One of the main reasons that the Bishops do not protest Abortion mills against Planned Parenthood , or State Court houses for legislation against abortions after 20 week gestation, against the redefinition of marriage, or the expansion of tax payer dollars for contraception, legal euthanasia and on and on is for one reason the new teachings of Vatican II –
It is for the same reason that the majority of all Catholic missions have gone defunct and or have had their conversion activities, even hundreds of year old orders whose primary charism it is to convert peoples to Catholicism, banned and renovated to social civil work project missions = Bishophric enforcement of erred Vatican II teachings
Calling a generation of brave Catholic men of honor and courage to rise up and politely but firmly confront a wayward generation of Catholic Bishops with Catholic teaching and facts ………A discourse on the specifics of the errors follows:
Primarily in the 1600s and in the century leading up to the French Revolution’s declaration of the Rights of Man and it’s disastrous effects on Catholic social teaching existed the heresy of Jansenism – Many schools of Jansenism, an officially taught school of thought in the Catholic Church for over a century continued to be retained at the Bishophric levels and as it applies to their order
Specifically what is Jansenism ?
Jansen emphasized a particular reading of Augustine’s idea of efficacious grace which stressed that only a certain portion of humanity were predestined to be saved. Jansen insisted that the love of God was fundamental, and that only perfect contrition, and not imperfect contrition (or attrition) could save a person (and that, in turn, only an efficacious grace could tip that person toward God and such a contrition).
These teachings were officially condemned for their similarities to Calvinism in the 1650s but continued on in the higher ranks of many quarters of the Church and as many say even to this day
The heresy of Jansenism, as stated by subsequent Roman Catholic doctrine, lay in denying the role of free will in the acceptance and use of grace. Jansenism asserts that God’s role in the infusion of grace cannot be resisted and does not require humanassent. Catholic doctrine, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, is that “God’s free initiative demands man’s free response,”[3]—that is, humans freely assent or refuse God’s gift of grace.
What does Sacred Scripture actually teach
James 1
. 22Be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. 23For if a man be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he shall be compared to a man beholding his own countenance in a glass. 24For he beheld himself, and went his way, and presently forgot what manner of man he was. 25But he that hath looked into the perfect law of liberty, and hath continued therein, not becoming a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work; this man shall be blessed in his deed.
What does the teachings of preconcilar orthodox Catholic Bishops and Saints clearly state
“Holy abandonment is found ‘not in resignation and laziness but at the heart of action and initiative.’ It would be dishonest to pray for victory without really fighting for it. … ‘The things I pray for’, St. Thomas More prayed magnanimously, ‘dear Lord, give me the grace to work for.’
Ten Highlighted Specific Errors Amongst the Many Similar Heterodox Errors of Vatican II
In the old days there was a list of books that were prohibited for Catholics, called the Index. In order for a book to be put on the Index and become illicit reading for a Catholic, the book does not have to be full of heresy. All that is needed is for it to contain just one heresy, just one thing that is wrong. There were books on the Index that contained just one line that was wrong. For example, there was a very good translation of the Bible on the Index, the “van Ess” translation of the Bible into German, which contained two or three little errors. The whole rest of it was a very good translation, but because of the two or three little errors it got put on the Index. This is also in keeping with the teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas concerning error. Here are some of the heterodox teachings of Vatican II. This is not an exhaustive list, but a sampling that will give the average reader an idea of how extensive and pervasive the issues are.
Lumen Gentium 1
This says that the Church is “…like a sacrament … both of very close union with God and of the unity of the whole human race.”
No! The Council of Trent dogmatically defines that there are seven sacraments. A sacrament is a sign. The Church is defined as a perfect society and not a sign. It is the Mystical body of Christ. And it does not concern “the whole human race” – like it or not, plenty of people do not belong to the Church. The Church wants them to convert, but as long as they remain outside they are (by their own will) nothing to do with the Church. They do not come under Church law, the Church does not judge them, the Church does not deal with them… They are not a part of the Mystical Body of Christ.
Lumen Gentium 8
“This Church [the Church of Christ] constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure.”
