I appreciate the reference to Spe salvi, 44-46. I remember reading that and being jarred. That encyclical was what started me thinking maybe Ratzinger's 'hermeneutic of continuity' thing was a sham. And by the way, that teaching is just antithesis (i.e., anti-Christ). Pretending that it's an Hegelian 'synthesis' is a slander on Hegel.
I appreciate the reference to Spe salvi, 44-46. I remember reading that and being jarred. That encyclical was what started me thinking maybe Ratzinger's 'hermeneutic of continuity' thing was a sham. And by the way, that teaching is just antithesis (i.e., anti-Christ). Pretending that it's an Hegelian 'synthesis' is a slander on Hegel.
I appreciate the reference to Spe salvi, 44-46. I remember reading that and being jarred. That encyclical was what started me thinking maybe Ratzinger's 'hermeneutic of continuity' thing was a sham. And by the way, that teaching is just antithesis (i.e., anti-Christ). Pretending that it's an Hegelian 'synthesis' is a slander on Hegel.