Heresies of the Second Vatican Council

INTRODUCTION

The Vatican II Council, promulgated by Antipope Paul VI in 1965, is based on two fundamental heretical principles that are contrary to the Catholic Faith. Based on these, there are also a number of other heresies, and vague statements offensive to pious ears that smack of a heretical interpretation. The other offensive statements will be presented in another treatise. This treatise focuses on two major errors and apostasies of the Vatican II Council. The two fundamental heretical principles at Vatican II that lead to total apostasy are the heresies that false religions worship the true God, and that false religions that differ from the Catholic Faith are good and praiseworthy. These heresies have been implicitly condemned by the ecumenical councils of the Church throughout the ages through their unmitigated condemnation of opposing views, and, as will be shown, by their definition that God is a simple essence which is the same as His Divine will.

In 1824 Leo XII defined that God is Truth itself and cannot approve of false religions:

“It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth Itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members.” -Pope Leo XII, Ubi Primum, 1824

God is Truth by His very definition, as taught by Our Predecessor Leo XII here and all the great scholastic theologians. It is impossible for He who is Truth to embrace or endorse falsehood by His will in any way. God does not merely have Truth, God is Truth:

“I answer that, As said above (Article 1), truth is found in the intellect according as it apprehends a thing as it is; and in things according as they have being conformable to an intellect. This is to the greatest degree found in God. For His being is not only conformed to His intellect, but it is the very act of His intellect; and His act of understanding is the measure and cause of every other being and of every other intellect, and He Himself is His own existence and act of understanding. Whence it follows not only that truth is in Him, but that He is Truth Itself, and the sovereign and first Truth.” -Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, P1 Q16 A5.

God cannot approve, praise, respect, revere, or declare good any false religion as a whole, because He is Truth itself. The truth by its very nature cannot endorse, recommend, or praise as good any entire thing that contains falsehood. For it to endorse or respect a thing, everything in the thing must be true. In ancient Israel, when the lamb was presented for offering, if it had even one blemish despite being otherwise perfect, it was rejected. If a Catholic has a single mortal sin, despite all other good acts, he is rejected until he is forgiven in penance or the act of contrition. So likewise, one argument, even if every other premise is correct, if it has even one false premise, it is rejected by truth. So likewise, any false religion, no matter how many truths it may have, if it has even one error, can never be approved, endorsed, and respected by God in its entirety, because God is Truth, and Truth can never approve of an erroneous system of belief or religion in its full regular expression:

“The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a tertian portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. ‘There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition’ (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).

The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodoret, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. ‘No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic’ (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).” -Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, 1896.

In addition to the error that false religions are good and praiseworthy, the idea that the false religions, including heresies, can worship the true God can also be proved to be certain heresy. It was defined at Lateran IV in its confession of faith that God is absolutely simple essence:

“We firmly believe and simply confess that there is only one true God, eternal and immeasurable, almighty, unchangeable, incomprehensible and ineffable, Father, Son and holy Spirit, three persons but one absolutely simple essence, substance or nature” -Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215 A.D.

According to Aquinas and all the Catholic theologians who taught on Divine simplicity at the time of this council, God’s simple essence means His will is identical to His essence. If God’s will was in addition to His essence, His essence could no longer be simple by definition, but composed. It is the same with every other attribute of God. This is why God is truth, God is charity, God is good according to the scripture, and why God is His will. They are not separate parts of God, but they are all God’s simple essence. A simple being by definition excludes every kind of not only physical, but metaphysical composition. Thus, since God is His own will, it is impossible that the false demonic god of the Muslims and the true God of the Catholics is the same God, since they are different wills:

“Neither can there be that kind of composition which is known as metaphysical, and which results from ‘the union of diverse concepts referring to the same real thing in such a way that none of them by itself signifies either explicitly or even implicitly the whole reality signified by their combination’. Thus every actual contingent being is a metaphysical compound of essence and existence, and man in particular, according to the definition, is a compound of animal and rational. Essence as such in relation to a contingent being merely implies its conceivableness or possibility, and abstracts from actual existence; existence as such must be added before we can speak of the being as actual. But this distinction, with the composition it implies, cannot be applied to the self-existent or infinite being in whom essence and existence are completely identified. We say of a contingent being that it has a certain nature or essence, but of the self-existent we say that it is its own nature or essence. There is no composition therefore of essence and existence — or of potentiality and actuality — in God, nor can the composition of genus and specific difference, implied for example in the definition of man as a rational animal, be attributed to Him. ” -Toner, P. (1909) The Nature and Attributes of God, Catholic Encyclopedia.

