Vatican II is apostate

“Nostra Aetate” and the “Spirit of Assisi”

 

Table of contents

 

1. Introduction

– Presentation of the apostasy of Nostra Aetate and its application through the “spirit of Assisi”.

2. Theological Definition of Apostasy

– Definition according to Saint Thomas Aquinas and the 1917 Code of Canon Law.

3. Proof that the Erroneous Proposition Originates from Nostra Aetate

– Analysis of Nostra Aetate §2 (general),

– §2 (Buddhism),

– §2 (Hinduism),

– §3 (Islam),

– §4 (Judaism).

– Confirmation via Unitatis Redintegratio.

4. Contradiction with Divine Revelation

– References to Acts 4:12 and John 14:6.

5. Definition by the Infallible Magisterium

– Dogmas of the Fourth Lateran Council,

– Unam Sanctam,

– Council of Florence,

– Council of Trent,

– Pius IX,

– Pius XI.

6. Authentic Interpretation: The Spirit of Assisi as Confirmation of Apostasy

– Facts of Assisi (1986, 2002) and refutations of counter-arguments.

7. Conclusion

– Synthesis of the apostasy of Nostra Aetate and the necessity of its rejection.

– Corollary : the biggest sin in history?

 

 

Introduction

 

The declaration Nostra Aetate (NA) of the so-called Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) is a text which, under the guise of interreligious dialogue, introduces a grave doctrinal deviation constituting a formal apostasy. According to the pre-1963 Catholic doctrine, faithful to Divine Revelation and the infallible Magisterium, apostasy is defined as a total rejection of the Christian faith (1917 Code of Canon Law, canon 1325 §2). This article demonstrates, in an academic and syllogistic manner, that Nostra Aetate is apostate in three steps: (1) proving that the erroneous proposition originates from Vatican II, (2) showing that it contradicts a revealed truth, which contains a rejection of the religion, and (3) establishing that this truth is a dogma defined by the infallible Magisterium. The practical application of Nostra Aetate through the “spirit of Assisi” (1986 and subsequent) will confirm this apostasy.

 

1. Theological Definition of Apostasy

 

According to Saint Thomas Aquinas, apostasy is a sin of infidelity by which a baptised person completely departs from the Christian faith (Summa Theologica, IIa-IIae, q. 12, a. 1). The 1917 Code of Canon Law (canon 1325 §2) specifies:

 

> Post susceptum baptisma si quis, nomen retento christianum, negat vel dubitat aliquam veritatem credendam fide divina et catholica, haereticus; si a christiana fide totaliter recedat, apostata.

 

(Translation: “After having received baptism, if someone, while retaining the name of Christian, denies or doubts a truth to be believed by divine and Catholic faith, he is a heretic; if he totally departs from the Christian faith, he is an apostate.”)

 

Apostasy, more grave than heresy, implies a voluntary and conscious rejection of the entirety of the faith, manifested externally, 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 haeresium summa et quasi synthesis” (“the sum and as it were the synthesis of all heresies”, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, §39, 1907).

 

Fundamental syllogism:

– Major: Accepting that other religions possess salvific value implies a rejection of the Catholic faith, which proclaims itself unique (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus).

– Minor: Nostra Aetate accepts false religions as containing salvific elements.

– Conclusion: Nostra Aetate rejects the Catholic faith and constitutes an apostasy.

 

1. Step 1: Proof that the Erroneous Proposition Originates from Nostra Aetate

 

1. Text of Nostra Aetate §2

 

“The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She considers with sincere respect those ways of acting and living, those precepts and doctrines which, though differing in many ways from what she herself holds and proposes, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men.”

(Source: www.vatican.va)

 

The term “true” refers to conformity with the divinely revealed reality. And the term “holy”, according to the doctrine of Saint Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologica, IIa-IIae, q. 81, a. 8), designates a participation in divinity through sanctifying grace, ordered to salvation. By affirming that non-Christian religions contain “holy” elements, Nostra Aetate suggests that they possess partial means of salvation, independently of Christ’s mediation. The expression “ray of that truth” valorises these religions without requiring their subordination to Christian Revelation.

 

2. On Buddhism (Nostra Aetate §2)

 

The text continues:

 

“In Buddhism, according to its various forms, the radical insufficiency of this changing world is recognised and a way is taught whereby men, with a devout and trusting heart, may be able to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or reach supreme enlightenment either by their own efforts or with the help from above.”

 

The terms “perfect liberation” and “supreme enlightenment” designate Buddhism’s ultimate goal, 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 Christ’s mediation, while “help from above” remains vague and does not mention Christian grace, suggesting an autonomous validity of this religion. Yet, Buddhism teaches a metaphysics of non-being, where Nirvana is an extinction, not eternal life, incompatible with the Catholic doctrine of salvation.

