.... of course, the Virgin Mary was without sin in her lifetime, but she is not the topic of discussion here.
The whole point of, and the exact title of the Remnant article which you referenced was "A Statement of Reservations Concerning the Impending Beatification of Pope John Paul II".
It was not the authors intent to merely point out that JPII was not "exempt from errors" in his lifetime. It was the intent of the author to point out reasons why JPII should not be beatified. These are two completely different intents.
"Beyond personal popularity with the world, however, lie deeper questions over whether either of these men would meet the Traditional standards for beatification or canonization. This is due to the unprecedented and novel acts of both popes, as well as the undeniably disastrous fruits of both of their pontificates."
I've seen enough biased and erroneous narratives on another topic by the Remnant and fully realize writing to them would be a complete waste of my time. I honestly have no such interest as it serves no purpose. I'm not going to change their minds and they aren't going to change mine about the sanctity of Blessed Pope John Paul II. All I care about is the decision reached by the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints...and the Supreme Pontiff's...as well as my own personal experience of Pope John Paul ll.
Of course that was the author's intent.
Did you not read the title of his article (repeated again here, just for you):
"A Statement of Reservations Concerning the Impending Beatification of Pope John Paul II".
You are the one who referenced the article in the first place. Certainly, you must have paid attention to the title of the article.
I couldn't disagree more. I consider myself very blessed to have experienced many years of the pontificate of Blessed Pope John Paul ll, and what I've witnessed clearly demonstrated that the world was intensely drawn to him because of his holiness. This has absolutely nothing to do with a so-called notion of secular "popularity".
I've always believed that he was "more than a Pope". I longed to see him. I would think, "If only I could touch his robe"! But neither happened.
When he died, a priest from St. John Neumann's Shrine in Philadelphia flew to Rome for his funeral and met up with his friend - Cardinal Ratzinger! He brought a huge suitcase of medals back to Philly which had been touched to Pope John Paul ll's tomb and blessed by Cardinal Ratzinger. I was privileged to receive such medals and treasure them. I now have a piece of Pope John Paul's robe which I cherish. I knew. I just knew...
There have been numerous times on this CM site (since Pope Francis was elected) that CM members have believed the spin of the secular media (about him, his words, his actions, his intentions) rather than doing proper research from trustworthy sources and reading the ACTUAL WORDS of the pope. This is the fault of that misinformed/biased media and the fault of those CM members. It is not the fault of the pope (any pope) that his actual words and actual deeds are spun and then gobbled up by willing recipients.
The article you posted, which we have been exclusively discussing from the onset, was written by Catholics, not the secular media. It's disheartening when secular journalists distort the Pope's words and actions, but truly disturbing when it's done by Catholics to spin their own agenda.
Could not agree with you more. And, then to add a couple of pennies to the discussion :-)
This entire exchange and the charges against JPII remind me of something equally as scandalous that Christ did. . . he met a Samaritan woman at the well and spoke to her. . . met her at the well -- shocking behavior as this was where lovers sometimes met --- a Samaritan woman nonetheless and he spoke with her and he sent her to tell others. . . and the apostles objected because of how it looked, but He did it anyway. . . and through those actions they came to believe the Samaritans that is. . .