Traditional Catholic Doctrine

On at least three points, the teachings of Vatican Council II appear to be, if not in logical contradiction, then at least difficult to reconcile with the statements of the earlier traditional Magisterium:

Recognition of all religions

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.

Second Vatican Council, Dignitatis Humanae Paragraph 2

The council’s doctrine on religious liberty, as expressed in paragraph 2 of the declaration Dignitatis humanae, contradicts the teachings of Pius VI in Quod Aliquantum, Gregory XVI in Mirari vos and of Pius IX in Quanta Cura, Leo XIII in Immortale Dei and Libertas Praestantissimum, Pius XI in Quas primas and Pius XII in Ecco che gia anno.

While all men are endowed with the dignity of free will, the Church’s teaches that use of this liberty must conform to what is good and true and consequently all men must believe what is true. However, Modernism teaches that man has the right to choose to believe as he likes, whether it is right or wrong, so long as his exercise of liberty does not harm others.

When some hear that there is no right for evil, they immediately fear persecutions and violence. Yet there is nothing more remote from the teaching, practice and spirit of the Church. Christ taught: “Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you. Bless them that curse you, and pray for them that calumniate you” (Lk. 6:27-28). And He gave the supreme example of this when He prayed for His enemies on the Cross, thereby teaching us “not to render evil for evil…but to overcome evil by good” (Rom. 12:17, 21). But to love those who hate us does not give others a right to hate us, not even a right to immunity for hating us. In his letter 153, where he advocated for the sparing of heretics, St Augustine also reminds us: “Now it is true, as morals go in our days, that men want both to be exempt from penalty for their crimes, and yet to possess that for which they admitted the crime [i.e., to continue in their sins]. This is the worst kind of men…” (Ep. 153, 6, 20—PL 33, 419—BAC, XIa Cartas. p. 423).

God forbid that the children of the Catholic Church should even be anyway unfriendly to those who are not at all united to us by the same bonds of faith and love. On the contrary, let them be eager always to attend to their needs with all the kind services of Christian charity, whether they are poor or sick or suffering any other kind of visitation. First of all, let them rescue them from the darkness of the errors into which they have unhappily fallen and strive to guide them back to Catholic truth and to their most loving Mother who is ever holding out her maternal arms to receive them lovingly back into her fold. Thus, firmly founded in faith, hope, and charity and fruitful in every good work, they will gain eternal salvation.

Pope Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, 1863

Throughout the history of the Church, the popes and the saints never hesitated to destroy idols, temples, or enact bans of non-Catholic practices. The Church has always recognized its right and duty to protect the faith of her children and to impede, whenever possible, the public exercise and propagation of false cults. To accept the teaching of Vatican II is to suggest that the popes and saints have unknowingly violated natural human rights for two millennia. This can only imply that the Catholic Faith was not the true religion until the Second Vatican Council.

What did the Church teach?

…at this time there are found not a few who, applying to civil intercourse the impious and absurd principles of what the call “naturalism,” dare teach ‘that the best form of society, and the exigencies of civil progress, absolutely require human society to be constituted and governed without any regard whatsoever to religion, as if this [religion] did not exist, or at least without making any distinction between true and false religions.’ … From this totally false notion of social government, they fear not to uphold the erroneous opinions most pernicious to the Catholic Church, and to the salvation of souls, which was called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, insanity (Encyclical, 13 August 1832): namely: ‘that the liberty of conscience and of worship is the peculiar (or inalienable) right of every man, which should be proclaimed by law, and that citizens have the right to all kinds of liberty, to be restrained by no law, whether ecclesiastical or civil, by which they may be enabled to manifest openly and publicly their ideas, by word of mouth, through the press, or by any other means.’ . … Therefore do We by Our apostolic authority, reprobate, denounce and condemn generally and particularly all the evil opinions and doctrines specially mentioned in this Letter, and We wish that they may be held as reprobated, denounced, and condemned by all the children of the Catholic Church” Pius IX, Quanta Cura

“(we reprobate, proscribe, and condemn all the evil opinions…) 15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true… 77. in the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship… 78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship.” Pius IX, Syllabus of condemned errors

“From this poisoned source of indifferentism flows that false and absurd, or rather extravagant, maxim that liberty of conscience should be established and guaranteed to each man…” Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos

