Pope John XXIII was inspiring to this non-catholic, the recent Pope perpetuated the church doctrine on issues such as birth control, and thus was partially responsible for one of the greatest sources of suffering, environmental degradation, and misery imaginable. By selecting equally backward officials for the church, he as locked it into similarly benighted policies for the foreseeable future. Latin America will soon be minority Catholic, the US church is beset by problems of pedophilia he did not address (with an official prominent in the scandal officiating at the Pope's funeral), and the church in France is near extinction given the average age of priests and the failure to recruit new ones. The church could be a force for raising moral awareness and behavior, in this this last Pope was in many ways a failure. - L. M.

I am not a Catholic, so I do not respond to any of the points made in your editorial, except to say that I do agree that this pope had significant influence in world affairs. However, there is one statement you made that does not seem accurate. In the 5th paragraph you state, "He defended them against Nazism and against Communism, which seems uncontroversial now since those two ideologies were defeated." I do not disagree that he did this. What I disagree is that either ideology has been defeated. There are over a billion people still under communist rule in various parts of the globe. Nazism is still out there lurking in many spots on the earth. It appeals to the malcontents who feel they deserve something they do not currently have. I did find it interesting that virtually across from your statement is the lead in for an article about Chinese Catholics and their struggle with communist rule. You might want to modify the statement. - D. H.

John Paul II was a remarkable man of God. May he now glory in the presence of God. But let's talk seriously about how we're memorializing him. To the Source dishonors his memory when you run a feature article by someone who selectively chooses to emphasize only a limited slice of the Pope's moral teachings. He lauds the pope's defense of "human rights" (ie, anti-communism), as well as his opposition to "abortion, euthanasia, and the biotechnological reduction of human lives to the status of commodities." Fine. All true. But aren't these the very places where the pope's views are aligned with modern American conservatives? Convenient. Why no mention of the pope's persistent critique of the prevailing geo-politcal landscape, which he describes as an "imperialistic monopoly of economic and political supremacy [gained] at the expense of others." Doesn't fit as neatly with the contemporary American conservative agenda, does it? Or his staunch defense of efforts to preserve and protect God's creation against the desecration of modern industry? Or his having called the Iraq War a "defeat for humanity" that could not be legally or morally justified. Pope John Paul II was remarkable because of his moral courage--a courage that led to a passionate championing of the poor, the marginalized, and the oppressed. Remembering him as a friend and ally of Reagan Republicanism is shameful, heretical, and cowardly. Let this man be remembered in all of his fullness. Don't make him into an image that suits your political purposes. - D. L.

If find the reference to the "Da Vinci Code" in your article on Bishop Gene Robinson insulting. The Da Vinci Code is meant to be read as entertainment, and any art history or history major could cite a number of things within that book that are just completely inaccurate. It also portrays different Catholic social groups as evil and secret when they are indeed not. I am a practicing Roman Catholic, 23 years old, and I work within the church as a youth minister. I pray that, this particular Bishop gets his act together, because he is preaching heresy and false teachings about my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. However, the Da Vinci Code should never be cited as a Catholic reference, in my opinion its Catholic Bashing. - K. R.

I have been watching with interest the social response to the death of John Paul II. It is easy to see in him high moral values and thus it is easy to agree wholeheartedly with the assessments of him as a moral man. What is often unknown about him, however, is his promotion of further Marian idolatry in the Roman Catholic Church. One should simply visit a website "voxpopuli.org," the website of a group committed to the Papal declaration that Mary is co-redemptix with Jesus Christ and read some of the quotes of John Paul displayed on the website. One statement is particularly chilling. In it John Paul II declared that as Mary watched Jesus on the cross, she suffered with all the sufferings that he suffered. What that means is that John Paul II believed either that Mary suffered the sufferings of hell along with Jesus (ie she received the wrath of God the father to no purpose), or Jesus did not. This statement cuts to the very heart of the gospel, which is the substitutionary atonement. Jesus Christ suffered hell for believers, so believers would be freed from it, yet according to John Paul II, Mary, claimed as the foremost of faith by the Roman Catholic Church, suffered it as well. The so-called fifth Marian dogma, as promoted by Vox Populi Marae Mediatrici woud move the Roman Catholic Church in its final step in saying that the work of Jesus Christ is insufficient, and that a creature (Mary) shares equally in that work. And John Paul was a supporter of the fifth Marian dogma. - T. M.

