In comments from interviews with RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, a wide range of experts, scholars, and religious leaders assess the pontificate of John Paul II:

Imam Yahya Hendi, Muslim chaplain, Georgetown University:

I have always seen the pope as a special, unique figure and leader. He led by his spirituality, his love of God, to reach out to those of other faiths. I have seen him as the leader of a movement that we needed to have a long time ago. Someone needed to start the process of positive relationship between the Catholic Church and Islam, between the Catholic Church and Judaism, and he did it, and the movement is out there.

Many Muslims believe that there was no need for a war in Iraq, or any other war. Muslims also believe that Islam is a religion of peace, and therefore one has to speak that language of peace, and the Holy Father, the pope, spoke that language of peace. We both, in Islam and Catholicism, share that conviction for peace, and that peace is the only solution. So we honor that commitment to peace, and we also believe that there were other ways by which one could bring about justice and peace to the Iraqis.

I think many Muslims around the world wanted to hear a Catholic, Christian, authentic voice speaking against what happened to Muslims during the Inquisition. The pope did that. They wanted to hear a Christian, authentic voice speaking about peace in the Middle East. The Catholic pope did that. They wanted to hear an authentic voice speaking about Islam being a legitimate religion. The Holy Father of the Catholic Church spoke that language. They wanted to open the door of dialogue to Christians, and they did not know how to do that, and the Holy Father did that. He opened the door for Muslims to reach out, for Christians to reach out. That opening of dialogue is what I call a movement that started with his leadership, and I hope it continues to be the legacy of any pope who happens to lead the Catholic Church after him -- a pope who is interested in reaching out to Muslims, a pope who is not interested in converting Muslims to the Catholic Church, but rather, allowing Muslims to be what they want to be and giving Muslims the chance to learn about Christianity. I personally believe that Christianity has all kinds of values to offer the world. And the only way for Muslims to accept those values is to not be threatened in their own faith or in their own communities. So the next pope, I hope, will be a pope who is respectful of Islam, ready to dialogue with Muslims, reaching out to the Muslim youth, reaching out to Muslim women, who also need a voice of support.

His visit to a mosque was what I call a milestone in the history of the relationship between Catholicism and Islam, but also between the message of Jesus Christ as understood in Christianity and the message of Islam, the message of peace, love, and compassion. His visit to the mosque was a message to Muslims that,"We have hurt you during the Crusades. We know what we have done to Muslims in the aftermath of the Crusades. That history is over. Let us work together. The presence of Islam is not a threat to Christianity." That's what it meant to Muslims.

The pope was very comfortable in his own Christianity. He was very comfortable in his own theology, in his own ethics. This is why he was not vulnerable about reaching out to Muslims. In general, ... the only way for us to do interreligious relations is to allow every religious community the ability to be what it want[s] to be and not to feel threatened. To be educated in your own faith is much better for us than not being educated in your own faith, to reach out to others. The Holy Father reached out because he was comfortable with his own faith.

I do think that the relationship between the Catholic Church and Muslims has come to a point of no return. We started a positive relationship with his leadership before he died, and I believe the future is much better and will be much better than what it was.

This pope has done more than any other pope to reach out to Muslims, to open the door to dialogues with Islam, and to give Muslims the room to come and speak about their own feelings as well, in a way that I have not seen addressed by most media coverage in the last few days. I hope I see more of that, because it is a milestone in the history of this specific pope, but it also started what I call an opening of eyes and hearts that had not happened before, and that needs to be explored for the sake of better relationships between these religious communities, but also for the dialogue of civilizations.

Many Muslims thought that the Church was always against Islam, was always there to threaten Islam and to wipe out Muslims because of the memories of Islam with the Crusades and the Inquisition. What the Holy Father had was a very strong message to Muslims saying, "No, we are not here to threaten you. We want you to be comfortable, Muslims, but we want to work together and to partner together in the fight of poverty and the fight of racism, in the promotion of human rights. For me, this is where we are supposed to work together, and that is the message that we have to focus on."

