Article on Pope

[Guest guest]

It could have been more nice if ISKCON communication office thought it more

carefully before sending a condolence letter for Pope John Paul II.

 

Though I am in disagreement with some of her points, but this article

Sandhya Jain, shed some lights.

 

 

 

John Paul: a loveless legacy

by Sandhya Jain

 

 

Seemingly, all roads led to Vatican City last week. Virtually all

political eminences of the Western world, as also national and spiritual

dignitaries of other countries and religious traditions, flocked to pay

respects to the Bishop of Rome, shepherd of the Roman Catholic Church, who

had one of the best attended funerals in world history. Through all the

solemn grandeur of the ceremony, however, one noted with admiration the

silent dissent of the People's Republic of China, which simply stayed at

home.

 

Unlike India's political elite, who seek international endorsement

through self-abasement and compromise, China's mandarins demand respect

through dogged assertion of national pride. Western media hype over the

funeral of John Paul II did not send Beijing scurrying to send a

representative for a photo-op with George Bush or Cardinal Ratzinger.

Instead, the atheist regime remembered how the Chinese people suffered at

the hands of the Catholic Church and how the late Pope bestowed sainthood

upon 120 "evil-doing sinners."

 

Bishop Fu Tieshan of the state-run Catholic Church said: "Some of those

canonized. perpetrated outrages such as raping and looting in China and

committed unforgivable crimes." (Associated Press, 1 October 2000). One

saint was Albericus Crescitelli, an Italian missionary who died in the

anti-Western, anti-Christian Boxer uprising. He "was notorious for taking

the 'right of the first night' of each bride under his diocese," according

to the State Administration of Religious Affairs.

 

India, however, crawled without being asked to bend. Perhaps out of

deference to the Italian-Roman Catholic origins of UPA chairperson Sonia

Gandhi, the Government followed Italy in declaring three days of State

mourning. And far from remembering the atrocities of the Goa Inquisition,

for which the Pope refused to apologize on his India visit, every luminary

with access to a centrimetre of newspaper space recorded a vacuous eulogy in

honour of the departed soul.

 

In Tamil Nadu, where the Kanchi Shankaracharya is being persecuted by a

vindictive regime trying to whip up anti-Brahmin votes for the Assembly

elections, the Directorate of Schools issued a Government Order directing

all schools to fly the Indian flag half-mast on Friday 8 April 2005 to mourn

the death of Pope John Paul II, and send a "compliance report." Some of us

wanted to ask why a secular government was issuing GOs to secular State

schools and private religious schools (not Government-aided) to mourn the

religious head of a foreign religious institution. But we thought it would

be uncultured and politically incorrect, so we remained silent.

 

Such Oriental niceties have been given short shrift in the White Western

world that Karol Wojtyla straddled with élan for nearly three decades.

Vatican's decision to let Cardinal Bernard Law lead a funeral Mass in Rome

has caused outrage in America, where Law had to quit as Boston Archbishop in

2002 for protecting paedophile priests (Reuters, 8 April 2005). The

Archdiocese is currently paying over $86 million as compensation to hundreds

of persons abused by priests. Law's rehabilitation as archpriest of the

Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome has therefore upset the devout.

 

Many Catholics found John Paul II's papacy disappointing because of his

painful indifference towards married priests, women who lost lives,

fertility and health in botched abortions, theologians dissatisfied with

many aspects of church doctrine, persons caring for AIDS victims, gay

Catholics longing for communion, victims of sexually abuse by priests, women

wishing to be priests, and so on. The Pope's high profile vis-à-vis the

Communist regimes of the erstwhile Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in no way

exonerates his "episodic and selective commitments to human rights

throughout the world," as Frances Kissling, president, Catholics for a Free

Choice, put it succinctly.

 

Kissling was anguished that while the Pope had no problem meeting persons

like Kurt Waldheim, he steadfastly refused to meet a single victim of

clerical sexual abuse. It bears noting that some the John Paul II's close

friends, notably Cardinal Hans Hermann Groer and Kurt Krenn, Bishop of St.

Poeltin, were forced out of office amidst allegations of sex scandals.

