Vatican II is Apostate:
Nostra Aetate and the Spirit of Assisi
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Theological Definition of Apostasy
- Proof that the Erroneous Proposition Comes from Nostra Aetate
3.1. Text of Nostra Aetate paragraph 2
3.2. On Buddhism (Nostra Aetate paragraph 2)
3.3. On Hinduism (Nostra Aetate paragraph 2)
3.4. On Islam (Nostra Aetate paragraph 3)
3.5. On Judaism (Nostra Aetate paragraph 4)
3.6. Confirmation by Unitatis Redintegratio
- Contradiction with Divine Revelation
4.1. Acts of the Apostles 4:12 (Vulgate)
4.2. John 14:6 (Vulgate)
4.3. Galatians 1:8
- Definition by the Infallible Magisterium
5.1. Fourth Lateran Council (1215), canon 1
5.2. Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctam (1302)
5.3. Council of Florence (1442), Cantate Domino
5.4. Council of Trent, Session VI, canon 1
5.5. Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore (1863)
5.6. Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (1928)
5.7. Pius XII, Mystici Corporis (1943)
- Authentic Interpretation: The Spirit of Assisi as Confirmation of Apostasy
6.1. The Facts of Assisi
6.2. Rejection in the Summa of Saint Thomas Aquinas
6.3. Counter-Arguments and Refutations
- Conclusion
List of sources
- Introduction
The declaration Nostra Aetate (NA) of the so-called Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) is a text which, under an appearance of interreligious dialogue, introduces a grave doctrinal deviation constituting formal apostasy. According to pre-1963 Catholic doctrine, faithful to divine Revelation and to the infallible Magisterium, apostasy is defined as a total rejection of the Christian faith (Code of Canon Law of 1917, canon 1325 paragraph 2). This article demonstrates, in an academic and syllogistic manner, that Nostra Aetate is apostate in three steps: (1) to prove that the erroneous proposition comes from Vatican II, (2) to show that it contradicts a revealed truth, which contains a rejection of the religion, and (3) to establish that this truth is a dogma defined by the infallible Magisterium. The practical application of Nostra Aetate through the “spirit of Assisi” (1986 and following) will confirm this apostasy.
- Theological Definition of Apostasy
According to Saint Thomas Aquinas, apostasy is a sin of unbelief by which a person totally withdraws from the Christian faith (Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 12, a. 1, body of the article; q. 10, a. 9, body of the article). The Code of Canon Law of 1917 (canon 1325, § 2) understands it of the baptized person and specifies:
“Post receptum baptismum si quis, nomen retinens christianum, pertinaciter aliquam ex veritatibus fide divina et catholica credendis denegat aut de ea dubitat, haereticus ; si a fide christiana totaliter recedit, apostata […]”
(Translation: “After having received baptism, if anyone, retaining the Christian name, obstinately denies one of the truths to be believed by divine and Catholic faith, or doubts it, he is a heretic; if he withdraws totally from the Christian faith, he is an apostate […].”)
Apostasy, more grave than heresy, implies a voluntary and conscious rejection of the whole of the faith, manifested outwardly, and requires: (1) a valid baptism, (2) the use of reason, (3) a deliberate rejection of the faith, (4) a public manifestation of this rejection.
Modern causes include culpable ignorance, ecclesiastical scandals and modernism, condemned by Pius X as “omnium haereseon conlectum” (“the collection of all heresies”, encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, 8 September 1907, Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 40, 1907, p. 632).
Fundamental syllogism:
Major: To accept that other religions possess a salvific value implies a rejection of the Catholic faith, which proclaims itself unique (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus).
Minor: Nostra Aetate accepts the false religions as containing salvific elements.
Conclusion: Nostra Aetate rejects the Catholic faith and constitutes an apostasy.
- Proof that the Erroneous Proposition Comes from Nostra Aetate
3.1. Text of Nostra Aetate paragraph 2
“The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She looks with sincere respect upon those ways of acting and living, those rules and doctrines which, though they differ in many points from what she herself holds and proposes, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men.”
(Source: Nostra aetate, declaration on the relation of the Church to non-Christian religions, 28 October 1965, § 2.)
Therefore Nostra Aetate explicitly attributes these “true and holy” elements to the religions themselves and not only to certain individuals.
