Monday, March 24, 2014

Was Vatican II Infallible? Tuesday 25th March, 2014. Annunciation of the BVM

Was Vatican II Infallible?  - Bro. Peter Dimond  




"It is widely recognised by those who claim to be conservative or traditional Catholics that Vatican II taught errors and false doctrines.   However, many of these people hold that Vatican II's  false doctrines do not pose problems for the legitimacy of John XXIII, Paul VI etc., for according to them, the teaching of Vatican II was supposedly never made binding by the Vatican II "popes."


Second Vatican Council 1962-1965


In this video we will address this issue and refute widespread misconceptions that exist on this matter. 

Our article and book dealt with this topic in detail.   Those materials contain numerous revealing facts, however, there are a number of interesting points that we need to consider, especially with regards to John XXIII's opening speech at Vatican II

Cardinals at Vatican II - Cardinal Siri Centre Left?

On October 11th, 1962 John XXIII gave the speech that opened the Second Vatican Council.   The speech is a crucial component of how many so-called traditionalists who accept the Vatican II "popes" as true popes, but have problems with the post-Vatican II Church and the teachings of Vatican II, explain their position.


What happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II - Book


In this video we will closely examine John XXIII's speech.  False information about what John XXIII said has been disseminated for years in so-called traditionalists newspapers, publications and magazines, as a result countless souls have failed to see the true nature of the current crisis in the post-Vatican II period.

The question is: did John XXIII's opening speech state that Vatican II would not be a doctrinal, dogmatic, magisterial or infallible Council, but only a pastoral one?


Heretic and Freemason John XXIII's opening speech


Does his speech allow the so-called traditionalists to reject Vatican II as erroneous or heretical, and yet accept the new men who implemented it, that John XXIII, Paul VI etc., as true popes?


Let's examine the evidence, later on we will consider the manner in which Paul VI confirmed Vatican II

John XXIII appears to give "blessing" with the upside down cross

Before we consider the speech, keep in mind that John XXIII was an antipope.   Our material proves that he was a manifest heretic and a Freemason.

Since John XXIII was not a Catholic, he was ineligible to become pope.

There's also evidence that he wasn't even canonically elected in the 1958 conclave but rather obtained the election by fraud after someone else had already been elected.   That's in addition to his ineligibility for the office.


Antipope Paul VI  Freemason wearing the Jewish ephod

When one considers the evidence that the Vatican II sect lacks the characteristics of the Catholic Church and represents a revolution against authentic Catholicism, a fact  which is only becoming more clear everyday under Francis, it makes sense that the line of Vatican II antipopes began with a fraudulent election in 1958.

Antipope Paul VI

Since the Vatican II claimants to the papacy were not true popes but antipopes, any attempt they made to bind Vatican II and the other false teachings, do not, let me repeat, do not impact or invalidate Catholic teaching on infallibility or Christ's promises to the Church for their actions were those of invalid usurpers who never sat in the chair of St. Peter.

Their false reigns were simply the fulfilment of the prophesied end times apostasy and deception.  However, for those who do recognise John XXIII, Paul VI etc., as true popes, as some false traditionalists still do, the facts we will now cover will definitely impact their position.

A day at the Godless United Nations - antipope Paul VI


These facts show that their position on Vatican II is incompatible with Catholic teaching on papal infallibility.

Kosher Francis - latest in the line of Vatican II antipopes

Let's now consider some key sections of John XXIII's opening speech at Vatican II in Latin and in English.

The Latin text of the speech is available here on the Vatican's website.    In consulting a key portion of the Latin text, and comparing it to a typical online English translation, I noticed that while the general point I'm going to be making can be proven from all English versions of the speech, the typical online translation was insufficiently faithful to the Latin original in important areas.


Therefore I asked Timothy Johnson [an expert in Latin and Ancient Greek] to provide a more accurate translation of key portions of the speech and he did so.    The following translation he provided is the most literal translation available of these sections.   Let's consider some of the crucial paragraphs and refute the false traditionalist myths about the speech.