“As a consequence, the State, constituted as it is, is clearly bound to act up to the manifold and weighty duties linking it to God, by the public profession of religion. Nature and reason, which command every individual devoutly to worship God in holiness, because we belong to Him and must return to Him, since from Him we came, bind also the civil community by a like law. For, men living together in society are under the power of God no less than individuals are, and society, no less than individuals, owes gratitude to God who gave it being and maintains it and whose ever-bounteous goodness enriches it with countless blessings. Since, then, no one is allowed to be remiss in the service due to God, and since the chief duty of all men is to cling to religion in both its reaching and practice- not such religion as they may have a preference for, but the religion which God enjoins, and which certain and most clear marks show to be the only one true religion -it is a public crime to act as though there were no God. So, too, is it a sin for the State not to have care for religion as a something beyond its scope, or as of no practical benefit; or out of many forms of religion to adopt that one which chimes in with the fancy; for we are bound absolutely to worship God in that way which He has shown to be His will. All who rule, therefore, would hold in honour the holy name of God, and one of their chief duties must be to favour religion, to protect it, to shield it under the credit and sanction of the laws, and neither to organize nor enact any measure that may compromise its safety. This is the bounden duty of rulers to the people over whom they rule…” Leo XIII, Immortale Dei

“…from this it follows not only that Christ is to be adored by angels and men, but that to him as man angels and men are subject, and must recognize His empire…It would be a grave error, on the other hand, to say that Christ has no authority whatever in civil affairs, since, by virtue of the absolute empire over all creatures committed to Him by the Father, all things are in his power… The rebellion of individuals and states against the authority of Christ has produced deplorable consequences.” Pius XI, Quas Primas

The Church and inter-religious activities

Its doctrine on the Church and ecumenism in paragraph 3 of the decree Unitatis redintegratio, and paragraph 8 of the constitution Lumen gentium, contradicts the teachings of Pius XII in Mystici corporis and Humani generis, the teachings of Pius IX in propositions 16 and 17 of the Syllabus of Errors, those of Leo XIII in Satis cognitum, and those of Pius XI in Mortalium animos (as well as the Council of Florence). Paragraph 8 of the decree Unitatis redintegratio contradicts St Pius X in Singulari Quadam and Notre Charge Apostolique. In addition, on the level of ecclesiology, there are novelties that appear chiefly with the new definition of the Church as sacrament and the vague notion of the common priesthood of the faithful (Lumen Gentium §10).

Quotations from Catholic teaching

“[T]his 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 the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it, …not with the intention and the hope that “the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their errors, but, on the contrary, that they themselves submit to its teaching and government.” Pius XI, Mortalium Animos

“They hold, in effect, that in order to reach the hearts of the separated sheep, it is opportune to keep quiet about certain points of doctrine as if they were less important or to minimize them to the extent that they no longer have the meaning the Church has always held. To show how blameworthy is the tendency of this conception one does not need long speeches …One must not believe either that there is no fault in this silence with which they cover certain principles of Catholic doctrine so as to wrap them in the obscurity of oblivion… the whole Christian doctrine have only one Author and Doctor…Let one beware not to subtract anything from the doctrine received from God or to omit anything for whatever reasons there might be; because he who would do that, would tend more to distance Catholics from the Church rather than to bring back to the Church those who are separated from it. Let them return; nothing indeed is dearer to our heart; let them return, all those who wander away from the fold of Christ, but through no other way than that which Christ Himself has shown” Leo XIII, Testem Benevolentiae

“Our sacred duty is to labor unceasingly that Our beloved sons may preserve the Catholic teaching unadulterated and unimpaired, in no way allowing their Faith to be endangered. If they are not in time urged to be on guard, they would obviously, gradually and inadvertently, fall into the danger of being satisfied with a vague and indefinite form of the Christian religion which has lately been designated as intercredal. This amounts to nothing more than an empty recommendation of a generalized Christianity. Obviously, nothing is more contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ… Accordingly, We first of all declare that all Catholics have a sacred and inviolable duty, both in private and public life, to obey and firmly adhere to and fearlessly profess the principles of Christian truth enunciated by the teaching office of the Catholic Church… when there is a question about associations which directly or indirectly touch upon the sphere of religion and morality, it would not be permitted to foster and spread mixed organizations, that is, associations composed of Catholics and non-Catholics” St Pius X, Singulari Quadam

“Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbour flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting … What are we to think of this respect for all errors, and of this strange invitation made by a Catholic to all the dissidents to strengthen their convictions through study so that they may have more and more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to think of an association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may express themselves openly and in complete freedom?… stranger still, alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, “the reign of love and justice” with workers coming from everywhere, of all religions and of no religion, with or without beliefs, so long as they forego what might divide them – their religious and philosophical convictions … the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish … no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer… and that – their ideal being akin to that of the Revolution – they fear not to draw between the Gospel and the Revolution blasphemous comparisons” St Pius X, Notre Charge apostolique

“God, through his only begotten Son, founded the Church, and he endowed his institution with clear notes to the end that she might be recognized by all as the guardian and teacher of the revealed word. To the Catholic Church alone belong all those things…” First Vatican Council, Dz. 1793-4

Position of the Pope and bishops in the Church

Its doctrine on collegiality, as expressed in paragraph 22 of the constitution Lumen gentium, including paragraph 3 of the Nota praevia [Preliminary Note], clashes with the teachings of Vatican Council I on the uniqueness of the subject of supreme authority in the Church in the constitution Pastor Aeternus, and the teaching of Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum.

Lumen Gentium speaks of the body of bishops with the Pope, in addition to the Pope alone, as permanently bearing supreme authority over the Church. This double subject of supremacy flies in the face of the traditional doctrine of the uniqueness of the Papal authority as stated in Pastor Aeternus and Satis Cognitum.

The Church has always taught that Christ gave the Church monarchical constitution: St. Peter and his successors was to have supreme authority over the Church on earth. A local bishop, as successor of the Apostles, was also to be the spiritual father and ruler of his designated jurisdiction, while answering to the Pope. This was changed after the Second Vatican Council, which blurred the distinction between the Pope’s powers, the powers of the body of bishops, and the local powers of each bishop. As a result of Vatican II (Christus Dominus Ch. 3, 38), the Bishops’ Conferences, by majority vote, can now overrule the authority of a bishop in his own diocese, while effectively ignoring the authority of the Pope (e.g. Pope Paul VI and the Canadian Bishops’ Conference). This allowed modernist practices to be forced everywhere in the whole Church without any individual accountability.

In connection with this is the growth of the numbers of organisations where power is exercised by laity (1983 Canon 536), which has eroded the distinction between the clergy and the laity (1983 Canon 129 § 2), a distinction of divine right. Such usurpation of the powers of the priesthood by the lay community had already been condemned as heretical (Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, Dz 2602).

If the truth be told, I shun every assemblage of bishops, because I have never yet seen that any Synod had a good ending, or that the evils complained of were removed by them, but were rather multiplied. For in those assembles, and I do not think I express myself too strongly here, indescribable contentiousness and ambition prevail, and it is easier to be reproached of wishing to set oneself as judge of others’ wickedness, than to attain any success at putting wickedness away.

