A Pope John Paul II question

[Norbert]

He was the second pope to use the name John Paul. He was successor to Pope John Paul I who had a very brief term as Holy Father before he died. I'm thinking very brief in terms of maybe just a few months or the William Henry Harrison of Popes.

Why did JP2 take his prediseccors name? My thinking always was becuase the other poor guy had such a very short time that he wanted to carry the same name.

Anyone have the real reason?

[adwon]

1. He borrowed from 3 popes

John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul. He did it honor of the modernizing influence each had made. Even John Paul I had some effect by being the first to refuse the Papal Coronation.

[ananda]

3. modern?

"John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul. He did it honor of the modernizing influence each had made. Even John Paul I had some effect by being the first to refuse the Papal Coronation."

It was only a superficial modernizing. A true modern would have figured out a way to include women and gays, and to make sure that they had a strong ally in the pope.


Sue

[ScreamingMeemie]

6. ahem...if you read up on JP1 he was interested in rethinking and

restructuring the Church's stance on birth control. Think of what might have been. :hi:

[adwon]

7. ?

Allowing the Mass to celebrated in native languages rather than solely in Latin is not superficial. It goes to the heart of being an active participant in the celebration.

Ending the strict separation of Catholics and Protestants was not superficial either.

How to do that and 'include women and gays' is a bit beyond me. Those two changes alone have caused years of dissent and debate in the church. And, when it comes to the inclusion of gays, this wasn't even an issue for DEMOCRATS until the 1980s. Given that the last of the 3 popes he borrowed from died in 1978, I wonder just what they should have done.

If the inclusion of women means ordination, well no shit. That should have always been the case. But any institution can only handle so much change at one time.

[Mnemosyne]

2. Here's a bit for you, was curious myself.

I remember when this happened and the rumors. Maybe someone else knows more on this murder theory.

Pope John Paul I: August 26, 1978 - September 28, 1978 (33 days)
Pope John Paul I had one of the shortest reigns in the history of the papacy - and his death is a matter of some speculation among conspiracy theorists. Many believe that he was murdered in order to prevent him from learning or revealing embarrassing facts about the Church.

[EVDebs]

5. Something about the Vatican Bank and Bishop Marcinkus of

Chicago, according to David Yallop's excellent book "In God's Name". Lotsa good stuff about the mafia and our ambassadors (Graham A. Martin for starters) and what the mafia does best.

The stuff about P2 is just CIA/Knights of Malta baloney fabricated up to make the Freemasons look like the 'culprits'. In reality our CIA and guys like Michele Sindona teaming up with the Vatican and the US intelligence agencies...you don't need a mystical "P2" lodge to get into trouble. The 'Freemasons' weren't the ones looting the Vatican Bank for example. Guess who was ?

BTW, KOM practically founded the CIA. Wild Bill Donovan, James Jesus Angleton, Allen Dulles... Lots of guys who'd also like to make the Freemasons look bad for the Vatican team.

[Mnemosyne]

9. Thanks EVDebs, I'll have to check out "In God's Name".

I remember when it happened in 1978 but was having too much fun back then to give it much thought.

[arcos]

11. There's a really good book by David Yallop about John Paul I...

It is called In God's Name, and it explains all the reasons why John Paul I may have been poisoned.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0553248553/qid=1112524260/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-3303538-6308809?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

[Mnemosyne]

12. Thank you arcos, I am curious.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. An interesting link

http://www.tldm.org/news3/johnpaulI.htm

[Mnemosyne]

14. Thanks proud, great link.

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. You are most welcome

found that today when I remembered there was something fishy about JPI's death.

[ScreamingMeemie]

4. You have the real reason right there. That is the official statement as

I remember hearing it when I was 9. JP2 took the same name to honor JP1 and what would have been. :hi:

And He wanted to emphasize his desire to continue reforms within the Church. JP1 was actually reconsidering the Church's stance on birth control.

[UTUSN]

8. There Was a Split Between the J-XXXIII and Paul-VI Forces

with John being "Lib" and Paul being retrenchment. JP-1 was making a point of unifying, then was cut down before the point could take hold. JP-2 took up the point, within his own parameters.

[Norbert]

10. Thanks, everyone.

Now that you mention it I seem to remember JP1 wanting the combination of John XXIII and Paul VI but alas I probably forgotten that a long time ago.