Pope Francis' funeral: Thousands gather in Vatican City to farewell head of the Roman Catholic Church
The service – expected to be conducted entirely in Latin – will last about two and a half hours and will be led by the dean of the College of Cardinals, 91-year-old Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re.
A sermon will pay tribute to Pope Francis' life.
The Swiss Guards, who provide personal security for the Pope, also have a role in the funeral service; kneeling for the consecration of the host and the blessing of the bread and wine.
The guards were reportedly put under a strict curfew in February when Pope Francis became severely ill with pneumonia. It was reported they were undergoing protocol drills in preparation for the Pope's death.
PM Chris Luxon, Prince William, US President Donald Trump among mourners
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will represent New Zealand at the Pope's funeral today, joining a host of world leaders and dignitaries paying their respects in person.
Luxon travelled from Turkey yesterday, where he gave a speech at the Gallipoli Peninsula as part of the annual Anzac Day commemorations.
United States President Donald Trump and the First Lady, Melania Trump, will also attend the papal funeral, as will Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Italian PM Giorgia Meloni, British PM Sir Keir Starmer, Argentina's President Javier Milei and France's President, Emmanuel Macron, are all on the confirmed guest list.
Other world leaders and dignitaries confirmed to attend the funeral today include Ireland's President Michael Higgins, India's President Droupadi Murmu, Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos, President of the Central African Republic Faustin-Archange Touadera, Slovakian President Peter Pellegrini, Israel's ambassador to the Holy See Yaron Sideman and Croatian President Zoran Milanovic.
The Prince of Wales, Prince William, will be there in place of his father, King Charles.
Traditionally, British sovereigns do not attend funerals. When Pope John Paul II died in April 2005, the then-Prince Charles attended the funeral to represent his mother, Queen Elizabeth II.
Other royal families represented include Queen Mary of Denmark, Belgium's King Philippe and Queen Mathilde, Spain's King Felipe VI and Queen Letizia, Sweden's King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia, and Monaco's Prince Albert II and Princess Charlene.
Final resting place breaks with tradition
A funeral bell will toll after the funeral service, as the body of the Pope is taken through what is known as the door of death, to the left of the altar at St Peter's.
In keeping with the pontiff's wishes, Pope Francis will be laid to rest at the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore – outside of the Vatican, where many Popes before him are buried.
He will be the first Pope to be buried at Saint Mary Major since the 17th century, when Pope Clement IX was laid to rest there.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
13 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Recognition of Palestine - NZ weighs decision amid global pressure
Neither argument is strictly relevant to New Zealand's decision, which will be made by UN leaders' week in six weeks. The purpose of recognising Palestinian statehood is not to please Hamas or the Palestinian Authority or to infuriate Israel, although it will do all of those things. It is not to instantly magic up a happy ending to the misery in Gaza. It is to preserve the viability of a two-state solution, a state of Israel co-existing with a state of Palestine in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Every country that has joined the latest international effort to recognise Palestinian statehood has cited that as the rationale. And the reason for that is that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu is redoubling efforts to undermine and reject a two-state solution, including plans to take control of Gaza City, and a symbolic vote in the Knesset (Israeli parliament) last month calling for Israel to annex the West Bank. 'The Netanyahu government's rejection of a two-state solution is wrong – it's wrong morally and it's wrong strategically,' said British Foreign Secretary David Lammy. 'The two-state solution is in mortal danger. It is about to give way to perpetual confrontation. That is something France simply cannot resign itself to,' said France's Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, Jean-Noel Barrot. 'Prospects for a two-state solution have been steadily and gravely eroded,' said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. 'The Netanyahu Government is extinguishing the prospect of a two-state solution by rapidly expanding illegal settlements, threatening annexation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and explicitly opposing any Palestinian state,' said Albanese. As in New Zealand, the two-state solution has long been endorsed by most countries, and the United Nations, as the only fair long-term answer to two peoples with claims to the same land. Palestinians wait to receive hot meals with their pots and pans in Deir Al Balah, Gaza. Photo / Anadolu via Getty Images The alternative, one state of Israel, is one in which the Palestinian quest for a homeland would never be satisfied, one in which Palestinian rights would be subjugated and one in which conflict would be permanent. At times, Israel has supported a two-state solution. But Netanyahu, now in this third stint as Prime Minister, has actively undermined it by supporting Israeli settlements in the West Bank, in breach of international law. When New Zealand was preparing to co-sponsor UN Security Council resolution 2334 in 2016 – again in order to preserve a two-state solution - he described it as 'a declaration of war'. Netanyahu had already bullied Egypt out of co-sponsoring the resolution, but it passed, and Israel withdrew its ambassador from Wellington for five months. The United States, whose Secretary