This is a very sad article because it is obvious that Ponuru has been too swayed by the charisma of John Paul II. He was a great man and he was on the right side of many issues that Evangelicals feel very strongly about. In that we can praise him and thank God for his papacy. He was, however, practically without influence in the lives of ordinary people. The Polish author, Stefan Chwin, wrote in an editorial published in the April 6th International Herald Tribune, that John Paul was dearly loved by the Polish people but they paid no attention to his teachings as shown by the rising rates of abortion, pre-marital sex and birth control. Thomas Cahill, in the same issue, wrote that John Paul was throw back to Popes Pius IX and X. He abandoned the fresh wind of Vatican II and moved away from the collegiality of John XXIII and Paul VI back to the dubious notion of papal infallibility. That is a big reason for the tremendous decline of the church in North America and Europe. As Walter Höllenweger once said, "The Catholic Church survives on the disobediance of its members." But more than anything else, his understanding of salvation - especially Mary's role - was seriously flawed and led many sincere seekers in 3rd world countries astray. Cyrus of Persia was used by God to bring freedom to the captive Jews. He even helped them return and rebuild their country. Being used by God, being devout and even having lots of Charisma doesn't mean that a person understands the way of salvation. Sadly, John Paul showed many times that he did not believe in salvation only through faith in Jesus Christ. - D. M.

As a cradle Catholic, I have always been grateful for the strong conservative voice of this Pope. I accepted Christ as a very young child, a Catholic child. When I became a parent I began to read the Scriptures and associated with other Catholics and Protestants who did the same...re-committing my life as a mature individual...seeing the work of the Holy Spirit in my life. I left the church when a middle-aged adult because of liberalism in the local parish and diocese. Despite the leadership of John Paul II and his predecessors on important issues, many Catholics I knew were living a life in violation of any authority the Scriptures or church leadership provided. While I do appreciate his strong Scriptural basis, my biggest disappointment has been that John Paul II was not a Pope who outrightly corrected some of the teaching of the Church that is not founded in Scripture. These things continue to divide the Body of Christ. I realize that the acceptance of the "New Testament" as we know it today, was a long time in the making and that oral tradition, led by the Holy Spirit, and treasured by our spiritual forefathers is the reason we have the Scriptures now. I note that even today Protestants revere the teaching of many men of God, elevating and venerating their writings and preaching while railing against Roman Catholic belief that traditional teaching and church authority have value equal with Scripture. It is widely acceptable among Protestants today to promote the work of one's favorite theologian or leader and their "take" on the Bible and modern issues placing it almost above or at least equal to Scriptural guidelines -- in practice. So there is a problem with that. But when it comes to things like indulgences, purgatory, veneration of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and prayer directed to "saints" firey arguments continue despite some efforts to "phase out" encouragement of these practices by many priests. A little help from higher up would have been more than welcome. - J. D.