I believe that this pope sent a strong message to Muslims that their memories of Christianity should not shape the future of the relationship. Our memories of the Inquisition, of the Crusades, of colonialism must not shape the future of [the] relationship between the Catholic Church and Islam, or between Christianity and Islam. Rather, the Holy Father spoke about what we have in common: God, Scripture, faith, human rights. The Holy Father was very much interested in speaking in the promotion of women's rights, against the trafficking of women and the rights of youth, and those are the values that we want to work together on to shape the type of history we want to have.

Christianity was seen as a threat to Islam, as a threat to Islamic civilization. What the Holy Father did was to wipe out that memory and say, "Let's start all over again. Christianity is not against Islam. Islam and Christianity have many values in common. We both promote human rights. We both have to speak about peace for the poor, poverty around the world, the trafficking of women, wars, religious extremism." All of those are common enemies for us all, and we hope that we'll continue to shape the relationship between the Catholic Church and Islam.

I know of many bishops who have started learning about Islam in an institutionalized fashion. The center at the Vatican for the study of Islam and the Middle East started because of the pope's leadership. The Holy Father encouraged Catholics around the world to open up to Muslims. The presence of a Muslim chaplain at Georgetown University is because of the vision of the Holy Father. Georgetown University was the first American university to ever open the door for a Muslim chaplain.

The Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, professor of religion and public life at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University:

I think he was one of the five or six most important figures of the 20th century, and he did that from an explicitly religious base in a world that is often understood as moved only by secular forces. He demonstrated the power of religious forces to intersect with the secular on a whole wide range of issues. I do think he took the papacy to a level and in a direction so that very few of his predecessors are comparable. Part of that was technological; he could do it both by travel and by use of the media. Both within the Church and outside the Church, he addressed so many issues on such a broad range that he never got, understandably, universal support across the board. He was a controversial figure both inside and outside. He mobilized the office of the papacy in a way that made it a major player in setting directions in the last part of the 20th century. It was a combination of his personal style, his personal vision, and his willingness to be very specific about religion's applicability, whether it was human rights, whether it was the Cold War, or whether it was the war in Iraq. When he came to the UN one year after he was named pope, the first appearance on the world stage, what does he talk about? It was human rights. I think that set the direction of this papacy. He was committed to deal with that "secular" topic from within a religious tradition, and that then led him into a whole series of other things. The most important was his role in the collapse of communism in Eastern and Central Europe and then, ultimately, in the Soviet Union itself. The human rights question and the dignity of the human person were the levers he used over power. He wasn't going to enter that discussion as a political actor representing a party or representing the West against the East. I don't think he went at it that way. He went at it as regimes that violate human dignity and human rights lose their moral legitimacy, and, therefore, he was willing to build a moral reaction to that. That's what he did when he went into Poland. One columnist said he "lit the fuse," meaning that he was both unique in his power of catalyzing the Poles and that that then led to other aspects of the collapse in Central and Eastern Europe, but he wasn't alone. There were other forces at work. Solidarity was at work. Frankly, the threat of NATO was at work. I think we realistically have to acknowledge that when Gorbachev decided not to use force in Eastern and Central Europe, it was both because he was facing a human uprising of enormous power from below, and the fact that there was NATO. I see him in the Cold War framework as a unique actor, but one among several, using the leverage of moral appeal to galvanize people, to give them courage; using the level of moral argument to bring under critique regimes and powers that lose legitimacy; and using the appeal of a moral argument to galvanize the international community to exercise the kind of secular power that a pope should not use. That was his dominant effect. But I don't think he was ever confined to that. What always struck me was that right after the revolutions in Eastern Europe, he went to Africa, and he said, "The world can't forget this place." That was a good example of the fact that he wasn't simply bound up in his Polish heritage, wasn't simply bound up in Europe, although he [had] very deep feelings about Europe and its significance. He was a voice for human rights and human dignity for the poorest parts of the world, speaking and addressing the powerful on their behalf -- whether it was questions of intervention or questions of political economy. It cut across the commonly developed lines of international politics. I think he showed the power of religion as a public force in the midst of other very powerful actors.

