According to Pius IX, the shepherds should never tolerate anything that could defile the purity of the Faith in the slightest degree. Was he right in believing this? Is this the same attitude we see from the Church’s shepherds today?

There is something offensively preposterous about the notion that after nearly two-thousand years of Christianity the leaders of the Second Vatican Council needed to extract and purify worthwhile values from corrupted society — as if neither Our Lord nor the Church’s saints had ever discovered such values!

As an initial matter, we can think of an “impurity” as any error or ambiguity that would contradict, confuse, or diminish the perfect expression of the Catholic Faith as it exists at any point in time. The consideration of the perfection of the Faith at a given point in time is relevant because, as St. Vincent of Lerins expressed so well, the Church’s understanding of a particular truth may become more perfect over time:

“[U]nderstanding, knowledge and wisdom must increase and powerfully grow in one and in all, both in each individual man and in the Church, during the passage of time and of the ages, but grow solely within its own species, that is to say within the same dogma, in the same sense and in the same meaning. In eodem dogmate, eodem sensu, eademque sententia."

The Holy Ghost guides the Church to perfect the presentation of the Faith over time, always according to the process and limits outlined by St Vincent. Thus, a recent expression of the Faith would be defective (and thus an impurity) if it deviated from the sense and meaning of what the Church had always taught; but a past expression of the Faith would not be “an impurity” merely because it lacked the fullness of understanding and knowledge that it might attain in the future.

All of this consideration about impurities in the Faith matters if we want to have a proper appreciation for what happened at Vatican II and why it caused so much damage. Aside from the truly illiterate defenders of Vatican II, those who sincerely try to defend the Council generally anchor their defense with the assertion that it did not unambiguously teach outright heresy. Even if that were the case, though, how does that standard compare with Pius IX’s exhortation to never tolerate and let pass “anything which could in the slightest degree defile the purity of this faith”? 

Although it is evident that the Council’s architect’s were not especially concerned with trying to protect against “anything which could in the slightest degree defile the purity of this faith,” the more damning reality is that they actively sought to incorporate ideas that were naturally “impure” as it relates to the Faith.

Although it is evident that the Council’s architect’s were not especially concerned with trying to protect against “anything which could in the slightest degree defile the purity of this faith,” the more damning reality is that they actively sought to incorporate ideas that were naturally “impure” as it relates to the Faith. Thus, we read in the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, that the Council wished to incorporate values prized by the modern world but “in need of purification”:

“This council, first of all, wishes to assess in this light those values which are most highly prized today and to relate them to their divine source. Insofar as they stem from endowments conferred by God on man, these values are exceedingly good. Yet they are often wrenched from their rightful function by the taint in man's heart, and hence stand in need of purification.”

There is something offensively preposterous about the notion that after nearly two-thousand years of Christianity the leaders of the Second Vatican Council needed to extract and purify worthwhile values from corrupted society — as if neither Our Lord nor the Church’s saints had ever discovered such values! Cardinal Ratzinger’s discussion of this passage makes it even more clear that the Council sought to import and purify values from liberal culture:

“The problem of the 1960s was to acquire the better of the values drawn from two centuries of ‘liberal’ culture. There are in fact some values which, although born outside the Church, can find their place purified and corrected in its vision of the world. This is what has been done.” (quoted in the January 1997 SiSiNoNo)

Again, why did the Council’s architects need to look to corrupt modern culture to find values to incorporate into Church teaching? In his closing address of the Council, Paul VI elaborated on the purported rationale:

“Secular humanism, revealing itself in its horrible anti-clerical reality has, in a certain sense, defied the council. The religion of the God who became man has met the religion (for such it is) of man who makes himself God. And what happened? Was there a clash, a battle, a condemnation? There could have been, but there was none. . . And what aspect of humanity has this august senate studied? What goal under divine inspiration did it set for itself? It also dwelt upon humanity's ever twofold facet, namely, man's wretchedness and his greatness, his profound weakness—which is undeniable and cannot be cured by himself—and the good that survives in him which is ever marked by a hidden beauty and an invincible serenity. But one must realize that this council, which exposed itself to human judgment, insisted very much more upon this pleasant side of man, rather than on his unpleasant one. Its attitude was very much and deliberately optimistic. A wave of affection and admiration flowed from the council over the modern world of humanity. . . The modern world's values were not only respected but honored, its efforts approved, its aspirations purified and blessed.”

Thus, we have Gaudium et Spes, the future Benedict XVI, and Paul VI all speaking of the way in which the Council adopted and purified the world’s values. But in what way were they purified?

Perhaps our good shepherds mistakenly believe that their efforts would be futile because only God can purge the Church of the impurities introduced by Vatican II? If so, this self-imposed impotence would add to the offense against God.

