20 Comments
User's avatar
Aaron's avatar

The Church as already defined that an Ecumenical Council is prevented from teaching ANY errors on faith and morals. Thus, if a council teaches something that is erroneous, then 1) it is NOT an Ecumenical Council, and 2) is not part of the Magisterium. V2 teaches error, and thus cannot be an Ecumenical Council, not can it be considered part of the Magisterium...

Expand full comment
Our Blood and Soil's avatar

Amen. From my understanding, there was no valid reason for calling Vatican II. It was not necessary and because of this the only purpose, intended or not, was to play into the modernist hands.

Expand full comment
Aaron's avatar

It's purpose was to provide Modernists cover for their heresies. Pope St. Pius X identified that in Pascendi.

Expand full comment
Robert Walker's avatar

Well said! Actually, to be a Council it only needs to be called by a Pope. There have been other Councils that did not have Papal confirmation and are not listed as Councils. Occasionally a Pope has corrected some language in a former Council’s documents to help with understanding and accuracy. Some regional conferences, like during the persecutions of the first four centuries, were not affirmed by a Pope. Vatican II was formally redefined as a “Council,” and had no reason to be. So the Council was not a typical Council, made no infallible proclamations, was infused with Modernist heresy and language, separates ancient truth from what it is to be “pastoral,” never invoked the Holy Spirit as guide, is not infallible, and needs to be forgotten on a dusty shelf and never referenced again.

- Deacon Bob

Expand full comment
Our Blood and Soil's avatar

Amen!

Expand full comment
Martin Fegan's avatar

Despite Paul VI bemoaning the negative effects of the changes I believe that the crocodile tears were just that. The outcome was the intended outcome. I can't believe he didn't read Pope Pius X warnings concerning modernising the faith.

We were warned what the enemies of the Church were planning and despite the clear warnings they went ahead with their diabolical changes and then pretend they could never have seen the outcome.

Pope St Pius X told us how to deal with these modernists. When they vomit out ambiguity as if they aren't sure what the perennial teachings are and in one page uphold them and in the very next page dismantle them , we hold them to their heretical interpretation and refuse to comply with it.

When they fill their new sacraments with ambiguous forms (and in some cases matter) to the extent that doubt arises to their very validity, then just apply St Pius X remedy. Assume their destructive intent and treat them as invalid.

Expand full comment
C2LT3's avatar

Crocodile tears in spades! Cardinal Suenens said in a moment of triumphant Freemasonic ecstasy:

“Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church … One cannot understand the French or Russian Revolutions unless one knows something of the old regimes which they brought to an end … It is the same in Church affairs: a reaction can only be judged in relation to the state of things that preceded it.”

Vatican II was the overthrow of the Vatican I Monarchial Papacy and with it the dogma of Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus. The thing that inhabits the Vatican today is truly the Church of the French Revolution not the One, Holy Roman Catholic Church.

Expand full comment
Jennifer Hoepfl's avatar

I totally agree with the crocodile tears theory. If he really believed all of those negative results of the council, he would have done SOMETHING to counteract those problems. It was early enough to plug the leaks in the boat. Now it would be almost impossible without Divine intervention.

Expand full comment
JAMES CONNOLLY's avatar

This is a brilliant synthesis of the problems Vatican II poses vis-a-vis traditional Catholicism.

Expand full comment
JumpJet's avatar

I highly recommend “Work of Human Hands” by Fr Cekada

Expand full comment
John Myler's avatar

Papa Ratzinger said it: “There were two Councils.” 1) the council that met in St. Peter’s,2) the council that was reported in the media.

Expand full comment
Kaylene Emery's avatar

Blessings and appreciation from Sydney Australia.

Expand full comment
Myrtsie's avatar

The ultimate purpose of V2 was to destroy the Catholic faith to please the Jews. In a document from 1961, the AJC complains about the NT gospels. B16s 2007 moto proprio was criticized by the ADL because it signaled a return of the Good Friday prayer for the conversion of the Jews. “At the time of the 2007 declaration Jewish groups expressed concern about the Latin Mass recited on Good Friday.

“Abraham Foxman, who at the time was national director of the Anti-Defamation League, penned a column expressing concern over the return of the Vatican-sanctioned prayer because it challenged decades of improving ties between Jews and Catholics and the unwinding of many of the church's worst teachings regarding the Jewish people.

"During the past four decades, the church has made great strides in reversing a 2,000-year history of antisemitism," Foxman wrote in 2007.”

Expand full comment
Laura Sutter's avatar

There is really no such thing as Judeo Christian values. We’ve heard that over and over. I think it’s a made up phrase. Israel just bombed the only Catholic Church in Gaza, so I don’t think we share any values with them.

Expand full comment
Myrtsie's avatar

Exactly!

Expand full comment
LoveIsCourage's avatar

From beneath the authors, heading “ loss of the sacred” I quote:

“the Novus Order Mass often prioritizes the community and horizontal aspects of worship”

Correct. And this could also be described as the removal of the foundation, the central pillar and the living source of the Faith and Church: Christ

Seems to me every devolution we’ve witnessed including those in the wider world originates from the resultant collapse. A fall from Grace dissembles into chaos.

So,

“the Novus Ordo Mass often prioritizes the community and horizontal aspects of worship”

here the sacred, or set apart, has already been decentered, even departed from. Horizontal worship suggests our obedience within the will of God and Grace of God:

participatory self transcendence in service to life and others.

I’m not a Catholic, not even a Christian per se, but isn’t the Mass for the purpose of establishing continuous communion with Christ Jesus the Person of God in all present?

🏳️💗🏳️

Kumbaya has its place but without a Center… the periphery will not hold

Expand full comment
Michael Allen's avatar

The Masonic infiltrators scripted this farce that continues until today and make no Mistake Prevost will be just as damaging with his meek dissimulation.

Expand full comment
Darrell Goodliffe's avatar

It opened the door for the Spirit of Lawlessness and a gaggle of unclean spirits to enter the Church and you are going to have awful problems rescinding that invite once made

Expand full comment
Helen Schultz's avatar

What is the near term end goal? Is it to have the limitations on the Tridentine mass lifted that were put in place with Traditionis Custodes?

Expand full comment
Phillip A. Ross's avatar

So, Vatican II proves that Vatican I was wrong about infallibility?

Expand full comment