That God is His Divine will in existence essentially is taught by Aquinas himself, in accord with all that has already been stated:

“Reply to Objection 1. The Divine will is God’s own existence essentially…” -Summa Theologiae, Thomas Aquinas, P1, Q19, A2.

Thus, since God is absolutely simple essence and God’s will is therefore God Himself since there is no division or composition or metaphysical parts in God, it is impossible that the god of Mohomet, who according to them eternally and unchangeably wills the victory of his false sect, and the God of the Catholics, who eternally and unchangeably wills the victory of the Catholic Faith on the last day, can be the same God.

PART I- VATICAN II WAS INTENDED TO BE PROMULGATED INFALLIBLY AND WITH THE FULL POWER OF THE MAGISTERIUM

It is important to address the authority Vatican II was intended to have over the faithful. Some have falsely taught that Vatican II was not intended to be promulgated infallibly, due to (what would be if they were true Popes) fallible statements by Paul VI at a speech or press event, which implied that the robbercouncil was “pastoral” in nature and therefore did not carry the note of infallibility. Yet, the texts that promulgate the conciliar documents, which would be a higher authority than any later fallible press statement, are some of the clearest and most authoritative promulgations ever given to conciliar documents. By the reading of the promulgation itself, clearly attempting to establish “to the glory of God” the teaching of the robbercouncil, there can be no doubt that according to the terms of the conciliar documents themselves, they were intended to be promulgated infallibly.

Remember, the Vatican II documents were issued only fifteen years after the true Pontiff Pius XII promulgated Humani Generis. Humani Generis taught that the ordinary magisterium that did not address all of the faithful is the voice of Jesus Christ and therefore infallible (since Christ cannot lie). Encyclicals are part of this ordinary magisterium that is not universal, because they are not usually published to all the faithful, but only to the bishops, primates, and some other classes. They are merely ordinary magisterium (without the universal component). Pius XII wrote in Humani Generis:

“Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary magisterium, of which it is true to say: “He who heareth you, heareth Me [Jesus Christ].” -Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, 1950.

Since ordinary magisterium is the voice of Jesus Christ Himself, the ordinary and universal magisterium, which is just a species of ordinary magisterium, is likewise the voice of Jesus Christ Himself and must also be believed by the faithful, as taught in Vatican I:

“Wherefore, by divine and catholic faith all those things are to be believed which are contained in the word of God as found in scripture and tradition, and which are proposed by the church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed, whether by her solemn judgment or in her ordinary and universal magisterium.” -Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, Session 3 Chapter 3 on Faith, 1870.

In the same way, Pope Leo XIII taught that the authentic magisterium is infallible, and stated that all who did not follow the authentic magisterium fell into heresy. Magisterium in Latin means “teaching office” or the office of the teacher, which is the Roman Pontiff. The authentic magisterium is defined by the theologians as including the non-universal teachings of the Roman Pontiffs. By the very definition of the word “authentic”, the authentic magisterium, or authentic teaching office, is simply any teaching that can be shown to be authentically or certainly from the hand of the Roman Pontiff, by notary or other proof. In other words, the teaching can be authenticated as coming from the Roman Pontiff himself, and not a subordinate or another bishop or lesser authority.

“The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authentic magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodoret, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. ‘No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic’ (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).” -Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cogntium, 1896.

It can be shown clearly that Vatican II promulgated its false decrees in a manner that was clearly intended to exceed the merely ordinary magisterium We have been discussing. The promulgation text of each Vatican II document, as signed by Antipope Paul VI, reads as follows:

“Haec omnia et singula, quae in hac Declaratione edicta sunt, placuerunt Sacrosancti Concilii Patribus. Et Nos, Apostolica a Christo Nobis tradita potestate, illa, una cum Venerabilibus Patribus, in Spiritu Sancto approbamus, decernimus ac statuimus et quae ita synodaliter statuta sunt ad Dei gloriam promulgari iubemus.”

Or in English:

“All and each of the things that have been decreed in this Declaration have pleased the Fathers of the Sacred Council. And We, by the Apostolic authority entrusted to Us by Christ, along with the Venerable Fathers, approve, decree, and establish them in the Holy Spirit, and command that what has thus been synodally established be proclaimed for the glory of God.”

Further, the Vatican II sect teaches in its false 1983 code of canon law that the teachings of Vatican II, and any teaching of its false authentic magisterium, must be adhered to by its faithful:

“Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firmly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church…Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.” -canon 750 of the false 1983 code of canon law, section 2 and canon 752 of the false 1983 code of canon law.

Since the Vatican II documents were plainly and specifically in solemn form approved, established, and proclaimed to all of the faithful to the glory of God, these documents are therefore intended to be not merely ordinary magisterium, but at least ordinary universal magisterium and even extraordinary magisterium. It is also obvious that the Vatican II council documents are intended to be more authoritative than encyclicals since the Vatican II documents were promulgated to the Universal Church in a solemn fashion.