Let's begin in paragraph #2.

 John XXIII says:

"The most recent and lowly successor of the same Prince of the Apostles who is addressing you, in convoking this most imposing Assembly, has proposed this for himself, that the Ecclesiastical Magisterium, never failing and persevering even to the end of the times, be once again affirmed; which selfsame Magisterium, taking into account of the errors, necessities and opportunities of our age, is, by means of this very Council, being presented to all men, as many as be in the world, in extraordinary form at the present time."


John XXIII states that in convoking Vatican II, he proposed for himself that the Ecclesiastical Magisterium, which is never failing, is affirmed.   He thus identifies Vatican II as an act of the Magisterium.   In fact, he identifies Vatican II as an act of the unfailing and therefore infallible Magisterium.   So much for the myth that John XXIII stated that Vatican II would not be infallible.    The truth is the opposite.   He states that it will enact the unfailing Magisterium.    The unfailing magisterium is infallible because if it could teach error or be deceived it would not be unfailing or indefectible.    It's interesting that the words John XXIII uses here are almost identical to the words Vatican I used to describe papal infallibility.   To express the infallibility of popes when speaking from the Chair of St. Peter, Vatican I stated:

             Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Session 4, Chap. 4, 1870 A.D. ..."So, this charism of truth and a never failing faith was divinely conferred upon Peter and his successors in this Chair ..."


Vatican I describes the infallibility of the Chair of St. Peter as a gift or charism of truth and a never failing faith.   The words it used for "never failing" are "nunquam deficientis."   That's the very same statement that John XXIII makes to describe the alleged "magisterial" authority of Vatican II.    John XXIII says "numquam deficiens."   The only difference between the two statements is that John XXIII's deficiens is the present active participle of deficio in the nominative form, whereas Vatican I's deficientis is the present active participle of the same verb in the genitive form.  



 Deficientis agrees with fidei. (Also, numquam is an alternative spelling of Nunquam.)  So, Vatican I and John XXIII's speech to open the Second Vatican Council use the same language.   They both refer to the unfailing Magisterium of popes in the Chair of St. Peter.  John XXIII says that Vatican II will exercise and represent that unfailing(and therefore infallible) Magisterium.


John XXIII also says that the Magisterium by means of this very Council, or through this very Council, is being presented to the world extraordinario modo, that is, in extraordinary form at the present time.


 In this passage extraordinario modo is an ablative of manner. It describes the manner in which the magisterium is being exhibited or presented to the whole world by means of this Council (Vatican II).  Thus, according to to John XXIII's opening speech, Vatican II would be an act of the infallible extraordinary Magisterium.  As we can see, the facts about what John XXIII actually said in the speech are just the opposite of what false traditionalists have been telling people for years.

One should keep in mind that while not everything a pope writes, approves or promulgates is magisterial, if something on faith or morals is indeed authoritatively taught by the Magisterium to the entire world, it is by that very fact infallible.  The Magisterium cannot commit itself to that which is false.


          Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri:  "Upon this magisterial office Christ conferred infallibility,  God Himself has made the Church a sharer in the divine magisterium and, by a special privilege, granted her immunity from error."


Pope Leo XIII also teaches in Caritatis Studium: "... a living perpetual magisterium was necessary in the Church from the beginning, which could by no means commit itself to erroneous teaching ... And since the faithful must learn from the 'magisterium' of the Church whatever pertains to the salvation of their souls, it follows that they must also learn from it the true meaning of Scripture."


 Since Vatican II purported to be magisterial - and, in fact, an act of the unfailing Magisterium - either it is infallible in all of its teaching on faith, morals and the understanding of Scripture, or the men who organized and confirmed it were not true popes but antipopes.   The truth is clearly the latter.


