The secret letters of Pope John Paul II - BBC

[pepipop]

IMHO this is the usual secularised MSM, anti-Catholic Church, spin mongering.

One very biased report of same. independent.ie/opinion/columnists/mary-kenny/why-pope-john-pauls-letters-to-married-woman-are-a-game-changer-for-church-34460258.html

There is little evidence, of anything, from the words written in the Pope’s letters, and more importantly none of the letters sent by the married woman have been viewed. How many letters were written a year - one letter, or one letter every few years…?

PJP11 was also good friends with the husband. Needless to say, the MSM are great at telling tales when all the characters are deceased.

How did they know she wrote the following words to the Pope, below?

*She wrote him that she “wanted desperately to be close to him” and he told her that “God gave you to me and made you my vocation”. *

As a bishop of the church, IMO, all that PJP11 would have inferred by his letters, and the words quoted above, that he was praying for the woman’s soul to get to heaven - i.e. his vocation, similar to St Padre Pio’s spiritual children. Allegedly at this point he sent her a scapular.

As I did not watch the farce, I noted several comments from those who did:

• • Reply•Share ›
  Avatar
  DeepFriedMarsBar • a day ago
  I watched Stourton’s expose last night, then saw the edited highlights again during the 10 o’clock news. The BBC seems to have very badly wanted to have found that the Bishop of Rome was carrying on with a Polish-American mistress for decades, and has had to report through gritted teeth that it wasn’t the case. Nevertheless, they loved getting that quote from the Cambridge academic, whose weasel words were along the lines of, “The Pope had an intense relationship with an extremely attractive married woman … wow!”

I have no love for the system of Popery, but honestly, this looked like a very grubby, failed attempt at a stitch up and the BBC should be ashamed, and leave a dead man’s memory alone.

lizabeth Spence Glen • 16 hours ago
What a load of totally delightful rubbish!!! The BBC Panorama’s author in all his pathetic efforts to incriminate our late Pope managed only to show his deep frustration with not being able to find any solid proof of an illicit affair he was hoping for. A pretty desperate attempt to bite more than he could chew…perhaps he suffers from a “post-mid-life” crisis, or lack of good materials to revive his career??? You have not succeeded - quite opposite - in your lack of understanding of Papal intentions, His firm and faithful position as a Pontiff, his absolute cohesion and personal integrity, and also His ability to be a real, loving, caring and devoted Friend with a woman (AAARRGGHHH!!!), not seeing Himself above anyone else but right there, beside the person, just like GOD does - you actually gave us another valid reason to love Him and feel close to Him more than ever before…Thank you very much for that!!! God bless you and let John Paul II pray for you. And by the way: what ‘a shame’ that countries like Poland have an established, unified and crystal-clear attitude towards faith, that they are not pro ‘multi-culti’, that they are proud to be Christian- Catholic and not trying to apologize for it…maybe that’s why there are no suicide bombers on their streets, no religious crisis…very condemnable and discreditable, isn’t??? Honestly, do so more research before you start and…get a life!!!
• Reply•Share ›
*

 

[Peter_Plato]

Can we please stop patronising St John Paul II?

I didn’t understand this request of yours until I came upon this paragraph in the article.

Furthermore, it is entirely plausible that Karol Wojtyla fell madly in love before he was ordained. He still chose to become a priest so let’s refrain from patronising this intelligent man as if he had never held or understood romantic feelings before he made his vows.

Of course, the alternative that society offers is to turn us all into sniveling, drooling, sex-starved zombies who must adhere to the newest and latest diktat from the politically correct propagandist elite as if no “normal” human could rise above the “ideals” set for us by that lot.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

IMHO this is the usual secularised MSM, anti-Catholic Church, spin mongering.

One very biased report of same. independent.ie/opinion/columnists/mary-kenny/why-pope-john-pauls-letters-to-married-woman-are-a-game-changer-for-church-34460258.html

There is little evidence, of anything, from the words written in the Pope’s letters, and more importantly none of the letters sent by the married woman have been viewed. How many letters were written a year - one letter, or one letter every few years…?

PJP11 was also good friends with the husband. Needless to say, the MSM are great at telling tales when all the characters are deceased.

How did they know she wrote the following words to the Pope, below?