The term “true” refers to a conformity with revealed divine reality. And the term “holy” is here understood in the sense of a participation in the divinity by sanctifying grace, ordered to salvation; Saint Thomas teaches that the light of grace is a participation in the divine nature (Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 110, a. 3, body of the article; q. 112, a. 1, body of the article). By affirming that the non-Christian religions contain “holy” elements, Nostra Aetate suggests that they possess partial means of salvation, independently of the mediation of Christ. The expression “ray of the truth” valorizes these religions without requiring their subordination to Christian Revelation.
3.2. On Buddhism (Nostra Aetate paragraph 2)
The text also declares:
“In Buddhism, according to its various forms, the radical insufficiency of this changing world is recognized and a way is taught by which men, with a devout and confident heart, will be able to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain supreme illumination by their own efforts or by a help coming from on high.”
The terms “perfect liberation” and “supreme illumination” designate the ultimate objective of Buddhism, equivalent to salvation. By presenting this “way” as valid, without explicit reference to the necessity of Christ, Nostra Aetate implies that Buddhism contains salvific elements. The expression “by their own efforts” excludes the mediation of Christ, while “help coming from on high” remains vague and does not mention Christian grace, suggesting an autonomous validity of this religion. Now, Buddhism teaches a metaphysics of non-being, in which Nirvana is an extinction, not an eternal life, incompatible with the Catholic doctrine of salvation.
3.3. On Hinduism (Nostra Aetate paragraph 2)
Concerning Hinduism, the text affirms:
“Thus, in Hinduism men scrutinize the divine mystery and express it by the inexhaustible fruitfulness of myths and by the penetrating efforts of philosophy; they seek liberation from the anguish of our condition, either by the forms of ascetic life, or by deep meditation, or by taking refuge in God with love and confidence.”
This passage praises Hindu myths and philosophies as valid, whereas Leo XIII condemns the “fables and the impure superstition of the Brahmins” (Ad extremas Orientis, 24 June 1893, first paragraph; Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 25, 1892–1893, p. 717). By valorizing these practices as means of “liberation”, Nostra Aetate attributes a salvific value to a polytheistic religion, without reference to the necessity of Christ.
3.4. On Islam (Nostra Aetate paragraph 3)
Nostra Aetate paragraph 3 declares:
“The Church also looks with esteem upon the Muslims, who adore the one God, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men.”
This text suggests that the Muslims adore the true God. However, the Koran explicitly denies the Trinity and the divinity of Christ (sura IV, The Women, verse 171, translation of Muhammad Hamidullah: “O people of the Book (Christians)! Do not exaggerate in your religion, and do not say of Allah anything but the truth. The Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, is only a Messenger of Allah […] Allah is only one God. He is too glorious to have a child.”). Nostra Aetate wrongly affirms an adoration of the same God, whereas the formal object of their worship excludes the Trinity.
This fundamental denial makes Islam incompatible with the Catholic faith, and the affirmation of Nostra Aetate constitutes an implicit approval of a religion that rejects essential dogmas.
Pius XI, Mortalium animos: “Such enterprises cannot in any way be approved by Catholics, since they rest on the erroneous theory that all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy […].” (6 January 1928; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, p. 6.)
Therefore the worship which explicitly rejects Christ God cannot be considered as a religious way approved by God.
3.5. On Judaism (Nostra Aetate paragraph 4)
Nostra Aetate paragraph 4 declares:
“Scrutinizing the mystery of the Church, the holy Council recalls the bond which spiritually links the people of the New Testament to the lineage of Abraham. […] The Church always has before her eyes the words of the apostle Paul concerning those of his race “to whom belong the adoptive sonship, the glory, the covenants, the legislation, the worship, the promises and the patriarchs, and from whom is born, according to the flesh, Christ” (Rom 9, 4-5) […]. If it is true that the Church is the new People of God, the Jews must not, for all that, be presented as reprobated by God nor cursed, as if this flowed from Holy Scripture.”
This text valorizes the post-Christian Jewish tradition without condemning its explicit rejection of Christ, suggesting that Judaism retains a salvific value independent of faith in Jesus. Moreover, it inverts the evangelizing mission by asking the sons of the Church that “they recognize, preserve and make progress the spiritual, moral and socio-cultural values which are found in them”, the adherents of other religions (Nostra aetate, § 2), betraying Matthew 28:19: “Go therefore, teach all nations”, and the sacred text of Acts 2:36: “God has made Lord and Christ this Jesus whom you have crucified.”
