Posted on 06/04/2005 8:23:30 AM PDT by RushCrush
WARSAW, Poland - Pope John Paul II's longtime private secretary said Saturday he did not burn the late pontiff's notes as his will demanded, arguing that the papers contain "great riches" and should instead be preserved.
Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, who worked with the pope from 1966 until his death earlier this year, told Polish state radio there are "quite a lot of manuscripts on various issues," but he offered no details.
"Nothing has been burned," Dziwisz said. "Nothing is fit for burning, everything should be preserved and kept for history, for the future generations — every single sentence."
"These are great riches that should gradually be made available to the public."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I'm not sure what to think of this. I can see where we would want to save his notes, however, it was not only a verbal wish but stated in his will?
Hmm, not following the pontiffs written statement?
They should burn the notes, obviously John Paul was more interested in his heavenly reward than people here on earth pawing through his private thoughts and papers.
The right and moral thing to do would be to burn the notes. I just don't understand.
I read about another person, Augustus Toplady, who directed in his will that all his manuscripts to be burned. Quite frankly I'm puzzled at why a person would make such a request.
Anybody who wants to read my pithy sayings after I'm gone can have at them. They'll find most of my great "theological treasures" here at FR. :O)
I'm torn. Of course I would love to read JP's notes, but it was his will after all. Strange.
He sees $$$$$$.
Wills should be honored. They are a sacred trust. This sets a bad precedent and example.
"You burn if you want to. The Sec'y's not for burning!"
I have to agree. The papacy should be setting a good example, not refusing one's last written request to curb their own curiousity. Perhaps God didn't want his thoughts given to John Paul expressed right now.
The more I think about this, the more disappointed I am.
I don't think the Pope was concerned with people pawing through his personal papers, I think that he did not want to be made out to be anything beyond a mortal man, a servant of God. That's how I saw it, anyway.
In the US, I no longer trust our courts (don't know to what extent - some will) to honor anything like I once would have.
"The right and moral thing to do would be to burn the notes. I just don't understand."
Follow the money.
I agree, the Pontiff's last wishes should be obeyed. To do any less is dishonor to his memory.
Apparently, there is no honor left among some quarters.
I would agree. He probably saw that people would deify him. He was a devoted and admirable Christian, a good example, but not to be deified. A servant, not the Master. I hope the Secretary will find it in his heart to burn the papers. It's the right thing to do.
More dishonorable behavior and double-dealing by filth that won't follow the instructions of a Will. Either burn them, or have the balls to release them all at once (if even then it can be believed they weren't edited).
This is not his decision to make. I hope the new pontiff steps in and sees that John Paul's wishes are carried out. The Archbishop has lost a lot of the respect that I would naturally have for him.
Calm down, cowboy. The Archbishop says they're valuable; since he worked with JPII for nearly 40 years, we can trust that they are.
They should be preserved.
He's the executor. It is his decision.
My mother has stated in her will that my brother and I get equal shares of her estate, however, as the executor, I think I should get it all.
Then your brother can sue you.
Who's going to sue to burn JPII's papers?
The Archbishop knew him well, and can be forgiven if he believes these papers should be preserved.
Sure, he could sue. It wouldn't happen because I would respect the wishes of the person who wrote the will. I would wish the Secretary (especially as a representative of the Church) to do the right and decent thing. If he respected the Pope, he would have bowed to his wishes no matter what his personal thoughts were.
The right thing to do is to preserve the papers of a saint of the Church.
Not so.
His job is to execute the final instructions of the decedent....which he is patently and admittedly NOT doing.
Executors aren't dictators or kings, it's a position of trust with very specific duties, as outlined by the decedent. Where there is no ambiguity, violating the instructions is an abuse of trust and a flagrantly dishonest act.
It's sad that Archbishop Dziwisz is such a traitor. It's worse that he's being given a diocese after demonstrating he is unfit.
