So, the body of St. Ignatius was still warm in his grave when the Jesuits had already turned into bad news, and there was good reason for their suppression.  I still feel that the lifting of said suppression was one of the greatest papal mistakes in history. 

They started early by requesting dispensation from the Divine Office so they could pursue various secular interests. 

Of course, despite the "suppression", the Jesuits kept operating anyway, sheltered by some monarchs with whom they had ingratiated themselves, and otherwise under cover.

Long before these events, the Jesuits had championed Molinist thinking, and were among the earliest enemies of EENS dogma.

These two sentences maintain a contradiction.

Nonsense.

The Church doesn't err. Evolution is allowed as long at we believe the soul was immediately created by God thus creating the human.

Church doesn't err when teaching something to the Universal Church.  But the Church can err in permitting various positions to be held?  So, the Church positively condemned heliocentrism as HERESY, and that condemnation had papal approval.  Then the Church allowed heliocentrism.  These two contradict one another, so the Church had "erred" either the first time or the second time.  So, the error would be the second time, since it's a prudential judgment and not a teaching.  Unfortunatley, dogmatic SVism have absurdly exaggerated the scope of infallibility in overreacting to the errors of R&R, which excessively minimize it.  They exaggerate infallibility to absurd lengths that NO THEOLOGIAN writing after Vatican I and before Vatican II ever held.

Church condemned usury, and then stopped condeming it.

Church permitted both Thomism and Molinism, where each group accused the other of heresy, and both cannot be true, so in permitting them both, it permitted something incorrect.

Pius XII permitted DISCUSSION of evolution ... not even adherence to it, much less did he teach it.  That was an unmitigated disaster, along with a number of his other decisions.

Dodgmatic SVism has indeed trended toward the papolatry that many R&R accuse all SVs of, where Popes are these divine oracles that are infallible every time they pass wind ... or even infallible in never being able to fail to condemn error.

Honorius was anathematized by Third Constantinople for failing to condemn various propostiions related to monothelitism, so either Honorius erroed or III Constantinople (and Pope Stephen II who ratified it) did.

Stuff like this tends to turn Catholic teaching regarding papal infallibility into a laughing stock.