32 Paul VI and his Successors are Heretics  

Proofs that Paul VI and his Successors

(till today 29/9/2026),

John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francis I

and Leo XIV  are Heretics

 

Table of contents

 

1. Introduction

 

2. Section 1: Definition of Heresy and its Consequences

 

3. Section 2: Vatican II Contains Flagant Heresies

 

4. Section 3: Paul VI and his Successors Promulgated and Maintained these Heresies

 

5. Section 4: Refutation of Counter-Arguments

 

6. Conclusion

 

NB La Salette

 

List of Sources

 

 

 

Introduction

 

We have seen that according to the immutable doctrine of the Catholic Church, founded on the Scriptures, the Fathers, the Doctors and the ecumenical councils before 1963, heresy is a grave error against the faith which, being public, entails the automatic loss of every ecclesiastical office and, being pertinacious (stubborn, obstinate), membership in the Church.

 

We shall demonstrate here, by the establishment of the facts and by logical reasoning, that Paul VI and his successors have manifested public heresies, placing them outside the Church.

 

The proofs rest on defined dogmas and authentic texts, without personal opinions. The counter-arguments will be refuted.

 

Section 1: Definition of Heresy and its Consequences (short recap, see the chapter on this subject)

 

– 1.1. Major: Heresy is the obstinate rejection, after baptism, of a truth of divine and Catholic faith proposed as such by the Church (Code of Canon Law of 1917, canon 1325, paragraph 2).

 

Minor: Public perseverance in these doctrines manifests outwardly the pertinacity required by common theology. A pope who promulgates such documents in such a manner loses his office.

 

Manifest heretics lose ipso facto all jurisdiction, as Saint Robert Bellarmine explains: “The manifest heretic is in no way a member of the Church” (De Romano Pontifice, book 2, chapter 30, at the end).

 

The bull “Cum ex apostolatus officio” of Paul IV (15 February 1559, paragraph 6) declares: “If it should ever appear that a bishop, even acting as archbishop, patriarch or primate, or a cardinal of the said Roman Church, even a legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, before his promotion or elevation to the cardinalate or to the Roman pontificate, had deviated from the Catholic faith or fallen into some heresy, his promotion or elevation, even made in concord and with the unanimous assent of all the cardinals, is null, invalid and without effect.” (Translation from the Latin; P. Gasparri, Codicis iuris canonici fontes, volume 1, Rome, Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, no. 94, paragraph 6, p. 166.) This applies without formal declaration: according to Bellarmine, Ballerini, Wernz-Vidal, Coronata and common doctrine, no constitutive declaration is required to produce the loss of office (Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, book 2, chapter 30; Pietro Ballerini, De potestate ecclesiastica, Verona, Marco Moroni, 1768, chapter 9, paragraph 2, no. 8, pp. 117–119; F. X. Wernz and P. Vidal, Ius canonicum, volume 2, De personis, 3rd revised edition by Philippe Aguirre, Rome, Gregorian University, 1943, no. 453, pp. 517–518; Matthaeus Conte a Coronata, Institutiones iuris canonici, volume 1, 3rd edition, Marietti, 1947, no. 316, 2°, c), p. 373).

 

– Canon 188, 4°, of the Code of 1917 stipulates that every office becomes vacant by the law itself and without any declaration, by tacit resignation, if the cleric has publicly abandoned the Catholic faith.

 

– Canon 2314, paragraph 1, 1°–2°, of the Code of Canon Law of 1917:

 

“Paragraph 1. All apostates from the Christian faith, all heretics or schismatics and each of them:

 

1° Incur by the very fact an excommunication;

 

2° If after admonition they do not come to resipiscence, let them be deprived of every benefice, dignity, pension, office or other charge, if they had any in the Church, and let them be declared infamous; after two admonitions, those who are clerics must be deposed.”

 

Indeed canon 2314 provides the canonical penalties of heresy, while canon 188, 4°, treats separately the vacancy of every office by tacit resignation.

 

– 1.2. Conclusion: Every pope manifesting a public heresy ceases to be pope, because he is no longer a member of the Church.