*She wrote him that she “wanted desperately to be close to him” and he told her that “God gave you to me and made you my vocation”. *

As a bishop of the church, IMO, all that PJP11 would have inferred by his letters, and the words quoted above, that he was praying for the woman’s soul to get to heaven - i.e. his vocation, similar to St Padre Pio’s spiritual children. Allegedly at this point he sent her a scapular.

As I did not watch the farce, I noted several comments from those who did:

• • Reply•Share ›
  Avatar
  DeepFriedMarsBar • a day ago
  I watched Stourton’s expose last night, then saw the edited highlights again during the 10 o’clock news. The BBC seems to have very badly wanted to have found that the Bishop of Rome was carrying on with a Polish-American mistress for decades, and has had to report through gritted teeth that it wasn’t the case. *Nevertheless, they loved getting that quote from the Cambridge academic, whose weasel words were along the lines of, “The Pope had an intense relationship with an extremely attractive married woman … wow!”

I have no love for the system of Popery, but honestly, this looked like a very grubby, failed attempt at a stitch up and the BBC should be ashamed, and leave a dead man’s memory alone.

lizabeth Spence Glen • 16 hours ago
What a load of totally delightful rubbish!!! The BBC Panorama’s author in all his pathetic efforts to incriminate our late Pope managed only to show his deep frustration with not being able to find any solid proof of an illicit affair he was hoping for. A pretty desperate attempt to bite more than he could chew…perhaps he suffers from a “post-mid-life” crisis, or lack of good materials to revive his career??? You have not succeeded - quite opposite - in your lack of understanding of Papal intentions, His firm and faithful position as a Pontiff, his absolute cohesion and personal integrity, and also His ability to be a real, loving, caring and devoted Friend with a woman (AAARRGGHHH!!!), not seeing Himself above anyone else but right there, beside the person, just like GOD does - you actually gave us another valid reason to love Him and feel close to Him more than ever before…Thank you very much for that!!! God bless you and let John Paul II pray for you. And by the way: what ‘a shame’ that countries like Poland have an established, unified and crystal-clear attitude towards faith, that they are not pro ‘multi-culti’, that they are proud to be Christian- Catholic and not trying to apologize for it…maybe that’s why there are no suicide bombers on their streets, no religious crisis…very condemnable and discreditable, isn’t??? Honestly, do so more research before you start and…get a life!!!
• Reply•Share ›

While I do not believe JP II ever broke a promise, the library in Poland has about 350 letters he wrote her, so I would say it was definitely more than one a year!

 

[Peter_Plato]

PJP11 was also good friends with the husband. Needless to say, the MSM are great at telling tales when all the characters are deceased.

How did they know she wrote the following words to the Pope, below?

*She wrote him that she “wanted desperately to be close to him” and he told her that “God gave you to me and made you my vocation”. *

As a bishop of the church, IMO, all that PJP11 would have inferred by his letters, and the words quoted above, that he was praying for the woman’s soul to get to heaven - i.e. his vocation, similar to St Padre Pio’s spiritual children. Allegedly at this point he sent her a scapular.

:bigyikes:

I am consoled in that this was ONLY an allegation.

 

[pepipop]

While I do not believe JP II ever broke a promise, the library in Poland has about 350 letters he wrote her, so I would say it was definitely more than one a year!

I didn’t read through all the ‘stories’. Over 30 years, so around 10 a year potentially and/or that could include christmas cards, easter blessings, birthday wishes, her children’s births, anniversaries, etc…

 

[pepipop]

:bigyikes:

I am consoled in that this was ONLY an allegation.

He did actually send her one, but not sure when.

Cardinal Wojtyla gave Anna-Teresa what is known as a scapular, an item of devotional clothing which is worn next to the skin.

telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12157733/What-really-happened-between-Pope-John-Paul-II-and-his-close-friend-Anna-Teresa-Tymienecka.html

 

[Oneofthewomen]

I think that the comments on this thread and on some of the others in MSM outlets that I have seen on this say a whole lot more about us as a society than this story does about JPII and his friend.

The whole idea that people honestly believe that a man (married, single or clergy/religious) cannot be friends with a woman (married, single or religious) is the most ridiculous, infuriating thing I have ever heard.

People need other people. We are a social society and love and intimacy DOES NOT always mean sex. If anything, sex is just a physical act. I know many people who have lots of sex, but who are not intimate or in love.

