p. 53:

… The Church is the celebration of the Eucharist; the Eucharist is the Church … they are one and the same. The Eucharist is Christ’s sacrament, and because the Church is the Eucharist, therefore she too is sacrament …

This is a rejection of the traditional doctrine of the Eucharist.

The assertion that the Church also is a sacrament stands in contradiction to the decree of the Council of Trent, which solemnly defined the number of the sacraments as seven, and the Church is not among them.

p. 56:

… The attempt to give Christianity a new public image by placing it in an undefined positive relation to the world – presenting it as a conversion to the world – corresponds to our feeling for life and therefore continues to prosper. Much false fear of sin, produced by a minute moral theology and too often nourished and strengthened by confessors, is taking its revenge today by leading people to treat the Christianity of the past as a kind of harassment, which constantly kept man in opposition to himself …

The Anticardinal states here that we are to have a positive attitude toward the world, something forbidden by Catholic tradition, and especially by Holy Scripture. Are we not to listen to theologians and priests who warn against sin, but rather to listen to Satan, who is the prince of this world?

I will not now speak many things with you. For the prince of this world cometh, and in me he hath not any thing. (Jn 14, 30)

The saints fled from the world to monasteries, to the desert. St. Paul tells us not to be conformed to the world, but to be crucified to the world. St. John tells us not to love the world nor the things of the world.

Our Lord Jesus says that the world will hate us, because we are no longer of this world:

If you had been of the world, the world would love its own. But because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. (Jn 15, 19)

As for this “opposition to oneself”, over which the Anticardinal so laments, did not our Lord Jesus Himself say that we must deny ourselves, and that there is a continual struggle of the spirit against the flesh?

If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life, shall lose it: for he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall save it. (Lk 9, 23-24)

Does not this struggle require self-denial and mortification, things unavoidable for one who wishes to grow in holiness?

p. 131:

… it is certainly noteworthy that Luther, for example, did not base his Catechism on a carefully elaborated system of proofs, but simply on what are called ‘loci’, the chief deposits of faith, which he gathered together and explained … One might add that in doing so he followed the ancient catechetical traditions and in this respect in no formal way differed from the Catholic Church. Honestly speaking, I do not understand why in the present age we are incapable of such moderation …

p. 196:

… The Church [during the great Western Schism of the 14th and 15th centuries] no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become doubtful in her whole objective form – the true Church, the true guarantee of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution. In the context of such events, which profoundly shook ecclesial consciousness, we must understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, finally came to perceive the Church not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation …

Martin Luther was an Archheretic. Referring to his person, attitude, or faith by Anticardinal Ratzinger only proves that he himself is a heretic and shall share his punishments.

He (Martin Luther) has now been declared a heretic, and therefore others also, the followers of the wicked and heretical sect of Martin Luther, must share his punishments and his name, and take from him everywhere their designation as ‘Lutherans’, who incur the same punishments as he. – Pope Leo X, Decet Romanum Pontificem, January 3, 1521

p. 186:

… The Resurrection cannot be a historical event in the same sense as the Crucifixion is. There is no account which presents it in this way, nor was it described at that time otherwise than by means of the eschatological-symbolic expression ‘on the third day’.

The Anticardinal does not believe in the historicity of the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Denying this fact really means renouncing the whole Catholic Faith.

But now Christ is risen from the dead, the firstfruits of them that sleep. (1 Cor 15, 20)

Put in thy finger hither, and see my hands; and bring hither thy hand, and put it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. (…) Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed. (Jn 20, 27.29)

p. 202:

… The Catholic does not desire the abolition of Protestant faith …, but rather trusts in the strengthening of [the Protestants’] faith as it takes place in their ecclesial reality …

This heresy is based on one of the chief “dogmas” of the Antichrist Antichurch, which opposes the conversion of non-Catholics to the Catholic Faith and seeks that Lutherans should be better Lutherans, Buddhists better Buddhists, and the sorcerers of Africa even better sorcerers.

The Catholic Church, however, has always fought heresies and desires their abolition in order to convert all dissenters to the Catholic Faith, because:

Outside the Catholic Church there is neither salvation nor remission of sins. – Pope Boniface VIII

… in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth (…) This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts 4, 10-12)

p. 259:

… The Greek Orthodox Church remained the true Church without submission to the pope …

According to Anticardinal Ratzinger, a Catholic no longer needs to submit to the true pope and, even without this, will still be a member of the Catholic Church.

Why then did our Lord Jesus establish the papal office in the Church?

And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. (Mt 16, 18-19)

Every human creature, if he wishes to be saved, must be subject to the Roman pontiff – Pope Boniface VIII, bull “Unam Sanctam”

p. 334:

In the Catholic domain Vatican II encouraged participation in the main movement. Even earlier, the renewed awakening of theology and all that it meant in terms of a new understanding of Scripture and the Fathers, of liturgy and openness to separated Christians, produced a new enthusiasm for learning and for a time even drove out the traditional pragmatism of many theology students: theological knowledge seemed to promise new possibilities of faith, new paths for the Church. The impulse given by Teilhard de Chardin had a broad effect. In a bold vision he incorporated the historical movement of Christianity into the great cosmic process of evolution from the Alpha point to the Omega: since, with noogenesis, the formation of consciousness, through which man became man, this process of evolution continued as the building of the noosphere above the biosphere. This means that evolution now takes place in the form of technical and scientific development, in which finally matter and spirit, the individual and society, will produce an all-embracing whole, a divine world. The conciliar ‘Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World’ took up the signal; Teilhard’s slogan ‘Christianity means more progress, more technology’ became the impulse in which the Council Fathers from rich and poor countries found a concrete hope, which was easier to interpret and propagate than the meaning of complicated discussions on the collegiality of bishops, the primacy of the pope, Scripture and tradition, priests and laity.

The Archheretic Teilhard de Chardin, among other things, did not believe in original sin, held that no one goes to hell, accepted evolution from inanimate matter, doubted supernatural grace, undermined celibacy and papal infallibility. Referring to his person, attitude, or faith by Anticardinal Ratzinger only proves that he himself is a heretic.

p. 378:

… Not every lawful church council was fruitful, some were only a waste of time … for example the Fifth Lateran Council …

The heretical Anticardinal Ratzinger attacks the Fifth Lateran Council and calls it fruitless, because it was precisely this Council that to a great extent condemned various errors of the Vatican II sect.

p. 381:

… in Harnack’s opinion the Syllabus of Pius IX is a declaration of war on its own age.

Harnack was an atheist and a Protestant heretic. He doubted the Holy Trinity, grace, the Incarnation of Christ, and other fundamental Truths of the Faith, and this in opposition to so important a document of Pope Pius IX as the Syllabus.

The Syllabus of Pius IX clearly pointed out and condemned the errors which destroy the Catholic Faith, even today. Among other things, it condemned: communism, indifferentism, secret societies, divorce, pantheism, rationalism, religious liberty, the subordination of the Church to secular power, and state interference in teaching in church schools and seminaries.

Pope Pius IX, who was continually persecuted by Freemasons, is criticized to this day, also for the First Vatican Council, among other things for proclaiming the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.