John Paul the Great?

[daughteroftruth]

Great and holy people are always controversial in different ways and John Paul is no exception to this.

So are unholy people. Being controversial isn’t proof of anything except, maybe, of playing both sides.

 

[pnewton]

You continuously make comments like this and then have the nerve to say that you don’t believe the pope to be a demi-god?

Yes, I made comments to a new poster who was castigated for his opinion on a subject based on opinion. I have no idea what my post had to do with the papacy, but no, I do not consider him a demigod. I do not mind responding to this accusation. I have done so many times from anticatholics that accuse us of papolatry.

 

[melja]

Just read some of this post and would like to add my bit - I thought he did a lot for the church - particularly with the younger end. I had the privelidge of seeing him at a youth rally when he came over to England. He was very charismatic and held the attention of the whole stadium some 40,000 youngsters - no mean feat. I think he was more ‘visible’ than many of the other popes, something which the young people at the rally certainly agreed with

 

[daughteroftruth]

Just read some of this post and would like to add my bit - I thought he did a lot for the church - particularly with the younger end. I had the privelidge of seeing him at a youth rally when he came over to England. He was very charismatic and held the attention of the whole stadium some 40,000 youngsters - no mean feat. I think he was more ‘visible’ than many of the other popes, something which the young people at the rally certainly agreed with

I’ve heard of this impact he made everywhere, but I’m curious as to how many of these people actually changed their lifestyle and live now for Christ *and *His Church? (sincere question, mostly food-for-thought, not picking a fight)

 

[pnewton]

I’ve heard of this impact he made everywhere, but I’m curious as to how many of these people actually changed their lifestyle and live now for Christ *and *His Church? (sincere question, mostly food-for-thought, not picking a fight)

An excellent question.

melja,

Could we persuade you to tell us what this visit meant to you?

 

[franklinf]

Just read some of this post and would like to add my bit - I thought he did a lot for the church - particularly with the younger end. I had the privelidge of seeing him at a youth rally when he came over to England. He was very charismatic and held the attention of the whole stadium some 40,000 youngsters - no mean feat. I think he was more ‘visible’ than many of the other popes, something which the young people at the rally certainly agreed with

To put it bluntly, so what? Yes he might have captivated younger people but so what? What was the result? Did he captivate them on a deeper and more profound spiritual level, or was it on a superficial and entertaining level? Was there an increase in vocations? An increase in Mass attendance?

Mass Attendance Graph
cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/gallup.jpg

Mass Attendance Breakdown by Age
cara.georgetown.edu/mattend.jpg

Collection of Statistics
cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/index.htm

 

[Frosty]

I’ve heard of this impact he made everywhere, but I’m curious as to how many of these people actually changed their lifestyle and live now for Christ *and *His Church? (sincere question, mostly food-for-thought, not picking a fight)

Here is a concrete example of how JP II had a life changing impact on young people. Last Saturday after confession at our Cathedral, I still had about an hour before Mass began. It was a nice sunny day so I decided to go for a walk in the park-like grounds surrounding the building. While I was studying the stained glass windows at the back of the apse, three young people, came and stood beside me. They were each dressed extremely well; the two women in dresses and heels and the young man in a dark grey suit. They started to ask me questions about the windows; who were the Saints depicted, what Scriptural events were shown, etc. There was a stone bench near where we were standing so the four of us went and sat and they continued to ask me questions about various aspects of the Cathedral building itself. In the course of the conversation, they told me that they were very excited [albeit a bit nervous also] about the upcoming Mass. It was the Mass for the First Scrutiny, by the way. The three of them were among the thirty some Elect who would receive the laying on of the Bishop’s hands.
Out of curiousity I asked what made them choose to become Catholic. All three as one voice said “Pope John Paul II!” It turned out that for the two women, the initial attraction was seeing him during the Stations of the Cross at World Youth Day in Toronto in 2002. For the young man, it was seeing JP II at a general audience in Rome in 2004. All three said that they had been brought up in very non-religious families and the only reason why they had been in a place to see the Pope was because they were with friends looking to see what all the fuss was about over this man. They each agreed that the thought of becoming a Catholic did not come over them all at once but that on seeing John Paul II, they had felt a spark that made them want to know more about him and the Church he so obviously loved. They also informed me that most of the other young people in their RCIA group were as heavily influenced by JP II as they were. In fact, they had formed a group of about twenty that meet weekly to read and study his various books, encyclicals, letters and homilies.
I also know many of my daughters’ friends who went to World Youth Day in Toronto and whose attitudes toward their Faith changed dramatically afterwards. Instead of being lukewarm and attending Mass only occasionally, they now are at the least weekly attendees and a few go daily. One of the young men is now in the seminary and will be ordained this coming November.