The word subsists doesn’t tell us much in English, but in Latin “subsistere” means to exist, to be present, to lie underneath. You could say for example that the grass is subsistent to my way of walking. But it could also be subsistent to someone else’s way of walking and not just to mine. So when you say that the Catholic Church “subsists” in the Catholic Church, it is phrased that way deliberately so as not to exclude Protestants, Orthodox, etc. The architects of Vatican II were too clever to say that the Church of Christ “contains” the Protestants, the Orthodox and all those other non-Catholics. So they said that it can be found in the Catholic Church in a way that does not exclude the others. But it is defined dogma that the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church, the two are identical. Nothing outside the Catholic Church is part of the Church of Christ and nothing of the Church of Christ is outside the Catholic Church. The two are identical.
Lumen Gentium 15
“Likewise we can say that in some real way they [non-Catholic/Protestant sects] are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power.”
What way is this “real way”? They never say. In the Gospel of St. John one can read that the Holy Ghost was given only to the Catholic Church, not to Protestants, not to the Lutheran Church, not to the Anglicans. When it is said in Scripture that there only one Church – One Body and One Mind of The Body to which does it refer The Catholic Church or now all the Churches?
Lumen Gentium 16
“But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, together with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.”
What about the Incarnation? What about the Holy Trinity? The Koran, the Muslims’ holy book calls the idea of the Trinity an “excremental idea.” And now Vatican II tells us that they, together with us, adore the one merciful God?!? What about the First Commandment? They have another God, they have the lonely one-person Allah. We have Father, Son and Holy Ghost. “Et Verbum caro factum est,” says the last Gospel at Mass, “And the Word became flesh” I’ve never heard that Allah became flesh. This is blasphemy. It is heresy and it is blasphemy.
The idea that Muslims, Jews and Catholics are basically all the same anyway is a Freemasonic idea. It was being promoted by the Freemasons long before Vatican II, and now we have a so-called Ecumenical Council telling us the same thing too. Give me a Catholic interpretation of that quote about the Muslims together with us adoring the same God. It’s not possible. It’s just a heresy.
Unitatis Redintigratio 3
“The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.
It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.”
The Protestant “churches,” and the Orthodox “churches,” cannot save anyone, they are not, never have been and never will be a means of salvation to anyone. They can only lead you to error, sin, heresy, and apostasy. Subjectively speaking, you might ask whether a Protestant who has lived a just life all his life, who has tried his best to find the truth, who has tried his best to avoid sin, whether perhaps for whatever reason he was not able to find out about the Catholic Church… or a Russian Orthodox living under communism all his life, who maybe never heard about the Catholic Church… whether because of that God would not send him to hell. Well, subjectively speaking perhaps, but even so objectively speaking they are living in mortal sin and outside Christ’s Church. Who knows if through an extraordinary act of grace from God, through an act of contrition, that man might die as a member of the Catholic Church. In reality, it must be highly improbable if ever possible, especially in this day and age for the likes of you and I. And, objectively speaking, for anyone to say that the Protestant sects or any religion other than the Catholic Church can be a means to salvation, that is a heresy.
Here is a small sample of what the Popes and Councils have taught concerning this:
“On the one hand, therefore, it is necessary that the mission of teaching whatever Christ had taught should remain perpetual and immutable, and on the other that the duty of accepting and professing all their doctrine should likewise be perpetual and immutable. ‘Our Lord Jesus Christ, when in His Gospel He testifies that those who not are with Him are His enemies, does not designate any special form of heresy, but declares that all heretics who are not with Him and do not gather with Him, scatter His flock and are His adversaries: He that is not with Me is against Me, and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth’ (St. Cyprian, Ep. lxix., ad Magnum, n. I).
. . .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.
. . .Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed. He willed and ordered, under the gravest penalties, that its teachings should be received as if they were His own. As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by everyone as true. … But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”
(Leo XIII, Satis Cogitum, 8 ff.)
“And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brothers, We should mention again and censure a very grave error in which some Catholics are unhappily engaged, who believe that men living in error, and separated from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. Indeed, this is certainly quite contrary to Catholic teaching.”
(Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, 7)
“This Council firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.”
