THE MUSINGS OF A NOT-SO-NAKED CIVIL SERVANT

THE PENULTIMATE PONTIFF

Well, there's a new pope.  Isn't that a comfort.  I can't exactly say that I care, being a recovering Catholic and all, but it's newsworthy so I suppose I should consider its implications for Catholics and the rest of the planet.  After all, I'm the not-so-naked civil servant and I muse...so I'd best be about it!

For those of you that may not remember, John Paul II was the 266th pope of the Roman Catholic Church and reigned over a billion people as God's purported official representative on earth for almost 27 years.  History teaches us that he is the descendant of St. Peter, the first pope and one of the Christ's twelve apostles.  He was and will remain the only Polish pope, and he traveled more and alienated more people than any other pope in history.  But, as with Catholics throughout history, the people John Paul led loved him despite his foibles, fallacies and forgetfullness because he is, according to the church's dogma, infallible.  And because, after a few decades of a cushy gig consisting mostly of public speaking to promote the church's interests, a few masses and a couple of hundred audiences in between massive banquets and lots and lots of rest on 300 count sheets, JP was a nice, portly, grandfatherly old man that seemed benign to the naked (gasp!) eye, but had a lot more going on under his robes than meets the eye. 

He's gone now, and we are officially - according to the most famous, if not the only, Catholic seer and prophet, St. Malachy of Ireland - now just one pope shy of what will either be the end of the world, the end of the papacy or the end of the church, take your pick.   According to the traditional account, in 1139, Malachy was summoned to Rome by Pope Innocent II. While there, he purportedly experienced a vision of future popes, which he recorded as a sequence of cryptic Latin phrases. This manuscript was then deposited in the Roman Archive, and thereafter forgotten about until rediscovered in 1590.

The phrases, according to legend, represent each of the popes by describing an integral element of them or their reigns.  For example, John Paul I (1978) was given the phrase "De medietate Lunae (of the half of the moon)" which, according to scholars and theorists, relates to his place of birth, Canale d'Ogardo, diocese of Belluno, (beautiful moon,) as well as the fact that he was elected pope on august 26, and his reign lasted about a month, from half a moon to the next half...

Similarly, John Paul II (1978-2005) was given the phrase, "De labore Solis (of the eclipse of the sun, or from the labour of the sun,") which many believe relates to the fact that he was born on May 18, 1920 during a solar eclipse. He also comes from behind the former Iron Curtain. He might also be seen to be the fruit of the intercession of the Woman Clothed with the Sun labouring in Revelation 12 (because of his devotion to the Virgin Mary).

Both of the associations seem to display an uncanny portending of future events, at least insofar as the popes are concerned.  Which is why there's so much concern, excitement and curiosity about our latest earth-bound god, Benedict XVI who, based on Malachy's vision, is the second-to-last pope - the penultimate pontiff, as it were.  And because I recognize that you are all chomping at the bit, Ben's phrase is "Gloria olivae" - the glory of the olive.  Prior to the papal conclave, this motto led to speculation that the next pontiff would be from the Order of Saint Benedict, whose symbols include the olive branch. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, selected in April 2005, is not a Benedictine, but did pick Benedict XVI as his papal name, which might be regarded as a fulfillment of this prophecy.

Yet there can also be a different meaning. Pope Benedict had his birthday on the 16th April and on that day is celebrated the feast of Saint Benedict Joseph Labrè (26 March 1748 - 16 April 1783), also known as the Holy Pilgrim. His first name was already Joseph and together with Benedict, which he has now assumed, his Christian namesake is now complete. Moreover, the Order of St Benedict is also known as that of the Olivetans.

The bottom line is that he's the next to the last pope....and has confirmed prophecy by sharing with the cardinals that elected him that his would not be a long papacy.  According to many, 28 days is the maximum length of time that Benedict will occupy the Holy See. 

And what then?  Well, the election of the last pope, of course.....

