VATICAN II DID NOT PREACH DOGMATICALLY SO IT IS NOT INFALLIBLE SO DID IT ERR?
Catholicism holds that ecumenical councils are protected from error by God. Vatican II did not invoke this protection and was pastoral.
The following is what a traditional Catholic would say about modern Catholic doctrine. It shows the Catholic claim to be straightforward and in line with commonsense and simplicity is false. So much for the Church reflecting Jesus' rule that there must be no confusion only yes or no as in clarity.
DO CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS SHARE THE SAME GOD?
Vatican II said that Muslims and Christians have the same God. The view that the
Muslims are right in many things about God means nothing. Being right is no good
if you are only guessing, which is what they are doing. They don’t have the real
word of God. We only know God through divine grace which guides our reason and
helps us to see that the Church speaks the truth. The man who guesses things
about the king cannot love the king for it is only his perception of him that he
loves. Even if his guesses are all correct it makes no difference. It may look
like he serves the king but he doesn’t. It is divine law that we must not
consider people who are outside the Roman Catholic Church to be really in touch
with God no matter how pious they seem to be. The Muslim God is not the same as
the Catholic God subjectively. In other words, the Muslims have a different God
by their perception. The Muslim God is not the same as the Catholic God
objectively. In other words, just because somebody believes in and adores a
being creating all things out of nothing and who is good it doesn’t mean they
worship our God. All secretaries have a lot in common and it doesn’t mean that
everybody has just the one secretary.
The God of our Lord Jesus Christ is a loving Father. The God of Islam has good
qualities but is not a parent. The God of our Lord is a relationship, the Father
loving the Son and the Holy Spirit and they loving him in return. The God of
Islam is one person. Both religions believe that God is the supreme spirit who
made all things. It seems then that objectively they have the same God but
differ in their beliefs about what God is like. Could this be said of the God of
the Jews? No, the Jews were never given any just reason to believe that God was
just one person or wasn’t a loving father. The Muslims have the Koran and their
tradition which are in denial of the God of Jesus Christ. Jews and Christians
have the same God but this God is not the same God as the God of the Muslims.
A horse and a cow are not the same thing just because both eat grass, have
young, and have four legs and live in fields. The Muslim God is not the God of
Jesus Christ for the main things are missing, the idea that God is love and God
is a relationship and God is Father. That is more important than God being
creator because we should believe that it is because God is relationship he
created so that others might have relationships to like him and have
relationships with him. The Muslim God is a different God and a horse and a cow
have more chance of being the same thing than he has of being the same God as
the God of Jesus Christ.
To say that the Muslim God and the Christian one is the same is to pay homage to
the Muslim God who is an idol.
ECUMENISM
Most traditional Catholics hold that Vatican II didn’t teach heresy.
The decree on ecumenism is glaring proof that it did albeit by a clever use of
words rather than any outward submission to heresy. The Holy Spirit protected
the Church. There is no need for ecumenism, religions coming together in prayer
and seeking religious unity. People of different religions can have friendships
together. However it is a sin for an untrained Catholic to discuss religion with
a heretic. Ecumenism that is just about softening barriers between religions to
get the other religions converted to your religion is not ecumenism but
manipulation. Ecumenism is really different religions treating each other as
sufficient ways to salvation. In Vatican II theology, the Catholic Church is the
only way to God but unbelievers who are sincere are Catholics without knowing
it. This is really saying that though there might be one best religion it
doesn’t matter what you believe. This is indifferentism. If you can be saved by
a very simple faith and a faith that is much simpler than Catholicism then that
faith is BETTER than Catholicism for with less rules it makes salvation easier.
Vatican II only pretends that Catholicism matters, its only doing that to look
Catholic. Liberals contradict themselves all the time for they don’t really
believe in truth.
Pope Pius XI wrote in his great encyclical Mortalium Animos published January
6th 1928 of ecumenists that, “They hold it for certain that men destitute of all
religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that
belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain
religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in
professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the
spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are
frequently arranged by these persons, 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 on that false opinion which considers all religions to be
more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different way 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; 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” (Chapter 2).
In chapter 4 he wrote, “Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even
consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from
mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked
with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that
His disciples might be “one”. .. But in reality beneath these enticing words and
blandishments lies a hid a most grave error, by which the foundations of the
Catholic faith are completely destroyed”. All this totally contradicts the sweet
words of Vatican II.
The Church teaches that the constant and unchanging teaching of the ordinary
magisterium (that what the Church has always taught from the beginning) is
infallible and in chapter 10 Pius XI writes: “So, Venerable Brethren, it is
clear why the Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the
assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by
promoting return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated
from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it.” He then quotes with
approval, St Cyprian, who said it was silly to believe that the Church could be
one while accepting breakaways having an ecumenical relationship with it as
members. The ordinary magisterium is simply what was always believed – novelty
doctrines are excluded from this magisterium and cannot be binding. The
extraordinary magisterium is used or should be used when such tradition is
questioned to make it clear that the doctrine or tradition is infallible
revelation from God. This is not because the Church is uncertain but because the
questioners are. It is certain then that ecumenism denies the infallibility of
the ordinary magisterium, the infallibility of divine tradition and wrecks the
faith. Pius XI knew this and said it. Without the ordinary magisterium being
infallible the extraordinary magisterium cannot be infallible either for it
depends on it. For example, before Pius IX proclaimed the Immaculate Conception
of the Blessed Virgin as infallible he checked what the Church always believed
and on that basis he had the evidence he needed to go ahead and proclaim that it
was revealed by God and that papal infallibility guaranteed this.
Christ our Lord and the holy apostles told the truth exactly as they saw it
regardless of the consequences and told it bluntly and commanded that the Church
put truth first and be willing even to die for the glory of Christ. The Vatican
II Church in contrast doesn’t do that in the name of sparing peoples’ feelings.
This is because of ecumenism and it’s another heresy.