 

3. On Hinduism (Nostra Aetate §2)

 

Concerning Hinduism, the text states:

 

“Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek liberation from the distresses of our condition through ascetical practices or deep meditation or a loving and trusting refuge in God.”

 

This passage praises Hindu myths and philosophies as valid, whereas Leo XIII condemns the “myths and vile superstitions of the Brahmins” (Ad Extremas, §1, 1893). By valorising these practices as means of “liberation”, Nostra Aetate attributes salvific value to a polytheistic religion, without reference to the necessity of Christ.

 

4. On Islam (Nostra Aetate §3)

 

Nostra Aetate §3 declares:

 

“The Church regards with esteem also the Muslims who adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself, merciful and all-powerful, Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men.”

 

This text suggests that Muslims adore the true God. However, the Koran explicitly denies the Trinity and the divinity of Christ (Surah 4:171: “O people of the Book, do not exaggerate in your religion and say of Allah only the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah […]. Allah is the only God. Far is He from having a son.”). Nostra Aetate wrongly affirms an adoration of the same God, whereas the formal object of their worship excludes the Trinity. This fundamental negation renders Islam incompatible with the Catholic faith, and Nostra Aetate’s affirmation constitutes an implicit approval of a religion that rejects essential dogmas.

 

5. On Judaism (Nostra Aetate §4)

 

Nostra Aetate §4 declares:

 

“As the sacred Council searches into the mystery of the Church, it recalls the spiritual bond which links the people of the New Testament to the stock of Abraham. […] The Church always has before her eyes the words of the Apostle Paul about those of his race ‘to whom belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, the promises, and the patriarchs; and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh’ (Rom 9:4-5). […] Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures.”

 

This text valorises 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 evangelising mission by asking to “recognise, preserve, and promote the spiritual and moral goods” of other religions (Nostra Aetate §2), betraying Matthew 28:19: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations.” and the sacred text of Acts 2:36 “God has made Him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

 

6. Confirmation by Unitatis Redintegratio

 

The decree Unitatis Redintegratio (§3) reinforces this error:

 

“The Churches and communities separated from us, though we believe they suffer from defects already mentioned, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation.”

 

This affirmation attributes salvific value to non-Catholic communities, in contradiction with the dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.

 

III. Step 2: Contradiction with Divine Revelation

 

Divine Revelation, contained in Scripture, affirms the exclusivity of salvation through Jesus Christ. Two fundamental passages demonstrate this:

 

1. Acts of the Apostles 4:12 (Vulgate):

 

“Et non est in alio aliquo salus: nec enim aliud nomen est sub caelo datum hominibus, in quo oportet nos salvos fieri.”

 

(Translation: “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”)

 

This verse, attributed to Saint Peter, excludes any other way of salvation: “non est in alio aliquo salus” means that no religion or mediation outside of Christ can lead to salvation.

 

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 valorising “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. Affirming that non-Christian religions possess salvific means, even partially, violates the exclusivity of salvation through Christ.

 

1. Step 3: 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:

 

1. Fourth Lateran Council (1215), canon 1 (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 no one at all is saved.”)

 

2. Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctam (1302):

 

> Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, definimus et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis.

 

(Translation: “Furthermore, we declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”)

 

3. Council of Florence (1442), Cantate Domino (under Eugene IV):

 

> The holy Roman Church […] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that none of those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, apostates, and schismatics, can become participants in eternal life, but will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to her before the end of their life.

 

4. Council of Trent, Session VI, canon 1 (1547) (under Paul III):

 

> Si quis dixerit, homines sine gratia Christi, per ipsa tantum opera, quae naturaliter possunt, iustificari… anathema sit.

 

(Translation: “If anyone says that men can be justified before God by their works—which are accomplished by the forces of human nature or by the teaching of the law—without divine grace through Jesus Christ: let him be anathema.”)

 

5. Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore (1863):

 

> It is known to us and to you that those who are in a state of invincible ignorance of our holy religion, and who, carefully observing the natural law and its precepts, which God has inscribed in the hearts of all, and being disposed to obey God, lead an honest and upright life, can, by the operation of the light and grace divine, obtain eternal life.

 

This text admits the possibility of salvation for individuals in invincible ignorance, but only through the grace of Christ, and not through the practices of non-Christian religions.

 

6. Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (1928):

 

> They gravely err who […] maintain that men can attain eternal salvation by practising any religion.

 

This text explicitly rejects the idea that non-Christian religions can be paths to salvation, reaffirming the dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.