Jim Wallis, editor of SOJOURNERS magazine and convener of Call to Renewal:

It's rare when the spirituality of a church leader is so attractive to millions and millions and millions of people, especially young people. Would that it were more true that the spirituality of the churches was so attractive to a new generation, but in this generation it really was. This pope was the most ecumenical, if you will, and even interfaith of any we've seen. He reached out to other Christian churches and clergy all the time, wherever he went, and to Muslims and Jews and people of other traditions. That is so important for the future.

Most important to me, I think, is that the Catholic Church has to offer the future of American politics this wonderful notion of a consistent ethic of life. Catholic social teaching has this seamless garment, Cardinal Bernardin said, a consistent ethic. And this pope was consistent. It's amazing to watch how political parties and ideologies want to claim him as their own, and you can't do that because he was so consistent. He was against abortion and euthanasia, but also the war in Iraq and capital punishment. He was not a communist, as conservatives say -- it's true he helped bring them down; neither was he a capitalist. He talked about economic justice, workers' rights, human rights. He was a powerful force for economic transformation. Conservatives in America want to claim him as their own because of abortion and euthanasia, but they forget to speak about Iraq. The White House did not get the photo op they wanted when George Bush went to see the pope in Rome. They got the pope shaking his finger at the President of the United States because of the war in Iraq: "This war is not right. This war is not a just war." And there is his passion about the death penalty. The U.S. Catholic Bishops have launched a new campaign on the death penalty. The pope would have been warmed by that campaign. So a consistent ethic of life challenges right and left politically, and neither political party nor ideology can claim him as their own. Maybe we can all claim him as our own, but he's a challenge to all of our politics.

I know that a number of Protestant church leaders were very warmed, often surprised, by his generosity, his welcome, his inviting spirit, his inclusiveness. We always felt like he wanted everybody to be there, and that was a very powerful thing. I've talked to many church leaders of the Protestant denominations, of the evangelical world. I think this pope did more to convey the Catholic faith to evangelicals. A number of evangelicals are grieving today because of the death of this pope. He certainly commended himself more to evangelicals than any other pope ever has, and to mainline Protestants and to black churches. I hear black clergy saying, "He wanted us to be there." I think that was a powerful sort of a leadership for the future, because that's what we need; we need Church leaders who reach out to other churches but also to other faith traditions and people with no faith at all.

People who wouldn't even call themselves Christian but would call themselves spiritual also were attracted to this man -- not because of his doctrines, and they might disagree with many of his stances on the issues. But many people who didn't agree with specifics were drawn to him in terms of his spiritual authenticity and integrity.

People who were conservative theologically in the rest of the Church were drawn to him because of his own conservative theology. But in his case and in the case of Dorothy Day, another Catholic saint, in my view, conservative theology leads to a radical social stance on the poor, on peace, on human rights, on the death penalty, on Iraq. And so those who want to say if you're conservative theologically, you must be conservative economically and politically -- that isn't true, and this pope showed that it wasn't true. In fact, you could cross boundaries. To be conservative on everything or liberal on everything aren't the only choices. This pope was conservative in doctrine, theology, Church polity, but like Dorothy Day, he was quite radical on economics, on worker rights, human rights, and steadfastly against not just the war in Iraq, but the first Gulf War. This pope was against that too. It would be a mistake to selectively choose which of this pope's stances you like and don't like because he had a very consistent ethic that cuts both right and left.