Now that it has been established against the calumnators that the Vatican II Council was intended to be an authoritative, binding, and infallible council according to its own standards, we can proceed to refute this false council, and thereby show that since it contains heresy, there is no way it can be from the teaching office of the actual Catholic Church. Instead, it is the teaching office of a counterfeit sect of false popes, that hijacked the Vatican buildings since 1958 starting with the heretical and apostate Antipope John XXIII. Since Antipope John XXIII and his successors Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Francis were all heretics who were alien to the Church and the offices inside of it (as already taught by Satis Cognitum quoted earlier), they had no authority to teach or command or bind anything in the Church as is also taught by Satis Cognitum. This is why the false magisterium of Vatican II can teach false doctrine, because the false magisterium of Vatican II was promulgated by men who were Antipopes and had no ability to share in Peter’s authority or command the Church:

“No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.” -Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum 1896.

Authority and infallible teaching capacity only come when a man is actually holding the office of the papacy and inside the Church (see i.e. Guiding Principles of the Lay Apostolate Pius XII 1957)

PART II- VATICAN II AND ITS ANTIPOPES HAVE HERETICALLY TAUGHT THAT FALSE RELIGIONS, IN THEIR ENTIRETY, ARE GOOD AND PRAISEWORTHY

Nostra Aetate, promulgated in 1965, is probably Vatican II’s most heretical document. It teaches that religions other than Catholicism are worthy of respect, praise. esteem, and admiration. Truly the decree Nostra Aetate is diabolical in its scope. Nostra Aetate heretically states in section 2:

“Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the Divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination.”

After teaching that pagans obtain refuge in God and contemplate the true God through false myths filled with errors, Nostra Aetate then begins to teach the apostasy that these and other false religions are therefore good and praiseworthy, when it holds that teachings which differ from what the Catholic Church are worthy of esteem. Section 2 of Nostra Aetate heretically continues:

“Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing ‘ways’, comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ ‘the way, the truth, and the life’ (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.”
This citation, which is located in Nostra Aetate heretically declares that teachings that DIFFER and therefore are OPPOSED to true dogmas that the Catholic Church holds, are to be regarded with SINCERE REVERENCE. Teachings that differ from the dogmas of the Church, which are Truth itself, are by their nature false, and Vatican II here teaches that these differing teachings, and therefore false teachings, are worthy of reverence. This is a direct contradiction of the dogma defined at the Council of Florence that the Catholic Church condemns, rejects, anathematizes, and declares alien to the body of Christ whoever holds opposing or contrary views:

“Therefore it [the Holy Catholic Church] condemns, reproves, anathematizes, and declares to be outside the body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds to the contrary.” -Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra Bull of Union with the Copts, Council of Florence, 1442 A.D.

The scope the Vatican II Antipopes later give to their interpretation of this passage from Nostra Aetate is broad. They mean to praise the false religions wholly and entirely, not merely the good parts of them. In his general audience on November 8, 1972, Antipope Paul VI (the Antipope who promulgated the Vatican II Council itself) taught:

“Thus ecumenism has awakened; such as respect for non-Christian religions, for our own opponents, for the values of human activity, etc.”
On December 8, 1975 in the “Apostolic” Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi,

Antipope Paul VI declared:

“The first proclamation is also addressed to the immense sections of mankind who practice non-Christian religions. The Church respects and esteems these non-Christian religions because they are the living expression of the soul of vast groups of people. They carry within them the echo of thousands of years of searching for God, a quest which is incomplete but often made with great sincerity and righteousness of heart.” [Later, you will see that Paul VI declaration that false religions praiseworthy because of man’s “inborn desire to seek/search for God” is the precise excuse to praise them condemned by Pius XI below].

In an address to the accursed Dalai Lama on September 30, 1973, Antipope Paul VI stated to the Lama:

“We are happy to welcome Your Holiness [the Lama] today, at the beginning of your first journey to countries in this part of the world. You come to us from Asia, the cradle of ancient religions and human traditions which are rightly held in deep veneration.”

Therefore, Antipope Paul VI directly taught that the leaders of false religions, who lead and practice their religions in their full entirety, can be holy and good.

Antipope John Paul II taught the same false respect for religions in his homilies and encyclicals, such as for example:

Antipope John Paul II, Homily, April 12, 1997:” the Church, which seeks only to be able freely to preach … with respect for … every religion.”

