I don't mark folk down for that, or up for the converse. I consider them independently.

I think that's entirely fair.

I think the Hitler Youth membership is the Ratzigner papacy equivalent of Jeff Gannon's gay porn career. It's that juicy little extra tidbit of backstory that makes everyone's eyes roll that much harder, but it's not really the problem.

This is what leads me to believe that Ratzinger is a compromise. The conservatives get their rottweiler, and the liberals get someone who probably won't be in office for long, thereby allowing them to drum up support for the next conclave. Politicking for Pope Benedict XVI's replacement has already begun, albeit behind closed doors in a subdued fashion.

Interesting. Makes sense. Although you'd have to check out the Ratzinger family to check life expectancy....

There were a few papabile that were open to revisiting the Church's stance on birth control and the ordination of women. Schoenborn of Austria was one, I believe.

Hmmm. Is he young (for a papabile)? Maybe in 10 years or whatever he'll have a shot.

See, I don't think that Ben's a worse guy for having ended up how he is and having been in Hitler Youth. He's bad enough on his own. In theory he's done more for Jews than I have.

I don't think it makes him worse either. He just doesn't get a "He had to! He felt really bad about it!" from me. I'm saying the things he's done for Jewish people is not enough to make up for the bad stuff he espouses now.

I stopped being surprised that close exposure to one injustice (like, say, racism) doesn't cure people of honestly believing something I consider a similar injustice (like, say, homophobia). I don't mark folk down for that, or up for the converse. I consider them independently.

I'm not sure that I'm suprised by it, but certainly disappointed. I don't think I mark people up or down, or maybe I do- I do consider them less thoughtful (in the larger sense).

so I'm stuck in exile with preachers in bad suits, Tom DeLay, and a room full of Thomas Kinkade paintings and a buffet table full of tragic casseroles you would find on Iron Chef: Battle Condensed Cream of Mushroom Soup.

Oh, this is effin' brilliant.

I have a question for the Catholics -- can a person use something that has the side effect of birth control if that is not its purpose -- i.e. estrogen can be prescribed for a variety of problems, but would have the effect of preventing pregnancy. Is that allowed?

He just doesn't get a "He had to! He felt really bad about it!" from me.

I don't think anyone (here) insisted he felt really bad about it. But the had to ... well, mandatory things while you're a teen? I'll go with he pretty much had to.

I have a question for the Catholics -- can a person use something that has the side effect of birth control if that is not its purpose -- i.e. estrogen can be prescribed for a variety of problems, but would have the effect of preventing pregnancy. Is that allowed?

I know that in Catholic hospitals that's what doctors have to do -- they can't prescribe birth control, but they can give the Pill for "irregular periods" or some such.

I stopped being surprised that close exposure to one injustice (like, say, racism) doesn't cure people of honestly believing something I consider a similar injustice (like, say, homophobia). I don't mark folk down for that, or up for the converse. I consider them independently.

Yes, this is a good point.

Also, I'm not sure I find his statements about other churches, as the protector of orthodoxy of his church, so offensive. I'm willing to be convinced, however.

To wit: In 1997 Ratzinger annoyed Buddhists by calling their religion an "autoerotic spirituality’" that offers "transcendence without imposing concrete religious obligations." And Hinduism, he said, offers "false hope"; it guarantees purification based on a "morally cruel" concept of reincarnation resembling "a continuous circle of hell." The Cardinal predicted Buddhism would replace Marxism as the Catholic Church’s main enemy this century.

Predicting one religion would become an enemy? Offensive. Stating that a religion offers no concrete religious obligations or that reincarnation would be like hell? Doesn't offend me. I'm not going to be more offended at him than at other cardinals because he doesn't have a good opinion of other religions. I think that's a given. The Catholic church has always been political.

I read that he deserted the German army towards the end of the war. Which was somewhat ballsy, as at that point deserters were usually shot on sight or else hanged publicly as an example.