I think there's such transformative power in this Catholic notion of a consistent ethic of life, and I hope that what this pope has done will continue, that whoever is chosen will be as consistent, or more so, than this pope was. I think the world needs someone who cares about every place that human life is threatened. Human life is so precious, it is so sacred; it is the gift of God. The pope's phrase "culture of life" has been taken over by politicians, including the President of the United States, but this is the pope's language. And what he means by "the culture of life" is much broader and deeper than what President Bush has used it to mean, and other politicians left and right. This is something that really calls us to affirm the sacredness of human life; everywhere life is threatened, people of faith ought to be defending human life, and I think that is a powerful vision for the future.

The next pope is going to have to understand and deal with Islam. Islam is facing an internal crisis; there's a war going on within Islam for its heart and soul. I think it's less Islam against the Christian West, and a pope who can engage the forces of Islam that are committed to tolerance and peace and openness and even democracy could be a powerful force for resolving this terrible issue of terrorism. I think this pope created a whole conversation territory where all of us are together at the table now -- evangelical, Catholic, mainline Protestant, black churches, all of the ethnicities of our faith are there, and this pope affirmed that, and to keep going down the road even more in that direction is something that I look forward to.

This pope talked a lot about poverty, a lot about poor people, a lot about this being the global issue, a lot about globalization. This pope was not on the side of those wealthy, powerful interests that ruled the globe. He was on the side of those who were being crushed by those powerful forces. He was their defender; he spoke on behalf of the vulnerable, of the poor. I think that lays the foundation, paves the way for a movement to overcome global poverty based specifically in faith. The wealth chasm between the rich and the poor -- this pope was sensitive to that. A whole generation is going to address its faith to that. I think poverty is going to be the defining issue of faith in the next generation, and this pope gave us a framework for how to do that.

I would like to see the next pope specifically identify overcoming poverty as the test of faith for our generation, and maybe a pope from the global south might be one way of making that statement.

The pope was consistent in his application of this ethic of life in a way that no political party or faction can claim; in fact, we are all challenged by that, and that's the way it ought to be.

Richard Cizik, vice president for governmental affairs, National Association of Evangelicals:

Evangelicals are wont to say he was just a man. Well, that he was, but what an extraordinary man. He was a bulwark against first Nazism, then communism, then, more recently, godless humanism. That's why evangelicals acknowledge him, respect him, admire him, and mourn his passing. What an extraordinary individual.

Most people will not remember that when the pope took office, there was a subliminal kind of animosity, sometimes hostility, between Catholics and evangelicals. Because of his stance on these great moral issues of our day, there was a political rapprochement -- what some people have called a kind of ecumenism of the barricades against the forces today that undermine the dignity of the human person, whether abortion, cloning, medical experimentation. All these he stood against. In that sense, there is a new kind of politics in America.

Obviously evangelicals don't attribute authority to the pope. We don't believe in papal infallibility, for example. But we do understand that he plays an incredible role as head of the Roman Catholic Church worldwide. His stands on behalf of so many issues -- religious freedom, the sanctity of life; against, for example, authoritarianism, communism, etc. -- have all built a repository of goodwill by evangelicals for this man. And thus it's possible for us to mourn in the same way that Catholics do.

Evangelicals and Catholics have great theological differences, true, on a lot of issues. Not just contemporary issues, such as whether or not we use birth control, for example. But on the bigger, most important issues, such as the divinity of Jesus Christ, we agree. And that is the central message which together we send to the world, and take it to the ends of the earth. And frankly, a lot of the differences have paled in comparison to the things we agree upon.

He was an evangelist for the Roman Catholic Church, of course. But he was also an evangelist for the human person, standing for the oppressed, for those who suffer, those who are without the sustenance that two out of three people in the world today don't have, namely, the means to even feed themselves. He was an evangelist for the Roman Catholic Church, but also for larger causes which, frankly, evangelicals can agree with the pope on, such as religious freedom, justice for the poor, care for the creation, peacemaking -- these are all values which we hold dear too.