Continuing with John XXIII's opening speech, he speaks of Vatican II in the context of ecumenical councils.   He then says: "Testimonies of this Extraordinary Magisterium of the Church  - that is, of its universal Synods - come constantly before Our eyes."


Since John XXIII identifies Vatican II as one of those universal Synods, he therefore once again identifies Vatican II as the testimony of the extraordinary Magisterium of the Church.   The extraordinary Magisterium of the Church is infallible.



 In paragraph #5 of his opening speech, John XXIII discusses the principal or chief duty of the Council.   Does he say that Vatican II will merely be a pastoral council that won't deal with doctrine, as the false traditionalists have told so many?  No, not at all.



 He says this: The principal duty of the Council: defending and promoting doctrine

 According to John XXIII, the main purpose of the Council was to deal with doctrine,   He then says: What especially interests the Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine should be more effectively guarded and presented."   Are people beginning to see how false traditionalists have misled the world about this speech and what it contains? 



The Council will concern Catholic doctrine, according to John XXIII.

In #6, he says:

       "These things having been established, sufficiently has been manifested, Venerable Brothers, the role that has been entrusted to the Ecumenical Council in regard to what pertains to doctrine."


"Namely, that the twenty-first Ecumenical Council - wishes to hand down Catholic doctrine (in an) integral, undiminished and undistorted (manner).


As we can see, Vatican II was intended to be a doctrinal council.


The facts we've covered thus far are clear.  However, let's now address the part of the speech that false traditionalists frequently misuse and misquote.  The truth is that almost none of them have any idea what the speech (or the following part of the speech) actually said.  They simply circulate and repeat myths and legends on the matter.   As we will see, the following section of John XXIII's speech does not support their position but contradicts it.   This section of the speech is also found in paragraph #6.   It's important to quote a number of sentences from this paragraph.


 John XXIII says:

          "Nor does our work focus on the following as though it were a primary end: namely a discussion should take place about certain special articles of Church teaching or that there should be a more extensive review of those points which the fathers and theologians, both ancient and more recent, have handed down (to us), and which, we rightly think, are not unknown to you but are firmly embedded in your minds.   For there was no need that an Ecumenical Council be proclaimed for disputations solely of this kind.   What is, however, needed at the present time is that Christian doctrine in its entirety, without any part removed therefrom, should here and now in our times be received by all men with a new zeal, with serene and tranquil minds - (a doctrine) handed down by that precise manner of conceiving and drawing up words which especially shines forth from the Acts of the Council of Trent and Vatican I.


 What is needed - as all sincere supporters of matters Christian, Catholic and apostolic eagerly crave - is that this same doctrine be more widely and deeply known and that minds be more fully imbued and formed by it.  What is needed is that this certain and immutable doctrine, to which faithful obedience is owed, be traced out and expanded with that reasonableness which our times demand.   For the Deposit of faith itself or the truths contained by our venerable doctrine are one thing, but the manner in which they are enunciated (albeit with the same sense and the same meaning) is another.   It is precisely to this latter manner that the majority (of our attention) will have to be given; and. if need arise, it will have to be patiently exerted therein.   In other words, there will need to be introduced those methods of explaining things which are


more in keeping with a Magisterium whose native character is primarily pastoral."


As a careful reading of this paragraph shows, John XXIII does not say that Vatican II would not be doctrinal or infallible.  He actually says the opposite.  He says that Vatican II - whose primary task is to deal with doctrine, as he already told us - will concern itself with the manner in which Church doctrine is expounded.   The manner or way in which Church doctrine is expounded is inseparable from doctrine itself. (Vatican I declared that we must believe Church doctrine exactly as it has been declared or expounded by the Church.)   The following line in the paragraph captures the essence of his point.  "What is needed is that this certain and immutable doctrine, to which faithful obedience is owed, be traced out and expounded with that reasonableness which our times demand."