Antipope John Paul II, Address, May 22, 2002: “Praise to you, followers of Islam… Praise to you, Jewish people… Praise especially to you, Orthodox [Schismatic] Church”

Antipope John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio (# 55), Dec. 7, 1990: “God… does not fail to make himself present in many ways, not only to individuals but also to entire peoples through their spiritual riches, of which their religions are the main and essential expression…”

Of course, recently Antipope Francis has also continuously praised and esteemed false religions in word and deed: he promoted and attended a ceremony worshipping the false Incan idol Pachamama on October 4, 2019, apologized that the idol Pachamama was afterwards thrown into the Tiber River by a disgruntled member of the Vatican II sect on October 25, 2019, bowed at the tombs of Muslim and Jewish leaders, attended Asian religious festivals filled with dragon creatures, and uttered many statements such as:

“If in the past, our differences set us [different religions] at odds, nowadays we see in them the richness of different ways of coming to God and of educating young people for peaceful coexistence in mutual respect. For this reason, education commits us never to use God’s name to justify violence and hatred towards other religious traditions, to condemn all forms of fanaticism and fundamentalism, and to defend the right of each individual to choose and act in accordance with his or her conscience.” -Antipope Francis, Address, October 5, 2021

Finally, Antipope Benedict XVI, an Antipope that many in the Vatican II sect deludedly call the most doctrinally Catholic among this sorry rabble of heresiarchs, also taught the same respect for all kinds of false religions, where among other things he has stated the following:

“Distinguished Chief Rabbi, you were recently entrusted with the spiritual guidance of Rome’s Jewish Community; you have taken on this responsibility enriched by your experience as a scholar and a doctor who has shared in the joys and sufferings of a great many people. I offer you my heartfelt good wishes for your mission, and I assure you of my own and my collaborators’ cordial esteem and friendship.” – Benedict XVI, Address to Chief Rabbi of Rome, Jan. 16, 2006

As this citation from Antipope Benedict XVI indicates, Benedict XVI sent good wishes for this rabbi’s Jewish Christ denying mission, approving of it. In another place, Benedict XVI taught that he has come to love an Eastern Schismatic Church:

“I was able to come to know and to love the [Schismatic] Church, personally as it were, through two young Archimandrites, Stylianos Harkianakis and Damaskinos Papandreou, both of whom later became Metropolitans… Our koinonia [communion with the schismatics] is above all communion with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit; it is communion with the triune God, made possible by the Lord through his incarnation and the outpouring of the Spirit.” -Benedict XVI, Address During Ecumenical Vespers Service, September 26, 2006.

It is undeniable what is being stated here- that the Eastern Schismatics worship the true God and that communion with the Eastern Schismatics is communion with God. This is apostasy. Benedict XVI also referred to the schismatic and heretical Patriarch of Constantinople in his false religion as a Pastor in the Church of Christ:

“This commitment comes from the Lord’s will and from our responsibility as Pastors in the Church of Christ.” -Benedict XVI, Joint Declaration with Patriarch Bartholomew, November 30, 2006.

Finally, while many more examples can be cited and will be cited in a future brief from the Apostolic See documenting the full range of the Vatican II apostasy, in an ultimate act of praising of almost every false religion, Benedict XVI praised the Taize community. This community is a religious community that includes people of every religion in it. He stated that more communities like this, of every religion, should be formed, giving his approval to all the false religions contained within it. He calls it a “community of faith”, virtually equating the natural faith in the false gods and demons of the false religions, with the virtuous supernatural faith of the Catholic:

“…Taize has been, without a doubt, the leading example of an ecumenical inspiration… Similar communities of faith and of shared living should be formed elsewhere…”-Benedict XVI, Principles of Catholic Theology (1982), p. 304.

Opposed to these heretical teachings of the Antipopes, the Catholic Faith has always held that when truths are mixed with erroneous false teachings, the false teachings and the false religion in its entirety are condemned by the true Catholic Faith and Councils of all ages, not revered. For example, it was defined at Florence by Pontiff Eugene IV:

“Therefore it [the Holy Catholic Church] condemns, reproves, anathematizes, and declares to be outside the body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds the contrary.” Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra Bull of Union with the Copts, Council of Florence, 1442 A.D.

“It [the Holy Catholic Church] also anathematizes, execrates and condemns Macarius of Antioch and all others of similar views who, although they are orthodox on the duality of natures and the unity of person, yet have gone enormously wrong on Christ’s principles of action by declaring that of the two natures in Christ, there was only one principle of action and one will.” Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra Bull of Union with the Copts, Council of Florence, 1442 A.D.

