A view from the Square.

Sunday was a strange day, in that two wings of the church diametrically opposed to each other agreed on the same thing. Namely the liberals and the traditionalists agreed that they had huge reservations about the beatification of John Paul II. This was a day for the neo-cons, those Catholics really celebrated.
  The liberals were predictable in their bleating about Vatican II being stymied by the "dictatorial" pontiff ( this is a bit rich as we shall see), they were on firmer ground in their misgivings about the handling of the abuse crisis and in particular the halting of the investigation of the antics of Maciel and the undue influence of the Legion in Rome.
  Traditionalists, well they had a long list of grievances.
But what is the problem? Well lets look at the positives.
Was JPII fearless in his struggle with communism? Yes he was.
The manner of his death and his example of witness to suffering was inspring.
Did he give an example of personal holiness and prayer? Yes he did.
Was he strong on moral issues around the sanctity of life? Yes he was.

 But with true Christian charity it must be pointed out that there was much to mourn:
The appointment of bishops unsuited to leading their flock, the supervision (or lack thereof) of these bishops to ensure that their flocks were not led astray.
Papal liturgies around the globe that were akin to rock/ pagan spectacles.
The Assisi meeting and frequent pronouncements that undermined for the faithful the belief that the One True Church was the sole means for salvation.
The Theology of the Body, JPII's own system of teaching on human sexuality and relationships, this continues to be the flavour of the month spawning conferences and seminars around the world, a rich meal ticket but shot through with humanism. At variance with the traditional teaching of the Church as regards the ends of  marriage.
His belief in the human institutions such as the UN as the means to bring about social justice etc.
 These are just a few of the concerns that could be expressed, JPII was truly a child of Vatican II, intimately involved in the council, one of the main movers and shakers behind Gaudium et Spes (a document whose ethos cannot be squared with traditional Catholic teaching  on man's place in creation and his reliance on God) a favourite of Paul VI.
  This goes some way to explain the haste of the process for beatification. Vatican II needs a saint. The neocons demand it. JohnXXIII is blessed, Paul VI's cause limps along. Now there is the strongest card to play. A consumate public figure, even the media grudgingly admired him. For the neocons he represented the best of their brand of charismatic Catholicism, namely visible, emotive and spiritual. Faith and Reason are the cornerstones of the Church, yet reason seems to have been jettisoned. This well fits in with the "cult of personality" that has become the trademark of this wing of the Church. "What? The Holy Father says that we must wear leather hats? Right I have my gun, now where did I put that cow...?"
 Even the mechanics of the process are up for questioning, the recent changes to the criteria favour speedy and less stringent  examinations of the cause. This was explained away with the notion that the judges must have enough evidence gathered to proceed with the cause, but who judges the judges and the background motivation and pressures that lead to their judgement?
John Paul the Great? No.  Blessed John Paul? ...