Therefore rabbinic Judaism subsequent to the year 70 rests on the explicit refusal of Jesus as Messiah. Hence any religious valorization of this system implies indirectly a valorization of the rejection of Christ.
3.6. Confirmation by Unitatis Redintegratio
The decree Unitatis redintegratio of 21 November 1964, paragraph 3, reinforces this error:
“Consequently, these separated Churches and communities, although we believe them to suffer from deficiencies, are by no means deprived of significance and of value in the mystery of salvation.” (Unitatis redintegratio, § 3; Francesco Ricossa, Le Pape du Concile, sixteenth part, p. 105.)
This affirmation attributes a salvific value to non-Catholic communities, in contradiction with the dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.
- Contradiction with Divine Revelation
Divine Revelation, contained in Scripture, affirms the exclusivity of salvation through Jesus Christ. Two fundamental passages demonstrate this:
4.1. Acts of the Apostles 4:12 (Clementine Vulgate)
“Et non est in alio aliquo salus: nec enim aliud nomen est sub caelo datum hominibus, in quo oporteat nos salvos fieri.”
(Translation: “There is salvation in no other; for there is under heaven no other name given to men, by which we must be saved.”)
This verse, attributed to Saint Peter, excludes every other way of salvation: “non est in alio aliquo salus” means that no religion or mediation outside of Christ can lead to salvation.
4.2. John 14:6 (Vulgate):
“Ego sum via, et veritas, et vita. Nemo venit ad Patrem, nisi per me.”
(Translation: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father, except through me.”)
Nostra Aetate, by valorizing “ways” such as Buddhism (“by their own efforts”), Hinduism, Islam and Judaism as containing “holy” elements and ordered to salvation, directly contradicts these scriptural passages. To affirm that non-Christian religions possess salvific means, even partially, violates the exclusivity of salvation through Christ.
4.3. Galatians 1:8
“Sed licet nos, aut angelus de caelo evangelizet vobis praeterquam quod evangelizavimus vobis, anathema sit.”
(Translation: “But even if we ourselves, or an angel from heaven, should announce to you a gospel different from that which we have announced to you, let him be anathema.”)
Saint Paul teaches here that every religious doctrine different from that revealed by Jesus Christ must be rejected. Now Nostra Aetate presents the non-Christian religions as bearers of positive religious values that must be recognized and promoted. Such an approach is incompatible with the apostolic obligation to convert the nations to the one Gospel of Christ.
- Definition by the Infallible Magisterium
To establish apostasy, the erroneous proposition must contradict a dogma defined by the infallible Magisterium before 1962. The dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus has been solemnly proclaimed on several occasions:
5.1. Fourth Lateran Council (1215), constitution 1, Firmiter credimus (under Innocent III)
“Una vero est fidelium universalis Ecclesia, extra quam nullus omnino salvatur.”
(Translation: “There is one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which absolutely no one is saved.” — Fourth Lateran Council, constitution 1, Firmiter credimus; Denzinger, no. 430.)
5.2. Boniface VIII, bull Unam sanctam (18 November 1302)
“Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis.”
(Translation: “We declare, say, define and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” — Boniface VIII, Unam sanctam, conclusion; Denzinger, no. 469; Johann Peter Kirsch, “Unam Sanctam”, The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. XV, 1912.)
5.3. Council of Florence, Cantate Domino (4 February 1442, under Eugene IV)
“The holy Roman Church […] firmly believes, professes and proclaims that none of those who are found outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics and schismatics, can become participants in eternal life, but will go into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are aggregated to her before the end of their life.” (Council of Florence, session XI, Cantate Domino, decree for the Jacobites, 4 February 1442; Denzinger, no. 714.)
This text infallibly defines (de fide divina et catholica) that salvation is exclusively bound to the Catholic Church, Mystical Body of Christ.
5.4. Council of Trent, session VI, canon 1 (13 January 1547, under Paul III)
“Si quis dixerit, hominem suis operibus, quae vel per humanae naturae vires, vel per Legis doctrinam fiant, absque divina per Christum Iesum gratia posse iustificari coram Deo: anathema sit.”
(Translation: “If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his works accomplished either by the forces of human nature, or by the doctrine of the Law, without the divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.” — Council of Trent, session VI, Canons on justification, can. 1; Denzinger, no. 811.)
