Not looking for a fight, so hear me out. That source is a Catholic paper, so arguably biased. Is it possible that Benedict does not need defending? In other words, maybe the truth is somewhere in the middle. As a young, scared boy, maybe he did not challenge his induction into Nazi service as vehemently as maybe his beliefs would have suggested. But it also sounds like he didn't really do much in the service to aid the Nazi's, either, and sought to get away asap.
THEN, in the time that followed, from say, 16 until his ordination at 24, he came to terms spiritually with his actions. There is a big difference between actively joining the HY and being dragged in kicking and screaming. There is also a place in the middle.
Sounds like whatever transpired in the War, JPII found either Benedict's actions or his renouncement of said actions basis for respect and friendship. And POPETITUDE!
That kind of viewpoint is only supportable by hard evidence. And I have yet to see any.
I still think the article cyborg posted was good, if only to show that it's not an "indisputable fact that Ratzinger was a hard core Nazi, loving every minute of his job" as some on this thread clearly want to imply.
At any rate I'm not going to debate that matter on this thread. This is supposed to be a thread dedicated to the new leader of the Catholic Church. IMO, anyone who comes on here with anti-Catholic screed and conspiracy theories, no matter how "historic" it's (thought) to be, is a tasteless, tactless, jerk.
And I don't care to talk to tasteless, tactless jerks at any time.
Didn't say you were that, btw, so please don't come back and say, "Thanks for calling me a tasteless, tactless jerk, very 'Christian' of you".