 

[maurin]

Here is a concrete example of how JP II had a life changing impact on young people…

that’s a touching story, Frosty. It’s a consolation, I think, that He sent you, or a Rose from Our Lady! I love when unexpected things like that happen!

 

[palmas85]

I agree that Pope John Paul II was indeed one of the greatest and most influential popes in church history. What’s more is that a goodly porportion of the faithful seem to think so as well. Indeed, according to recent news out of Rome, Pope John Paul II may be declared blessed as early as next April. Great and holy people are always controversial in different ways and John Paul is no exception to this. Still, his holiness, love of the Gospel, and faith in the resurrected Lord stand out. I believe he is indeed a saint.

Still, why the pre mature bestowing of the honorific the great? We have yet to have an answer to that one that passes muster…

And in fact, I am more convinced than ever that it is merely a sign of the affection the people had for him more so than anything that he did.

 

[Tsuwano]

So are unholy people. Being controversial isn’t proof of anything except, maybe, of playing both sides.

I agree that unholy people are also controversial and that controversy doesn’t necessarily mean anything. This is my point. The smoke surrounding Pope John Paul II on this thread is neither a sign of sanctity or lack of holiness on his part.

 

[Tsuwano]

Still, why the pre mature bestowing of the honorific the great? We have yet to have an answer to that one that passes muster…

And in fact, I am more convinced than ever that it is merely a sign of the affection the people had for him more so than anything that he did.

I can agree with you here. I also tend to think it is a bit early to bestow the adjective “great” after a mere four or five years since the Pope’s death. I think the desire to call the Pope “great” is indeed a sign of the affection that people had for him, but this affection counts for something, doesn’t it? Time will tell whether Pope John Paul II receives the honorific “great”, so I’ll settle for “blessed” for now.

 

[palmas85]

I can agree with you here. I also tend to think it is a bit early to bestow the adjective “great” after a mere four or five years since the Pope’s death. I think the desire to call the Pope “great” is indeed a sign of the affection that people had for him, but this affection counts for something, doesn’t it? Time will tell whether Pope John Paul II receives the honorific “great”, so I’ll settle for “blessed” for now.

If public affection is considered as one of the reasons for sainthood then I would think that there is a glitch in the system. Some very very unholy people are very very popular and enjoy great public affection.

 

[pnewton]

Still, why the pre mature bestowing of the honorific the great? We have yet to have an answer to that one that passes muster…

That passes muster for you. It sure passes muster for me. It is acceptable to others. When I did give you a reason you disagreed. as one can with opinion. It is highly improbable that anyone is going to show a reason that will sway another, if that is what you are wanting to see. Not here. If

 

[Volodymyr_988]

You continuously make comments like this and then have the nerve to say that you don’t believe the pope to be a demi-god?

No one here has deified any one. Maybe some of our posters are mortifying themselves too much and forgetting St. John Chrysostom’s admontion:

The value of fasting consists not in abstinence only from food, but in a relinquishment of sinful practices, since one who limits his fasting only to an abstinence from meat is one who especially disparages it. Do you fast? Give me proof of it by your works. If you see a poor man, take pity on him! If you see a friend enjoying honor, do not envy him. For let not the mouth only fast, but also the eye, and the ear, and the feet, and the hands, and all members of our bodies. Let the hands fast by being pure from avarice. Let the feet fast by ceasing from running to forbidden spectacles. Let the eyes fast by being taught never to fix themselves rudely upon handsome countenances. For looking is the food of the eyes, but if it be unlawful or forbidden it mars the fast and overturns the safety of the soul; but if it be lawful and safe, it adorns fasting. For it would be an instance of the highest absurdity to abstain from meats and unlawful food because of the fast, but with the eyes to feed on what is forbidden. Do you eat flesh? Do not feed on licentiousness by means of the eyes. Let the ear fast also. The fasting of the ear is not to receive evil speaking and calumnies. “You shall not receive an idle report,” it says. Let also the mouth fast from foul words. For what does it profit if we abstain from birds and fish, and yet bite and devour our brethren?

 

[Volodymyr_988]

To put it bluntly, so what? Yes he might have captivated younger people but so what? What was the result? Did he captivate them on a deeper and more profound spiritual level, or was it on a superficial and entertaining level? Was there an increase in vocations? An increase in Mass attendance?

