Much of what he has done is/was very good. Much of what he has done is the type of thing I like to think any pope would do.
Many of the crucial/important/loud decisions that have been made by the RCC in the past several years are things with which I have vehemently disagreed and are, in fact, several of the reasons I left the church.
So the general stuff: yea. The past few years: nay. Overall: nay.
Thumbs down. At the dawn of his occupancy of the office (reign? term of office?) the Catholic Church had a socially conservative theology but a lot of momentum towards socially liberal (and liberationist) practice, and seemed poised to preserve some of its moldier theological traditions mostl in an “historical legacy” sense while focusing more on ethical and moral encyclicals that would spotlight how to do the most good for people.
While I doubt he acted single-handedly with no support or acclaim from the upper hierarch that chose him, he steered the Church towards a reactionary social conservatism as dark and repressive as fundamental Protestantism, and pushed hard for strenuous activism in those areas, i.e., he didn’t merely put the kibosh on the possibility of women being priests or birth control being taken off the Naughty List, he led the charge against abortion rights and encouraged other loudmouthed snots like NY’s Cardinal O’Connor in their social-conservative ranting.
Check out that other thread OP guy… some good stuff there.
Living in a Catholic country means I’ve seen the damage wrought by the backward mentality of the Catholic Church and the Pope. So I say NAY for sure. I don’t think the Catholic Church will change especiallly since he made sure he got his own like minded Archbishops in the right places.
Maybe he was a nice and honest guy… but hey a lot of people who caused a lot of suffering and death were nice and honest too.
Since he died recently we will only read glowing stuff… and that is natural…
I don’t hate the man like I hate Falwell, but I really think his lifetime of anti-choice, anti-safe-sex, anti-gay politics has left the world somewhat worse off. The church has the money and influence to make a real difference in these things.
While Falwell’s deeds seem motivated by malice, the pope struck me as incredibly naive, sometimes veering off into willful ignorance – especially when it came to safe sex and abortion. I don’t buy the argument that “his hands were tied by dogma,” because the Catholic church doesn’t go in for strict interpretations of the Bible.
I’m hoping the next pope has a clue about things like AIDS, and doesn’t use spiritual blackmail to influence politicians’ voting. Don’t hold out much hope however.
He did some good work for the poor, and he came out against the Iraq War, which was good. But overall, his record on things was lousy, and – not content to lead his own flock – he muddled in things outside his church he has no business dealing with (like politics, and medicine).
I for one can’t wait until the news sites have news again, instead of revisionist papal glurge.
I’m kind of torn as well. On the one hand, you have one of the most “global” popes (for lack of a better term) who actively used his office to promote the church and it’s goals such as anti-communism, humanitarian goals, etc…
On the other hand, he was rather orthodox and reactionary in terms of retrenching the church’s position on birth control, married clergy, etc…
I have to wonder though, about a guy whose main opposition within the church on many contemporary issues is the Jesuits, and who instead encourages Opus Dei and Legion of Christ.