I sometimes wonder if this is a forum where adults can discuss topics or if it is filled with middle-schoolers who have sex on the brain.

Anyone who is questioning this relationship and the motives of JPII, based on a BBC news story, should get themselves to confession! :tsktsk:

 

[pepipop]

:bigyikes:

I am consoled in that this was ONLY an allegation.

On second reading, I assume this was a joke!

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I think that the comments on this thread and on some of the others in MSM outlets that I have seen on this say a whole lot more about us as a society than this story does about JPII and his friend.

The whole idea that people honestly believe that a man (married, single or clergy/religious) cannot be friends with a woman (married, single or religious) is the most ridiculous, infuriating thing I have ever heard.

People need other people. We are a social society and love and intimacy DOES NOT always mean sex. If anything, sex is just a physical act. I know many people who have lots of sex, but who are not intimate or in love.

I sometimes wonder if this is a forum where adults can discuss topics or if it is filled with middle-schoolers who have sex on the brain.

Anyone who is questioning this relationship and the motives of JPII, based on a BBC news story, should get themselves to confession! :tsktsk:

I respect your opinion, but I have to disagree.

I don’t think JP II was “having an affair” whether only in his imagination or not. I do believe he was a holy and saintly man and pope.

However, our parish priests are warned to stay away from intimate relationships with women, even if those relationships are just friendships, lest they develop into something more. They are told not to even be alone with a woman, such as riding in a car alone with a woman.

It seems apparent that this woman was “in love” with JP II, but he was struggling as to how to answer that (no I don’t think he was considering an affair) in light of his vocation and his inability to pursue any love affair. I think in true JP II fashion, he did not want to hurt her feelings. And I’m sure there were other complications none of us know about.

But, JP II was the leader and role model for the all the world’s Catholics, priests included. If someone is “in love” with a priest, the right thing for that priest to do is to tell the woman she is lovely, he will pray for her daily, but because of her feelings, the relationship cannot continue, on any level. If this holds true for a parish priest in a remote location, and it does, it holds true so much more for the leader of the world’s billion-plus Catholics, the role model for all priests.

Should JP II have had friendships with women? Sure! With women who were just friends and not “in love” with him. But this woman was different. She seems to have had a problem. There are women who consistently fall in love with priests, and it’s not good. It’s not good for the priest, and it’s terrible for the woman, who will always come out the loser.

It’s like venial sin. Venial sin doesn’t destroy our relationship with God, but if we commit one venial sin after another, if we get in the habit of committing venial sins, it could lead to mortal sin.

I still love JP II, I still revere him, I still think he was saintly. And, I still realize I don’t know all the circumstances. I will never judge him, but I admit to still being bothered a bit by this, even though I think the “love” was on her side only. I think JP II loved her as a child of God, just like he loved everyone else.

 

[liturgyluver]

I respect your opinion, but I have to disagree.

I don’t think JP II was “having an affair” whether only in his imagination or not. I do believe he was a holy and saintly man and pope.

However, our parish priests are warned to stay away from intimate relationships with women, even if those relationships are just friendships, lest they develop into something more. They are told not to even be alone with a woman, such as riding in a car alone with a woman.

It seems apparent that this woman was “in love” with JP II, but he was struggling as to how to answer that (no I don’t think he was considering an affair) in light of his vocation and his inability to pursue any love affair. I think in true JP II fashion, he did not want to hurt her feelings. And I’m sure there were other complications none of us know about.

But, JP II was the leader and role model for the all the world’s Catholics, priests included. If someone is “in love” with a priest, the right thing for that priest to do is to tell the woman she is lovely, he will pray for her daily, but because of her feelings, the relationship cannot continue, on any level. If this holds true for a parish priest in a remote location, and it does, it holds true so much more for the leader of the world’s billion-plus Catholics, the role model for all priests.

Should JP II have had friendships with women? Sure! With women who were just friends and not “in love” with him. But this woman was different. She seems to have had a problem. There are women who consistently fall in love with priests, and it’s not good. It’s not good for the priest, and it’s terrible for the woman, who will always come out the loser.

It’s like venial sin. Venial sin doesn’t destroy our relationship with God, but if we commit one venial sin after another, if we get in the habit of committing venial sins, it could lead to mortal sin.

I still love JP II, I still revere him, I still think he was saintly. And, I still realize I don’t know all the circumstances. I will never judge him, but I admit to still being bothered a bit by this, even though I think the “love” was on her side only. I think JP II loved her as a child of God, just like he loved everyone else.