Mass Attendance Graph
cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/gallup.jpg

Mass Attendance Breakdown by Age
cara.georgetown.edu/mattend.jpg

Collection of Statistics
cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/index.htm

What have you done to increase Mass attendance and priestly vocations? Are you expecting the Pope to do it all?

 

[franklinf]

What have you done to increase Mass attendance and priestly vocations? Are you expecting the Pope to do it all?

That’s a rather snide remark a serious comment. The point of this thread is if we should call Pope John Paul II the Great, not me.

Did you even take the time to understand what I was saying? I raised a legitimate concern. One of the major reasons why people want to call him “the Great,” is because of the supposed effect he had on youth and the world. If we are to call JPII “the Great” based on that reason, then I think it would only make sense to do so if it was on a deeper, rather than superficial, level. The decline in vocations and Mass attendance point to it being on a superficial level. Thus my comment.

Allow me to make an analogy. People are captivated by summer blockbusters. After watching “The Transformers” people walk out of the theater razzed up. They had a great 2 hours, they were captivated and loved the excitement. Fast forward 5 years. Would those same people call “The Transformers” one of the greatest movies? Would they put it up there with “The Godfather” or “Casablanca?” A bit of a profane example, but I hope you now get the point I was trying to raise. I’ve never seen him in person, but I’m sure he did captivate his audiences. But to what end. What was the result?

 

[melja]

I’ve heard of this impact he made everywhere, but I’m curious as to how many of these people actually changed their lifestyle and live now for Christ *and *His Church? (sincere question, mostly food-for-thought, not picking a fight)

I can only speak of the people who were in my diocese group and 3 went into the priesthood and I know of 1 who became ordained. Several people believed he influenced them to become better people - so yes I think he did good:thumbsup:

 

[melja]

An excellent question.

melja,

Could we persuade you to tell us what this visit meant to you?

It actually meant a lot to me. Never before had I heard of a Pope - the head of our Church actually making the effort to come out of the vatican and come to see us all. He made the Church seem more real, in that he didn’t stay hidden away and actually followed in Jesus footsteps by coming amongst the people and taking the time to greet us. Yes it did have an impacton me on a spiritual level otherwise I wouldn’t be speaking of it. Yes probably many people would disagree with me but I am speaking for myself and what his visit meant to me then and still does today. After attending this rally I even felt able to chat to my priests without being in total awe of them

 

[DavidPalm]

I can only speak of the people who were in my diocese group and 3 went into the priesthood and I know of 1 who became ordained. Several people believed he influenced them to become better people - so yes I think he did good:thumbsup:

I too am one of those converts whose conversion was influenced, positively, by John Paul II. I probably would have considered him “great” then and for some years thereafter. It was after being confronted with balancing information, other aspects of his words and actions, that I reconsidered that. Not to be schmaltzy, but it was heartbreaking, actually. Like losing another father. Like that (perhaps apocryphal) kid to Shoeless Joe Jackson, “Say it ain’t so, Joe” (link). There were just too many issues where I had to say, “Say it ain’t so, Papa”.

But of course that has its own emotional element on my part. So again, history will help give us perspective. I hope the Church takes her time.

 

[Volodymyr_988]

That’s a rather snide remark a serious comment. The point of this thread is if we should call Pope John Paul II the Great, not me.

Did you even take the time to understand what I was saying? I raised a legitimate concern. One of the major reasons why people want to call him “the Great,” is because of the supposed effect he had on youth and the world. If we are to call JPII “the Great” based on that reason, then I think it would only make sense to do so if it was on a deeper, rather than superficial, level. The decline in vocations and Mass attendance point to it being on a superficial level. Thus my comment.

Allow me to make an analogy. People are captivated by summer blockbusters. After watching “The Transformers” people walk out of the theater razzed up. They had a great 2 hours, they were captivated and loved the excitement. Fast forward 5 years. Would those same people call “The Transformers” one of the greatest movies? Would they put it up there with “The Godfather” or “Casablanca?” A bit of a profane example, but I hope you now get the point I was trying to raise. I’ve never seen him in person, but I’m sure he did captivate his audiences. But to what end. What was the result?

I’m one of those “JP2 Catholics.” I was changed when he visited St. Louis. I’ve been happily married for 8 years with 4 children.

So yes, even though he came to St. Louis in 1999, I am still fired up for my Faith and am growing 10 years later. My wife was essentially a pagan before we met. She converted and was Baptized, Confirmed, and received Holy Communion on Holy Saturday and we were married the next Saturday. So he converted at least 2 people when he came to St. Louis.

Santo Subito!