That is what is truly irrelevant.
I was not saying that the man came out and provided open endorsement for the principle, but was saying that his own words (as he wrote aspects of truth) when added together -- betrayed himself and Roman Catholic polemics as towards this issue, even when he himself may not have been aware of doing so -- as I made note of in my first note, this thread, when utilizing that source.
If you had bothered to read it the first time, I wouldn't need to here again repeat myself.
He (Ratzinger) also did show very much how your own self has long been in error as to your own usual polemics in regards to Luther.
Additionally, in Ratizinger's own accounting of things, as to Luther turning away from the way ECF's for reason of their use allegory, in later pages, Thomas is said to have done similar (and centuries earlier, or course) -- but doing so for differing reasons, yet still, in 'show the reason' instead of a 'show by allegory' type of thing, Luther can be seen to have been possibly influenced in that, by Thomas (even if Luther not fully aware of that influence) though as to what degree or extent even a most in-depth study and analysis would likely as not need make guesses towards.
“That is what is truly irrelevant.”
No, it’s your usage of it - since it doesn’t prove anything about sola scriptura - except for the fact that you’re wrong about it.