My statements are illogical. So be it.
I still love and honor Pope John Paul the Great. He is one of the great writers of the church.
Did he make mistakes? Sure. He even said as much in his last book. He wished he was stronger in matters concerning his priests and the Vatican. To that I say remember Divine Mercy.
You see murphE, the problem that I see with GerardPH and his arguments is that it seems to me that he does not believe in Pope John Paul II's legitimate position as pope.
And that's a problem. So what is the point in addressing anything GerardPH has stated? Will it really matter if I did?
Gerard ph has used documentation, some of which is Pope John Paul's own writing, to support the view that he wasn't such a traditional, conservative or particularly effective pope, contrary to what so many others seem to be proclaiming, that's all. That does not imply that Gerard ph did not accept him as pope.
The standard responses to Gerard ph's position boil down to this:
"I don't care what evidence you offer, or what objections you make, I liked him and so did many other people, in fact he was wildly popular, therefore he must have been a good pope. If you don't think he was a particularly good pope, it can't possibly for objective reasons, it must be because there is something wrong with you, because everyone else liked him."