I would have used the term "neo-Catholic" if that's what I intended. But I didn't intend my remarks to be "denigration." There's nothing wrong with being to the right of Mahoney and Weakland. There's nothing wrong with chanting "JP 2, we love you." These are not denigrations. I think if you read it again, you'll see that it's more of a "pick your preference," and there's nothing inherently denigrating about my references to "conservatives."
How can you be on FreeRepublic and "detest the phrase conservative"? These are useful labels and there's nothing perjorative about them. Go ahead and call me an "integrist" if you want. I don't find it insulting. As far as "schismatic," however, that would be factually incorrect.
One example would be Cardinal Ratzinger. At Vatican II he was considered a liberal. Now he's considered a conservative. His views haven't changed, but his relative position has changed. This demonstrates that "conservative" is a relative term. It doesn't make the word an insult, just demonstrates the nature of the term.
As in The Justice of the Term Neo-Catholic by Ferrara.
God Bless, both of you.
I do not find political labels useful in the Catholic realm, as Sursum Corda pointed out recently. See the remarks here: Catholic Caucus: Discussion topic: What is an "orthodox Catholic"??? immediately at the top, re "conservative" and "Papal trads"