I think this is the nub of the issue. Nobody has suggested that there was any sexual element to this relationship - the documentary itself pointed out that he had not acted inappropriately. However, it does raise questions about whether the friendship should have been pursued in the light of fact that her feelings for him might have overstepped the mark? What bothers me most is why the library in Poland paid a seven figure sum for her letters and is refusing access to them. Surely if there is nothing to hide it is unwise of them to do this.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I think this is the nub of the issue. Nobody has suggested that there was any sexual element to this relationship - the documentary itself pointed out that he had not acted inappropriately. However, it does raise questions about whether the friendship should have been pursued in the light of fact that her feelings for him might have overstepped the mark? What bothers me most is why the library in Poland paid a seven figure sum for her letters and is refusing access to them. Surely if there is nothing to hide it is unwise of them to do this.

I agree. If there is nothing to hide, I think they should make them all available to the public and end all the speculation. Because of JP II’s exalted status, before canonization and after, and because he is so loved, people aren’t just going to brush this off. At least the people who loved him most aren’t. When we love someone, we want to know everything about them.

I certainly don’t feel JP II did anything unseemly with this woman, but I do feel, in light of what we’ve been allowed to know, that it was unwise to continue the friendship. And, I certainly agree with you; I think it’s unwise for the library not to make all the letters public and let people know there was nothing to hide.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

It seems apparent…

And this is the problem, It seems.

We do not know the whole story, and I don’t think we ever will.
This “story” by the BBC was nothing more than an attempt to discredit a beloved Pope and Saint, and to make people question him, his motives and Catholic teaching.

And, I know and am friends with many priests. With some it’s just a casual friendship, others are colleagues, some are like “uncles” and a couple are very close friends, with whom I dine with, travel with and enjoy outside activities with such as hiking & photography, and musical theater.

Anyone who wants to believe that there is something more going on between me and my friends, well, that is their problem, and they will be the ones that have to answer for it.

Priests are people first- and people need other people. Living in isolation and fear that someone, somewhere will think something is inappropriate is no way to live. For a priest or for anyone.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

And this is the problem, It seems.

We do not know the whole story, and I don’t think we ever will.
This “story” by the BBC was nothing more than an attempt to discredit a beloved Pope and Saint, and to make people question him, his motives and Catholic teaching.

And, I know and am friends with many priests. With some it’s just a casual friendship, others are colleagues, some are like “uncles” and a couple are very close friends, with whom I dine with, travel with and enjoy outside activities with such as hiking & photography, and musical theater.

Anyone who wants to believe that there is something more going on between me and my friends, well, that is their problem, and they will be the ones that have to answer for it.

Priests are people first- and people need other people. Living in isolation and fear that someone, somewhere will think something is inappropriate is no way to live. For a priest or for anyone.

No one is even coming close to suggesting that JP II should not have had women as friends. I, too, have many friends who are priests. I’ve received letters and postcards and gifts from them. But I am not in love with them, and they do not write me “intense” letters when we are apart. As a professor of theology, we exchange ideas, of course, but there is no feeling each other close when we’re far away or going to X every day or some such romantic sounding things. My latest letter with a priest I write to often concerned the visual component of the Easter appearances.

As the other poster and I have stated, it isn’t JP II’s friendships with women that are the problem here, and the BBC didn’t even have to try to sensationalize this. It is inherently sensational since, as another already stated, a seven figure sum was paid for the letters, yet the library is not making them available for reading. They, themselves, could clear the air, so to speak, simply by making them available and showing us there is nothing at all to hide.

Yes, priests are people, and like all people they have choices to make. A billion plus Catholics have the right to know that a shepherd they loved so much was making the right decision and not encouraging a woman in a love that could not be. Sure, JP II was a human person with hopes, desires, and struggles, but he was no ordinary person. Everything he said and did influenced his flock. You can’t compare JP II with “a priest,” nor can one compare a woman admittedly “in love” with him to a strictly platonic friendship.

It’s kind of like Clinton and her emails, and she did turn them over, along with her server.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

. A billion plus Catholics have the right to know that a shepherd they loved so much was making the right decision and not encouraging a woman in a love that could not be. .

Sorry, but this is a bunch of horse manure.

