Easter weekend reflections

Every year come Easter, 2 billion Christians celebrate the day when they believe Christ rose from the dead. Likewise, the world's 1 billion Roman Catholics look forward to the Easter Mass on this day, in which the Pope traditionally leads the service from the Holy See in Rome (Interesting note: the Vatican website actually features the "Pope's" email address).

This year's service was a bit different, however. The Pope's ailing health left him with an inability to address the crowd. He struggled to speak and instead chose to simply make the sign of the cross, leaving the bulk of the Easter weekend responsibilities to subordinate cardinals, mainly Angelo Sodano of Italy and Joseph Ratzinger of Germany.

This is the first time in John Paul II's 26-year papacy that he did not take part in the Holy Week celebrations leading up to the Easter Mass. More and more we are seeing top-level cardinals stepping in to fill the Pope's position, reading statements on his behalf and trying to keep peoples' spirits up. What is the Catholic Church to do with the problem of an ailing Pope who refuses to accept resignation? John Paul has begun to relate his suffering to that of Christ Himself, which I perceive as a humble yet proud statement at the same time. On the one hand, it is good to look to the example of Holy Figures such as Christ in order to get through periods of tribulation. On the other hand, in the case of the Pope, I think that it is better for him to accept that he is, in fact, only human. True, Christ suffered on the cross, but he was able to rise again (whether you take that to be a literal or allegorical truth), which is something a sick 84-year-old will never be able to do, regardless of whatever he may believe about his station here on earth. In any case, some at the Vatican seem to be preparing for the worst, while others still cling to the notion that the Pope's embrace of suffering will somehow bring about his redemption. Either way, I do not believe he has much time remaining on this plane.

On the Terri Schiavo front, there is something truly profound (at least, I hope you think so as well) that dawned on me while reading about the resiliency of "pro-Terri" protesters, who were asked today by the Schiavo family to go home to their families for Easter. Some insisted on staying behind and continuing to fight on "behalf" of the Schiavo family.

The idea that many of these conservative Christian/Catholic protesters are arguing, in favor of allowing Terri Schiavo to live, is the intrinsic value of a human life; that no matter how handicapped a person may be or hopeless the situation may seem, we are still talking about a human life. If that is the case, then why not spend more time lobbying the U.S. government to send food aid to starving people in Third World countries? Does the conservative American belief in the intrinsic value of a human life remain confined to our own borders? I don't mean to play Devil's advocate here, but I think it's a good point to be made. If Terri Schiavo has the right to food and water, why not an orphan from Sudan or the Congo? Just something to think about...