These and hundreds of other texts from original Catholic dogmatic decrees show that the Church has always rejected and anathematized whoever holds views in opposition to her, not praised them. For example:

“Since it is necessary that those who were absent from the synod and remained in the country or the city, on account of their own church affairs or because of their health, should not be ignorant of the decisions formulated concerning these matters, we make it known to your holinesses that if any metropolitan of a province dissents from the holy and ecumenical synod and attaches himself to the assembly of the revolters, or should do so later, or should he have adopted the opinions of Celestius, or do so in the future, such a one is deprived of all power to take steps against the bishops of his province. He is thereby cast out by the synod from all ecclesiastical communion and is deprived of all ecclesiastical authority.”- Pope Sixtus III.

Ecumenical Council of Ephesus, 431 A.D., ex cathedra

“Therefore all those who dare to think or teach anything different, or who follow the accursed heretics in rejecting ecclesiastical traditions, or who devise innovations, or who spurn anything entrusted to the church (whether it be the gospel or the figure of the cross or any example of representational art or any martyr’s holy relic), or who fabricate perverted and evil prejudices against cherishing any of the lawful traditions of the catholic church, or who secularize the sacred objects and saintly monasteries, we order that they be suspended if they are bishops or clerics, and excommunicated if they are monks or lay people.” -Ecumenical Council of Second Nicea, 787 A.D., ex cathedra

“… there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.” -Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, 1434

“I vow to… exalt the true Faith, and to extirpate the diabolical sect of the reprobate and faithless Mahomet [Islam] in the East.” -Pope Callixtus III

“It is an insult to the holy name and a disgrace to the Christian faith that in certain parts of the world subject to Christian princes where Saracens [i.e., the followers of Islam, also called Muslims] live, sometimes apart, sometimes intermingled with Christians, the Saracen priests, commonly called Zabazala, in their temples or mosques, in which the Saracens meet to adore the infidel Mahomet, loudly invoke and extol his name each day at certain hours from a high place… This brings disrepute on our faith and gives great scandal to the faithful. These practices cannot be tolerated without displeasing the divine majesty. We therefore, with the sacred council’s approval, strictly forbid such practices henceforth in Christian lands. We enjoin on Catholic princes, one and all… They are to forbid expressly the public invocation of the sacrilegious name of Mahomet… Those who presume to act otherwise are to be so chastised by the princes for their irreverence, that others may be deterred from such boldness.” -Pope Clement XI, Council of Vienne, ex catehdra, 1311-1312.

Indeed, as another example, the teaching of the heretic Nestorius was never praised, but instead only condemned as blasphemy. This is despite that it resembled Catholic teaching in many ways, and could no doubt qualify under Nostra Aetate as “reflecting a ray of truth” (such as for example accepting the reality of the man Jesus). Why? Because Nestorius committed blasphemy by mixing truth with error. When truth is mixed with error, the combined teaching becomes worse, not better, because it is even more capable of deluding those who are not careful. No matter how true the teaching is, if it is false on even a single point of dogma, it is enough to condemn the soul to everlasting fire. That is why Leo XIII taught in Satis Cognitum in 1898:

“The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. ‘There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition’ (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).” -Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, #9, 1898

Regarding the heretic Nestorius, the ecumenical council of Ephesus declared:

“If anyone divides in the one Christ the hypostases after the union, joining them only by a conjunction of dignity or authority or power, and not rather by a coming together in a union by nature, let him be anathema… Our Lord Jesus Christ, who has been blasphemed by him [Nestorius], has determined through this most holy synod that the same Nestorius should be stripped of his episcopal dignity and removed from the college of priests.” -Pope Sixtus III, ex cathedra, Council of Ephesus, 431 A.D.

The addition of the error admixed into the truth, created the blasphemy, and in no way could a blasphemy be praised. Therefore, the heresy in section 2 of Nostra Aetate is undeniable, both by its own words, and as practiced and interpreted by the Vatican II Antipopes. We have established here that it clearly teaches the heresy that entire religions which differ from Catholicism are more or less good and praiseworthy.

In a major development and defense of all of the past condemnations the Church uttered against heresy and false religions over the centuries in countless decrees and councils, of which we already cited a few examples, Pius XI in 1928 summed it all up perfectly, when he explicitly rejected the praise of false religions. In Mortalium Animos he declared with the authority of his ordinary and authentic magisterium (teaching office), which is the voice of Jesus Christ Himself:

“Conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons [religious leaders], at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.”

Therefore, not only has the Church in every dogmatic decree and authentic council never ever praised, but instead only condemned false religions; Pius XI in 1928 even explicitly made it as clear as possible that in no wise can false religions ever be called good and praiseworthy, simply because they signify and express the desire in man to seek truth. Because God is Truth itself, God can never praise a false religion simply because man created a false religion while seeking truth. The religion itself must actually be true. Therefore, it is beyond all doubt that Vatican II with its self-proclaimed “spirit of openness” to false religions and esteem for them is heretical.

