The errors of Vatican II

[2] The kingdom of heaven is likened to a king, who made a marriage for his son. [3] And he sent his servants, to call them that were invited to the marriage; and they would not come. [4] Again he sent other servants, saying: Tell them that were invited, Behold, I have prepared my dinner; my calves and fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come ye to the marriage. [5] But they neglected, and went their own ways, one to his farm, and another to his merchandise.

[6] And the rest laid hands on his servants, and having treated them contumeliously, put them to death. [7] But when the king had heard of it, he was angry, and sending his armies, he destroyed those murderers, and burnt their city. [8] Then he saith to his servants: The marriage indeed is ready; but they that were invited were not worthy. [9] Go ye therefore into the highways; and as many as you shall find, call to the marriage. [10] And his servants going forth into the ways, gathered together all that they found, both bad and good: and the marriage was filled with guests.

[11] And the king went in to see the guests: and he saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment. [12] And he saith to him: Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? But he was silent. [13] Then the king said to the waiters: Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. [14] For many are called, but few are chosen.
 -- Gospel According to Saint Matthew 22:2-14

If you want to fully understand the errors of Vatican II than you must turn to those who have the most at stake in understanding and exposing those errors. It is of no use to turn to those who are to one extent or another bound to defend Vatican II. Nor should we turn to those enemies of the Church who lose no opportunity to harm her.

No, we must turn to those who in their love for the Church have chosen a hard path of separation. These are the sedevacantists.  And so I ask that you carefully consider the arguments offered in the following 3 hour discussion of the errors of Vatican II. One of the main arguments is that the changes initiated by Vatican II were intended to blur the lines between the Catholic Church and other Christian churches in a false spirit of ecumenism. Even Catholic teachings that were centuries old and which had always been declared infallible were sacrificed in order to achieve the ecumenical goals of the architects of the Council.

More Culture Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with The Restoration Radio Network on BlogTalkRadio

In 1794 Pope Pius VI (NOT Paul VI) condemned the teachings of a local council of bishops which taught some similar heresies and used similar ambiguous language to obscure their true intentions. The document is titled "Auctorem Fidei" and it was written in response to the heretical "Synod of Pistoia" of 1786.

It is important to note the historical context of these events. It was during the time of the masonic French Revolution. Later, in February of 1798, Napoleon's forces would invade the Papal States and take Pope Pius VI prisoner. He died in captivity in March of 1799.

-- From introduction of Auctorem Fidei (1794)

They [our most holy predecessors] knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, the innovators sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words7 such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error.

Moreover, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it.

It is as if the innovators pretended that they always intended to present the alternative passages, especially to those of simple faith who eventually come to know only some part of the conclusions of such discussions, which are published in the common language for everyone's use. Or again, as if the same faithful had the ability on examining such documents to judge such matters for themselves without getting confused and avoiding all risk of error. It is a most reprehensible technique for the insinuation of doctrinal errors and one condemned long ago by our predecessor St. Celestine8 who found it used in the writings of Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, and which he exposed in order to condemn it with the greatest possible severity. Once these texts were examined carefully, the impostor was exposed and confounded, for he expressed himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which he confessed.

In order to expose such snares, something which becomes necessary with a certain frequency in every century, no other method is required than the following: Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements that disguise some suspected error or danger under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic truth is camouflaged.

In 1949,  Pope Pius XII had the remains of Pius VI moved to the Chapel of the Madonna below St. Peter's in the Papal Grotto. His remains were placed in an ancient marble sarcophagus. The inscription on the wall above the container reads:

"The mortal remains of Pius VI, consumed in unjust exile, by order of Pius XII are placed in this dignified and decorous location, illustrious for art and history, in 1949".