John Paul II was indisputably a great man: a charismatic moral leader with keen political savvy.
However, I believe his greatness in the long term will be judged not only by what he accomplished, or tried to accomplish, but also by what his successors can accomplish, based on the groundwork he laid.
Since Vatican Council II, the Church has taken a decidedly liberal turn. Most people agree that, under John Paul's watch, liberalism has been somewhat checked by a return to fundamentals.
If we now see his successor continue along the path of traditionalism, then we may conclude that John Paul's pontificate was a success. However, if we return to the prior slide into unbridled liberalism, then we'll have to conclude John Paul's pontificate was nothing more than a blip along an otherwise inevitably long slide into the cesspool of modernism.
John Paul II has undoubtedly laid the intellectual foundation for the authentic reform the Council sought. It remains to be seen whether his advice is picked up and implemented or simply ignored.
What the Church needs is a pope with the creativity, courage and tenacity to finish those things John Paul has started. The Church desperately needs a fearless reformer, the likes of which have not been seen since Pope St. Pius X.
Pat Buchanan has this to say on the subject, which is along the same lines as I have proposed.
Buchanan's commentary betrays his myopic American conservativism. He misses the dates of decline, which far predated the Council in Europe, and fumbles with some pretty fuzzy poll findings. Under Pius XII we had a world war, Jewish genocide, the cold war, and the beginning of arms build-ups. I'd count Buchanan among those Americans complaining to the pope about his hangnail while other Catholics have far more grave concerns.
With Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger at the helm of the Barque of Peter, as Pope Benedict XVI, I cannot help but be optimistic.