PART III- THE FALSE RELIGIONS ARE BLASPHEMOUSLY SAID TO WORSHIP THE SAME GOD ACCORDING TO VATICAN II

As was already shown above in the introduction, based on the fact that God is absolutely simple essence and therefore is the same as His Divine will, it is impossible that the Catholic God be the same as the god of any false religion. Yet, this is precisely what Vatican II teaches. Keep in mind when reviewing the quotations below, that Jesus is also God, Jesus is fully God and fully man. Therefore, whenever Vatican II states that protestant or other heretics (which it calls “separated brothers”) believe in Jesus, it is attempting to declare that heretics have the true God. First, Vatican II teaches that Muslims worship the one and merciful God who will judge mankind on the last day:

“In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.” -Lumen Gentium, Vatican II, Antipope Paul VI 1964

This is absolute heresy and apostasy, because it teaches that the God of the Moslems is the same as the God that will judge mankind on the last day.

Vatican II also teaches that Muslims worship the Creator of heaven and earth:

“The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God.” -Nostra Aetate, Vatican II, Antipope Paul VI 1965

Next, the Vatican II decree Unitatis Redintegratio teaches that men who follow false creeds in false sects believe in Jesus Christ (who is God as the Catholic Church has defined many times):

“The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church – whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church – do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion.”

This passage undeniably teaches that heretics who worship another Christ, another God, and differ in doctrine and discipline (opposing the Divine will), believe in the true God and true Divine will. This is absolute blasphemy and heresy.

The men who are in these heretical communities with different doctrine and practice do not believe in Christ. They profess a different faith and teaching and thus cannot have supernatural Catholic Faith. The object of their belief is not the Catholic God and Man Jesus Christ, but their heretical false god man.

As another example of clear heresy, in a passage already brought up in the previous section, the Vatican II council teaches that pagans, through their abundance of false myths, obtain refuge and fly to the true God:

This passage is undeniably teaching that all pagans worship the true God of the Catholics! In the passage, the word God or Deus is capitalized, which is only proper to do with the one true God. The original Latin of this passsage reads:

“Ita in Hinduismo homines mysterium divinum scrutantur et exprimunt inexhausta fecunditate mythorum et acutis conatibus philosophiae, atque liberationem quaerunt ab angustiis nostrae condicionis vel per formas vitae asceticae vel per profundam meditationem vel per refugium ad Deum cum amore et confidentia. In Buddhismo secundum varias eius formas radicalis insufficientia mundi huius mutabilis agnoscitur et via docetur qua homines, animo devoto et confidente, sive statum perfectae liberationis acquirere, sive, vel propriis conatibus vel superiore auxilio innixi, ad summam illuminationem pertingere valeant.”

The section not only capitalizes Deus, clearly implying that the pagan flight is to the true God and not some false imposter, but it also states that Buddhists can obtain the Supreme Illumination. The Supreme or Greatest Illumination is God Himself, not a false god. This passage is possibly the most apostate passage in all of Vatican II.

Finally, and amazingly, the heretical Vatican II decree Nostra Aetate states that discriminating against people in false religions is “foreign to the mind of Christ”. This is another certain way of teaching a false Christ or false god. The true God, from the Old Covenant of Moses to beyond the Middle Ages of the Great Pontiffs who were Our Predecessors of old, allowed discrimination against heretics, idolaters, unbelieving Jews, and apostates. There are numerous passages in scripture, the councils, and the bulls of past Pontiffs that could be cited to show this. As Gregory XVI declared in Mirari Vos- the laws of the Church are perfect:

“Furthermore, the discipline sanctioned by the Church must never be rejected or be branded as contrary to certain principles of natural law. It must never be called crippled, or imperfect or subject to civil authority. In this discipline the administration of sacred rites, standards of morality, and the reckoning of the rights of the Church and her ministers are embraced.” -Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, 1832.

Also, as already shown above in Section I, the teaching of even the authentic non-universal magisterium is the voice of Jesus Christ. The Church in its perfect and infallible councils and laws often enacted laws discriminating against heretics, such as at the Fourth Lateran Council, and other ecumenical councils and bulls of the Popes where crusades and inquisitions were called. The Fourth Lateran Council as just one example, discriminated against Jews holding public offices:

“It would be too absurd for a blasphemer of Christ to exercise power over Christians. We therefore renew in this canon, on account of the boldness of the offenders, what the council of Toledo providently decreed in this matter : we forbid Jews to be appointed to public offices, since under cover of them they are very hostile to Christians. If, however, anyone does commit such an office to them let him, after an admonition, be curbed by the provincial council, which we order to be held annually, by means of an appropriate sanction. Any official so appointed shall be denied commerce with Christians in business and in other matters until he has converted to the use of poor Christians, in accordance with the directions of the diocesan bishop, whatever he has obtained from Christians by reason of his office so acquired, and he shall surrender with shame the office which he irreverently assumed. We extend the same thing to pagans.” -Fourth Lateran Council, Innocent III, 1215 A.D.