 

The demonstration that follows does not rest on an accumulation of private opinions, but on a simple theological principle: when a man publicly teaches a doctrine contrary to a defined dogma, then promulgates it as a norm for the whole Church and perseveres in that profession despite the constant teaching of the prior magisterium, the external elements of notorious heresy are assembled. The examples cited below therefore do not have as their purpose to constitute each an isolated demonstration, but to establish together a convergent bundle of proofs.

 

Section 2: Vatican II Contains Flagant Heresies (short recap, see the chapter on this subject)

 

2.1. Major: A teaching that contradicts a dogma defined by an ecumenical council or the infallible magisterium is heretical.

 

The First Vatican Council (Dei Filius, 24 April 1870, canons on the Catholic faith, group 4, On faith and reason, canon 3) teaches that dogmas are irreformable: “Si quis dixerit, fieri posse, ut dogmatibus ab Ecclesia propositis, aliquando secundum progressum scientiae sensus tribuendus sit alius ab eo, quem intellexit et intelligit Ecclesia; anathema sit.”

 

(Translation: “If anyone says that it can happen that, according to the progress of science, a sense different from that which the Church has understood and understands must one day be attributed to the dogmas proposed by the Church, let him be anathema.”) (Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia [The Magisterium of the Church], Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno, Herder, 3rd reprint, 1963, no. 1818, p. 421.)

 

2.2. Minor: The texts of Vatican II contain direct contradictions with the Deposit of Faith. For example:

 

– “Gaudium et Spes”, 7 December 1965, no. 12, paragraph 1:

 

“Believers and unbelievers generally agree on this point: everything on earth must be ordered to man as to its centre and summit.”

 

The text affirms that man is the centre and summit of all earthly realities without explicitly recalling that all creation is ordered first of all to God as ultimate end, which constitutes a reversal of perspective already denounced by the prior magisterium.

 

This contradicts the Syllabus of Pius IX (8 December 1864, proposition 3): “Humana ratio, nullo prorsus Dei respectu habito, unicus est veri et falsi, boni et mali arbiter, sibi ipsi est lex et naturalibus suis viribus ad hominum ac populorum bonum curandum sufficit.”

 

(Translation: “Human reason, without taking any account whatsoever of God, is the sole arbiter of true and false, of good and evil; it is a law unto itself and suffices, by its natural powers, to procure the good of men and of peoples.”)

 

(Pius IX, Syllabus, proposition 3; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, no. 1703, p. 406.) This promotes a heretical anthropocentrism.

 

– “Dignitatis Humanae”, 7 December 1965, no. 2:

 

“This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom consists in this, that all men must be immune from coercion on the part of individuals as well as 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.”

 

This contradicts Quanta cura of Pius IX (8 December 1864):

 

“From this entirely false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, extremely fatal to the Catholic Church and to the salvation of souls, called delirium by Our predecessor Gregory XVI of happy memory, namely that ‘liberty of conscience and of worship is a proper right of every man, which must be proclaimed and guaranteed by law in every well-constituted society’ […]. Thus all and each of the perverse opinions and doctrines mentioned individually in these present Letters, We reprove, proscribe and condemn by Our apostolic authority; and We will and command that all the sons of the Catholic Church hold them absolutely as reproved, proscribed and condemned.” (Translation from the Latin; Pius IX, Quanta cura; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, nos. 1690 and 1699, pp. 401 and 404.)

 

The text is in fact in contradiction with the whole Tradition such as: Gregory XVI, Mirari vos, 15 August 1832; Pius IX, Quanta cura and Syllabus, proposition 15, 8 December 1864; Leo XIII, Libertas, 20 June 1888; Pius XII, Ci riesce, 6 December 1953.

 

– “Nostra Aetate”, 28 October 1965, no. 2:

 

“The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.”

 

This contradicts the dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, “Outside the Church there is no salvation”, defined at the Council of Florence: “She firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal […].” (Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 4 February 1442; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, no. 714, p. 210; French translation of the Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno.)

 

Pius XI, Mortalium animos, 6 January 1928, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, pp. 6–15, is probably the text most directly opposed.

 

2.3. Conclusion: Vatican II is heretical, because it overturns defined dogmas.

 

Section 3: Paul VI and his Successors Promulgated and Maintained these Heresies

 

3.1. Major: He who promulgates a heretical council or adheres to it is a heretic, manifesting public pertinacity (Code of Canon Law of 1917, canon 1325, paragraph 2).

