Talk:Funeral of Pope John Paul II/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Is the Pope already a Saint?

Santo Subito!

Do I think he could / probably would become a Saint? - Yes

Is he already officially a Saint already? - No (How could he? Need a Pope to make someone a Saint, we haven't gotten a new Pope yet.)

-- KTC 13:01, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Apart from which, officially the Church will not start the canonisation process within 5 years of the death of the person concerned (although JP II himself bent the rules in the case of Mother Theresa), and everything the candidate ever wrote has to be read to check that he's theologically orthodox, and after that, of course, is the need to have two officially accepted miracles. -- Arwel 13:43, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Pope can and did make a rule to allow the Pope to waive the rule if he so wish. As was the case with Mother Theresa, JPII indeed did waive the rule. So either way, a Pope is needed first. And of course, a Pope could just make someone a Saint without going through all that. He is the ultimate decision maker. Not that it's going to happen tho. -- KTC 01:31, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Events So Far

Can someone add accurate information about the private lying in state, the processional to St. Peter's, public lying in state (times, etc).

Pope John Paul II has been buried in St Peter's Basilica. His funeral in Rome, which was watched by many thousands of people was attended also by 200 world leaders.

An enormous crowd of pilgrims packed St Peter's Square and surrounding streets.

Millions of people witnessed the Mass on TV, some on public screens in cities around the world.

After the requiem, the coffin was returned to the basilica and its final resting place in the crypt.

Senior clerics and friends of the Pope were in the crypt for the private interment.

Heads of State

Is someone just naming the heads of state that are currently in office? There are no sources listed or confirmation that these people are attending that I have seen.

It should be noted that the world leaders listed will only come if the Vatican sends them an invitiation to come. Said list has been amended with a number of American heads of state expected to come.

• I've rephrased the comments at the head of the list of attendees to indicate the tentative nature of the list. IceKarma 11:06, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)

It will be interesting if many/all of these people show up at the same time... GWB and Fidel Castro? Maybe they can trade numbers or something... --Chiacomo 13:53, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pallbearers to St. Peter's

Extra photograph for later placement:Millions of people lined up to see the body of Pope John Paul II lying in state at St. Peter's Basilica.

Can someone expand this page to discuss the procession carrying the Pope's remains from the Apostolic Palace to St. Peter's Basilica? I would also be interested to know who the pallbearers were.

• The pall bearers were ushers who had served the Holy Father during his time at the Vatican. Don't know their names. They were dressed in their "uniforms"... Monks on both sides of the bier sang the Kyrie Eleison (Lord have mercy) and carried lit tapers as the procession passed across the square... Had I more details, I'd add them. Sorry. --Chiacomo 03:31, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• The pallbearer's are officially known as "Papal Gentlemen". They are members of families that have long served the Pope (for centuries). Like the user said above, they are essentially ushers, or butlers, for the Pope. For example, if the Pope has visitors, they will escort the visitor, tell the visitor where to sit/what to do, etc. As far as I know, these same Gentlemen that carried John Paul the Great's body will serve the next Pope. I have no information about their names. If someone wants to add this "generic" information please do so.

• Interestingly enough, many of the Papal Gentlemen comes from Papal families themselves. Some have as many as 4 pontiffs in their family trees (not to mention saints). Their service to the Holy Father is steeped in history and their family names pop up frequently in the histories of Rome and it's ruling families... Very interesting stuff. Perhaps they deserve an article of their own -- I'll try to gather more information. --Chiacomo 14:45, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• These are the same folks who were at one time "Secret Chamberlains of the Cape and Sword", "Privy Chamberlains of the Cape and Sword", etc. Reforms in 1968 made then "Gentlemen of His Holiness". There were at one time as many as 600 such "chamberlains" -- some having actual jobs, but most apparently serving the ceremonial functions we've seen of late in certain processions and church festivals.