No one has a RIGHT to any information about anyone or anything that is not their business.

And quite frankly, suggesting that the situation with Hilary Clinton is even remotely like this situation with JPII is disgusting. Hilary Clinton’s actions/inactions have caused the deaths of people. Not even close to being the same thing!

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Sorry, but this is a bunch of horse manure.

No one has a RIGHT to any information about anyone or anything that is not their business.

And quite frankly, suggesting that the situation with Hilary Clinton is even remotely like this situation with JPII is disgusting. Hilary Clinton’s actions/inactions have caused the deaths of people. Not even close to being the same thing!

Sorry, but they are analogous. No one knows if Hillary Clinton did anything at all to cause any harm to come to anyone. No one here has seen all of her emails, just as no one has seen all of JP II’s letters.

People have a right to know what the leader, or probable leader, of their nation is doing. People have a right to know the man who is leading them in faith is practicing what he preaches, and I don’t mean physically. I’m sure he was physically, but if other priests are “supposed” to avoid being alone with women, married or single, all the more so our Holy Father.

And, I repeat, the library could put all to rest by making all the letters available, which they refuse to do. So something seems definitely wrong. Sorry, but as much as I loved JP II, I just don’t buy that, “But he had lots of female friends.” Sure, he did, ones not “in love” with him! And that is fine. As I’ve said before, this woman was different.

 

[clem456]

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.278 He becomes guilty:

• of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
• of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.280
2479 Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one’s neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

clem456:
I think that goes in the Hillary Clinton thread.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Are you living in “Democrat La-La Land”?
Ask Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods about the harm that came to them at the hands of Hilary Clinton, and how she lied about it.

Oh, wait- YOU CAN’T!!!

I find it almost obscene that a professor of theology would think such awful thoughts about a beloved, and sainted Pope, especially based on a very one-sided television program from a known ultra-liberal, non-Catholic source. It boggles the mind!!

Sorry, but they are analogous. No one knows if Hillary Clinton did anything at all to cause any harm to come to anyone. No one here has seen all of her emails, just as no one has seen all of JP II’s letters.

People have a right to know what the leader, or probable leader, of their nation is doing. People have a right to know the man who is leading them in faith is practicing what he preaches, and I don’t mean physically. I’m sure he was physically, but if other priests are “supposed” to avoid being alone with women, married or single, all the more so our Holy Father.

And, I repeat, the library could put all to rest by making all the letters available, which they refuse to do. So something seems definitely wrong. Sorry, but as much as I loved JP II, I just don’t buy that, “But he had lots of female friends.” Sure, he did, ones not “in love” with him! And that is fine. As I’ve said before, this woman was different.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Are you living in “Democrat La-La Land”?
Ask Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods about the harm that came to them at the hands of Hilary Clinton, and how she lied about it.

Oh, wait- YOU CAN’T!!!

I find it almost obscene that a professor of theology would think such awful thoughts about a beloved, and sainted Pope, especially based on a very one-sided television program from a known ultra-liberal, non-Catholic source. It boggles the mind!!

Clinton didn’t attack the compound. She did nothing to provoke that attack. It was a tragedy, but not one perpetuated by her. She didn’t send anyone to Benghazi. She is responsible for the death of no one.

I base nothing on the TV program. See how things we don’t know can be distorted? I did not even see it. I’m basing it on news articles I’ve read and quotes from the actual letters in JP II’s handwriting as well as interviews from people who knew JP II.

I’ve said many times, but you conveniently skip that part, I love JP II, I revere JP II, I think he should be a saint, but I question his judgment in encouraging the love of a married woman by writing her hundreds of letters. The relationship should have ended the day she told him she loved him, and yes, she did tell him that. He talks about it in the letters. He wrote her for forty years.

I repeat, if there was complete innocence, surely the library would want them to be read in their entirety by all, they would not suppress them, and they are suppressing them. Some non-Catholics are already using this against the Catholic Church, and the only way to stop that is to make the letters public.

 

[Brendan_64]

I’ve said many times, but you conveniently skip that part, I love JP II, I revere JP II, I think he should be a saint, but I question his judgment in encouraging the love of a married woman by writing her hundreds of letters. The relationship should have ended the day she told him she loved him, and yes, she did tell him that.

Love means many different things. Loving someone is not morally wrong. There is not an automatic path that goes:
love → sexual temptation → sexual relationship