:: Tears of the Moon ::

:: Sunday, April 03, 2005 ::

The Holy Father has passed away. The entire day we've been watching the telecast. I went to dinner with my friend to celebrate her birthday that evening. I kept on checking my phone for a text or a call from my family, because I knew they were watching TV. The entire time I was at work, I had been refreshing Google News for any update on his condition. I didn't want to be at work if he died.

Got home around two, turned on the TV and parked in front of it, while flipping through CNN, BBC and EWTN. I was so exhausted from lack of sleep from last week that I slept for a bit. I even dreamed of watching TV and seeing an announcement saying he had died. I was crying in my dream.

Dad was nudging me awake: the Pope had died. I texted some friends about it, and woke my mom up.

The world has lost an incredible man. You may not be Catholic (or maybe you are one, but are nominal, non-active), but this is nevertheless a great loss.

One thing I notice about the Western press (ie CNN, BBC, and American and British commentators) is that they know nothing about the stance of the Church. Again and again they comment and try to get a rise out of the Catholic priests and analysts they interview about the following topics:

condoms
gay priests
women priests
sexual freedom
reproductive choice
divorce

What is it with the West and sexual freedom? What, they can't survive if they can't have indiscriminate sex?

My dad, my sister and I talked about it at dinner last night: there's a huge abyss between the believer and the non-believer when it comes to what the Catholic Church believes in. The press is starting to speculate on which cardinal might make it: Africa has a huge delegation, Italy has a bit of a clout. America has 11 cardinals but they might not elect one because the US is a powerful global force.

History has always proven all 'predictions' wrong. Case in point: Karol Wojtyla was never in anyone's betting radar the last time there was a conclave.
"Maybe some cardinals can vote consistently even if they were a minority, to get their candidate elected-?" are some of the things that commentators are speculating upon.

There is an aspect in this that's entirely human. Men vote for the next man to become pope. But then the gravity of this can only be imagined: the next pope will be the successor of Peter, the 265th Vicar of Christ. One cannot be Catholic to the point of being Cardinal without that weighing heavily in his mind. Do you think he'll stay 'loyal' to a political stance - to some stupidly irrelevant political ideology - once he is called upon to choose a Shepherd to lead the global flock?

I don't think so.

But then this confidence comes from me, staunchly Catholic.

It's just incredibly annoying to hear the speculation and commentators from a very anti-religious media.

Another topic that the media is continuously bringing up (and in extension, they keep on asking Americans what they think about the Church) is the notion that the Church under John Paul II's leadership is strongly conservative and is 'out of touch' with modern times.

The Church will not bend in deference to 'modern times' if it means compromising her stance. That has always been the case. It's just that we have television and newspapers in this century. On the contrary, the Church has been beset with issues like divorce, abortion, homosexuality since her earliest days: early Church Fathers have written about it. The disciples wrote about it. The Old Testament writes about it. John Paul II merely underlined it and emphasized it for this gereration.

:: D said @ 3:53 PM [+] ::
...