So it's all about money, huh? Well, I am sure Pope John Paul II knew how valuable they would be just as much as the Archbishop. Of course, I wouldn't expect someone who had such didain for the pope to not want to violate his wishes.
If he is a saint, why are you in such a hurry to disobey his wishes and descrate his memory?
Who said anything about money?
Preserving the writings of one of the longest-serving Popes in history, and a saint, is paramount.
JPII likely wanted them burned out of humility, but he was wise enough to entrust them to his lifelong friend (who has now made the right decision).
You did:
The Archbishop says they're valuable; since he worked with JPII for nearly 40 years, we can trust that they are.
A crooked deal.
Perhaps he felt he did not want to provide this for you. After all, he publicly stated and had a will written to that effect.
If you think he is so great, so wonderful and his private thoughts would be an inspiration, then perhaps you would respect him enough to follow his wishes. He chose not to provide this information for you.
You care not what he thought, only looking for your own inspiration. I do not wish to be judgemental but perhaps your own selfish interests are negating his wishes. This is what he chose.
Stop thinking "I" and think "he".
What's selfish about wanting to read the writings of a great saint?
The fact is that JPII entrusted his papers to his good friend. All the legalistic whining around here seems to overlook the fact that Dziwisz loved the man and would never do anything to dishonor him.
That's the whole point, he didn't "entrust" his papers.
He said, my good friend, please destroy these papers for me.
It's a betrayal and I won't discuss this any more.
Who has now violated the trust placed in him by John Paul the Great.
Whether this deep betrayal is evidence of any as-yet-unknown dishonors is yet to be discovered.
What's selfish about that?
You are putting YOUR interests above John Paul's. He instructed they be destroyed, but since you want to read them, to hell with the instructions.
THAT'S what's selfish.
Get a load of this.
Well put, and yes, deeply sad.
I haven't seen his will, have you? I only know what's been reported. I would like to see exactly how his instructions were written.
This is very distrubing. On one hand I'd like to see his writings preserved within the Church and not for public viewing; but I also believe that the wishes of every deceased person must be obeyed, barring any illegalities.
It WAS my understanding that his writings were more along the lines of personal notes... ideas in the making, and any publication of same would not be ethical or moral.
Sounds great to me.
I recall the text of the will as reported at the time. It did not strike me as ambiguous on this point.
That was my understanding too. Maybe we're wrong. It's "possible" but not likely.
The Archbishop knew JPII well and was a close friend. Calling him a "traitor" and accusing him of dishonoring a man he surely loved for over 40 years is pure hysteria.
Whatever serves YOUR needs, "deacon." That's what it's all about for you.
Pity you don't understand the principle of trust involved. "This is my instruction, I trust you to carry it out."
I've always heard that the executor's job is to act in accordance with the will, to essentially carry out the deceased's wishes after death. It's also my understanding that Pope John Paul listed in his will the burning of personal papers, which was also in accordance with Vatican tradition. Curious. I have no doubt there are insights of value in those papers, but...
In his will and Vatican tradition, I'm told. I have to agree with you, I'm torn also. I'm sure that there are indeed great insights in his personal papers, but also exists the possibility that those papers are not translated properly or that segments are left out or over emphasized, which is why I suppose it has been Vatican tradition for the personal papers of deceased Popes to be burned.
The executor "executes" the instructions provided by the decedent.
If the instruction was "do what you think is best," then great latitude is available. If the instruction is "burn this," then it must be burned.
Input/criticism/discussion from other legal Freepers is of course welcome, as you've said.
I don't know what to make of it. I'm sure the papers contain useful insights, things of value, but there is too much room for misinterpretation, intentional or not, and the deceased is not available to clarify. Plus, I'd always thought that the Executor has the responsibility to carry out the details of the will according to the decedent's wishes, not his/her own. See my #43 & 44.
JPII probably wanted to hide from the world his secret passion for writing detective novels and techno-thrillers. ;)
I'm upset too, and don't know quite what to make of it. I think we can assume that JPII didn't want his private, personal writings viewed by the public.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.