In "From Wartime Germany to the Papacy" mostly dislikes the idea of a strong Pope, and the centralized authority he has and represents. Ironically then, in its last couple sentences, it underscores its importance. Many are in favor of the national bishop's conferences. They like the idea of religion being made to fit the region, instead of the region made to fit the religion. However, it is true to our own experience that this weakens the expression of the faith. When is the last time the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops came out with a strong statement? All the strong statements, the ones that teach, the ones that let you know what Catholicism is and what it is not have come from the individual Bishops and Cardinals acting on their own, while the Conference has deliberated and disappointed again and again. Nor is this unique, for this article, so critical of a strong Pontiff, itself remembers that the German Bishop's Conference was equally week and ineffective, equally disappointing.
Another of the NYTimes articles, "An Evangelizer on the Right, With His Eye on the Future," provides I think, the first and closest the media has come yet to a good understanding. That he will combat the ideas that have made us sick, relativism, socialism, abortion. That he will help us to know what the Church teaches. That he has linked himself not only to quiet popes, but to Saint Benedict, who helped shape Europe, and infuse it with the monastic life.
"Benedict XVI Sets Out Papal Goals in First Public Mass," on the other hand, fails to understand. Ecumenism is not at all incompatible with the ideas of the preceding paragraph. Rather, it is necessary, we cannot afford the confusion of ideas, the confusion of what is Christian. Indeed, Christian and Catholic are, and must be seen to be, synonymous. It is not a softer tone to insist that he will continue the ecumenical efforts of Pope John Paul II, but rather a firmness, a commitment to do all that is needed to teach his global flock. Similarly, it is surprising that they are so quick to forget the teachings of Pope John Paul II, who was said to be attempting to "roll back Vatican II." Continuity with his predecessor will not give us with a "transient" pope in Benedict XVI, but with another strong pope, one I hope God will grant many years of service to us all, that we may be left in a stronger, clearer, more unified position, unswayed by priests and bishops who teach us falsehoods.
Meanwhile, some in the United States are wary, "Bush welcomes Pope Benedict XVI" was quick to point out openly what is implied throughout the NYTimes.
A few in the progressive wing of America's Catholic population of 67 million have expressed surprise or concern at the choice of the Cardinals, with critics suggesting the new Pope's conservative views may polarize opinion.
Naturally, here, where so many routinely ignore the teachings on abortion (I myself have heard Catholics say "I do not like it, but it is their choice"), on birth control, divorce, and other issues, it really isn't surprising that some are less than pleased. Why would they be? They now have a second pope who they will be ignoring. Those that hope to change the Church are in for a second frustrating pontificate. ☺ According to this BBC article, the Philippines is on the same page that Father Buckner was on in his homily last night. Ecstatic to have another strong pope who will help us grow, as Saint Francis de Sales would have said (my PVI upbringing showing through), "in faith and wisdom."
The excerpts of his homily, here, seem to me to confirm what I have said. Ecumenism is needed on the path to "reconstitute the full and visible unity of all Christ's followers." And he intends to be "to be a rock on which everybody can stand with confidence."
Interestingly, this article continues the pattern of thinking his homily before the conclave would have encouraged his election. Father Buckner had literally the opposite take. He said that we can clearly see the hand of God here, because if anything ensured that Pope Benedict XVI would not have been elected, it was that homily, in which he chastised his fellow Cardinals for their failings and weaknesses. This take strikes me as more true to reality. While this is precisely the tone we need, we need to have our course corrected, it is not a homily calculated to gain friends or supporters. Humanly speaking, our new Pope spent his time as head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faithful making enemies, telling people with influence in the Church that they were wrong, and to shape up.