• I might be confused, but doesn't the Pope's funeral, scheduled for Friday, have to take place before there will be pallbearers' names to record? IceKarma 04:09, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)

• I think we're speaking of the gentlemen who carried the body of the Pope across the square today rather than the actual bearers of the body during the funeral. Properly, I didn't see a "pall" as I understand it as a burial cloth or wrapping or as we generally understand it here in the southern US as a floral arrangment. It is interesting too when we consider the relationship to the pallium worn by the Pope and metropolitan archbishops. --Chiacomo 04:36, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• In Catholicism, the burial pall is a particular form of the pallium that archbishops wear and one of the linens that covers a chalice in the celebration of the Eucharist. The significance and symbolism is intertwined. While many of us in Western cultures see pallbearers as only limited to the carrying of an actual casket covered in a burial pall, the Papal Gentlemen did in fact serve as "pallbearers" during the transfer of the apostolic person from the palace to the basilica. --Gerald Farinas 17:12, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Factual Accuracy

What is being disputed as factually inaccurate? I presume the list of attendees is disputed -- isn't the section on attendees titled "Prominent Likely Attendees"? I'm guessing this list will be revised as a more accurate list is available, perhaps as these individuals are actually invited and accept the invitation. As it stands, the list is useful as a reference of who will likely be there. --Chiacomo 04:52, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• I can't find anything, so after incorporating comments about how the Vatican's official list of invitees has not been made public and that the list is intended as leaders expected to be invited, rather than confirmed, I've removed the disputed tag. IceKarma 11:05, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)

• • One problem I found... the article states that JPII's body was placed inside of three caskets *before* the funeral mass but this isn't true. According to news reports, the body was placed inside a simple, cypress casket before the mass. Then, after the mass, but before burial, the cypress casket was placed within a zinc casket which was then placed inside another woodent (possibly oak) casket. The three caskets were then interred into the ground beneath St. Peter's Basilica. This was reported on CNN during the live broadcast as well as on NPR and a local radio station I heard. Can we change this? Gurp13 14:57, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of dignitaries

Considering the extreme length of the list of dignitaries, it has been moved to a separate article entitled List of dignitaries at the funeral of Pope John Paul II. This frees up space for the expected lengthening of the main article, allowing for faster download of text and photos on older computers. --Gerald Farinas 15:17, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Preparation

I heard a few moments ago (on CNN) that the Pope's body has not yet been embalmed (though I read in other online news articles that it had been embalmed "lightly")... Other sources say the Vatican said the body had been "prepared" without elaborating. Without being macbre or disrespectful, how can the body lie for 6 days in the open without some sort of preparation?--Chiacomo 03:35, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The "preparation" would deal with the situation. It wouldn't be a complete embalment, perhaps, but it would be more than enough to prevent premature decomposition.

I was talking with some of my theology professors about this. There is a theory that they deliberately chose not to do a full embalming hoping that the possibility of a lack of smell and little decomposition could qualify as a miracle for future consideration in beatification and canonization proceedings for sainthood.

ABC News, and I'm guessing other firms too, called the embalming firms throughout Rome to investigate what embalming could have been done by any of them. Apparently, the family that did the embalming of all the previous popes in the past century said that the Vatican told them that they weren't needed and explained their decision to them.

Also, it is not entirely inconceivable that a body could go through a period of several days without a whole lot of decomposition and smell. It can be done and it has happened. We also have to consider air conditioning and the fact that incense is heavily used in most Roman Catholic rites, as a symbol of prayers rising to heaven. This is especially true at St. Peter's Basilica. --Gerald Farinas 13:17, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I may well be wrong, but I seem to reacall hearing somewhere (probably on EWTN or the History Channel) that incorruptibility didn't count as a miracle for canonization. This site says that the Church is "reluctant" to accept incorruptibilty as a miracle. By the by, it also says that the body of John XXIII was sprayed with some kind of chemicals prior to being displayed to the public. Check it out. :) --Jen Moakler 04:48, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nomenclature for Martinez Somalo

Cardinal Martinez Somalo is referred to as "Cardinal Somalo" almost throughout;his family name proper is "Martinez",Somalo is the matronymic added in Spanish practice.--Louis E./le@put.com/12.144.5.2 14:17, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I fixed that for you. Thanks for the heads up! --Gerald Farinas 14:54, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Terrorism

Perhaps the phrase, "infamous Air Force One" would be better stated "easily recognizable" or even "famous". Is Air Force One really "infamous"? --68.213.57.224 16:13, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry. Problem fixed. --Gerald Farinas 16:31, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Refinements

Death Certificate

First Lady Laura Bush, President George W. Bush, Former Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton offered the largest United States delegation to any memorial service outside its borders.

