Also in that same New York Times article, we see that the liberals’ favored candidate going into the conclave, Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium, wasn’t too happy.
But already, there was at least one voice of careful reservation. Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium, one of the most liberal cardinals, who has been critical of Cardinal Ratzinger, skipped the dinner specifically to hold a news conference.
He would not disclose his own vote and did not criticize Cardinal Ratzinger directly. But he was not effusive in his praise, either, saying that he had “a certain hope” based on the choice of the name Benedict. Benedict XV, who appealed for peace during World War I, “was a man of peace and reconciliation,” Cardinal Danneels said.
But, he said, “We have to see what’s in a name.”
I’m guessing “Ratzinger” wasn’t on Cardinal Danneel’s ballot. In fact, I bet after the first ballot, the cardinal was less than interested in the rest of the proceedings. That he also skipped the special dinner to complain to the press and express “his hope” apparently that Benedict is not the man he has always been says a lot about Danneels.