of State John Kerry had done a huge amount of work in the Middle East, abstained, allowing it to pass without dissent. The present has some echoes to back then. Today's rallying of the international community, once again to preserve the two-state solution, also serves to reinforce the position that this protracted conflict needs a political solution, not a military one. Since the Hamas attack on Israel in October 2023 and the ensuing crisis, New Zealand's position has remained non-committal about when it will recognise Palestine and to 'focus on the needs of the moment'. It is the classic bob-each-way position of a small state, trying to keep onside with Israel by not recognising Palestine, and keeping Palestinians onside by saying it's just a matter of when, not if. But given that Israel has thumbed its nose at the international community and its disproportionate, horrific actions in Gaza, the question New Zealand must ask is whether it is still valid to try to please everyone. With movement on the issue from a large number of like-minded friends, Australia, Britain, France, and Canada give a small country the cover it might not normally have over such a major shift. No shift is likely without conditions. They could be similar to those accepted by France and Canada, such as commitments by the Palestinian Authority to reform its governance, commit to elections in 2026, exclude any role for Hamas, and demilitarise any Palestinian state. If a condition by New Zealand were to wait for recognition until an actual state was in place, that would be tantamount to the status quo. Foreign Minister Winston Peters took an oral item to cabinet on Monday about recognition of a Palestinian state, as opposed to a cabinet paper. That is not to say that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade won't have plenty of advice on recognition, and that is being prepared. But it is also a reminder that no matter what the official advice is, it will be a political decision. Peters himself, a former student of Hebrew, has been a hawk on Israel. He was critical of New Zealand sponsoring resolution 2334 in 2016. That meant his strong criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza last year and this year has carried more weight. Planes drop aid packages by parachute over western Gaza City, Gaza. Photo / Anadolu via Getty Images It is acknowledged by most countries that the United States and President Trump, Israel's strongest ally, hold the key to ending the conflict and what happens afterwards. And because Peters is sympathetic to the Trump Administration and its America First ethos, he is open to accusations of delaying recognition in order to please the United States. That is why Peters, despite professing to loathe the common refrain that New Zealand has an independent foreign policy on the basis that it implies that others don't, on Monday insisted that 'New Zealand has an independent foreign policy'. An important factor in how New Zealand is approaching the issue of recognition is the unique makeup of the Government. It is the prerogative of the cabinet to make such a decision. However, given that the cabinet avoids votes (National with 14 out of 20 would win every time) and operates on party consensus, it effectively gives a veto to each of the three parties in Government, National, Act and NZ First. That could lead to an outrageous outcome if, for example, every party in Parliament except Act favoured recognition of Palestinian statehood or if every party except Act and NZ First supported recognition. The parties other than Act, led by Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour, and NZ First, led by Peters, represent 85% of the Parliament. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says the recognition of Palestine is a complex issue and will take time to work through. Actually, it is not that hard. What will be hard is presenting the views of a disparate Government to a country that has largely lost sympathy with Israel because of its appalling treatment of Palestinians. One of the reasons Peters might find it difficult to support recognition of Palestinian statehood is that he has spent the past year saying why New Zealand shouldn't. But when the circumstances change, as they have done, it is not unreasonable for the response to change.
NZ Herald
17 hours ago
- NZ Herald
NCEA's demise is a lesson in failed educational policy
New Zealand students ranked above the OECD average in maths, reading and science literacy in the 2022 Pisa (Programme for International Student Assessment) report. But there has been a decline in scores across all three subjects in the last 20 years. We should not move on from the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) without asking how it happened and why we persisted with a scheme so obviously flawed. If I tell you Trevor Mallard was the Minister of Education in 2002 when the NCEA was implemented, you may think no further explanation is needed. When he was Speaker of the House, Mallard responded to protesters coming to Parliament by turning on the sprinklers and playing Barry Manilow songs over the public address system. But, in fairness, the NCEA was not his idea. I was in Parliament when it was promoted. It was his associate minister, Steve Maharey, by profession a sociology lecturer, who drove it through. Maharey was a true believer in 'cognitive learning', what he called 'personalised learning', more commonly known as 'pupil-led learning': the notion that children learn by discovering knowledge for themselves rather than being directly taught. We do learn from experience and finding out information is an important skill. But to master any worthwhile subject, we must first be taught essential foundation knowledge. A simple example: to write coherently, one must know grammar. You cannot do chemistry without being taught the periodic table, or mathematics without learning times tables. The NCEA allowed pupils to choose to skip learning challenging content essential for subject knowledge