5.5. Pius IX, Quanto conficiamur moerore (10 August 1863):
“It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, and who, carefully observing the natural law and its precepts, inscribed by God in the heart of all, and being disposed to obey God, lead an honest and upright life, can, by the operation of the divine light and grace, obtain eternal life […].” (Quanto conficiamur moerore, 10 August 1863; Denzinger, no. 1677; Denzinger-Schönmetzer, no. 2866.)
This text admits the possibility of salvation for individuals in invincible ignorance, but only by the grace of Christ, and not by the practices of non-Christian religions.
5.6. Pius XI, Mortalium animos (6 January 1928):
Pius XI recalls, citing Lactantius: “Alone […] the Catholic Church is the one that keeps the true worship. […] Whoever does not enter it or who leaves it, deprives himself of all hope of life and of salvation.” (Mortalium animos, 6 January 1928; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, p. 15; Lactantius, Divine Institutions, book IV, chapter 30, §§ 11–12.)
This text explicitly rejects the idea that non-Christian religions can be ways of salvation, reaffirming the dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.
These definitions, founded on Acts 4:12 and John 14:6, establish that salvation is exclusively bound to Christ and to His Church, excluding every other religion as a salvific way.
In the same encyclical, Pius XI teaches:
“[…] christianorum enim coniunctionem haud aliter foveri licet, quam fovendo dissidentium ad unam veram Christi Ecclesiam reditu […].”
(Translation: “[…] it is not permitted to favor the union of Christians otherwise than by favoring the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ […].” Mortalium animos, 6 January 1928; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, p. 14.)
The Pontiff therefore does not envisage a mutual enrichment of religions nor a reciprocal recognition of their proper values, but only the conversion of the dissidents to the Catholic Church. This doctrine is directly opposed to the spirit which animates Nostra Aetate.
5.7. Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (29 June 1943)
This Pope teaches:
“In Ecclesiae autem membris reapse ii soli annumerandi sunt, qui regenerationis lavacrum receperunt veramque fidem profitentur […].”
(Translation: “Only those must really be numbered among the members of the Church who have received the bath of regeneration and profess the true faith […].” Mystici Corporis Christi, 29 June 1943; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 35, 1943, p. 202; Denzinger, no. 2286; Denzinger-Schönmetzer, no. 3802.)
The adherents of non-Christian religions cannot therefore be considered as belonging to the Mystical Body of Christ as members of their respective religions. Hence, to attribute a positive religious value to the religions themselves contradicts the traditional Catholic doctrine on the unicity of the Church.
- Authentic Interpretation: The Spirit of Assisi as Confirmation of Apostasy
The application of Nostra Aetate at the interreligious meetings of Assisi (1986, 2002), initiated by Karol Wojtyla (John Paul II), confirms the apostasy. Wojtyla declared:
“[…] the day of Assisi was like a visible expression of these affirmations of the Second Vatican Council.”
(Address to the Roman Curia, 22 December 1986, § 9; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 79, 1987, p. 1088; translation from the Italian.)
6.1. The Facts of Assisi
In 1986, representatives of false religions were invited to pray for peace. The Buddhists placed a statue of Buddha on a Catholic altar (H. J. A. Sire, Phoenix from the Ashes, 2015, pp. 382–388, note 26). They danced around the altar, the Hindus invoked idols, and the animists sacrificed animals. Cardinal Silvio Oddi testified:
“That day, I went to Assisi as the pontifical legate for the Basilica of Saint Francis, and I saw a real profanation in certain places of prayer. I saw Buddhists dancing around the altar, on which they had put a Buddha in the place of Christ, and they burned incense to the Buddha and venerated him.”
(Silvio Oddi, testimony reproduced in “The Controversy concerning the Third Secret — Eighth Part: The testimony of Mgr Silvio Oddi”, Salve Maria Regina, vol. 50, no. 161, summer 2010, French translation.)
Wojtyla called to “keep always alive the spirit of Assisi” (Address to the Roman Curia, 22 December 1986, § 10; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 79, 1987, p. 1089; translation from the Italian). In 2002, these practices were repeated, despite attempts to separate the prayers. These acts directly violate Exodus 20:3-5, which forbids the adoration of other gods.
6.2. Rejection in the Summa of Saint Thomas Aquinas
It is in no way permitted to participate in the rites of the infidels. Saint Thomas teaches:
“[…] superstitio est quaedam infidelitatis protestatio per exteriorem cultum.”
(Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 94, a. 1, reply to the first objection.)
(Translation: “[…] superstition is a profession of unbelief by exterior worship.”)