 According to John XXIII, Vatican II will expound and trace out Church doctrine, which the faithful must obey; but it will do so "with that reasonableness which our times demand."   In other words, it will present doctrine in a way that heretics such as Antipope John XXIII deemed more friendly, modern and pastoral.  Of course that does not mean that the Council will not deal with doctrine.   It means it will deal with doctrine.   Something can be both doctrinal and pastoral.  The two are not mutually exclusive.   On the contrary, that which is doctrinal accompanies that which is pastoral.   A pope's pastoral office, for example, involves the power to teach faith and morals.  Vatican I even stated that the dogmatic definition of papal infallibility was made precisely to clarify that the Son of God connected an infallible teaching power on faith and morals "with the supreme pastoral office."


 Moreover, concerning the enunciation of the truths of the Deposit of faith, John XXIII says:  "It is precisely to this "that the majority of our attention.  Once again, the Council will deal with the enunciation of what it considers to be truths of faith.


In fact in this one line of speech that false traditionalists like to use, the point is confirmed.   They rarely quote what John XXIII actually said, and it's not a surprise why.    They prefer instead to give their inaccurate summary of it.

The line says:  "In other words, there will need to be introduced those methods of explaining things which are more in keeping with a Magisterium whose native character is primarily pastoral."

 John XXIII refers to methods of explaining things.   What things?    As he already told us, the things to be explained are matters of Church doctrine.     He referred to them as matters of Christian doctrine "to which faithful obedience is owed."


In this line he also says that Vatican II will represent the Magisterium "in keeping with a Magisterium whose native character is primarily pastoral."  The Magisterium is infallible as we already covered.      Therefore this line by itself, demonstrates that Vatican II will concern itself with explaining Church doctrine.    It will be binding and magisterial, that is to say, infallible.


When John XXIII says that Vatican II will use methods of explaining the doctrine [which people must obey] in keeping with a Magisterium whose native character is primarily pastoral, he means that Vatican II will employ methods of formulating Church doctrine that modernists such as John XXIII deemed more palatable to modern man.


They will consequently be considered more friendly or "pastoral."  The reference to "pastoral" is thus to how the Church's doctrine is being presented.   It concerns doctrine and how it is expounded.    It does not mean that the Council will not deal with doctrine or that it will not be magisterial or infallible.


The fact that Vatican II did deal extensively with matters of Church doctrine is obvious from the Council's Documents.    They deal at length with matters of doctrine.


Lumen Gentium is even called the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church and Dei Verbum is called the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation.


 The problem is that Vatican II contains numerous heresies and false doctrines.   It was a wicked council.   It teaches the following heresies: that Protestants and schismatics who reject catholic teaching are in the Body of Christ; that Jews are not to be considered rejected by God, even though they reject Christ and His Churchy; that Islam and other non-Christian religions are to be esteemed; that non-Catholics may lawfully receive Holy Communion; that non-Catholic religions are means of salvation; that non-Catholics are martyrs; that it's good to participate in non-Catholic worship; that Muslims worship the one true God; that states lack the authority to prevent the public expression of false4 religions; and much more.



Vatican II definitely dealt with doctrine, but it taught falsely on doctrine and the results are demonic.   That's because it was a false revolutionary, anti-Council run by heretics.   It was convoked by an antipope and conferred by an antipope.   It initiated a theological revolution and a Counter Church.


Let's now summarize the facts we've covered about John XXIII's opening speech at Vatican II.



  • John XXIII's opening speech repeatedly states that Vatican II will be an act of the Magisterium.

  • It states that Vatican II will be an act of the unfailing and therefore infallible Magisterium.

  • It states that Vatican II will enact the Extraordinary Magisterium.

  • It states that Vatican II's principal duty will be to deal with doctrine.

  • It states that Vatican II will expound and trace out, in a manner they consider reasonable or pastoral for our times, Church teaching to which faithful obedience is owed.


There's simply no doubt that if John XXIII was a true pope (and he