St Gregory Nazianzus, letter to Procopius AD 382

Comparison

Vatican II innovations	Catholic teaching
“Man is the only creature on earth that God has wanted for its own sake” (Gaudium et Spes, §24),	“The Lord hath made all things for Himself” (Prov. 16), and “Man is created to praise, reverence, and serve God our Lord, and by this means to save his soul. And the other things on the face of the earth are created for man and that they may help him in prosecuting the end for which he is created.” (St Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises)
“by His incarnation the Son of God has in a certain way united Himself with each man” (§22),	“The Word of God “did not assume human nature in general, but ‘in atomo'”—that is, in an individual” St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, III, Q. 2. A. 2)
so “Human nature… has been raised in us also to a dignity beyond compare” (§22),	“You have made him a little less than the angels…”(Ps. 8:6)
and because of “sublime dignity of the human person” (§26),	Only he who lives well is worthy (Apoc. 3:4).
his “rights and duties are universal and inviolate” (§26); including:	He who buries his talent will be stripped of it (Matt. 25:14-30)
“The Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom…” (Dignitatis Humanae, §2),	Condemned statement:  “Liberty of conscience and of worship is the proper right of every man…” (Pius IX, Quanta Cura)
“…all men should be immune from coercion on the part of …every human power so that, within due limits, nobody is forced to act against his convictions nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his convictions…” (Dignitatis Humanae, §2),	Condemned statement:  “the best condition of society is the one in which there is no acknowledgment by the government of the duty of restraining… offenders of the Catholic religion, except insofar as the public peace demands” (Pius IX, Quanta Cura).
“This right of the human person to religious freedom must be given such recognition in the constitutional order of society as will make it a civil right” (Dignitatis Humanae, §2),	Condemned statement:  “Liberty of conscience and of worship … should be proclaimed and asserted by law in every correctly established society…” (Pius IX, Quanta Cura)
The Church of Christ subsists in (not is) the Catholic Church (Lumen Gentium, §8)	“[The] true Church of Jesus Christ… is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church” (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis §13)
“…the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using (separated churches) as means of salvation… the brethren divided from us also carry out many of the sacred actions of the Christian religion… these actions… can be rightly described as capable of providing access to the community of salvation” (Unitatis Redintegratio, §3), and so,	“The Catholic Church firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within Her, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics, cannot become participants in eternal life but will depart ‘into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ (Mt. 25:41), unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock…” (Council of Florence, Dz 714).
“ecumenical action should be encouraged so that … Catholics might cooperate with their separated brethren …by a common profession before the nations of faith in God and in Jesus Christ…”  (Ad Gentes, §115). Later development: “the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using (separated Churches and Communities) as means of salvation … [T]he extent that these elements (of truth and sanctification) are found in other Christian Communities, the one Church of Christ is effectively present in them.” (John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint §10, 11)	“Now it is manifest that he who adheres to the teaching of the Church, as to an infallible rule, assents to whatever the Church teaches; otherwise, if, of the things taught by the Church, he holds what he chooses to hold, and rejects what he chooses to reject, he no longer adheres to the teaching of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will… Therefore it is clear that such a heretic with regard to one article has no faith in the other articles, but only a kind of opinion in accordance with his own will” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II II, Q.5, A.3).
Even non-Christian religions: “The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is good and holy in these religions.  She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct…” (Nostra Aetate, §2),	“All the gods of the Gentiles are devils.” Ps. 95. “… beware lest thou have a mind to imitate the abominations of those nations” (Dt. 18:9).
“In fidelity to conscience, Christians are joined with the rest of men in the search for truth” (Gaudium et Spes §16)	“the people must be taught that the profession of the Catholic faith is uniquely true” (Pius VIII, Traditi Humilitati).
“‘ecumenical movement’ indicates the initiatives…to promote Christian unity. … [W]herever this is allowed, there is prayer in common” “during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren.” (Unitatis Reintegratio, §4, 8)	“[T]his 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 the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it…” (Pius XI, Mortalium Animos)
“[T]he books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation.“ (Dei Verbum, §4)	“But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the sacred writer has erred.” (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, Dz. 1950)
“This tradition which comes from the Apostles develop 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. … For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.” (Dei Verbum §8)	“[T]he doctrine of faith which God revealed has not been handed down as a philosophic invention to the human mind to be perfected, but has been entrusted as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding…” (First Vatican Council, Dei Filius, Dz. 1800)
“Now, episcopal consecration confers, together with the office of sanctifying, the duty also of teaching and ruling…” (Lumen Gentium §21).	“This (episcopal) dignity in fact, depends immediately on God as to the power of orders, and on the Apostolic See as to the power of jurisdiction…” (Pius VI, Deesemus Nos).
Rite and formula of penance are to be revised (Sacrosanctum Concilium §72), and Extreme Unction should be an Anointing of the Sick (§§73,75).	The Church has no power over the “substance of the sacraments” (Pius XII, Sacramentum Ordinis, Dz. 2301)

Are Catholics required to follow the innovations of Vatican II?

