You have failed.
You cited a quote where Ratzinger was speaking about modern man
Not a single word about the new rite of mass appears in your quote.
And it is painfully obvious you do not do justice to the plain sense of the words (see your irrational explanation about See of Peter and antiChrist) of others.
No, you are wrong. The words I cited were taken from the Cardinal's speech at Fontgombault, a conference specifically dedicated to the Liturgy. Ratzinger had pointed out that modern man was unable to believe he wounds God by his sinfulness, something the Cardinal felt precluded belief in classical theological formulations for the reasons for Christ's sacrifice--hence my citation. It was a citation directly related to the notion of propitiatory sacrifice, something central to the meaning of the Mass. If you did not follow this argument, I suggest you go back over the posts. My quote was not the whole of his speech, but a part cited to emphasize the difference between Ratzinger's view of sacrifice and that of the more traditional view of the SSPX, something you apparently misconstrued entirely, thinking I cited the speech to prove the Cardinal was in agreement with SSPX. So you got the argument completely wrong. I was, in fact, suggesting just the opposite from what you claimed I was saying--and I then cited Trent's dogmatic description of the Mass to show how Ratzinger's contemporary view is out of keeping with Trent. In short, you really don't know what you're talking about.