Likewise, the Church condemned heretics and handed them over to the civil authority for punishment, thus discriminating against them in particular and harassing them with the civil power for their heresy. Just one example of this (many others could be cited) occurred at the Fifth Lateran Council in 1512 A.D.:

“All false Christians and those with evil sentiments towards the faith, of whatever race or nation they may be, as well as heretics and those stained with some taint of heresy, or Judaizers, are to be totally excluded from the company of Christ’s faithful and expelled from any position, especially from the Roman curia, and punished with an appropriate penalty. For these reasons we rule that proceedings are to be taken against them, with careful enquiry everywhere and particularly in the said curia, by means of judges appointed by us, and that those accused and rightly convicted of these offences are to be punished with fitting penalties; and we wish that those who have relapsed are to be dealt with without any hope of pardon or forgiveness.” -Pope Leo X, Fifth Lateran Council, 1512 A.D.

In the Old Covenant of Moses, idolaters who attempted to change the God of Israel and replace Him with a false religion were also put to death:

“If thy brother the son of thy mother, or thy son, or daughter, or thy wife that is in thy bosom, or thy friend, whom thou lovest as thy own soul, would persuade thee secretly, saying: Let us go, and serve strange gods, which thou knowest not, nor thy fathers, of all the nations round about, that are near or afar off, from one end of the earth to the other, consent not to him, hear him not, neither let thy eye spare him to pity and conceal him, but thou shalt presently put him to death. Let thy hand be first upon him, and afterwards the hands of all the people. With stones shall he be stoned to death: because he would have withdrawn thee from the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.” -Deuteronomy 13:6-10.

Since as to His Divine Nature the mind of Christ is also the mind of God, and also as to His human nature since His human mind always follows the mind of God because His human mind is in perfect submission to the mind of God, and as has been shown it is not contrary to God’s moral nature to discriminate and harass heretics, it is absolutely impossible that discriminating against heretics, idolaters, apostates, and unbelieving Jews is foreign to Christ’s mind as is declared in the following heretical passage of Vatican II:

“The Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against men or harassment of them because of their race, color, condition of life, or religion.” -Nostrae Aetate, Vatican II, Antipope Paul VI 1965

PART IV- FALSE RELIGIOUS WORSHIP TO FALSE GODS IS PROMOTED IN UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO

The ultimate expression of apostasy is not so much holding it in your heart, but engaging in the reverence and worship of the false god or gods of the sect into which one has gone apostate, as the final expression of that wicked heart. It is an ultimate expression of betrayal of the true God. The Second Vatican false sect, in allegiance to the heretical teachings already discussed above, actively encourages participation in meetings with false sects, and prayer to the false gods is to be actively encouraged at the meetings. It is impossible for the Holy Spirit, who is the true God, and who is Truth Itself, to actively encourage worship to another Christ than the true one, or another god. Unitatis Redintegratio declares:

“In certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers ‘for unity’, and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren.” -Unitatis Redintegratio #8, Antipope Paul VI, 1964.

By encouraging and joining in prayer with separated heretics, prayers are actively being sent to the false god, and heretical blasphemy is occurring. The Holy Spirit can never encourage a violation of the First Commandment, something taught in all of the basic catechisms of the Church. Therefore, we can know with absolute certainty that Vatican II is not from God. The Holy Spirit, in the Catholic Church, has taught that heretics are to be avoided when reasonably possible, and certainly they could never be encouraged to pray in false worship to their false version of god. We already have established above that the heretics and schismatics have another Christ through misrepresentation of the will of Christ as His simple essence, either Christ’s essence is to will Catholicism or to will heresy, but it cannot be both.

PART V- RELIGIOUS LIBERTY TO SPREAD FALSEHOOD IS PROMOTED IN DIGNITATIS HUMANAE

The apostate Second Vatican document Dignitatis Humanae declares it is the will of God, who is Truth, to give falsehood right to exist, and also to spread its errors. Obviously, once again, it is impossible for Truth to encourage the spread of lies. Such a thing is a most basic contradiction. Pure Truth can only oppose lies. Yet, the apostate Vatican II document Dignitatis Humane declares:

“This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits. The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.”” -Dignitatis Humanae #2, Antipope Paul VI, 1965.