 

3.2. Minor:

 

– the popes from 1964 onwards have all accepted publicly and indubitably the heretical council of Vatican II; they have applied it, executed it and promulgated it.

 

– Paul VI after his first heresy “Lumen Gentium” (21 November 1964) promulgated the texts of Vatican II on their respective dates, notably Nostra aetate on 28 October 1965, then Dignitatis humanae and Gaudium et spes on 7 December 1965, declaring them obligatory.

 

Joseph Ratzinger wrote concerning “Gaudium et Spes”:

 

“Since Vatican II it has therefore been more and more regarded as the true heritage in which, after three years of fermentation, the real intention of the Council seems to have been incarnated.” (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology: Building Stones for a Fundamental Theology, English translation of Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 1987, second impression 1989, p. 378; French translation of this extract.)

 

– John Paul I, by choosing his name in homage to John XXIII and Paul VI, the popes of Vatican II, manifested his complete adhesion to that heretical conciliabulum, thus confirming his public pertinacity in error. Indeed he publicly declared that he wished to pursue integrally the work of Vatican II and of his two predecessors (John Paul I, Angelus and Urbi et orbi message of 27 August 1978).

 

– John Paul II applied the apostate text of “Nostra Aetate” at Assisi (1986), declaring afterwards:

 

“The day of Assisi was like a visible expression of those affirmations of the Second Vatican Council” (John Paul II, address to the Roman Curia, 22 December 1986, no. 9; translation from the Italian).

 

– Benedict XVI commemorated in 2007 the meeting of Assisi of 1986 (Angelus at Assisi, 17 June 2007), fully accepting Vatican II. In his book, Joseph Ratzinger presents “Gaudium et Spes”, jointly with the texts on religious liberty and the religions of the world, as “a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of counter-Syllabus” (Principles of Catholic Theology, English translation of Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 1987, second impression 1989, pp. 381–382; French translation of this extract).

 

– Francis I continued these ecumenical acts: “Pluralism and the diversity of religions […] are willed by God in His wisdom […]” Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, signed by Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, Abu Dhabi, 4 February 2019.

 

Contradicting Mortalium animos of Pius XI (6 January 1928; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, p. 6), as well as proposition 16 of the Syllabus of Pius IX, which condemns the affirmation: “Men can find in the worship of any religion whatever the way of eternal salvation and attain eternal salvation.” (Pius IX, Syllabus, 8 December 1864, proposition 16; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, no. 1716, p. 407; French translation of the Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno.)

 

– Leo XIV, promoted in 2025, adheres to the modernist heresies issuing from Vatican II, notably the official acceptance of Vatican II; affirmation of continuity with Francis (address to the College of Cardinals, 10 May 2025); the maintenance of ecumenical dialogue (address to representatives of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities and of other religions, 19 May 2025); the maintenance of Dignitatis Humanae; the maintenance of Nostra Aetate (same address of 19 May 2025).

 

In his address to Eastern Catholics of 14 May 2025, Leo XIV insisted on the preservation of Eastern traditions. On 19 May 2025, before the representatives of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, he affirmed his will to pursue the ecumenical engagement of Francis. We denounce this conception of “unity” with schismatics as eluding the requirement of submission to the full and entire Roman primacy, as it was defined at the Council of Florence (Laetentur coeli, 6 July 1439; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, no. 694, p. 201).

 

3.3. Conclusion: Paul VI and his successors are heretics, losing ipso facto their office (Code of Canon Law of 1917, canon 188, 4°).

 

Section 4: Refutation of Counter-Arguments

 

4.1. “Vatican II is pastoral, not dogmatic”

 

Refutation: The magisterium teaches that every teaching, even pastoral, cannot contradict the dogmas (Vatican I, Dei Filius, chapter 4 and canons, group 4, canon 3; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, nos. 1797–1800 and 1818, pp. 418–419 and 421). This chapter teaches in fact with certainty that the Magisterium, assisted by the Holy Ghost, is the depositary of the faith and must preserve it faithfully without any possible contradiction with the dogmas, because God cannot contradict Himself, and divine truth is one and immutable. Every pretended “deeper intelligence” that would depart from this established sense is a heresy, as the Council condemned it against nascent modernism. The pretended later “progresses” that would dare to contradict this are only schismatic innovations, to be rejected as such, in conformity with the inviolable Catholic faith.

