Paul Greenberg gets just about everything wrong. He strongly implies that Pope John Paul II was not in charge towards the end of his pontificate, as he grew more and more frail. Apparently Mr. Greenberg does not credit the reports to the contrary, or the prolific output our Holy Father had in his final months. Just look at the Vatican's online archives. 7 Pontifical Messages, 4 speeches to different bodies, 14 Letters and 6 audiences are up for reading. Sure, he wasn't able to read his own speech much of the time, but that is Parkinson's Disease for you. The evidence is firmly in support of the control and authority Pope John Paul II continued to exercise right up to his final days.
Mr. Greenberg thinks that Pope Benedict XVI will not reach out. Our new Holy Father has barely even started his pontificate, and already, in his homilies, he is reaching out in ways even the New York Times has noticed (reference previous posts here). Mr. Greenberg suggests we are entering a "holding pattern," while the Pope is talking about attempting to revive the faith world wide. Mr. Greenberg thinks that this Pope is too old, while the youth even before his election cheered him, stood in the rain to meet with him (I have lost the reference for this statement ☹).
And lastly, Mr. Greenberg thinks that in recent decades the Church has been "the health of freedom, of the West, of learning and of tolerance, all of which a renewed church championed." I can only ask where he has been? Certainly not Earth. The Church has not tolerated the push for the acceptance of depravity and death. The Church changed no doctrine, and angered many who hoped to use Vatican II as an excuse to introduce the Modernist heresy into the Church. Further, looking here at the United States alone, we have seen slower growth, growth mostly from immigration in fact. We have seen those who claim to be Catholic in open opposition to the Church's teaching. How is that "health" Mr. Greenberg? Unless you actually want to see the Church flounder.