In a 1995 discourse, Bishop Tissier de Mallerais addressed Vatican II’s attempts to assimilate the values of the world and offered a powerful rebuke of this illusion of purification:

“[I]t is an illusion to wish to ‘extract and purify’ these ideas of the modern world. The popes have condemned them purely and simply. . . The popes did not lack discernment! They condemned those errors. Those errors were condemned and remain condemned. The popes have declared these pseudo-values incapable of being assimilated into Catholic doctrine. To claim that these popes had not known how to make the distinction, to assert that the condemnation of liberal ‘values’ is therefore a mistake, is an act of impiety against these popes; it is an injustice; it is a lie. The popes have done their duty, with the assistance of the Holy Ghost. They have vigorously excluded any attempt at reconciliation between the Church and the principles of the Revolution. They have been genuine witnesses of Tradition, witnesses of a Tradition which lives because it combats.”

So either Bishop Tissier and the pre-Vatican II popes were correct, or Paul VI and Vatican II were correct — which is it? Bishop Tissier offered his assessment:

“Let us remember this lesson. Tradition is alive as long as the deposit of the Faith is accurately transmitted. On the contrary, it dies of sterility where the transmission has been interrupted. Neo-modemism has killed Tradition because it has not transmitted it. It has falsified it; it has adulterated it, disarming it when faced with error in order to join it to the error. Archbishop Lefebvre had the great grace of simply passing on that which he had received, as was engraved on his tombstone at Econe, according to the words of St. Paul (1 Co. 11:23): Tradidi quod et accepi . . . I have transmitted that which myself have received. But to transmit it faithfully, what a struggle he had to carry on! . . . This is the fighting Tradition which assures, by its struggle, the necessary conditions of its integral transmission and of its vitality. It is especially the Holy Mass of all times, which needs neither permission nor indult to remain in force and to make the Christian life fruitful.”

All faithful Catholics can hear the truth in these words, and we do not need any other explanation for the crisis that has plagued the Church and world since Vatican II. It is quite simple: the pre-Vatican II popes had warned that accepting the modern errors would lead to the disasters we see today; the liberal Council Fathers foisted the modern errors on the Council and Church, and we therefore experience the disasters about which the pre-Vatican II popes warned.

Of course, we must realize that it was not the pre-Vatican II popes who were offended by the Council’s attempt to assimilate errors they had condemned — the offense was primarily against the Holy Ghost, Who had inspired the popes to warn against modern errors. This offense against God is ongoing for so long as the impurities introduced by Vatican II are still accepted by those Catholics who wish to remain faithful to the Church.

The great papal encyclicals against the modern errors are among the most nourishing spiritual works we have today, because they remind us of how real Catholics should think about the sickening lies we hear from Francis and his blasphemous Synod on Synodality.

This consideration of the offense against God should have been a sufficient motivation for Catholics to repudiate the errors of Vatican II, but for most Catholics it has not been. Today, however, it appears that God has given us additional motivations in the form of the unmistakable evils overtaking the Church and world. Without God we are lost, but how can we expect God to spare us if we do not cooperate with His grace to rebuke the lies that afflict the Mystical Body of Christ? Why, in other words, do we expect God to intervene on our behalf while so many purportedly faithful Catholics tenaciously hold to the wicked errors that have fueled the attacks against everything good in the world?

Perhaps our good shepherds mistakenly believe that their efforts would be futile because only God can purge the Church of the impurities introduced by Vatican II? If so, this self-imposed impotence would add to the offense against God. We are not called to do what only God can do, but we must cooperate with His grace to do what He wants us to do.

No bishop or priest, for instance, is forbidden to publish or teach the great encyclicals of the pre-Vatican II popes. The great papal encyclicals against the modern errors are among the most nourishing spiritual works we have today, because they remind us of how real Catholics should think about the sickening lies we hear from Francis and his blasphemous Synod on Synodality. Unlike the emasculating nonsense from the Vatican II documents, the encyclicals of the pre-Vatican II popes inspire us to fight like Catholics against the enemies of God. Thus, Pius IX’s exhortation in Qui Pluribus applies to all faithful Catholics, especially priests and bishops:

“Therefore, in this great crisis for religion, because We are greatly concerned for the salvation of all the Lord’s flock and in fulfillment of the duty of Our Apostolic ministry, We shall certainly leave no measure untried in Our vigorous effort to secure the good of the whole Christian family. Indeed, We especially call forth in the Lord your own illustrious piety, virtue and prudence, venerable brothers. With these and relying on heavenly aid, you may fearlessly defend the cause of God and His holy Church as befits your station and the office for which you are marked. You must fight energetically, since you know very well what great wounds the undefiled Spouse of Christ Jesus has suffered, and how vigorous is the destructive attack of Her enemies. You must also care for and defend the Catholic faith with episcopal strength and see that the flock entrusted to you stands to the end firm and unmoved in the faith. For unless one preserves the faith entire and uninjured, he will without doubt perish forever.”

It is only by cooperating with God’s grace to purge the Mystical Body of Christ of the impurities introduced by Vatican II that we will begin to overcome Satan’s globalists throughout the Church and world. May God grant all of us, especially our remaining faithful shepherds, the grace to fight like real Catholics while we still have time. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!

Latest from RTV — WYD & the NEW LOCKDOWNS (Trust THE SCIENCE, Stupid!)