 

Regarding John Paul II's reputation as a crusader for human rights, well,

many Catholic women think he excluded half of humanity. A staunch advocate

of traditional Church policies on women, he refused to ordain women as

priests, and condemned contraception, condoms and abortion. He and his

conservative advisers worked hard to roll back reforms from the Second

Vatican Council (1962-1965), which gave women more say in the liturgy and

allowed altar girls to serve Mass. In fact, the Church excommunicated seven

women from Germany, Austria and the United States, who were ordained in

Austria in 2002.

 

This arch conservatism alienated both religious and lay women who felt

ignored, with the result that the US alone saw a sharp drop in nuns' orders,

from 179954 in 1965 to 73316 in 2003. In Ireland, church opposition to

divorce and contraception has led it to being perceived as irrelevant and

outdated. Critics especially carp at the Pope's opposition to the use of

condoms to combat AIDS in Africa, artificial birth control to curb rising

population in many countries, and abortion for Bosnian women (mostly

Muslims) who were raped by Serb soldiers.

 

Much has been made of his extensive travels across the world, and

his so-called inter-faith dialogues. Former Prime Minister Inder Gujral's

wife, Sheila, lauds him for visiting synagogues and mosques and meeting the

Dalai Lama (Indian Express, 9 April 2005). It is true that the Pope

apologized to the Jews for the Vatican's anti-Semitism and its aloofness

during Hitler's Final Solution. He also apologized to the Eastern Orthodox

Christians and the Muslims for papal advocacy of the Crusades and the forced

conversions and massacres in the Balkans during World War II.

 

But how sincere were these apologies? The Pope elevated to sainthood such

scum as Cardinal Stepinac of Croatia, who supported the Nazi puppet regime

of Ante Pavelic and endorsed the shameful treatment of Orthodox Christians

and Jews there. Similarly, Jose Maria Escriva de Balaguer, the sinister

founder of Opus Dei and close ally of the Spanish dictator, Gen. Franco, was

canonized. Many justly felt that such actions undid the benefits expected

from "dialogue."

 

Of course, cunning political spiritualist that he was, John Paul II was much

too canny to advocate respect for or dialogue with Hindu dharma, the native

and majority faith of this land. This is because he had identified India as

a recruiting ground to revive his dying church by converting the populace

and subjugating it to the diktat of Rome. Mrs. Gujral may not notice or

care, but those of us who love our Ishta Devatas see the hectoring of men

like Karol Kojtyla as an affront to our religious freedom.

 

 

Even Western Catholics are disturbed over the manner in which Karol

Wojtyla, from the time of his tenure as Archbishop of Krakow, aligned

completely with the financially powerful but secretive Opus Dei movement,

which has been linked to fascist regimes and is now active in the world of

finance, politics and journalism. He went so far as to give Opus Dei special

legal status, exempting the organization from supervision by local bishops,

as dissident German theologian Hans Küng points out. Clearly the Catholic

Church is in deep crisis. It remains to be seen if it can see the way

forward.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/17/2005 9:10:18 AM Eastern Standard Time,

Isvara.GGS (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

It could have been more nice if ISKCON communication office thought it more

carefully before sending a condolence letter for Pope John Paul II.

 

Though I am in disagreement with some of her points, but this article

Sandhya Jain, shed some lights.

Prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances, all glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

You sent your comment to the Prabhupada Disciples conference, so presumably

you expect response from that conference. Normaly I avoid this kind of

discussion, but comments (mostly negative ones) about IsKcon's official

reaction to

the Pope's death have been flying around lately. If those who disagree do not

speak out, the negative comments appear to have more support. Even at the risk

of criticism, one should not remain silent in such a situation.

 

Just as you do not agree with some of the points expressed by Sandhya Jain,

(I am assuming her criticizing the Pope for not supporting Catholic women who

want access to abortion is one of your disagreements) the Communication

Ministry probably does not support many of the former Pope's actions. A letter

of

condolence does not imply support, only condolence. IsKcon simply sent a letter

 

of condolence. Someone died, it was a tragic thing for many Catholics, not all,

 

but many and our organization expressed sympathy for their grief. Bas.....

there is no other implication here.

 

I personally was very proud of the fact that IsKcon is moving out of

marginalization and into the realm of thoughtful and compassionate as well as

professional actions. In my humble opinion, this shows a maturity of

understanding and

purpose. We had no need to criticize the Pope in this letter, only offer

condolences to those who are missing him and perhaps recognizing whatever

positive

role he played on the world stage. Every endeavor in the material world is

covered with fault, if we only find the faults, we are in the category of

flies.