The pope was a peripatetic preacher on behalf of the causes that he so deeply felt about. It's forced all of us, not just Catholics but evangelicals, to reach deep within ourselves, examine our own consciences about what is right and what the Bible teaches. To that extent, yes, he has been able to prick even the consciences of evangelicals, and that's why opinion poll after opinion poll show[s] they admire him a great deal.

John Paul II stood for orthodoxy against theological liberalism, and that's why evangelicals admired him. That's why there has developed a rapprochement politically. We don't agree on everything theologically, of course not, but politically the impact of the two groups, evangelicals and Catholics together, has formed the new moral center of gravity in America, and some would say in the world.

Often in evangelical churches, if a strong pastor has led for many decades, it's almost impossible for a successor. Well, we hope not, but pray for his successor that he would be the kind of person that the pope's been, standing against theological liberalism; for orthodoxy, for the dignity of the human person; against the materialism, consumerism, and all the forces that wage war against the human person today. We hope that his successor stands for these same values.

Evangelicals have not particularly supported the ecumenism that the pope has stood for, fearing that in reaching out to other religions, he might dilute his own orthodox Christian faith. Evangelicals don't identify with all that this recent pope has stood for, but nonetheless the challenges to Christianity in the world today, from materialism, consumerism -- all of these, you see, wage war against what is really truth. And so the next pope must be someone who believes, as has this past pope, in objective truth. Standing for something that is permanent against all the relativity of the age is fundamentally most important for the cardinals to look for in the next pope, at least from this evangelical's viewpoint.

Mark Pelavin, director of Reform Judaism's Commission on Interreligious Affairs:

It's difficult to imagine the impact that this pope has had on Catholic-Jewish relations. Time and time again, this pope, through gesture, through word, through teaching, has not just reached out to the Jewish community, but rather, embraced the Jewish community. His loss is an immeasurable one.

He managed to convey to the Jewish community that the Jewish people were not in any way rejected by God, rejected by Catholicism, but rather, embraced. He spoke about Judaism as being Christianity's older brother. He found phrases over and over again that resonated powerfully in his tradition and in our tradition. I think of him making the first ever visit by a pope to a synagogue and greeting the rabbi by saying, "I am Joseph, your brother." This pope, over and over again, found the right words at the right time to reach out to the Jewish community, to embrace the Jewish community.

To have a Polish pope in this century and to have someone who understood so deeply the tragedy of the Holocaust, the uniqueness of the Holocaust -- when he spoke about the Holocaust he often used the Hebrew word "Shoah," emphasizing its unique nature, that it was a particular event, that it wasn't genocidal activity, that there was something distinctive about the attacks on the Jews during the Shoah. You saw it in his visit to Israel when he visited Yad Vashem at the Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem and spoke so powerfully and so movingly. He spoke of the long black night of the Shoah. Through his words and again through his deeds, his visits, through the meetings he chose to have and the places he chose to visit, he sent over and over again a very powerful message that he understood the suffering of the Jewish community in this century.

I think one of the things that was most striking about this well-traveled pope was his visit to the Holy Land. I was very moved by the pope's visit to Israel as part of the jubilee millennium celebration. Clearly the pope came to visit Israel as a country -- not as some abstract idea, not as some map, but rather, meeting the people of Israel, walking the streets of Israel, understanding the reality of Israel today. You saw that in his recognizing Israel and establishing diplomatic relations. You saw that in his words calling for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. You saw that in the approach that the entire Catholic Church has taken, trying to bring peace to an area that has known so much bloodshed, so much war.

One of the hallmarks of Pope John Paul II's pontificate has been this focus on embracing the Jewish community, and not just the Jewish community but other faiths as well. Clearly that desire, that teaching, has filtered down throughout the Church. We find renewed interest in such conversations in every level of the Church. From cardinals to local priests, we find that same type of approach, that same type of desire, not just for outreach, not just for discussion, but for true understanding.