Dear friend, I must thank you for sending us the various writings. We appreciate reading them and pass some on to others, as we have a wide circle of friends with whom we keep in touch. We just read the latest item written by Mr. Ramesh Ponnuru, highly adulatory of the late pope, John Paul II. Allow me to take exception to the views of Mr. Ponnuru and many hundreds of millions of people everywhere. My wife and I followed the whole tenure of John Paul II’s papacy. We are people who visited Poland many times. We live in Europe, where we have become first-hand observers of many world events. I am sorry to say that the late pope loved encomium and adulation, which to us is contrary to what Christ taught. “Woe to you, when all men speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets” (Luke 6:26). Another word of our Lord can be recalled relative to this: “…truly, I say to you, they have received their reward” (Matthew 6:2b). My far-stretched thoughts are transferred to John the Baptist with his categorical pronouncement, “He must increase, I must decrease” (John 3:30). Throughout history the papal office has not been deficient of pomp. Nevertheless, John Paul II outdid them all. If I may express my personal opinion, he will fall under the indictment of the quoted words. We are in a critical point of history when the name of Jesus Christ is disliked and shunned in too many circles. In fact, it has been jettisoned, even in circles or areas where this name should be voiced without any apology. ‘God’ is the non-offensive substitution which hardly offends anyone. It is in such a milieu that John Paul II is the most celebrated and bolstered mortal throughout the whole world. The late pope has done very little to let his value diminish in favor of Christ’s glory, whose vicar he claimed to be. This is an age of distressing contradictions, in which we endured twenty-seven years of highly-charged papal prominence. At his death, the world reached its tormenting climax. If Jesus Christ does not return in the meantime, one of the next generations will witness this pope’s canonization, an area that depicted his aptitude. The late pope grabbed the indisputable supremacy of the Lord Jesus Christ in an age when not many people claim the Lord’s name boldly. It grieved us along with millions of other children of the Reformation. May I make an observation which came to my mind as I considered the pope’s life. Karol Wojtyla’s country fell under the spell of the dictatorial Third Reich in 1939; immediately following it, under detestable Marxism in 1945. This reminds me that from his nineteenth year of age he lived under two harsh regimes, both of which he obviously loathed. However, without his being cognizant of it the spirit of dictatorship rubbed off on him and he couldn’t shed it. He wasn’t even aware of the workings of negative forces in his psyche. I grew up in a land of a different religion than mine. This alien religion I disliked. But alas! I could not rid myself of some of the bad traits of this religion which worked in my psyche. At eighty-one, I am still trying to combat them. In brief, Mr. Wojtyla was not a democratic pope; conversely he was pretty much a dictatorial one. The outworkings were carried throughout his tenure. This hallmark clung to him being evident even more profoundly at his imperious funeral which has already been dubbed, ‘The funeral of all ages’. Let sound-thinking people visualize for a moment the funeral of mankind’s Redeemer. Our earnest prayer is that the Roman Catholic hierarchy discard many of the unscriptural, undemocratic priorities and wholeheartedly embrace Christ’s approach to life and eternity. - T. C.

Ramesh Ponnuru writes interestingly, and no doubt believes what he writes without the "political correctness" that plagues most writers, but he is entirely mistaken about the pope and Catholic church. He writes: "Resisting what the pope called the “culture of death” involved a continued insistence that freedom is grounded in moral truth." This is about the organization responsible for the deaths of more Christians than any other organization since the term "Christian" first began to be used around 1950 years ago. There is no real freedom or moral truth in the organization that stands in the place of God and changes his holy day from Saturday to Sunday. - D. W.

I usually enjoy reading tothesource. It is thought provoking, and generally gives a rational argument for the author’s conclusions. I was saddened to hear that the author converted to Catholicism because he became convinced “that the central claims of the Catholic church were true: that it was what it proposed to be.” I was under the assumption that the author of tothesource was functioning from a Biblically based world view and life philosophy. Martin Luther and John Wycliffe apparently were misguided, and did not understand “that the central claims of the Catholic church were true: that it was what it proposed to be”. I am deeply saddened that another fine mind has put aside truth and reason and has been overcome by the seductive power of the largest cult in the world. And I am even more disturbed that the author ascribes this deluding influence to be the Holy Spirit. - R. C.

Thank you for your testimony concerning your becoming a catholic. One question I would ask you, did you tell God your were sorry for your sins and asked Jesus to come into your heart and save you from your sins? I was on my way to Hell until I did that and now I am on my way to heaven. Hope you are also. I am thankful for all Pope John did and his life will still bear fruit. - F. A.