I don't think that is the IsKcon agenda, I hope not anyway. yhs, Kanti dasi

[Guest guest]

>

>I personally was very proud of the fact that IsKcon is moving out of

>marginalization and into the realm of thoughtful and compassionate as well as

>professional actions. In my humble opinion, this shows a maturity of

>understanding and purpose. We had no need to criticize the Pope in this

>letter, only offer

>condolences to those who are missing him and perhaps recognizing whatever

>positive role he played on the world stage. Every endeavor in the

>material world is

>covered with fault, if we only find the faults, we are in the category of

>flies.

 

 

I originally had a response to the PR release, but then decided not to send

my email, but as this is going on a bit, I can't resist saying

something. (as I think to some extent it is a "PR" job, that being, you

say what you think people would like to hear), it maybe no harm is saying

something, but I think the article is a bit over the top, I do agree we

should be careful, no need to "criticize" the Pope on public forums, but we

should have a balanced view I think, yes he did some good, but we have to

remember he falls rather short (obviously) of the standards in the

Bhagavad-gita and Srimad Bhagavatam of a sadhu.

 

Srila Prabhupada was at times very scathing of the Pope and other "so

called" leaders (his words), while there are a few times he would give

"some" credit, I just wish the PR devotees would be a bit more real in

what they say, whereas the article appeared to me to be more or less

copying what many others had already said.

 

I would say have to think very carefully how we deal with such matters, how

would Srila Prabhupada have dealt with it, to me that is the first starting

point, Popes died when he was present didn't they? Plus I am cautious when

devotees say that if Srila Prabhupada was here, 30 years have passed, he

might have dealt with things differently, a bit risky I think?

 

 

 

Your servant

 

 

Ananta Purusottama das

[Guest guest]

Good point Mother Kanti

Ys TS

 

> In a message dated 4/17/2005 9:10:18 AM Eastern Standard Time,

> Isvara.GGS (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

> It could have been more nice if ISKCON communication office thought it

> more carefully before sending a condolence letter for Pope John Paul II.

>

> Though I am in disagreement with some of her points, but this article

> Sandhya Jain, shed some lights.

> Prabhu,

> Please accept my humble obeisances, all glories to Srila Prabhupada.

>

> You sent your comment to the Prabhupada Disciples conference, so

> presumably you expect response from that conference. Normaly I avoid this

> kind of discussion, but comments (mostly negative ones) about IsKcon's

> official reaction to

> the Pope's death have been flying around lately. If those who disagree do

> not speak out, the negative comments appear to have more support. Even at

> the risk of criticism, one should not remain silent in such a situation.

>

> Just as you do not agree with some of the points expressed by Sandhya

> Jain, (I am assuming her criticizing the Pope for not supporting Catholic

> women who want access to abortion is one of your disagreements) the

> Communication Ministry probably does not support many of the former Pope's

> actions. A letter of

> condolence does not imply support, only condolence. IsKcon simply sent a

> letter

>

> of condolence. Someone died, it was a tragic thing for many Catholics, not

> all,

>

> but many and our organization expressed sympathy for their grief. Bas.....

> there is no other implication here.

>

> I personally was very proud of the fact that IsKcon is moving out of

> marginalization and into the realm of thoughtful and compassionate as well

> as professional actions. In my humble opinion, this shows a maturity of

> understanding and

> purpose. We had no need to criticize the Pope in this letter, only offer

> condolences to those who are missing him and perhaps recognizing whatever

> positive

> role he played on the world stage. Every endeavor in the material world is

> covered with fault, if we only find the faults, we are in the category of

> flies.

> I don't think that is the IsKcon agenda, I hope not anyway. yhs, Kanti

> dasi

[Guest guest]

Dear Kanti Mataji,

PAMHO. AGTSP.

 

Thanks for your letter.

 

> Please accept my humble obeisances, all glories to Srila Prabhupada.

>

> You sent your comment to the Prabhupada Disciples conference, so

> presumably you expect response from that conference. Normaly I avoid this

> kind of discussion, but comments (mostly negative ones) about IsKcon's

> official reaction to

> the Pope's death have been flying around lately. If those who disagree do

> not speak out, the negative comments appear to have more support. Even at

> the risk of criticism, one should not remain silent in such a situation.

