. .A people's priest, an amateur actor and playwright, John Paul knew both Soviet oppression in his native Poland and the inner liberation that only the Spirit can provide. John Paul didn't so much govern the church as reinvigorate it, substituting his vibrant personality for the Vatican's impersonal bureaucracy. He traveled, he reached out, he transmitted love as if determined to make contact with the whole world one by one. As a correspondent from a French paper commented at his accession, "This pope is not from Poland. He's from Galilee."
. .If this church reborn found itself conflicted between its new and old ways after Vatican II, that didn't seem to bother John Paul. He treated all such breaks with the church's past as this country's Supreme Court tends to describe its landmark decisions: as just part of the law's continuity. John Paul didn't confront differences within the church so much as rise above them. His broad smile covered a multitude of differences within the church. Behind that smile was not just a master of realpolitik, but a canny geopolitician who rose above it. John Paul would make a more than equal partner with merely secular politicians like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in dismantling the Soviet empire and threat. "The pope?" Stalin once sneered. "How many divisions does he have?" John Paul, it turned out, raised whole armies of souls, and they didn't need tanks and cannon to conquer.
. .To succeed John Paul as pope, the church chose his opposite: a thoroughly Teutonic scholar and rigorous theologian. As a cardinal, Joseph Ratzinger had headed the church's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly known as the Inquisition. He acted as the pope's enforcer, the bad cop to match John Paul's good one. When he himself became pope, he returned the church to the spirit of the counter-reformation. His formal policies as Pope Benedict XVI were much the same as those of John Paul II; they lacked only the spirit. But spirit, as John Paul showed us, can be all. Instead of carrying the church to the people, Benedict XVI seemed imprisoned by it. A pervasive grayness spread over the Vatican, covering corruption great and small, financial and sexual. Its incompetent bureaucracy was forever trying to paper over one scandal or another. Or explaining away what could not be explained -- like the long-running story of priests sexually abusing young boys. This new pope's style didn't help; it was more pedantic than persuasive, as in his Regensburg Lecture. Its combative air and tendency to caricature Islam rather than address its complexities offended the Muslim world, and with reason. Let's just say that Benedict's reign as pope was not among the most successful. That is what comes of choosing a theologian as pope. Poor Benedict. He was ill-suited to administer a vast church and worldwide enterprise. And In his inner circle he found himself betrayed by those he should have been able to trust most -- from butler to banker. When he was elected pope, he said he felt "inadequate" for a job that demanded "dynamism," and he was never more right. Much like Celestine V some eight centuries ago, he might have done better to have fled.