(Council of Ferrara-Florence, Session XI)
We could, if we wished, quote many, many more Popes and they all say the same thing, indeed until Vatican II one could not find any Pope or Council saying differently. So, it is clear that this one part of this one document is heretical. Therefore the whole document is heretical. Therefore the whole Council, philosophically speaking, is heretical. As noted in the teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas, just one heresy would be enough to condemn an entire document or work, but it doesn’t here…
Unitatis Redintigratio 6
This document is supposedly about ‘Ecumenism’, and in this paragraph it suggests the following as a means to achieving ‘Christian unity’:
“Christ summons the Church to continual reformation as she sojourns here on earth. The Church is always in need of this, in so far as she is an institution of men here on earth. Thus if, in various times and circumstances, there have been deficiencies in moral conduct or in church discipline, or even in the way that church teaching has been formulated – to be carefully distinguished from the deposit of faith itself – these can and should be set right at the opportune moment.”
The morals of the clergy have often needed reforming throughout the history of the Church. But the idea of “reforming” Church teaching (or its ‘formulation’) is something entirely different. And a supposed “new” distinction introduced here between “Church teaching” and “the deposit of the Faith itself” is completely false. Here is what a Pope Pius XI taught infallibly regarding this bogus distinction:
“12. How so great a variety of opinions can clear the way for the unity of the Church, We know not. That unity can arise only from one teaching authority, one law of belief, and one faith of Christians. But We do know that from such a state of affairs it is but an easy step to the neglect of religion or “Indifferentism,” and to the error of the modernists, who hold that dogmatic truth is not absolute but relative, that is, that it changes according to the varying necessities of time and place and the varying tendencies of the mind; that it is not contained in an immutable tradition, but can be altered to suit the needs of human life.
- Furthermore, it is never lawful to employ in connection with articles of faith the distinction invented by some between “fundamental” and “non-fundamental” articles, the former to be accepted by all, the latter being left to the free acceptance of the faithful. The supernatural virtue of faith has as its formal motive the authority of God revealing, and this allows of no such distinction.”
(#12 and #13 Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, 1928)
Dei Verbum 8
The following attempts to re-define Sacred Tradition as being something which:
“…develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see Luke, 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth.”
So “Tradition” is now a “development” which “grows” through the “contemplation and study” of the laity and through their “spiritual realities which they experience”? Whatever this is, this is not the Catholic meaning of Tradition.
Interestingly enough, in ‘Ecclessia Dei Afflicta,’ 1988, John Paul II criticized Catholic Tradition itself accusing it of having a supposedly wrong interpretive understanding of itself, by using and quoting ‘Dei Verbum’ to make his point, which was a document he himself contributed to authorship. This is in itself what Saint Thomas Aquinas calls a violation of reason in the use of order that exists within natural law of using yourself to substantiate yourself.
Gaudium et Spes 12
This whole document was indirectly written by the founder of Opus Dei, “Saint” Jose Maria Escriva. He wanted the Church to conform to the modern world and he wanted a one world government. Section 12 of this document utters blasphemy when it says:
“According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be directed towards man as their centre and crown.”
That should sound familiar to anyone who has studied the philosophies and ideologies of Freemasonry and or the similar blasphemous utterances of the United Nations. All the efforts of the Church are directed towards God. All our efforts here on earth should be directed towards God. The old Mass made that clear in multiple instances of every section of the Mass; The new Mass on the other hand has substituted the people, we and I in several of it’s invocations.
Gaudium et Spes also postulates a peaceful government of the whole world under one body of government. This is to say the least naïve since in 1965 most governments on the earth were anti-Catholic and anti-clerical.
Ad Gentes Divinitus 29
“For all missions and for the whole of missionary activity there should be only one competent office, namely that of the ‘Propagation of the Faith,’ which should direct and coordinate, throughout the world, both missionary work itself and missionary cooperation. … In collaboration with the Secretariat for the Promotion of Christian Unity let it seek ways and means for attaining and organizing fraternal co-operation and harmonious relations with the missionary undertakings of other Christian communities, so that as far as possible the scandal of division may be removed.”
Given what has been discussed above regarding the infallible doctrine of there being no salvation outside the Catholic Church and the absolute necessity of belonging to that same Catholic Church, this should hardly require comment. Needless to say, to urge Catholic missionaries to cooperate with Protestant “missionaries” is bad enough, but to do so on the grounds of “unity” is doubly absurd. Protestant “missionaries” are in reality not missionaries at all: what they spread is a false religion, and thus they themselves are a cause of the spread of disunity, causing more souls to be outside the unity of Christ’s Church.