> Just as you do not agree with some of the points expressed by Sandhya

> Jain, (I am assuming her criticizing the Pope for not supporting Catholic

> women who want access to abortion is one of your disagreements) the

> Communication Ministry probably does not support many of the former Pope's

> actions. A letter of

> condolence does not imply support, only condolence. IsKcon simply sent a

> letter

>

> of condolence. Someone died, it was a tragic thing for many Catholics, not

> all,

>

> but many and our organization expressed sympathy for their grief. Bas.....

> there is no other implication here.

>

If ISKCON wants to start offer condolenses to all religious organisations

whose leaders passed away, then they should have started long time ago, or

is it just a matter of pick and choose? Recently few Gaudiya Vaisnava

acaryas passed away, who had large followings, I mean such personalities as

Srila Bhakti Pramoda Puri Maharaja, Srila Vaman Maharaja, and few others;

there was no official letter of condonlenses from ISKCON. Or is this letter

of condolenses from ISKCON just another attempt to adapt to mainstream

materialistic religions, which offers no real benefit to devotees.

 

> I personally was very proud of the fact that IsKcon is moving out of

> marginalization and into the realm of thoughtful and compassionate as well

> as professional actions. In my humble opinion, this shows a maturity of

> understanding and> purpose. We had no need to criticize the Pope in this

letter, only offer

> condolences to those who are missing him and perhaps recognizing whatever

> positive> role he played on the world stage. Every endeavor in the

material world is

> covered with fault, if we only find the faults, we are in the category of

> flies.

 

I don't know you how concluded that ISKCON has been in marginaization.

Marginalised by who? Srila Narottama dasa Thakura has sung "golokera prema

dhana harinama sankirtan", that the harinam sankirtan, which is the only

purpose of ISKCON's existence have descended from the spiritual world.

Infact ISKCON will be entering into being marginalised from true spiritual

organisations as it geared its agenda more towards appeasing mundane popular

sentiments. But the movement of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu is a very vibrant

and dynamic movement started by the Lord Himself more than five hundred

years, and will continue for the next ten thousands years. Srila Prabhupada

has said ISKCON is a branch of Lord Caitanya's tress, and it does need any

approval of any mundane religious organisations. Infact, the more the

intelligent people from various religious organisations understand the real

mission of Lord Caitanya as being propagated by the real ISKCON started by

Srila Prabhupada, the more they will heartily embrace it.

 

your servant,

 

Isvara dasa.

 

> I don't think that is the IsKcon agenda, I hope not anyway. yhs, Kanti

> dasi

[Guest guest]

>If ISKCON wants to start offer condolenses to all religious organisations

>whose leaders passed away, then they should have started long time ago, or

>is it just a matter of pick and choose? Recently few Gaudiya Vaisnava

>acaryas passed away, who had large followings, I mean such personalities as

>Srila Bhakti Pramoda Puri Maharaja, Srila Vaman Maharaja, and few others;

>there was no official letter of condonlenses from ISKCON. Or is this letter

>of condolenses from ISKCON just another attempt to adapt to mainstream

>materialistic religions, which offers no real benefit to devotees.

 

I agree with all the points here, well said, especially about the

vaisnavas, how could we miss that, nor do we observe any disappearance of

some of these great souls, of course what I am saying here could be a

controversy, or at least a digression from the topic at hand.

 

 

 

>I don't know you how concluded that ISKCON has been in marginaization.

>Marginalised by who? Srila Narottama dasa Thakura has sung "golokera prema

>dhana harinama sankirtan", that the harinam sankirtan, which is the only

>purpose of ISKCON's existence have descended from the spiritual world.

>Infact ISKCON will be entering into being marginalised from true spiritual

>organisations as it geared its agenda more towards appeasing mundane popular

>sentiments. But the movement of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu is a very vibrant

>and dynamic movement started by the Lord Himself more than five hundred

>years, and will continue for the next ten thousands years. Srila Prabhupada

>has said ISKCON is a branch of Lord Caitanya's tress, and it does need any

>approval of any mundane religious organisations. Infact, the more the

>intelligent people from various religious organisations understand the real

>mission of Lord Caitanya as being propagated by the real ISKCON started by

>Srila Prabhupada, the more they will heartily embrace it.

 

Great, stick to the real point, let's not compromise to suit the populous.

Some members of the public don't like Harinam, should we stop to please

them, and adopt some other method? The list could go on no doubt

 

 

 

 

Your servant

 

 

Ananta Purusottama das