Pope Benedict is conservative- no wait liberal . . .

Summary: Is Pope Benedict XVI a liberal or a conservative? It seems that people cannot make up their minds. If you ask "liberal" Catholics, they'll tell you that he's conservative. On the other hand, if you ask "conservative" Catholics, they'll claim that he is a raging ecumenical liberal. Don't take my word for it . . .
Click below to read this article:

From "Traditionalmass.org" - the conservative side

Question: Is it accurate to say, then, that Ratzinger is a conservative?

Answer: No. From the point of view of the Catholic Faith, Ratzinger is not even a Catholic. He is a public heretic just like Wojtyla. He could be styled a conservative Novus Ordite, inasmuch as he is not in favor of women priests, contraception, abortion, sodomy, etc. He also has said a few things in favor of the traditional liturgy. But in comparison to Catholic popes, such as Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, Benedict XV, Pius XI or Pius XII, he is not even a Catholic.

Question: Why do you say that Ratzinger is not even a Catholic?

Answer: Because he is an ecumenical maniac, more ecumenical, I think, than even Wojtyla, if that is possible. But ecumenism is contrary to our holy Faith. It was condemned in no uncertain terms by Pope Pius XI in 1928, as being equivalent to the “abandonment of the religion revealed by God.” Ecumenism is the heart and soul of Vatican II. All of the liturgical, doctrinal, and disciplinary changes of Vatican II were made in the name of ecumenism. Ratzinger assured the cardinals in his very first speech that he would continue the reforms of Vatican II and continue to reach out to other religions through ecumenism. Our faithful must understand that ecumenism is the central problem. Ecumenism and Catholicism cannot get along. If Ratzinger is ecumenical — and he is — then he is no good, and no pope.

Where does this line of thinking go wrong?

1. The assumption that ecumenism is contrary to our holy Faith. Since when has dialoguing with people in search of the truth contrary to the Faith? I think the assumption that some traditionalists make is that ecumenism means compromising the truth of the Faith. Rather, ecumenism means exploring the elements of truth that lie in every Christian denomination and world religion, and then leading non-Catholics and non-Christians down that path of truth to fuller truth. Pope Pius XI rightly condemned sacrificing the truth of faith in the name of ecumenism - and he condemned the ecumenism of his time because it was doing just that. However, the conversion of those in error has always been a focus of the Church. The ecumenism of Vatican II is simply forging relationships with people of other faiths so that we can lead them to conversion and to the fullness of truth.
2. To claim that all of the changes of Vatican II were made in the name of ecumenism is an erroneous statement. The main purpose of Vatican II, according to Pope Paul VI, was to lead the Church in exploration of what Christ intended the Church to be. It wanted to get rid of errors (that have been condemned in the Church throughout history) such as legalism and clericalism, and to reinvigorate everyone to live out their roles in the Church.
3. The last sentence quoted above is ridiculous. Whether or not a pope is truly a pope does not depend on his personal beliefs. It depends on whether or not he was chosen by a proper council of Cardinals. We have had popes that have believed in and practiced great evils, but they have never made their personal errors part of official Church teachings.

In the love of Christ,

Brother Thomas

Tomorrow: we'll hear from the "liberal" sides.