Joseph Ratzinger, from Priest to Peritus to Pope.(3)

The topic of The Syllabus is addressed beginning on page 4.  One is reminded of when Ratzinger spoke of Gaudium et Spee as a counter Syllabus

https://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_031_RatzingerCouterSyllabus.htm

As to be expected when speaking about an earlier time in the life of the Church, he is critical of it: .... the Syllabus of Pius IX (1864) in which the Church decisively and uncompromisingly detached itself from the growing error of the "modern mind." As with every historic necessity however it undoubtedly went about this with excessively one-sided zeal.

Can anyone even imagine him saying this about Vatican Two? Of course not.

...such tragic figures as Loisy and Tyrrel. men who thought they could not save the faith without throwing away the inner core along with the expendable shell...It must be said that in sifting it out, much real wheat was lost along with the chaff?

He will only say things like this about the work of faithful Catholics. As to what he thinks is expendable, we know from what he did at Vatican Two.

The same cramped thinking, once so necessary as a line of defense, impregnated the text and informed it with a theology of negations and prohibitions, although in themselves they might well have been valid, they certainly could not produce that positive note which was now to be expected from the Council.

1. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
2. You shall not kill.
3. You shall not commit adultery.
4. You shall not steal.
5. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
6. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife.
7. You shall not covet your neighbor's goods.

Now the time has come to recognize with greater respect that there is also a partial truth, in fact a profound truth in every doctrine taught by our separated brethren which we should profess along with them..p. 97-98.

Yes, Vatican Two was the time when Catholic experts like Ratzinger began to praise and mimic the heretics and schismatics because he thought they were right where as the Catholic Church was a barrier to progress and ecumenical bliss.

Ratzinger is the synecdoche of all of the periti possessed by the modernistic spirit that was so puissant during the lamentable and destructive  Vatican Two Council.

OK,  I am done. I had intended to do a criticial review of this text but I have to stop now. Every time I reread his words I become too angry to continue; his words express a clear dislike (hatred is not too strong a word) for the Catholic Church of history (he repeatedly criticises it in this text) whereas he is quite generous in expressing admiration and praise for its enemies.

These who elected him knew all of this about him. Is that part of the reason they elected him Pope?