The longest and final motto reads, "In persecutione extrema S.R.E. sedebit Petrus Romanus, qui pascet oues in multis tribulationibus: quibus transactis ciuitas septicollis diruetur, & Iudex tremêdus iudicabit populum suum. Finis." (During the final persecution, the seat of the Holy Roman Church will be occupied by Peter the Roman, who will feed the sheep in many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed, and the terrible Judge will judge his people. The End.) According to some sources, this was not a part of the original prophecy but was added in the early 19^th Century by a publisher.

There are several interpretations regarding the last Popes listed by St. Malachy taken by those who believe the prophecies:

• Regarding whether additional Popes, not listed by St. Malachy occur between Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus the following differing views are held:
  1. Gloria Olivae is immediately followed by Petrus Romanus.
  2. there is a gap of unknown length between these two Popes, about which Malachy did not write.

• Regarding whether the Papacy ends with Petrus Romanus, the following differing views are held:
  1. Petrus Romanus will be the final Pope. The end of his papacy will mark either the end of the papacy, the end of the Church, or the end of the world.
  2. There will be additional Popes following Petrus Romanus, about which Malachy did not write. There is also possibility that these additional popes might be considered antipopes, which could justify their omission in St. Malachy's eyes.

And Malachy is not the only one that sees the final days.  In 1909, while granting an audience, pope Pius X leaned back and closed his eyes. Suddenly he "awoke" and cried out: "What I see is terrifying. Will it be myself? Will it be my successor? What is certain is that the pope will quit Rome, and in leaving the Vatican, he will have to walk over the dead bodies of his priests. Pius's prophecy was fulfilled neither in his own time nor in that of the next pontiff. According to Malachy's vision of the Church's "tribulation," it applies to the successor of Gloria Olivae-the next pope but one.

Again, the bottom line is that, for all intents and purposes, the end really is near.  Having destroyed the planet and each other; turned against God and his angels; and dared to call ourselves gods with fits of rage and avowals of judicious condemnations of those that we believe to be sinners - despite any evidence of God's opinion on the subject anywhere in scripture - we are so deserving of punishment that I doubt even the second coming of the Christ can save us.  I am actually looking forward to the end, so that the human suffering that we, ourselves, have created can finally be over. 

I'm ready to go home.  This world is a horrific place, filled with such hatred and such rage that even the light of God is having a difficult time getting through to us.  This formerly wonderful country is being run by a cabal of lying thieves; our economy is about to hit the toilet as oil prices line the pockets of the Bushies and rape the common man; we are detested around the world - and those that hate us don't like each other very much, either; our planet is on its last legs - and Bush wants to take it off life support;  I don't like it here anymore, and I want to go home.  And, with John Paul's death and the election of Benedict, it looks like it won't be too much longer until I get my wish....

You listening, God?  Get my room ready, please....I'm comin' home......

BRITISH ROYALTY AND THE EQUESTRY - A LONG AND HAPPY TRADITION

In a spectacle noted more for its decided austerity than for its jubilee, Prince Charles, the eldest son of Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United  Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith and The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (as decreed by Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, etc. etc. etc.) and first (as of this day) in line to the English throne, married his mistress (concubine,  harlot,  whore,  siren, wench, temptress,) Her Royal Highness the Princess Charles, Princess of Wales (technically correct but not in use,) Her Royal Highness the Princess Charles, Duchess of Cornwall (used every-where but Scotland,) and Her Royal Highness the Princess Charles, Duchess of Rothesay (used only in Scotland,) nee Mrs Camilla Parker Bowles and expected to be, upon Charles' ascension to the throne, Her Royal Highness The Princess Consort, in a double ceremony - one a civil union at the local union hall, the other a blessing in the chapel of Windsor Castle. 

It would be easy to look at today as nothing more than what it really was - the first race in the 2005 Ascot season - were it not for the political, moral, constitutional, ethical and decency concerns that it has raised.  Every season, Ascot is a singular society event that calls, from the four corners of the realm, the most important families in the Empire to a near hahj-like ritual that is not only encouraged, but expected, of any person or family wanting to be noticed and patronized by the Queen.  Princess Diana was a regular attendee, as was her sister-in-law, the Duchess of York.  At the event - which is, at its core, a tea-time costume ball for the ladies of the court - the most famous participants are not the sleek Arabians that are raised specifically for the season; no, they are the millinary creations sported by the afore-mentioned ladies and their numerous dopelgangers.  As is befitting the opening race of the season, today's wedding of Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall featured more wide brims, feathers and netting than the costume shoppe at the Olde Globe Theatre, and will be remembered as much for the crowds' difficulties in seeing the face of the bride as it is for the slap in the face that the entire event was to the memory of Diana.