In other words, the teaching of the false council is that the dignity of man is so great that he is to be permitted to exercise his free will erroneously in contradiction to God and Truth. While God has given and permitted man free will to permit him to choose either God or damnation, it is always the desire of God that man choose God and the good and the Truth. Therefore, just as civil society doesn’t allow or encoureage men to murder each other, even though they have free will to do this, nor can civil society allow or encourage men to choose contrary to Truth without some kind of penalty. If civil society does allow such a course of action without imposing the death penalty for the false religion, it is done out of merciful toleration in the hope that such deluded men will come out of their false religion, not because such men have a “right to religious freedom”. No one has the right under Divine law or natural law to sin, even if they are given the free will to sin. The false council even teaches that false religion and lies have the right to proselytize and attempt to convince others of their lies:

“Religious communities also have the right not to be hindered in their public teaching and witness to their faith, whether by the spoken or by the written word…In addition, it comes within the meaning of religious freedom that religious communities should not be prohibited from freely undertaking to show the special value of their doctrine in what concerns the organization of society and the inspiration of the whole of human activity. Finally, the social nature of man and the very nature of religion afford the foundation of the right of men freely to hold meetings and to establish educational, cultural, charitable and social organizations, under the impulse of their own religious sense…It follows that a wrong is done when government imposes upon its people, by force or fear or other means, the profession or repudiation of any religion, or when it hinders men from joining or leaving a religious community. ” -Dignitatis Humanae #4 and #6, Antipope Paul VI, 1965.

Obviously, this excerpt from Dignitatis Humanae goes against everything the Catholic Faith and true Pontiffs have taught for millennia. It is in fact an utter absurdity and a travesty that so many bishops at once embraced this apostasy and fell from the faith. The true Predecessors of Boniface X have always launched crusades and inquisitions against heretics, pagans, and infidels. This is because error must often be suppressed rather than tolerated. Error certainly never has a right under natural law to exist, certainly not from any right that stems from “human dignity”. Other than the inherent dignity of man in being the image of God, there is no dignity in seeking to defy God. Dignity is the quality or state of being worthy of esteem and respect. Man becomes more worthy of esteem insofar as he conforms to good, to truth, and to God. God’s essence is pure Existence (Being). Being is what is, and truth is what is, God is therefore pure Truth. A doctrine and its followers are more esteemed insofar as they conform to what is really there in actuality, and to the Truth. The dignity of man cannot override the dignity of God. Since Truth does not countenance error, even if man in his dignity as God’s image chooses by his free will evil and error, that does not mean society can condone it above the dignity of God and His will to destroy and suppress evil and error. God’s will must always triumph in society over a man’s evil will. All erroneous teaching therefore has no right to exist. In fact, the notions expressed in Dignitatis Humanae, in their emphasis of the dignity of man to the detriment of God’s dignity, teach nothing less than the doctrine of Antichrist.

“While, on the other hand, and this according to the same apostle is the distinguishing mark of Antichrist, man has with infinite temerity put himself in the place of God, raising himself above all that is called God; in such wise that although he cannot utterly extinguish in himself all knowledge of God, he has contemned God’s majesty and, as it were, made of the universe a temple wherein he himself is to be adored. ‘He sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself as if he were God’ (II. Thess. ii., 2).” -E Supremi, Pope Pius X 1903.

Further, Dignitatis Humanae blathers heretically about how men were not coerced to believe in the time of the Apostles and no one can be forced to believe. Of course, the Catholic Faith has always admitted that no one can be forced to believe, that is why it has always suppressed error rather than forced belief. It is obvious that feigned belief is nothing more than an abomination. The Catholic Church has never declared it can force the internal will of men to believe, but only seeks to suppress falsehood and punish error. While belief cannot be forced, error can nonetheless be suppressed. Further, the fact that the Apostles, who had no support of any state power at the time of their mission, since not enough men had yet converted, did not use force to suppress error has nothing to do with what was able to be accomplished after emperors like Constantine and Theodosius converted out of paganism. Once states converted to the Catholic religion it was only common sense based on the nature of God as Truth and God as willing the Truth that the state use its powers to suppress errors and heresies. Thus the true Pontiffs have in the past warned against the false idea of freedom of religion:

“This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. ‘But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,’ as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly ‘the bottomless pit’ is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty. Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again?” -Mirari Vos, Pope Gregory XVI 1832.

“For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of ‘naturalism,’ as they call it, dare to teach that ‘the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones.’ And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that ‘that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.’ From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an ‘insanity,’ viz., that ‘liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.’ But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching ‘liberty of perdition’; and that ‘if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling.’” -Quanta Cura, Pope Pius IX 1864.

Therefore, this brief and all its proofs demonstrate, beyond all doubt, without any room for obfuscation, that Vatican II was an apostate and heretical council.