 

Pius XII affirms: “That which does not correspond to truth and to the moral law has objectively no right to existence, nor to propaganda, nor to action.” (Allocution to Italian jurists “Ci Riesce”, 6 December 1953; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 45, 1953, p. 799.)

 

4.2. “The successors have interpreted Vatican II orthodoxly”

 

Refutation: Their acts, such as the meeting at Assisi in 1986, confirm the heresy, violating Mortalium animos of Pius XI (6 January 1928; Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, p. 6):

 

“Such enterprises cannot in any way be approved by Catholics, since they rest on the false opinion of those who think that all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy […]. Those who profess this opinion not only are in error and deceive themselves, but also, by distorting the notion of the true religion, they reject it […].” (Translation from the Latin.)

 

Conclusion of the Chapter

 

According to the common doctrine set forth previously, the public and persistent profession of these doctrines entails the ipso facto loss of every ecclesiastical office; thenceforth they cannot be considered true popes.

 

Paul VI and his successors, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francis and Leo XIV

 

by promulgating and applying the heretical conciliabulum Vatican II, are heretics and antipopes.

 

Catholics must reject them in order to preserve the immutable faith and save their soul.

 

Let us pray for their conversion.

 

NB

 

LA SALETTE

 

In the Secret published by Melanie Calvat at Lecce in 1879 with the imprimatur of Mgr Sauveur-Louis Zola, bishop of Lecce, an immense crisis of the faith is announced. Melanie reports notably that “several will abandon the faith” and that among the priests and religious who will separate themselves from the true religion “there will even be found Bishops”. Further on comes the capital announcement: “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the antichrist”, then: “The Church will be eclipsed”. These words are found effectively in the text reproducing the Lecce edition of 1879 (Melanie Calvat, L’Apparition de la Très Sainte Vierge sur la sainte montagne de La Salette, le samedi 19 septembre 1846, Société Saint-Augustin, Paris–Rome–Bruges, 1922, pp. 10 and 12; imprimatur reproduced p. 18).

 

Melanie gives still a remarkable indication in a letter written at Galatina on 30 September 1894: “… But before that time there will be twice a peace of short duration, two worm-eaten, flat, doubtful Popes.” (Cited by Jean Vaquié, Bénédictions et malédictions : prophéties de la révélation privée, 3rd revised and enlarged edition, Dominique Martin Morin, Bouère, 1987, p. 143.) The identification of these two popes is not given by Melanie herself; it must therefore be distinguished from the text of the prophecy.

 

The correspondence with John XXIII and Paul VI is however particularly striking.

 

John XXIII was the first of these two successive popes. He convoked Vatican II and opened its first session on 11 October 1962. A few days later, during the Cuban missile crisis, when the world found itself before the danger of a nuclear war, he launched on 25 October 1962 a radio appeal to the rulers that they do everything possible to save peace. The document is recorded in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 54 (1962), pp. 861-862. The crisis was defused three days later. It is therefore a first possible correspondence with the “peace of short duration” announced by Melanie.

 

Paul VI was the second. Under his reign the Vietnam war raged and he intervened several times in favour of peace. His messages of 30 and 31 December 1965 to those responsible for the conflict are conserved in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 58 (1966), pp. 161–162; in that addressed to Lyndon B. Johnson, on 30 December, he expresses explicitly his hope of a “permanent peace”, that is to say a “permanent peace”, for Vietnam (p. 162). On 27 January 1973 were finally signed at Paris the accords whose official title was precisely Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Viet-Nam, that is to say Accord on the cessation of the war and the restoration of peace in Viet-Nam. The authentic text, English and Vietnamese, was registered with the United Nations under number 13295 (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 935, 1974, no. 13295). This peace was of short duration: the war continued and Saigon fell in April 1975.

 

The succession is therefore remarkable: John XXIII, then Paul VI; and, under each of them, an intervention or a major accord in favour of a peace that was not durable. That corresponds in a striking manner, without constituting by itself a demonstration, to Melanie’s formula: “twice a peace of short duration, two worm-eaten, flat, doubtful Popes”.