On Oct. 11, 1962, Pope John XXIII, in his address Gaudet Mater Ecclesia at the opening of Vatican II, proclaimed that “nor was the primary purpose of the council to discuss some of the chief articles of the Church’s doctrine… this certain and unchangeable doctrine, to which loyal submission is due” but was to be “predominantly pastoral in character”. Bishop Thomas Morris in an interview by Kieron Wood, Catholic World News, September 27, 1997: “I was relieved when we were told that this Council was not aiming at defining or giving final statements on doctrine, because a statement on doctrine has to be very carefully formulated and I would have regarded the Council documents as tentative and liable to be reformed”. Pope Paul VI himself, in an audience on January 12, 1966, said that it “had avoided proclaiming in an extraordinary manner dogmas affected by the mark of infallibility.” (cf. the declaration of the Theological Commission of March 6, 1964, and repeated by the Council’s General Secretary Abp. Felici on November 16, 1964: “In view of conciliar practice and the pastoral purpose of the present Council, this sacred Synod defines matters of faith or morals as binding on the Church only when the Synod itself openly declares so.” It never did.) Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) said in 1988, “the Council itself did not define any dogma, and limited itself to a more modest level, simply as a pastoral council.”

if the faith is endangered a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence Paul, who was Peter’s subject, rebuked him in public, on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning the faith, and, as the gloss of Augustine says on Gal. 2:11:  [St. Peter] the very head of the Church showed to superiors that if they ever chanced to leave the straight and narrow path, they should accept to be corrected by their inferiors.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica IIa, IIae, q.33, art. 4

2. Nor by reason of the ordinary universal magisterium, because this is not a defining power, but one of passing on what was always believed. The “universality” in question is not just one of place (all bishops) but also of time (always) (cf. Vatican I, Dz 1836 “For, the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might faithfully set it forth.”).

the Roman Pontiff, who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fulness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith.

Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio, Pope Paul IV

3. Nor even by reason of the simply authentic magisterium, because the object of all magisterium is the deposit of faith to be guarded sacredly and expounded faithfully (Vatican I, Dz 1836), and not to adopt as Catholic doctrine the “best expressed values of two centuries of ‘liberal culture,’” even if they are “purified” (Cardinal Ratzinger, Gesu, November 1984, p. 72; cf. Gaudium et Spes, §§11, 44).

But where the power to command is wanting, or where a law is enacted contrary to reason, or to the eternal law, or to some ordinance of God, obedience is unlawful, lest while obeying man, we become disobedient to God.

Libertas præstantissimum, Pope Leo XIII

Aren’t Popes chosen by the Holy Spirit?

“I would not say so in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope, because there are too many contrary instances of popes the Holy Spirit would obviously not have picked. I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit’s role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote.”

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI

Fruits of Vatican II

Nearly all orders and institutes experienced growth before Vatican II, and immediately afterward stagnated and continued declining to this day. 30% decrease in Sunday Mass attendance in U.S. (NY Times 5/24/75), 43% decrease in France (Cardinal Marty), 50% decrease in Holland (NY Times 1/5/76). Fewer than 30% of Catholics go to Mass regularly, less than 12% of Catholics fulfil the minimum annual Confession (Georgetown University 2008). For the Institutes of Consecrated Life, the overall membership declined from 256,137 in 1967 to 162,732 in 2014. For the Societies of Apostolic Life, membership declined from 25,347 religious in 1967 to 14,038 religious in 2014. This represents a total decline for these congregations of about 36.5% and 44.6%, respectively, between 1967 and 2014.

• Adoption of so-called modern philosophy, psychology, sociology (Vatican II Optatam Totius, §§15, 20) leading to open spirituality and subjective morality: the “Dictatorship of Relativism” as Cardinal Ratzinger described in 2005.
• Holy Communion granted to non-Catholics (canon 844 §4, 1983 Code of Canon Law; Directive of the Secretariat for the Unity of Christians 4th May 1967; “Walking with Christ: Tracing Unity” German Episcopal Conference Feb 20 2018).
• The Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, which forbade Catholics from attempting to convert Orthodox (Balamand Declaration, Lebanon, June 17-24, 1993)
• Marriage and married love equated (Vatican II Gaudium et Spes, §§48,50), leading to granting of Holy Communion to civilly ‘remarried’ divorcees with no penitence (Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia); the Annulment Mills fiasco of nullifying marriages on insubstantial grounds through canon 1055 §1, canon 1095, 1098, 1983 Code of Canon Law.
• Ecumenical joint services with other religions.

They claim that they are representing the Church, but in reality they are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if the Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Christ.

St Athanasius the Great, Doctor of the Church