As if orchestrated by some insane party planner, Queen Elizabeth carried the theme of today's festivities to its almost divinely-inspired conclusion - by toasting the winner of today's four-legged horse race before she toasted the second marriage of her eldest son:

"I've got two things to announce to you of the greatest importance," declared the monarch on the auspicious event.  "The first is that the Grand National was won by Hedgehunter. The second is to say to you that despite Becher's Brook and The Chair (two obstacles on the Aintree race course) and all kinds of other terrible obstacles, my son has come through and I'm very proud and wish them well." 

A lovely sentiment from the world's greatest mother...

And, in a moment that Diana certainly created from beyond this earthly plane, the newest  (though certainly not the youngest) member of the royals actually - and you are NOT going to believe this! - threw a horse shoe while greeting the crowds outside of Windsor, and then reacted with a quite audible whinny and a neigh.  Not since the other royal equine, Princess Anne, was thrown from her mount during competition as a British athlete in the 1976 Montreal Olympics has one of the royals so closely mirrored the behavior of the beasts that they resemble, and so clearly suffered a significant episode of hoof-in-mouth disease in response.

As if the horse and pony show played out by the Duchess weren't enough to cast a pall over the ceremonies, protesters took to the streets near Windsor to decry the marriage in  both the name of Diana - to whom most Britains remain completely devoted - and as a blatant thumbing of the royal probiscusis to the country's homosexuals that, as in the United States, are not allowed to marry in Britain.  Making matters worse, the British press - long known for both its judiciousness and its yellow journalism - tossed aside convention by continuously reminding the populace that the marriage marked the union of two people that had been in an intimate, marriage-like relationship for thirty-five years - fourteen of which were while he was married to the mother of the future kings of England, Prince William and Prince Harry.  Granted, the only person that didn't know about Charles and Camilla was the Queen Mum, who lived her final days in a gin-besotted haze that not even the scandal of divorce or the murder of Diana could penetrate, but one would have thought - given the supposed sophistication and propriety of the British people - that with Diana's children and the world in attendance, some measure of dignity and decorum would have been observed.  But, with two mares attending Christmas dinner this year at Sandringham, and it now a foregone conclusion that the Queen has sanctioned her new daughter-in-law's eventual ascent to the throne, who the hell cares about decorum?

Now, if you've ever been to a horse race, you know that the action on the track is often not the most interesting in the park.  Oft-times, it's the machinations in the stands and stables that garner the most attention, and today's hoped-for only running of the Bowles Cup was no exception.  Obviously completely recovered from the devastating death of their mother - and choosing not to bear a grudge against their new Mummy for the part that she played in the disolution of their parent's marriage - both Harry and William were active participants in the ceremonies  (William attended his father,) and throughout the day's events were seen to be quite convivial and bouyant.  Miraculously, Harry - who gets better-looking every day - was even able to elicit a laugh from his usually-stern Grandmama, though no confirmation about the humorous exchange having its genesis in the tossed shoe incident of horse number 7 can be confirmed nor denied.  What can be confirmed, however, is the number of comments made during the day-long festivities about the almost clone-like appearance of Prince Harry to a certain Captain of the Guard, James Hewitt, that was a very close friend of Princess Diana's.  The phrase "stunt-double" was the most popular, though not the only, moniker applied to the dashing prince throughout the day.

Because we are observing the royals in their natural environment, it is important to remember that all manner of scandal and innuendo and grief always accompanies any important rite that the family participates in.  The opening of Parliament every year becomes a tradition-steeped afternoon during which the Queen gets to break-out the good jewelry, even though it's just a matter of showing up and saying "Get to work," and weddings become the one opportunity that the family has to put forward their best face and prove to the English that they are worth every single one of the millions of pounds spent each year to keep them in the style to which they are accustomed.  Even Diana's and Charles' wedding over twenty years ago was shrouded in scandal because it was said - by the hard-working British press - that Diana was not a virgin, as is required by the Church of England as a means of protecting the most sacred bloodline of the Windsors.