The reason set forth by Saint Thomas is that exterior worship is the sign of interior worship, and that superstition thus constitutes an exterior profession of unbelief (Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 94, a. 1, reply to the first objection; a. 2, body of the article). Participation in the religious ceremonies of false cults constitutes outwardly an approval of religious error. The gatherings of Assisi, where representatives of multiple religions were invited to accomplish publicly their cultic acts, therefore appear in direct contradiction with this traditional doctrine.
6.3. Counter-Arguments and Refutations
Objection 1: “Nostra Aetate does not deny the exclusivity of Christ, because it mentions that the Church ‘unceasingly announces Christ’ (John 14:6).”
Refutation: By valorizing “ways” such as Buddhism (“by their own efforts”) and by omitting to condemn the rejection of Christ by Judaism, Nostra Aetate attributes a salvific value to practices independent of Christ, violating Acts 4:12 and Mortalium Animos. Aristotle’s principle of non-contradiction (Metaphysics, book Gamma, chap. 3, 1005 b 19-20) applies: “It is impossible that the same attribute belong and not belong at the same time and under the same respect to the same subject.”
Objection 2: “Assisi aimed at peace, not syncretism.”
Refutation: To pray together implies an implicit recognition of the validity of non-Christian cults, which is incompatible with Mortalium animos (6 January 1928; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, p. 6). This unity in religious diversity constitutes a form of Masonic syncretism. The separation of prayers is artificial, because the intention of spiritual unity remains.
Objection 3: “Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) was against Assisi.”
Refutation: Ratzinger participated in Assisi in 1986. In 2007, at Naples, he commemorated the spirit of Assisi by calling for interreligious prayer (Benedict XVI, greeting to the heads of the delegations of the International Meeting for Peace, Naples, 21 October 2007), confirming his adhesion.
- Conclusion
Nostra Aetate constitutes a formal apostasy for the following reasons:
7.1. Origin in Vatican II: Nostra Aetate (paragraph 2, paragraph 3, paragraph 4) affirms that the non-Christian religions (Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism) contain “true and holy” elements, implying a salvific value independent of Christ, reinforced by Unitatis Redintegratio (paragraph 3).
7.2. Contradiction with Revelation: These affirmations contradict Acts 4:12 (“There is salvation in no other”) and John 14:6 (“No one comes to the Father, except through me”), which establish the exclusivity of salvation through Christ.
7.3. Contradiction with the Infallible Magisterium: The dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, defined by the Fourth Lateran Council, Unam Sanctam, the Council of Florence, the Council of Trent, Pius IX and Pius XI, excludes every other religion as a way of salvation.
7.4. Confirmation by the gathering at Assisi: The application of Nostra Aetate at Assisi (1986, 2002) by Wojtyla (anti-pope John Paul II), who invited false religions to pray and declared these acts conformable to Vatican II, manifests a public rejection of the Catholic faith, in violation of Exodus 20:3-5.
Corollary:
Aaron, as high priest of the Old Testament, permitted once the adoration of a golden calf to a single people and in the desert. It is considered a very great sin, such that Moses by punishment and anger broke the tables of the law which he was returning from receiving from God Himself (Exodus 32:1-6, 19, 21 and 30).
The sin of Wojtyla is far greater: it is one of the greatest sins in the history of the world: a pope (considered as such by most of the world: it is the greatest religious authority of the New Testament), gathers the chiefs of all the religions of all the peoples of the world (not a single people), to adore each one his false god (not a single idol the golden calf), and this before the whole world (the media were on the spot, therefore not only in a desert), asking that every bishop follow his example (therefore not only once) of a greater sin (apostasy and therefore against the most important commandment (the first: “Thou shalt have no strange gods before me”, Exodus 20:3)). One cannot imagine a greater one! Objectively speaking it is, in my humble opinion, the greatest sin that a man has ever committed and been able to commit on earth.
As the height of misery, this anti-pope became so popular that he was “canonized” shortly after his death and venerated excessively, especially in Poland, his native country.
Aaron publicly repented of his sin, JPII never. Then to call such a man “holy Father” sounds like a blasphemy.
In short, according to canon 1325 paragraph 2, Nostra Aetate and the “spirit of Assisi” totally reject the Catholic faith, constituting an apostasy. This conclusion implies that the so-called Vatican II council and its adherents depart from the faith, confirming the sedevacantist position, faithful to the eternal teaching of the Church. The salvation of souls, supreme law (according to a fundamental adage in canon law “Salus animarum suprema lex” “the salvation of souls is the supreme law”; cf. Pius XII, address Sollemnis conventus, 24 June 1939, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 31, 1939, p. 248), requires the rejection of Nostra Aetate and of Vatican II in order to preserve Catholic truth.
