He did no such thing; and still less did he do what Gendron ridiculously suggested was denying that Jesus is our creator by doing so. It is a dogma of the Catholic faith that man was created by God, period, end of discussion. Questions of how he was created and by what means (whether immediately or through some kind of descent) are interesting, but the Christian's sanctity does not stand or fall on them.
did he fail to discipline the sexually confused Bishops
As a matter of fact, yes, I believe his reign was marked by a regrettable laxity in discipline. If that is an automatic sign of damnation, God have mercy on all our souls.
did he award a "plenary indulgence"
Plenary indulgences are awarded all the time for certain pious acts. But in Catholic theology, they come directly from Christ's blood atonement in purification for sin, and are in no way, shape, matter, or form separate from same. The Church has no power save that was given Her by Christ.
does he accept the worship of men as "Holy Father"
He accepted the title "Holy Father" and he rejected the idolatrous worhip of men. The one does not imply the other any more than "Holy Bible" implies a worship of books.
and did he or did he not play footsie with the Muslims, kissing the Koran and claiming a "unity in spirit" with them?
The Koran incident, if it was reported accurately, was scandalous and should in no way have been done. Plenty of Catholics on this forum will agree with that. But how it proves he was damned, I still have no idea.
NEWSBRIEF: Chicago Tribune, Friday, 10/25/96, "POPE BOLSTERS CHURCH SUPPORT FOR EVOLUTION", by Stevenson Swanson, Tribune Staff Writer, Dateline: New York.
"In a major statement of the Roman Catholic Church's position on the theory of evolution, Pope John Paul II has proclaimed that the theory is 'more than just a hypothesis' and that evolution is compatible with Christian faith. In a written message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, the pope said the theory of evolution has been buttressed by scientific studies and discoveries since Charles Darwin ... "It is indeed remarkable that this theory has progressively taken root in the minds of researchers following a series of discoveries made in different spheres of knowledge', the pope said in his message Wednesday. 'The convergence, neither sought nor provoked, of results of studies undertaken independently from each other constitutes, in itself, asignificant argument in favor of this theory..."
"If taken literally, the Biblical view of the beginning of life and Darwin's scientific view would seem irreconcilable. In Genesis, the creation of the world, and Adam, the first human, took six days. Evolution's process of genetic mutation and natural selection-the survival and proliferation of the fittest new species-has taken billions of years, according to scientists ..."
>>He did no such thing;<<
It appears otherwise.
>>Questions of how he was created and by what means (whether immediately or through some kind of descent) are interesting, but the Christian's sanctity does not stand or fall on them.<<
Does the Catholic Church then not take Genesis literally?
And your answers to the rest still point to "Yes, but...".
A 'yes' is still a 'yes'.