Today's wedding was, as could be expected, no exception.  While the couple was walking down the aisle towards the blessing of their union, ancestry and royalty experts were announcing the findings of their exhaustive research - research that showed that Charles and Camilla are either 9th cousins, due to the commonality of Henry Cavendish in their bloodlines, or half-cousins once removed, thanks to the affair that Charles' great, great-grandfather, King Edward VII, had with Camilla's great-grandmother, Alice Edmonstone - which produced Camilla's grandmother, Sonia Keppel.

PROVO, Utah, April 4 /PRNewswire/ -- When Prince Charles first met Camilla Parker-Bowles at a polo match in the early seventies, she said to the prince, "My great-grandmother and your great-great grandfather were lovers, so how about it?" Today, genealogical research shows they have an even stronger bond, they are ninth cousins. According to family history experts at Ancestry.com, a service of MyFamily.com, Inc., Prince Charles and Camilla are ninth cousins once removed.

Prince Charles and Camilla are both descendents of Henry Cavendish, 2nd Duke of Newcastle. Prince Charles' family history can be traced back to the Duke's elder daughter Margaret Cavendish, while Camilla's family tree leads to the Duke's younger daughter Catherine Cavendish.

A second and more scandalous possible tie also exists that would make the soon-to-be married couple half second cousins once removed. It is believed that Camilla's grandmother, Sonia Keppel, was the illegitimate daughter of King Edward VII. If this is true then she and Charles would be half second cousins once removed. The half denotes that Charles and Camilla are descended from different partners of Edward VII (Charles from Edward's wife and Camilla from Edward's alleged mistress, Alice Edmonstone).

Thank God it's safe to assume that Camilla is past child-bearing age. 

Thankfully, that was pretty much the end of the drama, and the balance of the day was left for family to join together to celebrate what is supposed to be the beginning of the happy years for Charles.  Edward and Sophie, Charles' brother and sister-in-law, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, were there; so was Andrew, the groom's other brother, with his daughters by the Duchess of York Sarah Ferguson, Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice.  Princess Anne was in attendance, with her daughter Zara Phillips and son Peter Phillips by her marriage to Captain Mark Phillips.  But what wasn't there was an excuse - not even an explanation - for all of the many improprieties that today's union brought to light.

Let's forget, for a moment, that it's just tacky that the future king of England is marrying his concubine after 35 years of shacking up in drafty palaces and castles throughout England - while Diana was giving birth to the next-in-line to the throne and dealing with a press that vilified her for what it declared was her lack of attention to her marriage - only to be murdered by the "grey men" that were brought out of the shadows - the M5 - in Fergie's autobiography. 

And let's forget that Elizabeth's sanctioning of the union is both a very public rejection of Diana's memory as the legitimate Queen Mother once William becomes king and a very vocal statement of support in favor of Trigger Bowles.  In addition, as the defender of the Faith, Liz's blessing of the marriage is much like a papal blessing - in essence, declaring that the divorce of Charles and Diana was irrelevant and the marriage of a whore and an adulterer - with the blessing of the Church of England - completely relevant and completely acceptable in the eyes of the church.

The forgotten element of today's events are the lone and quiet gay rights' protesters that pointed out just how hypocritical and prejudicial and downright un-constitutional the marriage laws in both America and Britain are.  While Charles and Camilla both take a second honeymoon trip to Scotland, gay and lesbian couples in a majority of countries fight for custody rights and visitation rights and the right to end a partner's suffering and a host of other things that 90% of the planet take for granted. 

But, hey, who has time to think about 10% of the population.  Charles and Camilla are finally legally wed.  And bookies are laying 2-1 odds that this filly is going to finish out in front.

And Camilla's happiness is what it's really all about...at least it has been for the past 35 years...

