‘Very, very kind': St. Petersburg bishop remembers Pope Francis after his death
TAMPA, Fla. (WFLA) — Catholics in Tampa Bay woke up Monday to news that Pope Francis, 88, died just hours after a public appearance to celebrate the Easter holiday.
Bishop Gregory Parkes with the Diocese of St. Petersburg joined WFLA News Now at 11 to respond to Pope Francis' death and discuss how it impacted local parishioners.
Tributes from around the globe pour in for Pope Francis after his death
'To hear this morning that he passed away, it was a shock,' Parkes said, noting the Pope's health appeared to be improving after a recent lengthy hospitalization.
Parkes said local churches, Christ the King in Tampa and the Cathedral of St. Jude the Apostle in St. Pete, would hold mass on Monday morning to pray for the repose of the soul of Pope Francis.
Prior to the Pope's death, the bishop already planned a trip to the Vatican, which now falls during his funeral services. Parkes plans to attend his funeral mass.
Parkes, who has met Pope Francis on three occasions, described him as 'a grandfatherly figure … Very, very kind. Very warm.'
'Something people may not realize is he had a very good sense of humor,' Parkes said. 'I'm 6-foot-8, very tall, and the Holy Father noted that and asked me if I played basketball.'
Pope Francis' death leaves Catholics across the globe wondering what comes next. Parkes explained that Cardinals from around the world will gather in Rome to participate in a conclave to elect the next pope.
'We don't know when that's going to happen. A date for the Conclave hasn't been set yet, but it should be happening within the next couple of weeks,' Parkes said.
When asked if the next Pope will follow in Francis' footsteps, Parkes said that since Pope Francis appointed the majority of the Cardinals during his lengthy pontificate, some believe that they will be inclined to continue to move the church in that direction.
'We also believe that this process is guided by God's will and by the Holy Spirit, so you have to leave room, that it could be someone who goes in a completely different direction,' Parkes said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Stormont ministers make joint appeal for end to violence in Ballymena
Stormont ministers have made an urgent appeal for calm following two nights of street violence in Northern Ireland. In a joint statement, ministers from across the powersharing Executive in Northern Ireland, which includes Sinn Fein, the DUP, Alliance Party and UUP, said those involved in disorder in Ballymena have nothing to offer society but 'division and disorder'. Seventeen police officers were injured following a second night of sustained violence in the Co Antrim town on Tuesday. The violence flared at first on Monday following an earlier peaceful protest which was organised in support of the family of a girl who was the victim of an alleged sexual assault in the area. The four-party powersharing Executive is headed by Sinn Fein First Minister Michelle O'Neill and DUP deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly. The statement released on behalf of all ministers said: 'We strongly condemn the racially motivated violence witnessed in recent days and make an urgent appeal for calm across society. 'The alleged serious sexual assault reported on June 7 in Ballymena was appalling and our collective thoughts are with the victim and their loved ones at this deeply traumatic time. 'It is paramount that the justice process is now allowed to take its course so that this heinous crime can be robustly investigated. 'Those weaponising the situation in order to sow racial tensions do not care about seeing justice and have nothing to offer their communities but division and disorder. 'While all of our citizens have the right to engage in peaceful protest, there can never be any justification for the violence that has taken place in recent days, during which residents have been terrorised and numerous PSNI officers injured.' The statement added: 'We send our best wishes to all of those affected by these senseless acts and thank the PSNI and the NI Fire and Rescue Service for their efforts in ensuring that no-one has been seriously injured or worse. 'As an Executive, we work collectively every day to create a safe, prosperous and welcoming Northern Ireland for all. We are urging everyone in our communities to play their part in that effort and reject the divisive agenda being pursued by a minority of destructive, bad faith actors.' In a social media post, Ms Little-Pengelly said: 'Dismayed to see further disorder last night. 'Violence is always wrong. I have been in constant contact throughout last night with PSNI and in contact with local elected representatives. 'This disorder and violence must stop and justice be allowed to prevail.' Meanwhile, Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald described the scenes of violence in Ballymena as 'unnerving'. She said she expects Ms O'Neill to visit the Co Antrim town. 'I'm sure the First Minister will visit there. And let me say that the behaviour, I found it really unnerving, depressing,' she told RTE Radio. 'It was reminiscent of times a long, long time ago when violent loyalism burnt out Catholics from their homes. 'Let me say everybody needs to be safe in their community and in their homes, calm needs to be restored. 'Order needs to be restored. Respect has to be maintained. People's safety is absolutely paramount.' Ms McDonald added: 'So this behaviour needs to stop. It needs to end. 'And as I say, when I saw those images, they transport you back to a very bad time when sectarian violence and pogroms and all of those episodes. We're not going back to those times, every single person needs to be safe. 'I'm sure the First Minister will reiterate those sentiments very fully, and let me tell you it wouldn't be her first time in Ballymena, either.'