Dignitatis Humanae 2
This is perhaps the best known error of Vatican II, perhaps because its consequences are so visible, or because is an error which so many Popes fought against right up to the Council. Here’s what the document actually says:
“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.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.”
The supposed reason or grounds for this error, human dignity, is also itself an incorrect interpretation of Catholic teaching. Pope St. Pius X declared “The only dignity of man is in his being a Catholic.”
If I really believed in this teaching that I had religious liberty and another religion could also get me to eternal paradise , I would find an easier religion to belong to. Why not be an Anglican? They have nicer churches than many of today’s Churches, they are more musical, their laws are not as strict… But I am not an Anglican, I am a Catholic because I do not have ‘religious liberty’, I have no choice: I am bound in conscience to be Catholic if I want to save my soul. In addition to infallible Catholic teachings I was also taught this by the Nuns and Priests of our grade school Catholic education – How can this suddenly become no longer the teaching of the Church.
G.K. Chesterton said “If I were not a Catholic I would have a harem.”
“Religious freedom” or “religious liberty” has been infallibly condemned in declarations by the following Popes, Gregory XVI, Pius IX, St. Pius X, Pius XI and Pius XII. You are not free to choose your religion. You are bound in conscience to become a Catholic and to join the Catholic Church in order to save your soul. While it is true that no one can coerce someone else into thinking something they do not want to think or believing something they do not want to believe, the laws of a Catholic state can prevent the followers of a false religion from practicing in public, from trying to make converts, from trying to spread their false doctrine and false morals, etc. To accuse same said Catholics of the various Catholic states, in their use and enforcement of such preventative measures, according to authentic Catholic teaching via the citing pastoral documents of the 1960s Council presents a contradiction of Catholic teachings. Look at the catastrophic numbers of millions of souls today leaving the Church to join ‘evangelical’ protestant sects in countries where before the council everyone was formerly Catholic: South America, the Philippines, etc. These formerly Catholic countries were forced to change their civil constitutions following the Council so as to no longer give the Catholic religion pride of place and so as to conform to what they believe was the new teachings of the Catholic Church which advisory Bishops erroneously concurred as if they themselves had the power and or authority to change Catholic teaching and which is necessarily false. All of these internationally social wide disasters resulted from just two erroneous paragraphs in one of the sixteen documents of this self declared – non-doctrinal, non-binding, pastoral advisory council.
As noted above and according to both Catholic scholastic discipline and the teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas just one error is enough to make an entire teaching or document invalid and individually inapplicable.
One heresy makes the whole document heretical, and there are as acknowledged by dozens of Bishops multiple such items in each of the Vatican II documents. Enforcing the reality that the documents and teachings of this advisory Council are non-binding and will fade with time in the same way that 150 years of papal proclamations of the teachings of Jansenism were eventually “and officially” declared by the Roman Catholic Church to be a heresy. Therefore for anyone that truly believes in the supernatural power and eternal existence of the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church knows in their academic and supra- natural heart, mind, and soul that the keys of binding and losing were given to one Church even to error The proclamation that it cannot ever error in terms of faith and morals is also interpretative and to be read as “when the bell sounds before the end of a long game, has the error been corrected or will be corrected”
Additional Apologetics Refutation
Many folks are using some of the numerous non-Catholic statements our Pope is regularly making and to which is causing an indefensible furor at Catholic apologetics journals, web sites, and blogs
Professional Catholic apologists have turned and twisted themselves into pretzels trying to defend the Church as to how the sayings and discourses of the current Pope against accusations from non-Catholics and Catholics alike and as to their contradictions to the authentic teachings of the Catholic Church
The pretzel can forthwith be unwound as professional Catholic apologist and Catholic lawyers guild director John Salza answers these charges in Catholic detail. Quite profoundly and simply many of the sayings and teachings of the current Pope are heterodox –citing specific examples against infallible teachings- and in more than several cases a potential material heresy as defined by the Roman Catholic Church
Attached below at the following link for your review and for the protection and salvation of your children
Catholic Apologetics – Pope Francis – Invincible Ignorance and Material Heresy
Laudetur Jesu Christus ……….Et Maria Immaculata
Credits
Some of the research contained herein is additionally based on data and research collected by the late Fr. Gregory Hesse, STD, JCD
Credits
John Salza – J.D. & Attorney