Good show, Camilla.  Now, give the old girl a carrot.

Ding, Dong The Pope is Dead...

By the time most of you read this, Pope John Paul II will have left the planet.  As a recovering Catholic, my only concern involves whether or not the prophecy that there are only two popes left before Armaggedon is true; as a human being, my only concern is whether the planet that John Paul is leaving is worth saving from destruction. 

Much has and will be said about John Paul and his incredible magnetism and appeal and, as the tributes begin, much will be said about the hundreds of self-less and Godly acts committed by the Pope in the name of Catholicism.  He will be remembered and lionized as the man that ended communism and spent the better part of his papacy traveling the world in an effort to unite the over 1 billion members of the Catholic faith and to bring even more non-Catholics into the fold.

What will not be mentioned, however, is John Paul's continuing demonizing of homosexuality, which virtually rubber-stamped hatred towards and violence against gays and lesbians worldwide; his virtual obfuscation of the church sex scandal, which shook the faith of the faithful but caused no widespread reform in the church to address the issues of priests as predators and choir boys as their objects of lust; his continued rejection of contraception to curb exploding populations in the poorest countries on Earth, since it is the Catholics of those countries that form the foundation of the church's wealth; his less-than-forceful condemnation of the war in Iraq and its satanic instigator, George Walker Bush; nor his hands-on policy of dealing directly with oppressive regimes while doing nothing for the citizenry being oppressed. 

In many ways, John Paul shouldn't be remembered for those things - he was, very much like Ronald Reagan, a popular pontiff that will in all probability be remembered as the most popular of the many hundreds that have reigned over and governed the largest Christian denomination on Earth.  As a man, that popularity is understandable - but, as God's representative (and alleged mouthpiece) on this plain of existence, he fell far short of the teachings of the Christ and the spirit of God's love. 

The world's wealthiest entity - Vatican City - houses the papal government while hiding the entire history of mankind in its  bowels.  The things that we know about this history is that it does not follow the principles so ardently asribed to by John Paul.  It all paints a very different picture of the "creation" of man, the life of the Christ and the ultimate fate of our home world.  This information is kept hidden so that the people under papal control will remain devoted to the faith and thus support the massive corporation that is the Catholic Church.  If any of it were to be revealed, the masses would have no need for religion and, therefore, no need for the church.

Which is what, ultimately, needs to happen.  Christ stated that the only way to the Father was through Him - He didn't mention churches or synagogues or mosques or temples, and He certainly didn't prescribe clergymen as the intermediary for communication with the Almighty.  Apparently, God's word is meant to be edited.

I've never been able to reconcile the Church's tenets that call for love and compassion for all with the same church's blatant discrimination towards women and gays and lesbians.  The God of my understanding wants us to love one another support one another and help one another.  He, at no time, preaches hatred or discrimination.  God's word, you see, is contained in the Ten Commandments - which simply do not support the contention that gays and lesbians should be shunned and denied civil liberties, or that priests should be given a pass to abuse children or that the impoverished should be condemned to a life of starvation and disease and indignity so that the Church and other corporations can continue to operate without government interference or taxation. 

And that, you see, is what must be remembered about this pope.  He was an astute politician, much more so than a devout prelate.  He actively sought to drive a wedge between the divergent factions of the Catholic Church and to promote an image of moral and spiritual superiority over those of opposing viewpoints.  Having gained immense popularity because of his support of the Polish labor unions that eventually brought communism to its knees, he continued to rely on politics to advance the causes of the Church and allied and aligned himself and the Church with leaders and governments which human rights records and fostering of liberty and justice were at least as questionable as his own. 

I'm sorry that the Pope is dying - truly, I am.  His death heralds the final chapter of our collective histories, and signals - like Gideon's trumpets - the pounding hooves of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.  But the fact remains that John Paul II was, like Jesus, merely a man - guilty of human foibles and human failings.  He was not perfect and he was not God.  If we agree with that, then we must agree that many of his proclomations were false, and that much of what passed for the word of God during his papacy was merely political posturing to maintain his control.

Rest well, John Paul...your work is, thank God, done....