It appears that the death certificate referenced (and linked) to in the article was not issued by Cardinal Martínez Somalo but rather Dr. Renato Buzzonetti. I'm guessing, based on what I've read, that there are probably two death certificates -- one issued by the public health authority and one issued by the church. I'm not sure, of course. Anyone have any clues on this? Perhaps the cardinal only officially promulgated the death certificate (in which case there would be only one). --Chiacomo 19:03, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dr. Renato Buzzonetti works for the camerlengo. The camerlengo ceremonially issues or authorizes the death certificate as the governing authority of the sancte sede, as is tradition, but signed by the head physician of the Vatican City State. Think of it as the same way an attorney general's or secretary of state's name/signature as the authorizing agent is listed on a state i.d. or driver's license issued in the United States. Or the way the head of the state department of health's signature is present on a birth certificate, but signed by a physician that actually checked the baby's health. --Gerald Farinas 19:22, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Excellent! I knew there was an answer... I'm generally very impressed with how well this whole article has come together. So much information, very well organized, etc... I've never watched an article develop this closely. I can only hope all articles evolve as smoothly as this one has. --Chiacomo 19:28, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

white silk veil

Extra photograph for later placement:Crowds line up to see Pope John Paul II lying in state. An estimated four million people are expected to flock to Vatican City in pilgrimage for the Mass of Requiem and interment.

Does someone know what the white silk veil placed over John Pauls face stands for? 85.124.45.91 16:10, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

He is unembalmed - it is likely to do with his biological decay. --Oldak Quill 23:51, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's not precisely true to say he is unembalmed. None of his organs were removed. I'm not sure if embalming fluid was administered. At very least, his skin was treated for the viewing. A body just can't lie in the open for several says without some treatment. The white silk veil is a traditional symbolic gesture that shows that from now on JPII will only be seeing the face of god, from what I understand. I looked for a source on this but couldn't find it yet. I may have heard it on the telecast from one of the Catholic experts. Not sure, though. Gurp13 17:45, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

CofE

"The funeral of Pope John Paul II will be the first since the Church of England's break from Rome in the 16th century at which the sitting Archbishop of Canterbury, who is leader of the Church of England and the Anglican Communion, will be present."

I thought the monarch of the United Kingdom was the leader of the Church of England? --Oldak Quill 23:50, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• The Archbishop of Canterbury is the Primate of the Church of England while the Queen is constitutionally titled Supreme Governor of the Church of England. The Queen, I suppose, is by title the leader of the church, the Archbishop is actually in charge. Reference the above linked article on the Supreme Governor for more information on the relationship. As a note: I understand the CoE doesn't consider itself Protestant -- rather, they contend they are Catholics that don't recognize the supremacy of Rome. --Chiacomo 02:53, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why does this article exist?!

This article should obviously be on Wikinews. Wikipedia is not a new site. So why is it here?→Raul654 13:20, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

This was an instance where a news story accrued such an immense historical significance (the largest single pilgrimage of people in the history of the world) that it warranted its own Wikipedia article. You may notice that this article was originally a subsection of the Pope John Paul II article, where a link to the related Wikinews article is also found. --Gerald Farinas 13:44, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I concur with Farinas, this is an historic event and warrants a Wikipedia article - it is about the largest gathering of world leaders ever. It is now far too good, informative, encyclopaedic, and NPOV to move - --Oldak Quill 13:55, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In my case, this is a "once in a lifetime" event -- at least so far... Great article about a fascinating topic. --Chiacomo

This is indeed an historical event directly affecting nearly one billion people, rather than a newsworthy incident. --Taxrelief

Television Coverage

While on the whole a quite well written article, i must take issue with the viewership figures given for the funeral. i strongly doubt that every person on the planet (bar a few million perhaps) watched this on tv. while the potential viewership may be 6 billion people, it seems highly implausible to suggest 6 billion people actually watching it. for example, if only half of the chinese and indian populations watched it (a VERY generous figure in my opinion), there is a billion people ruled out right there. a leap too far in my book

Correct. Associated Press estimated over 2 billion people watched. --Gerald Farinas 15:05, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Homily

Does the entire text belong in this article (which is already quite long)? I propose that it be moved to Wikisource. --Dhartung | Talk 20:35, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I believe the homily text provide substantial depth and will be referenced by students across the world for years to come. -Taxrelief

I concur with Dartung. Wikisource exists for such things. To Taxrelief, we don't want to wipe the text out, simply move it to a repository more suited for it. It can be linked from the article. What is the homily's copyright status? --Slowking Man 22:28, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