in favour of collecting soft credits. It is also unfair to blame only Maharey. In the British comedy Yes Minister, politicians come and go while the real power lies with senior civil servants. So too in New Zealand. The NCEA was the creation of senior bureaucrats in the Ministry of Education. It is a department that has promoted a string of fads, from open-plan classrooms, 'look-and-guess' reading and that built schools so badly designed they have had to be demolished. The ministry has created a school system where absenteeism is rife. Really big mistakes are usually made by clever people. Stupid people are rarely able to make a big mistake. Those promoting pupil-led learning were clever, articulate and convinced that they knew best. What they claimed is superficially attractive. Rote learning can crush creativity, but the alternative they imposed was worse. Act MP Deborah Coddington summed up our view at the time: 'One of the most dangerous experiments ever foisted on New Zealand children.' John Morris, Auckland Grammar headmaster, correctly predicted that the NCEA would mean 'the dumbing-down of academic standards'. Some New Zealand schools have never adopted pupil-led learning, opting for the Cambridge exam instead. National's then education spokesman Sir Bill English warned that if problems weren't fixed, 'NCEA will lose credibility'. This belief that it just needed a few tweaks led the Key Government into continuing with a system that was flawed. The flaws were visible from the start. Students and schools gamed the system. In 2004, Cambridge High School claimed a 100% NCEA pass rate by giving pupils credits for picking up litter. In 2013, nearly 25% of internal assessments were marked incorrectly, yet the credits still counted toward NCEA grades. In 2017 then Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced a review of the NCEA. The Government launched a trial of of new NCEA literacy and numeracy tests in 2022. The results were shocking. More than 40% of students failed at least one test in the June 2023 exams. The Herald has reported that Labour's current education spokeswoman, Willow-Jean Prime, didn't respond to NCEA meeting offers. By contrast, in just 18 months, Education Minister Erica Stanford has announced the end of the NCEA and its replacement with externally marked exams. Critics complain this will mean teachers 'teaching to the test'. Exactly. Exams will result in teacher-led learning. Pupils being taught reading, writing and arithmetic, essential for passing exams. For two decades, NCEA's designers insisted their system was the future. The future has arrived, and it has failed. The real lesson is not just that the NCEA must go, but that the political class must never again be permitted to impose unproven ideology-driven experiments on our children.
NZ Herald
2 days ago
- NZ Herald
‘Concessions do not persuade a killer' - Zelenskyy warns against capitulating to Russia's demands
'This is really a feel-out meeting a little bit,' Trump told reporters at the White House. 'We're going to see what he has in mind and if it's a fair deal, I'll reveal it to the European Union leaders and to Nato leaders and also to President Zelenskyy,' Trump said. 'I may say - lots of luck, keep fighting. Or I may say, we can make a deal.' Trump insists on swaps Zelenskyy has ruled out ceding territory seized by force. Trump - who publicly berated Zelenskyy at a White House meeting in February - said he was a 'little bothered' by Zelensky's stance and insisted land swaps would need to take place. 'There'll be some swapping, there'll be some changes in land,' he said. But Trump said he would also tell Putin that 'you've got to end this war'. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has invited the French, British and other European leaders and the EU and Nato chiefs to virtual talks. Merz's office said today that the video conference in various rounds of talks would discuss 'further options to exert pressure on Russia' and 'preparation of possible peace negotiations and related issues of territorial claims and security'. EU foreign ministers met in Brussels today with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha and also examined imposing a 19th package of sanctions on Russia since the invasion. Until Russia agrees to a 'full and unconditional ceasefire, we should not even discuss any concessions', EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said after the talks. 'It has never worked in the past with Russia, and will not work with Putin today.' Zelenskyy again warned against capitulating to Putin's demands. 'Russia refuses to stop the killings, and therefore must not receive any rewards or benefits. And this is not just a moral position - it is a rational one,' Zelenskyy wrote in a statement published on social media. 'Concessions do not persuade a killer,' he added. Question on Zelensky role Asked yesterday on CNN if Zelenskyy could be present at the Alaska summit, US Ambassador to Nato Matthew Whitaker responded, 'Yes, I certainly think it's possible'. Trump, asked today about inviting Zelenskyy to Alaska, suggested the Ukrainian leader would be involved in talks at a future date. 'I'll be there if they need, but I want to have a meeting set up between the two leaders,' he said. It remains unclear if Putin would accept a meeting with Zelenskyy, who has publicly dared him to negotiate. As a prerequisite to a peace settlement, the Kremlin has demanded Kyiv pull its forces out of several regions claimed by Moscow and embrace sweeping demands - including committing to being a neutral state excluded from Nato and shunning US and European military support. Both sides have stepped up aerial assaults, with Ukraine claiming to have hit a facility that produces missile components in Russia's Nizhny Novgorod region. Local authorities said one person died in the attack and two were wounded. Russia's Defence Ministry said its forces had captured the village of Fedorivka, in eastern Ukraine's Donetsk region. -Agence France-Presse