 

The doctrinal correspondence is graver still. Under John XXIII Vatican II was opened; under Paul VI were promulgated the texts that instituted the new conciliar orientation. From 21 November 1964, Paul VI promulgated Lumen gentium and Unitatis redintegratio, the latter making ecumenism one of the principal objectives of the Council (Unitatis redintegratio, no. 1). On 7 December 1965 he promulgated Dignitatis humanae, which affirms a “right to religious liberty” that must be recognized as a civil right (no. 2).

 

It is here that the announcement “Rome will lose the faith” takes all its force. John XXIII inaugurated an ambiguous theological orientation, marked by positions of a semi-heretical type or favouring modernist compromises without immediate formal rupture; under Paul VI, whose pontificate ended by an effective loss of authority by reason of public adhesion to heresy, the doctrinal rupture became consummated. According to the sedevacantist theological perspective, these pontiffs mark the end of the true legitimate pastors, the later successors revealing themselves to be antipopes invalidly elected by an electoral body vitiated by heresy and totally cut off from the formal apostolic succession.

 

The words “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the antichrist” and “The Church will be eclipsed” thus find their full accomplishment: Rome conserves outwardly its structures and its institutional appearances occupied by an illegitimate hierarchy, while the true Church is reduced to a deep eclipse in the midst of the general apostasy. This situation of desolation calls, according to the prophetic tradition, for the purifying chastisements before the final triumph of the Church restored by the coming of the Great Monarch and the Holy Pope.

 

Melanie never wrote that the “two worm-eaten Popes” would be John XXIII and Paul VI. This identification therefore remains an interpretation. But the ensemble of the correspondence is exceptional: two successive popes marked by compromises and public heresy; the rupture of the pontifical succession; the establishment of the false conciliar structure; the general apostasy and the eclipse of the Church. The texts of 1879 and of 1894, read in the light of the post-conciliar crisis, thus present a striking historical and eschatological concordance.

 

List of sources

 

1. Code of Canon Law of 1917. Codex iuris canonici, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 9, part 2, 1917: canon 188, 4°, p. 41; canon 1325, paragraph 2, p. 257; canon 2314, paragraph 1, 1°–2°, p. 438. Latin text.

 

2. Bellarmine, Robert. De Romano Pontifice [On the Roman Pontiff], book 2, chapter 30, notably the end; in Opera omnia, volume 1, Disputationes de controversiis christianae fidei adversus huius temporis haereticos, first Neapolitan edition, Naples, Giuseppe Giuliano. Latin text.

 

3. Paul IV. Cum ex apostolatus officio, 15 February 1559, paragraph 6; in Pietro Gasparri (ed.), Codicis iuris canonici fontes [Sources of the Code of Canon Law], vol. 1, Concilia generalia – Romani Pontifices usque ad annum 1745, Rome, Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1947, no. 94, p. 166. Latin text.

 

4. Ballerini, Pietro. De potestate ecclesiastica summorum pontificum et conciliorum generalium [On the ecclesiastical power of the sovereign pontiffs and of the general councils], Verona, Marco Moroni, 1768, chapter 9, paragraph 2, no. 8, pp. 117–119. Latin.

 

5. Wernz, F. X., and Vidal, P. Ius canonicum [Canon Law], volume 2, De personis [On persons], 3rd revised edition by Philippe Aguirre, Rome, Gregorian University, 1943, no. 453, pp. 517–518. Latin.

 

6. Conte a Coronata, Matthaeus. Institutiones iuris canonici ad usum utriusque cleri et scholarum [Institutions of canon law for the use of both clergies and of schools], vol. 1, Normae generales – De clericis – De religiosis – De laicis [General norms – On clerics – On religious – On the laity], 3rd enlarged and corrected edition, Marietti, 1947, no. 316, 2°, c), p. 373. Latin.

 

7. Denzinger, Enrique. El magisterio de la Iglesia. Manual de los símbolos, definiciones y declaraciones de la Iglesia en materia de fe y costumbres [The Magisterium of the Church. Manual of the symbols, definitions and declarations of the Church in matter of faith and morals], Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno, Herder, 3rd reprint, 1963, according to the 31st edition of the Enchiridion symbolorum, 1958. Passages cited: no. 694, p. 201; no. 714, p. 210; no. 1690, p. 401; no. 1699, p. 404; no. 1703, p. 406; nos. 1715–1716, p. 407; nos. 1797–1800, pp. 418–419; no. 1818, p. 421.

