mhflierman said:
RIP.
I'm hoping for a more progressive pope. It's a known fact that John Paul II was a real conservative, he made the Vatican even more conservative than when he took over.
What was "non-conservative" in one way was his last decision. He choose not to go to a hospital after what happened in USA over the last month with Terri Shaivo - he wanted to go when it was his time, not have someone turn off the life support system.
Now being very liberal-left wing myself, I looked up to John-Paul, from when he stood up against communism to when he went to the UK and told Blair and Bush they were wrong (kind of telling them "dont use god as an excuse for the war, as you wont have his blessing - you must have the pope's blessing before you can say your doing gods work in war).
I cant really see what the pope did wrong? - he waited till the apartheid was over before he visited South Africa - he condemed all wars and oppressive regimes, and even visited those countrys (yes he did visit Cuba, and told Fidel Castro to remember religion and the people).
Now im a 'Irish' catholic, but not a practising one, I personally dont believe in god and when I went to the Vatican City in Christmas 2003, I relised how great this pope was in comparision to previous pope's who stole and plunded other cultures like theives, if you visit - I cannot remember the name of the room but its in St Peter's Catherdial where all the cups and chalesse are you well see about enough gold and jewels and jems to probably buy most of Europe if not most of the world. - the whole pledge of sharing during christmas time was lost on me during that trip after seeing that.
Now he did revolutionise catholism by the way priests teach, pray and be more "open" in their explainations on the bible, and if memory serves me he also made the priests actually face the congration during mass, previously they had their back to the congration and prayed to the tabinacle - only a very few churches in the world still uses the old method, I cannot remember the name of the decision to change this, something like Cardinal College No. 2 or something it was the second major change in the way mass is conducted since Christ's death.
He revoultioned not only changes in Church but also in Politics. While people would be against his stance on marriage, homosexuality, abortion and the right for life, remember its the teachings of catholism. Personally im against all four, I believe people have a choice when it comes to all four, does that make me less catholic or christian? no way, but if the pope did it, he would be against the majority and would might as well through away the bible.
The peadophile priests was also a touchy subject, know I can understand why he seperated himself of this subject because it was against the fabric of catholism and the congration believed he should have done something to stop it - but remember this is a civil matter, not the churches and dont convict someone until they are provern guilty, previously we have had a priest convicted of being a peadophile by a former student at his school, they found he wasnt gulity when that same student said some of his other teachers were peadophiles as well.
The people did alot, not just for Catholics and Christians but also political and also repairing the damages between Catholics and Jews during WW2.
But above all - he forgave the person who tried to kill him in 1981 imo he will be a saint.
The next pope imo should be an african pope.