Who cares about the pope. all he did was send souls to hell fire with his false doctrine and now he is there to join them. i wonder what they all think when they saw the pope come strolling in. when he was the one who caused them to go there. i'm sure that was somekind of suprise for him as well as them. because they actually think they are going to gods heaven. i wish they could but god said no sin can enter there. that means no sin. and they are full of sin and pagan rituals. you decide. it doesn't make any difference to god all the good things that are said about him now that he is gone. his life is over. it's gods heaven and sin is not coming back into it. that is why he kicked the devil out. it makes me sad to think that a man would live in a religious arena and still never know the saving grace of god. that is what is so sad about all this whole catholic church and all the damnable doctrines they have poured into the world and the protestant church. no one will believe this until they close their eyes in death sleep or jesus comes then they will have a shock of thier life. only what you do for jesus......being born again of the water and spirit and living by faith is going to get you to heaven......none of your good works will get you there......man cannot place you in heave. - J. R.

In your article about Gene Robinson's remarks regarding Jesus' unconventional life, I believe what he was saying was not that he was gay but that he did not live like the average male Jew, by accounts in the Bible, and was thus not living a conventional life. Most all Jewish men of Jesus' age were married and making families. From what we learn of Jesus in the Bible, we don't really know whether Jesus was married or not. That part you don't mention in your article, but I'm guessing you read the Bible. (For my part his being married, being conventional or unconventional, has no bearing on my love for him or on my faith. But you guys seem to be very hung up on that.) What you do mention is that sensational book, The Da Vinci Code, which the Vatican itself recently criticized as having false information, as well as being a book that is doing a great deal of damage to the reputation of Catholicism. You accuse Gene Robinson of not having read it and then seem to imply yourselves that it is a book of fact that clearly shows that Jesus had children with Mary Magdalene. Obviously you have not read the many books written, including one by Greg Jones, an Episcopal Priest from North Carolina, that debunk the so called facts in the Da Vinci Code and that shame the author for implying that they are all true. Much of the information Mr. Brown gathered for the story comes from a French hotel owner who created a myth to improve tourism in his town and in turn improve business for himself. You should read about it. It's very interesting. In light of all this, I believe that what you are doing is printing sensational information that leads people who don't really read much to believe everything you say. It's offensive to me as a Christian person to see others who are Christians engaged in such behavior, but you have the right to print what you want. Our civil liberties haven't all been taken away, thankfully. I've asked to be removed from your list. Gods' peace to you all the same. - A. D.

I am really overwhelmed by the pro-Roman Catholic bias of this article. There is truly a big difference between respecting what a man has accomplished (most of us do that) and adoring or idolizing the man. The Bible clearly teaches that we have one Father (God in heaven) and we are to call no man father on earth. We are all brothers. The RC Church thumbs its collective nose at this teaching and expects everyone to fall in line and address this man (and all the priests) with a title that strictly and uniquely belongs to God, the Father. A church that teaches us to violate such a simple and clear doctrine of truth should not be trusted with the more important issues. Yes, many of us agree on the social concerns for which this man spoke, but we are and should be very skeptical about the doctrines of heaven and hell and the way to faith when such low regard for clear Biblical truth is splashed out front for all to see and supposedly endorse. - J. S.

You need to study the claims of the Roman Catholic Church against Scripture. Scripture is the final authority and not the institution of men, the Roman Catholic Church. It is on the testimony of Peter and not the person of Peter on with the Church is built. I agree Pope John Paul took the right stand on protecting the image of God or as you have stated in the article, human rights. Many, many good things can be said about John Paul II. We must also remember that for Pope John Paul Christ was only the best way to righteousness and not the only way as Christ said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" John 14:6. Study the Roman Catholic position. I enjoy your articles and I think your doing a great job. - R. M.