 

These definitions, based on Acts 4:12 and John 14:6, establish that salvation is exclusively linked to Christ and His Church, excluding any other religion as a salvific way.

 

1. Authentic Interpretation: The Spirit of Assisi as Confirmation of Apostasy

 

The application of Nostra Aetate during the interreligious meetings of Assisi (1986, 2002), initiated by Karol Wojtyla (John Paul II), confirms the apostasy. Wojtyla declared:

 

> This great concentration of believers… is in itself an invitation to the world to become aware that the spirit of Assisi is truly the application of the teaching of Vatican II.

 

(Discourse, 27 October 1986)

 

1. The Facts of Assisi

 

In 1986, representatives of false religions were invited to pray for peace. Buddhists placed a statue of Buddha on a Catholic altar and danced around it, Hindus invoked idols, and animists sacrificed animals. Cardinal Silvio Oddi testified:

 

> That day, I went to Assisi as the pontifical envoy of the Basilica of Saint Francis. I was a witness to veritable profanations in these places of prayer. I saw Buddhists dancing around the altar, on which they had placed Buddha in place of Christ, which they incensed and venerated.

 

(Interview, Trente Jours, November 1990)

 

Wojtyla called on bishops to follow this example: “I ask you to promote similar initiatives in your dioceses” (discourse, 1986). In 2002, these practices were repeated, despite attempts at separating the prayers. These acts directly violate Exodus 20:3-5, which prohibits the worship of other gods.

 

2. Counter-Arguments and Refutations

 

– Objection 1: “Nostra Aetate does not deny the exclusivity of Christ, since it mentions that the Church ‘proclaims Christ unceasingly’ (John 14:6).”

 

Refutation: By valorising “ways” such as Buddhism (“by their own efforts”) and by omitting to condemn Judaism’s rejection of Christ, Nostra Aetate attributes salvific value to practices independent of Christ, violating Acts 4:12 and Mortalium Animos. The principle of non-contradiction of Aristotle (Metaphysics, book Gamma, chap. 3, 1005 b 19-20) applies: “It is impossible that the same attribute should both belong and not belong to the same subject at the same time and in the same respect.”

 

– Objection 2: “Assisi aimed at peace, not syncretism.”

 

Refutation: Praying together implies an implicit recognition of the validity of non-Christian cults, which is incompatible with Mortalium Animos (§2), which condemns unity in religious diversity as a form of Masonic syncretism. The separation of prayers is artificial, as the intention of spiritual unity remains.

 

– Objection 3: “Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) was against Assisi.”

 

Refutation: Ratzinger participated in Assisi in 1986 and, in 2007, in Naples, he commemorated the spirit of Assisi by calling for interreligious prayer, confirming his adherence.

 

1. Conclusion

 

Nostra Aetate constitutes a formal apostasy for the following reasons:

 

1. Origin in Vatican II: Nostra Aetate (§2, §3, §4) affirms that non-Christian religions (Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism) contain “true and holy” elements, implying a salvific value independent of Christ, reinforced by Unitatis Redintegratio (§3).

 

2. Contradiction with Revelation: These affirmations contradict Acts 4:12 (“There is salvation in no one else”) and John 14:6 (“No one comes to the Father except through me”), which establish the exclusivity of salvation through Christ.

 

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 any other religion as a path to salvation.

 

4. Confirmation by the gathering at Assisi: The application of Nostra Aetate to Assisi (1986, 2002) by Wojtyla (anti-pope John Paul II), who invited false religions to pray and declared these acts in conformity with 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 the worship of a golden calf once to a single people in the desert. This is considered a very great sin, such that Moses, in punishment and anger, broke the tablets of the law he was returning with from God Himself. 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: the greatest religious authority of the New Testament), gathers the leaders of all the religions of all the peoples of the world (not a single people), to worship each their false god (not a single idol like the golden calf), and this before the whole world (the media were present, therefore not only in a desert), asking that every bishop follow his example (thus not once) of this greater sin (apostasy and therefore against the most important commandment (the first: “You shall worship one God”). One cannot imagine a greater one! Objectively speaking, it is, in my humble opinion, the greatest sin that a man has ever committed and could commit on earth. As the height of misery, this anti-pope became so popular that he was “canonised” shortly after his death and excessively venerated, especially in Poland, his native country. Aaron publicly repented of his sin, JPII never did. So calling such a man “holy father” sounds like blasphemy.

 

In short, according to canon 1325 §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 deviate from the faith, confirming the sedevacantist position, faithful to the eternal teaching of the Church. The salvation of souls, the supreme law (1917 Code of Canon Law, canon 1752: “Salus animarum in Ecclesia suprema lex esto”), requires the rejection of Nostra Aetate and Vatican II to preserve Catholic truth.