List of sources
Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae (Summa Theologiae), Leonine edition, Rome, 1892, 1895 and 1897: I-II, q. 110, a. 3; q. 112, a. 1; II-II, q. 10, a. 9; q. 12, a. 1; q. 94, a. 1–2.
Code of Canon Law of 1917, Codex Iuris Canonici, can. 1325, § 2, Latin text.
Pius X, encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, 8 September 1907, Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 40, 1907, p. 632.
Leo XIII, letter Ad extremas Orientis, 24 June 1893, Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 25, 1892–1893, p. 717.
Pius IX, Quanto conficiamur moerore, 10 August 1863; Denzinger, no. 1677.
Pius XI, encyclical Mortalium animos, 6 January 1928, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, pp. 6 and 14–15.
Lactantius, Divinae institutiones (Divine Institutions), book IV, chapter 30, §§ 11–12, cited in Pius XI, Mortalium animos, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, p. 15.
Pius XII, encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, 29 June 1943, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 35, 1943, p. 202; Denzinger, no. 2286.
Pius XII, address Sollemnis conventus to the students of the seminaries, colleges and ecclesiastical institutes of Rome, 24 June 1939, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 31, 1939, p. 248.
Fourth Lateran Council, constitution 1, Firmiter credimus, 1215; Denzinger, no. 430.
Boniface VIII, bull Unam sanctam, 18 November 1302, conclusion; Denzinger, no. 469.
Johann Peter Kirsch, “Unam Sanctam”, The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. XV, New York, Robert Appleton Company, 1912.
Council of Florence, session XI, Cantate Domino, decree for the Jacobites, 4 February 1442; Denzinger, no. 714.
Council of Trent, session VI, Canons on justification, 13 January 1547, can. 1; Denzinger, no. 811.
Heinrich Denzinger, Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum (Collection of symbols, definitions and declarations in matters of faith and morals), edition revised by Karl Rahner, 31st edition, Herder, Barcelona–Freiburg im Breisgau–Rome, 1957.
Nostra aetate, declaration on the relation of the Church to non-Christian religions, 28 October 1965, §§ 2–4, Latin text and French translation.
Unitatis redintegratio, decree on ecumenism, 21 November 1964, § 3, Latin text and French translation.
Francesco Ricossa, Le Pape du Concile, sixteenth part, “The Secretariat for the unity of Christians”, Sodalitium, no. 39, June-July 1995; collection, pp. 104–105 and 110, notes 42 and 48.
Holy Scripture: Exodus 20:3–5 and 32:1–6, 19, 21, 30; Matthew 28:19; John 14:6; Acts 2:36 and 4:12; Romans 9:4–5; Galatians 1:8. Latin texts according to the Clementine Vulgate.
Koran, sura IV, The Women, verse 171, French translation of Muhammad Hamidullah.
Karol Wojtyla (John Paul II), address to the representatives of the Churches and Christian communities gathered at Assisi for the World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, §§ 1 and 4.
Karol Wojtyla (John Paul II), address to the cardinals and members of the Roman Curia, 22 December 1986, §§ 7, 9 and 10, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 79, 1987, pp. 1082–1090, particularly pp. 1086, 1088–1089, Italian text.
Karol Wojtyla (John Paul II), address during the Day of Prayer for Peace in the world, Assisi, 24 January 2002, § 7.
Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI), greeting to the heads of the delegations participating in the International Meeting for Peace, Naples, 21 October 2007.
“The Third Secret Controversy—Part VIII. The Testimony of Msgr. Silvio Oddi”, Salve Maria Regina, vol. 50, no. 161, summer 2010, English text and French translation.
J. A. Sire, Phoenix from the Ashes: The Making, Unmaking, and Restoration of Catholic Tradition, Kettering, Ohio, Angelico Press, 2015, pp. 382–388, note 26, English text.
Silvio Oddi, interview with Tommaso Ricci, 30 Dias, November 1990, p. 64, cited by H. J. A. Sire, Phoenix from the Ashes, note 26.
Aristotle, Metaphysics, book Γ (Gamma), chapter 3, 1005 b 19–20.