After discussing Catholicism with RCs for years now, I think I might use Ratzinger's own terminology which he used against Protestant churches to answer that question -- he is a "defective" Christian.
I doubt very much those would be Pope Benedict's words. He is a Holy man, illuminated by the Holy spirit. He would never call another Chrisitan "defective". It is your decision to listen to him or not, but for you to quote him like that is SLANDEROUS, and a little creepy.
James Ch. 4
Humble yourselves before the Lord and he will exalt you. Do not speak evil of one another, brothers. Whoever speaks evil of a brother or judges his brother speaks evil of the law and judges the law.
When did Benedict identify, specifically or generally, any Christian as “defective?”
That was not the question put to him. The question was: Is Benedict XVI a Christian?
That shouldn't get any kind of reaction. If you remember, all that took offense were told not to that it really wasn't an insult, but you really couldn't be "complete" Christians until you submit to Rome's domination.
I'm still amazed that people who have nothing good to say about the Catholic Church will throw a fit when the slightest negative thing is said about their church.
Mr. Spurgeon, Mr. Whitefield, Mr. Wesley, Mr. Watts, Mr. Newton, Mr. (Jonathan) Edwards, Mr. (Dwight) Moody, Mr. Ratzinger. -— I thought I was putting the man, whom I have never met, and of whom I've probably seen fewer than a dozen photos thus far, in very good company.
Some of you folks are running around just calling him “Ratzinger,” as if you were in the next bunk with him in Marine basic training. But I see that this is common in articles written about him, and people don't get upset about it. I think in journalism this is considered to be acceptable.
Then the name got changed in the questioning, and I was asked whether I thought “ . . . Benedict . . .” was saved. Honestly, I cannot remember the numbers, and I don't know how many “Benedicts” there were were among these “successors.” I also do not know the purpose of their using an alias, how the names are chosen, or who chooses them.
I am not being disrespectful. I simply and honestly don't believe that any man on earth has any obligation to play these name games, or to join in to the exaltation of clergymen. Those who want to believe that there is one visible “church” on earth today that is the visible “Kingdom of God” on earth are also free to believe (if they wish) that they should exalt one man who kind o’ looks like a king on a throne. But others don't have any obligation to view that man in the same light.