Firstly, how does JPII classify as a Doctor of the Church? This title is an official honor that is given in recognition of the outstanding contribution a person has made to the understanding and interpretation of the sacred Scriptures and the development of Christian doctrine.
So what better understanding of the Bible has JPII given - other than (among other things) the heretical idea that Hell is not a place of fire and eternal suffering, but only as a separation from God. JPII stated that Hell is only symbolically described as a fiery place of torment and that the descriptions of torment was an "improper use of Biblical images".
So, JPII knows better than Jesus? Jesus many times mentioned that Hell was a place of fire. To list a few examples, Jesus said:
hell and fire go together as "hell fire" (Matt 5:22, 18:9, Mark 9:47)
hell is a place of "fire" (Matt 7:19, 13:40, 25:41)
hell is the "furnace of fire" (Matt 13:42, 50)
hell is "the fire that never shall be quenched" (Mark 9:43, 45)
hell is the place where "the fire is not quenched" (Mark 9:44, 46, 48)
hell is a place of "everlasting fire" (Matt 18:8, 25:41)
hell is the place where the damned will be "tormented in this flame" (Luke 16:24)
JPII said that hell (and he also included heaven and purgatory in this equation) are only states of being of a spirit (angel/demon) or human soul, rather than places. Notice that he only mentions the human soul. Well, I guess he must have forgotten about the end of time when our bodies will be united with our souls in heaven and hell (purgatory will cease to exist).
As far as being named a Doctor for development of doctrine, the only thing JPII did was add more confusion to doctrine with his ambiguous interpretations of doctrine and long-winded, confusing encyclicals that needed intrepreters to interpret what he wrote. Oh, and let us not forget his ever so popular "Theology of the Body", which scandalously sɛҳuąƖized the vision of the human person and blasphemously sɛҳuąƖized God and His Sacraments. Christopher West, who has made a career of interpreting JPII's "Theology of the Body"), stated "I actually see very profound historical connections between Hugh Hefner and John Paul II." West argues that Victorian prudishness (and its predecessor Puritanism) caused Christians to see sɛҳuąƖity as a source of shame. He stated that, in different ways, both Hefner and the pope challenged this attitude.
A secondary problem I have with JPII is that there are currently 33 Doctors of the Catholic Church. The number 33 is significant since that is the age at which Christ died. That is why you also see many saints dying at the age of 33 years old. I believe God intends for there to only be 33 Doctors because of the deeper symbolism behind the number (just as the numbers 3 and 40 are significant in our faith and many of our devotions). By adding a 34th Doctor, they will be doing what JPII did to the Rosary when, by adding 50 more decades to it, he destroyed the connection between the 150 Psalms of David and the 150 decades of the Rosary (that is why the Rosary was also called Our Lady's Psalter).
There are three requirements that must be fulfilled by a person in order to merit being called a "Doctor of the Church".
1) holiness that is truly outstanding, even among saints
2) depth of doctrinal insight; and
3) an extensive body of writings which the church can recom­mend as an expression of the authentic and life-giving Catholic Tradition.
Does JPII meet these requirements? I think not.
1) While JPII may have been a very devout (although confused) Catholic, I don't think that he reached a level of holiness. When a person is holy, they possess the 7 gifts of the Holy Ghost to a greater degree than the normal devout Catholic.
Did JPII did possess the gift of Understanding, which enable us to know more clearly the mysteries of faith. Apparently not, since he was rather confused about a lot of mysteries of the faith and even espoused heretical views of the faith.
Did JPII possess the gift of Counsel, which warns us of the deceits of the devil, and of the dangers to salvation. I think not, since he put many souls in danger of salvation with his scandalous behavior (ie. Assisi, kissing Koran, sacriligious Papal Masses, and so on and so on) and heretical views (ie. Jєωs are still part of the covenant and don't need to convert, and neither does any other non-Catholic for that matter, and so on and so on).
Did JPII possess the gift of Fortitude, which strengthens us to do the will of God in all things. Nope. He was a coward when it came to standing up to heretical bishops and priests, he didn't allow the Latin Mass (even though he knew it had never been abrogated and every priest had a right to offer it) out of cowardice when he was threatened with a schism by liberal bishops of Eastern Europe, he didn't have enough gumption to deal with the clergy abuse, and so on and so on.
2) Did JPII have any depth of doctrinal insight? I already discussed this in the first few paragraphs of this thread. There was no depth to his insight - his doctrinal insight was too confusing even for the theological scholar and was on many occassions heretical in nature.
3) Did JPII have "an extensive body of writings which the church can recom­mend as an expression of the authentic and life-giving Catholic Tradition". Well, I must admit he did have an extensive body of writings. Unfortunately, many of his encyclicals and writings were the volume of a book yet, after what seemed like a hundred pages of words, the reader (if he actually had the patience to read through the entire thing) was left with the all too frequent reaction - "Huh?". And so, interpreters were often required for his writings. And the irony - additional interpreters were sometimes required for these interpreters. Yet, with the ball of confusion JPII had created with his writings, the interpreters themselves couldn't even agree on the meaning of what they had just read (apparently, JPII's writings were almost beyond the realm of human understanding). And did these writings of JPII express Catholic tradition? Not always. As mentioned before, JPII was controversial in the heretical statements and ideas imbued in some of his work.
The image Catholic Martyr posted is pretty much my reaction to this whole thing.