It should indeed be moved to Wikisource. I don't think we need to worry about copyright status as the Vatican is probably quite happy for it to be reproduced wherever. — Trilobite (Talk) 03:13, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Raul654, whom I asked for advice, is skeptical. Vatican City is a signatory to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, which means copyright is automatic and must be explicitly divested for reuse (excepting fair use and the like, of course). I've dug around the Internet, but I can't find any definitive statement of the copyright status of Vatican publications. Some areas of the Vatican website, such as the Vatican Library pages, have "All rights reserved" messages, but that's all. --Slowking Man 04:03, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. If/when the copyright issue is figured out, the homily ought to go to Wikisource. It's very long - a link would be better. --Jen Moakler 05:06, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Where did the text of the homily go? Ironic isn't it that the person who delivered this homily ended up becoming our next Pope. -Taxrelief

Which Creed

The article mentions that the Nicene Creed was recited rather than the Apostle's Creed. I don't know if this is worldwide but in the US Catholic church the Nicene Creed is the standard creed recited at each Mass. The Apostles Creed is used on special occasions, particularly Masses with a large percentage of children in attendence, and when beginning the Rosary.

Maybe it has to do with the Pope being the succesor of the Apostles? (Alphaboi867 03:19, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC))

In the Philippines, we usually use the Apostle's Creed during mass, and the Nicene Creed on certain special occasions. I've heard mass in some other churches in Asia and the Apostle's Creed is what is usually used. --Ronaldo Guevara 11:50, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sound recording

Can we find a sound recording (preferably in mp3) of the funeral, or at least the mass of requiem and Cardinal Ratzinger's speech?

Deacon nationality

I've amended "An American deacon, Paul Moss, began by singing, "The Gospel according to John."" - according to the RC Archbishop of Birmingham, UK, commentating on the BBC TV coverage, Moss is English, and he will be ordaining Paul Moss next July and he will be working in the Birmingham archdiocese. -- Arwel 01:15, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The reason I wrote American was that both CBS News and ABC News coverage said he was an American. I guess they were mistaken? --Gerald Farinas 04:43, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pictures

This is a really nice article, but can someone please tell me when Wikipedia's policy about picture copyrights was changed? As far as I know, Associated Press pictures are still unacceptable on Wikipedia. I note that someone has already listed them on Wikipedia:Copyright problems -- Arwel 01:15, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This is my understanding as well. The AP charges a hefty fee for permission to republish its pictures, so I don't see why Wikipedia is free to violate the AP's copyright protection. The only exception is for rare cases where the image uniquely shows something that nothing else could quite illustrate, or those with historical significance (e.g. Image:Deweytruman12.jpg). Yes, these images have historical significance, but Wikipedia should pick one, maybe two at most, if we're claiming fair use. --Minesweeper 02:26, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I had noticed that, and was about to do something. Observe that not all the article's photos are AP, however. --Slowking Man 04:04, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

11 of the 13 pictures on the page are currently from AP, which is wildly excessive for any conceivable claim of "fair use" - the only non-AP pictures are the ones in the crypt, taken from L'Osservatore Romano, and I wonder what their copyright status is, too. Sorry, but most of those pictures will have to go, soon. Surely there were some Wikipedians in the crowd who had cameras? -- Arwel 14:54, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Have a look to see what pictures other Wikipedias are using, perhaps the Italian, French and Norwegian would be good places to start (the latter two as they appear to have specific articles on his funeral). Thryduulf 17:49, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Norwegian Wikipedia has no pictures, French uses one picture of JP II in his prime, only; Italian uses a number of pictures from Agencia Brasil which are claimed to be released for free use as long as origin is attributed, and a few photos of the crowd in St Peters' Square from Wikipedians; German has a picture of JP II lying in state from the Argentinian presidential site, which has released all pictures under GNU FDL, if I understand the mixture of German and Spanish correctly! -- Arwel 20:37, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As I see it, the only pictures that one can claim "fair use" are the 2 from L'Osservatore Romano (if they're copyrighted), as those are the only picture available of events during the Rite of Interment & lowering of the coffin since it was a private event. -- KTC 23:07, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Article move

Why was this article moved to Funeral of Pope Karol Józef WojtyÅ‚a? I've reverted it for the following reasons:

• The polish "ł" character breaks in the title to "Å,"
• He was never Pope Karol Józef Wojtyła, he was Priest/Bishop/Archbishop/Cardinal Karol Józef Wojtyła but upon becomming Pope he was Pope John Paul II
• Wikipedia naming conventions are that the most common name should be used.
• There was apparently no discussion of the move. Thryduulf 14:49, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)