John Paul II gained the whole world but forfeited his soul. Year after year he was the most loved and admired man in the world. The idolatrous veneration and adoration of this man was unprecedented. His devotees, who are now singing his praises, are probably ignorant of the strong rebuke of Jesus who said, "Woe to you when all men speak well of you" (Luke 6:26). Had the pope been devoted to Jesus Christ and His Gospel of grace, he would have been hated and persecuted by the world. No one can judge John Paul's heart but we are all called to judge the fruit of our spiritual leaders. Clearly this man was blinded by the prince of this world and never saw the light of the gospel or the glory of Christ. I mourn the death of this man, not for the reason the world mourns, but because he rejected Jesus as God's only provision for his sins. I also have a solemn compassion for those who blindly followed this pope and his man-centered religion. My heart is painfully burdened to see so many "professing" Christians unable to discern truth from error and genuine Christianity from its counterfeit. If ever there was a more important time for faithful servants of our Lord Jesus Christ to take a stand for the truth, it is now. The religious corruption of Rome has been on constant display for the whole world to see. The splendor and pageantry has been extraordinary. Thousands of hopelessly deceived people stood in long lines for as long as 12 hours to venerate a dead man with a rosary in his hands and a twisted crucifix by his side. Bishops and Cardinals encouraged Catholics to pray to and for this dead pope whose body was constantly being "blessed" with incense and "holy" water. They must not be aware that praying to anyone other than God is an abomination to God (Deut. 18:11). Tragically the pope has had greater success in deceiving the world since he died than during his 26 year pontificate. The global media has become his mouthpiece and willing partner in spreading his perverted theology. Through non-stop television coverage, the pope's church became the world's stage. Its princes masqueraded in their purple and scarlet robes as "ministers of righteousness." They successfully cast a spell over the TV audience with the splendor or their rituals and the pomp and pageantry of their pagan traditions. The magnificence and grandeur of this corrupt religion bewitched much of the gullible world into believing this is what Christianity is all about. Few evangelical leaders, who were interviewed by the media, refused to capitalize on the opportunity to expose the pope's false gospel that shut the kingdom of heaven to those who wanted to enter. They refused to acknowledge that he was condemned by God's word for preaching another gospel (Gal. 1:6-9). Instead they took the popular road and said since he "believed in Jesus," he went directly to heaven. They said his salvation was guaranteed because of his suffering, goodness, and holiness. Many are praising John Paul II for being a great spiritual leader. But why give such honor to the head of an apostate church which keeps over a billion people in spiritual darkness. While he never claimed to be God, he took pleasure in being addressed with titles reserved for the triune God alone. He usurped the title "Holy Father" from God the Father, "The Head of the Church" from the Lord Jesus Christ and "The Vicar of Christ" from the Holy Spirit, who Jesus promised to send in His place. The pope said he represented Jesus Christ, yet he lived in stark contrast to the Savior who had no place to lay His head. He denied Jesus was man's Creator by teaching evolution is true. On several occasions he denied that Jesus was the only way to the Father. When he addressed Muslim leaders, he said there is "a common spiritual bond that unites us." In 1999 he denied the blood of Jesus was the only purification for sin by awarding a plenary indulgence for anyone who quit smoking or drinking alcohol. John Paul is acclaimed as a great moral leader, yet he failed to discipline American Bishops for tolerating the wicked sexual abuse of deviant priests. One thing is certain - the pope knows the truth now. I believe he is experiencing what the rich man in Luke 16 endured. Both of them dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in splendor every day. When the rich man died and found himself tormented in the flames of Hades, he begged the Father to send someone to tell his family the truth so they would repent and not end up in the same place. The pope may now be making the same request. There are times in the lives of evangelicals when our faith is tested. This is indeed one of those times and sadly we see many failing the test by capitulating with enemies of the Gospel. Could it be that they are seeking the favor and approval of men rather than the approval of God? The passing of John Paul II opens up a tremendous opportunity for Christians to talk about spiritual issues. We must speak the truth in love and proclaim the Gospel with clarity and completeness! We must also earnestly contend for the faith against everything that stands opposed to God's word. May God help us to be faithful in these times of great deception and compromise! Let me know how we can serve you. - P. P.