It's difficult, from the perspective of the Jewish community, to anticipate what a successor might be like to someone who has really redefined Jewish-Catholic relations. What would a successor do to further this? Use the same type of language. One of the things that was most striking about John Paul II was the wonderful way he had of mixing grand gestures, the visit to the synagogue in Rome, the visit to the Western Wall in Jerusalem, with important teachings and with beautiful language, and I think that will be the challenge for a successor in this area, as in so many areas -- to manage to lead both symbolically and to lead through the teachings of the Church.

I think the next pope has such a strong foundation to build on in Jewish-Catholic relations and in the work the pope was beginning to do toward the end of his pontificate, reaching out to other faiths. I imagine that that would be one of the major challenges for the next pope -- reaching out, not just to the Jewish community but to the Muslim community and to other faiths across the world. And of course, this pope traveled so widely and met so many people. But the theological work of building those bridges that was really something from the latter part of his pontificate will, I imagine, be a significant challenge for his successor.

One of the things that is striking to me about the relation between Catholics and Jews today is the depth and breadth and vitality of our relationships. It doesn't mean that we don't have disagreements; it doesn't mean that there aren't controversies; but one of the real legacies, I think, of Pope John Paul II is that we have a context in which to have those conversations. We can disagree, and we do, sometimes heatedly, but we can always have that conversation; we can do so in a manner of mutual respect, mutual admiration, and mutual understanding of each other's faiths. That is a powerful and important legacy.

Nathan Diament, director of public policy for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations:

This pope's relationship with the Jewish community was historic -- I'm tempted to say revolutionary. He was the first pope to visit a synagogue, make an official papal visit to Israel, to the chief rabbis of Israel and the president of Israel, who is the head of state, and really revolutionize the relationship of the Catholic Church with the Jewish people and the State of Israel.

The outreach the pope did to the Jewish people was very meaningful, very significant. I failed to mention his visit to Yad Vashem, and his historic statements of admitting the mistakes and shortcomings of the Church during the Holocaust era, which, of course, was something the pope lived through personally in Poland, and he really reached out to the Jewish people in an unprecedented way for a pope and a Church leader.

There was great disappointment, if not anger at the Church as an institution for its failure to speak out in the face of the evils of Nazism, even though there were individual Catholics and priests and others who saved individual Jews. For this pope to step forward and recognize that was a failing of the Church as an institution and to openly and explicitly try and mend that breach was something that touched the lives of all individual Jews.

I suppose the hope of the Jewish community is that John Paul's successor will build on his legacy of improving relations with the Jewish people. There's still more correcting that can be done.

A hope for the future of John Paul's successor is that the successor will build on John Paul's legacy of Catholic relations toward the Jews, build on his warming of relations with the Jewish community, and that our two faiths and faith communities can work together for the benefit of humanity around the globe, along the trajectory that John Paul has set forward.

As someone who represents an organization that tries to translate principles of faith into the real world, whether it's in the public square or in the halls of government, Pope John Paul II was really a model for people of faith around the world that ancient traditions of faith can play a high-impact role in modern society on the most contemporary of issues. He was really a model for bringing and translating faith into the lives of people in their everyday living.

The Vatican is not only a religious institution, it's a state in the global community, and John Paul's establishment of diplomatic relations with the State of Israel, the home for Jews around the world, was a historic development, something that brought the two faith communities together in a way that was very meaningful to all.

I think the papacy of Pope John Paul II is marked by his role as a faith leader who brought his faith into the real world. He took his faith principles and traveled the world and tried to translate that faith to influence people and governments and policies for the benefit of humanity.

John Paul II had regular meetings with rabbis and other leaders of the Jewish community and really tried to find opportunities to both acknowledge the shortcomings of the Church in the past and ... build a better future for Catholic-Jewish relations. I think most Jews would hope that the pope's successor will build upon the pope's legacy, will continue to find opportunities to relate to Jews directly, but also will have the Church as an institution relate to the State of Israel and the people of Israel in meaningful and productive ways, and [ways] that will be better for our two communities and for the world in general.