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: Another unanimous win for religious freedom at the Supreme Court
Is religious freedom a wedge issue? The unanimous agreement between all the justices in a decision just issued by the U.S. Supreme Court suggests the answer is no. The Court's example provides an important corrective to the framing of some commentators and advocacy groups. The facts of this case initially seem unreal — the state of Wisconsin determined that the Catholic Charities Bureau was not 'religious enough' to qualify for a tax exemption available to religious organizations in the state. Piling on, the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed because Catholic Charities did not proselytize or exclude non-Catholics from its services. Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court has now corrected that decision and ruled unanimously that the state cannot prefer one religion over another on the grounds of the church's teachings. The Court's opinion was written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She points out, 'A law that differentiates between religions along theological lines is textbook denominational discrimination.' The state had denied the exemption to Catholic Charities simply because the group did not follow the practice of some other churches, which proselytize while providing social services and serve only fellow members. Since doing either of these things would violate the beliefs of the organization, it was treated differently from other religious organizations solely because of this belief. Justice Sotomayor's opinion summarizes the legal standard: 'When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny.' The Court rightly concludes that Wisconsin had no compelling reason that would justify this disparate treatment. Justice Clarence Thomas joined the Court's opinion and wrote separately to note another problem with the Wisconsin court's opinion. The Court treated Catholic Charities as separate from the local Catholic Diocese. This is contrary to the 'religious perspective' of the church, which is owed deference by the state. Ignoring the church's beliefs violated the First Amendment guarantee 'to religious institutions [of] broad autonomy to conduct their internal affairs and govern themselves.' Religion and claims for religious freedom are sometimes characterized as divisive issues. When a presidential commission on religious freedom was recently created, some commentators charged that this would undermine the separation of church and state. The Supreme Court's decision demonstrates that religious freedom issues need not be divisive. The clear constitutional protection of the right of people of faith to live and of religious organizations to operate consistent with their beliefs is right there in the text of the First Amendment. This is a threshold principle that no government can ignore without endangering the most basic liberties of its citizens. This is especially true given the fact that verbal expressions of personal faith have defined modern protections for freedom of speech, and gatherings of members of organized religion form the foundations for protections of freedom of association. State and federal lawmakers should ensure that their actions are consistent with this guarantee. Additionally, reporters, commentators, politicians and advocacy groups should take note that protecting religious freedom is typically a consensus issue for the U.S. Supreme Court, whose role is to ensure that the First Amendment guarantee is protected in legal disputes. In the 12 religious freedom cases decided since 2015, four have been unanimous and four more have garnered only one or two dissenting votes. There are, obviously, some cases where the justices don't reach consensus, but these cases should not cause us to lose sight of the strong support religious freedom claims typically receive. The Court's support for religious freedom is a bright spot in our current political climate. It demonstrates the wisdom of the Framers of the Bill of Rights in including specific religious exercise protections and vindicates one of the nation's highest aspirations: that people of faith should be free to act on their beliefs without interference or discrimination.
New York Post
14 hours ago
- New York Post
Dems smearing Trump as ‘authoritarian' were oddly quiet over Joe Biden's strongarm diktats
The left's attempts to brand President Donald Trump's deportations and his response to the Los Angeles riots as 'authoritarian' would be downright comical — if they weren't so dangerous. Trump's actions are 'purely authoritarian,' insists Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.). Boston Mayor Michelle Wu decries the 'secret police tactics,' while ex-Veep Kamala Harris claims that deploying the National Guard is all about 'stoking fear.' The Intercept's Natasha Lennard warns of a 'full-on authoritarian takeover of the U.S. government.' Please. No such charges flew when President Joe Biden illegally ordered the private sector to make all its workers get vaxxed during COVID. Or when he openly defied the Supreme Court to extend the federal eviction moratorium. Nor when Team Biden was caught using strong-arm tactics to censor speech it didn't like. Progressives saw no fascism in prosecutors using the courts to try to bankrupt and jail Trump as he ran for reelection. Or when Democrats sought to remove his name removed from ballots. Radio silence prevailed, too, when the Biden Justice Department sent FBI agents to raid Mar-a-Lago, Trump's personal residence. And when the Bureau targeted traditional Catholics and parents who opposed DEI and trans policies in their schools. Now Trump is doing exactly what he said he'd do — i.e., deporting illegal immigrants and enforcing the law — and the left screams 'authoritarian!' Please. Progs hate our immigration laws but lack the votes to change them, and so detest Trump's moves to enforce them — and sympathize with the rioters trying to interfere with that enforcement. Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters So when the president sticks to his course, they smear him as dictatorial. They've chosen to stand up for the illegal-immigrant rapists, murderers and gangbangers ICE agents are trying to deport, claiming the arrests create 'fear' in their neighborhoods. Sorry, but it's the gangsters, killers and sex offenders who create fear, and most Americans are glad to see Trump get them out their nabes. An RMG Research poll late last month found voters back Trump's immigration policies by a 56%-to-42% margin. An Economist/YouGov study through Thursday had Trump up 51-47. Confusing their left-wing base for the American center, Democrats — from Wu to LA Mayor Karen Bass and California Gov. Gavin Newsom — are attacking Trump for taking an approach voters support. As so their words embolden rioters and fuel violence, infuriating average Americans . . . and handing Trump and the GOP a political gift. They're only further deepening the nation's divides while digging themselves into deeper holes.
