Sunday paper to read on the front porch–gorgeous day here yesterday.
They had an ENTIRE section on the Pope. No, I didn’t read it–because the rest of the paper was all about him, too. Well, not the want ads and the automotive sections, but I don’t read those anyway! Enough!
Irked me no end. Yes, he is dead. Yes, he was reactionary and contrary as hell about social issues. Yes, he attempted to reverse 400 years of Church teachings re: end of life issues (the parts about you don’t have to obstruct nature with artificial means–there is no moral call to do so etc). Yes, I am (as a non-Catholic) hoping for someone who might actually be progessive and harken back to Vatican II. I don’t need to know the weather at Vatican City right now; I don’t need to know that 1 billion Catholics are in deep mourning. Given that the American Catholic church is deeply at odds with the Vatican–I think there may be some Catholics out there saying–hope the next one is more open to dialogue.
but all we get is keening and platitudes.
Respect your Pope, by all means. But he was the Bishop of Rome, not a saint. And don’t expect the rest of the world to stop in its tracks and mourn with you. A show of respect, yes–but you’ve had that. On with life.
Oh-and my local Catholic church had their American flag at half mast! :eek:
WTH?
did we do that for Yasser Arafat? How about when Ariel Sharon bites the big one?
Oy. :rolleyes:
Yeah, time to watch Zatoichi all over again. 
You’d have to watch the Hitler, er…, History Channel for that. That is if you can get past all their gross inconsistencies, hypocrasies, and outright errors.
I would pay to see this.
On FoxNews this morning some female reporter I’ve never seen who has probably done the Rome Newsbeat for them for years, languishing in obscurity, finally got The Big Story Of Her Career and interviews two young 20 something priests who instantly, and I mean this sincerely & without malice, set off my Gaydar to the Red Zone. If they weren’t destined for the preisthood, looked like they’d be chorus boys.
Really? So they were at sea, then, were they? :smack:
From many sources.
A large part of the hoopla I think is due simply to the length of the Pope’s reign, and once they get back to a Pope dying every 10 years or so, we won’t see this kind of mania by the news organizations.
The news coverage has certainly been historic. I watched CBS Channel 2 in Chicago newscast after the Michigan State-North Carolina basketball game last Saturday night.
IIRC-They did an hour-long local news broadcast. There was about 15 minutes of Pope glurge then about 10 minutes of coverage of the Fightin’ Illini in the Final Four live from St Louis. There was a brief weather report, and a brief sports report.
Then they came back with another 5 minutes of Illini Final Four coverage, and closed with about 10 minutes of all the Pope, all the time.
Earlier I said historic because there was not a single report of some senseless gangland-related shooting, horrible 5-car pileup on the Dan Ryan, or child kidnapping. The media is probably overcovering the Pope’s death, NPR got a letter from a listener who said they should change the name of the afternoon program to One Thing Considered. It was refreshing to see at least some of the media getting away from the If it bleeds, it leads mentality.
Hey, there might have been an ad for an opening for the Bishop of Rome and some guys looking to sell a used Popemobile.
I just wish the guy would stop spamming my newsgroup. The Pope has nothing to do with Mecha.
Imagine the coverage if the Pope had died when his car crashed into the Michigan State-North Carolina basketball game after his tires were shot out by gangsters while he was kidnapping David Letterman’s baby!
“Red China,” Milroyj? What decade are you living in?
As far as men in dresses go, the late JPII didn’t have as much style as RuPaul or age as well as Dame Edna.
. . . right after he raised Terri Schaivo from the Dead!
There’s an excellent column by Terry Eagleton in today’s Guardian which pulls no punches.
It ends:
“The greatest crime of his papacy, however, was neither his part in this cover up nor his neanderthal attitude to women. It was the grotesque irony by which the Vatican condemned - as a “culture of death” - condoms, which might have saved countless Catholics in the developing world from an agonising Aids death. The Pope goes to his eternal reward with those deaths on his hands. He was one of the greatest disasters for the Christian church since Charles Darwin.”
There was a poll here.
19% of the Dutch felt something when the pope died.
81% couldn’t care less. :o
Actually, the fact that Terry Eagleton seriously tries to say that Darwin was a disaster for the Christian church puts him firmly in the camp of “I don’t know what I’m talking about”. He may even be right about the Pope. But he still doesn’t know what he’s talking about. The Christian church (whatever comprises that entity in his mind) seems to have weathered Darwin quite well, except for a very small minority.
But you have to admit they did it by moving the creation story in Genesis from the LITERAL file over to the METAPHORICAL category. But your point is correct–science does not and cannot contradict religion because religion isn’t falsifiable. Sure, we can show thqt the specific claims of religion don’t stand up (e.g., no Flood), but science doesn’t prove anything. All it can do is test hypotheses to come up with coherent theories that fit the facts.
“Admit” has that tinge of iniquity to it, like I’m trying to get something past the readers. I’ll “acknowledge” that that’s how they did it. On the other hand, my point wasn’t about how they did it so much as it was about how Eagleton seems to be trying to conflate “Young-Earth Creationists” with “the Christian church”, and how that isn’t even close to correct, thus revealing the deficiencies in his choice of examples to compare what he feels JPII’s legacy to the church is.
And, um, if anyone would care to take a crack at translating the last half of my last sentence there into something resembling actual English grammar, you have my blessing…