 

8. First Vatican Council. Dei Filius, dogmatic constitution of 24 April 1870, chapter 4 and canons on the Catholic faith, group 4, On faith and reason, canon 3; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, nos. 1797–1800 and 1818, pp. 418–419 and 421. Latin text.

 

9. Second Vatican Council. Gaudium et spes, pastoral constitution of 7 December 1965, no. 12, paragraph 1. French version.

 

10. Second Vatican Council. Dignitatis humanae, declaration of 7 December 1965, no. 2. French version.

 

11. Second Vatican Council. Nostra aetate, declaration of 28 October 1965, no. 2. French version.

 

12. Second Vatican Council. Lumen gentium, dogmatic constitution of 21 November 1964. French version.

 

13. Second Vatican Council. Unitatis redintegratio, decree of 21 November 1964, no. 1. French version.

 

14. Pius IX. Syllabus, 8 December 1864, propositions 3, 15 and 16; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, nos. 1703, 1715 and 1716, pp. 406–407. Latin text; Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno.

 

15. Pius IX. Quanta cura, encyclical letter of 8 December 1864; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, nos. 1690 and 1699, pp. 401 and 404. Latin text; Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno.

 

16. Gregory XVI. Mirari vos, encyclical letter of 15 August 1832. Italian version consulted.

 

17. Leo XIII. Libertas, encyclical letter of 20 June 1888. French version.

 

18. Pius XI. Mortalium animos, encyclical letter of 6 January 1928, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 20, 1928, pp. 6–15, particularly p. 6. Latin text.

 

19. Pius XII. Ci riesce, allocution to Italian jurists of 6 December 1953, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 45, 1953, p. 799. Italian text.

 

20. Eugene IV, Council of Florence. Cantate Domino, decree for the Jacobites of 4 February 1442; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, no. 714, p. 210. Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno.

 

21. Eugene IV, Council of Florence. Laetentur coeli, decree for the Greeks of 6 July 1439; Denzinger, El magisterio de la Iglesia, no. 694, p. 201. Spanish version of Daniel Ruiz Bueno.

 

22. Ratzinger, Joseph. Principles of Catholic Theology: Building Stones for a Fundamental Theology, English translation of Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D., San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 1987, second impression 1989, pp. 378 and 381–382. German original: Theologische Prinzipienlehre, Munich, Erich Wewel Verlag, 1982.

 

23. John Paul I. Angelus and Urbi et orbi message, two interventions of 27 August 1978. French versions.

 

24. John Paul II. Address to the Roman Curia, 22 December 1986, no. 9. Italian text.

 

25. Benedict XVI. Angelus at Assisi, 17 June 2007. French version.

 

26. Francis and Ahmad Al-Tayyeb. Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, Abu Dhabi, 4 February 2019. French version.

 

27. Leo XIV. Address to the College of Cardinals, 10 May 2025; address to Eastern Catholics, 14 May 2025; address to representatives of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities and of other religions, 19 May 2025. French versions.

 

28. Calvat, Melanie. L’Apparition de la Très Sainte Vierge sur la sainte montagne de La Salette, le samedi 19 septembre 1846, Paris–Rome–Bruges, Société Saint-Augustin, 1922, pp. 10 and 12; imprimatur of 1879 reproduced p. 18. French.

 

29. Vaquié, Jean. Bénédictions et malédictions : prophéties de la révélation privée, 3rd revised and enlarged edition, Bouère, Dominique Martin Morin, 1987, p. 143: extract from the letter of Melanie Calvat, Galatina, 30 September 1894. French.

 

30. John XXIII. Radio appeal for peace, 25 October 1962, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 54, 1962, pp. 861–862. French.

 

31. Paul VI. Messages to Lyndon B. Johnson and to Nguyen Van Thieu, respectively 30 and 31 December 1965, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 58, 1966, pp. 161–162. Message to Johnson in English; message to Nguyen Van Thieu in French.

 

32. United Nations. Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Viet-Nam, Paris, 27 January 1973, Treaty Series, vol. 935, 1974, no. 13295. Authentic English and Vietnamese texts.