This is the refutation of articles affirming Vatican II apostasies.
1. There wasn't any apostasy: couldn't
Vatican II self-declared and was declared by the Popes, as a pastoral council, not dogmatic: by definition, there can't be apostasies if there are no additions, subtractions or modifications to our faith.
2. Nostra Aetate was just repeating two millenia of Magisterial teaching
This article insists that the document is a heresy against the dogma that "There's no salvation outside the Catholic Church":
This should be considered as a fraternal correction to anybody agreeing with the above article, which should be corrected or retracted.
The author, doesn't understand that the Roman Catholic Church, Christ mystical Body, doesn't exactly match the formal structure of the Church.
On one hand, there are so-called Catholics who don't belong to the Body, though they might even go to Church every Sunday. For example, pro-abortion Catholics or Freemason Catholics are automatically excommunicated according to Canon Law.
The same applies for Catholics omitting in confession mortal sins (paid by death of Christ at the Cross), which turns it invalid, and dying chained to Satan due to those sins:
24 That is why I told you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.”
26 I have much to say about you in condemnation. But the one who sent me is true, and what I heard from him I tell the world.”
33 They answered him, “We are descendants of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How can you say, ‘You will become free’?”
34 Jesus answered them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin.
35 A slave does not remain in a household forever, but a son always remains.
36 So if a son frees you, then you will truly be free.
37 I know that you are descendants of Abraham. But you are trying to kill me, because my word has no room among you.
38 I tell you what I have seen in the Father’s presence; then do what you have heard from the Father.”
39 They answered and said to him, “Our father is Abraham.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works of Abraham.
40 But now you are trying to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God; Abraham did not do this.
41 You are doing the works of your father!” [So] they said to him, “We are not illegitimate. We have one Father, God.”
42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and am here; I did not come on my own, but he sent me.
43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? Because you cannot bear to hear my word.
44 You belong to your father the devil and you willingly carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he speaks in character, because he is a liar and the father of lies.
On the other hand, there might be unbaptized people of good will, where the Gospel is censored or unreachable, where there's no Catholic contact, but they live according to their not-erroneous conscience: they become part of the Body, just as Abraham and all the good men before Christ became part, even if he didn't know much about the time of Christ and the Holy Spirit.
Not accepting this would mean God is unmerciful and unjust: an insult to reason, but especially, to His infinite Divine Mercy and perfect Divine Justice. Is it like they don't care if others end up in eternal Hell as long as they are saved?
3. Why be Catholic if I could reach Heaven without the Church?
Non-Catholic religions have errors and evil, yet they keep some basic truths, which help men to find and follow truth in a very limited way (Jesus is the Truth, wherever it is).
John Paul II wrote in his book “Crossing the Threshold of Hope”:
Buddhism is in large measure an 'atheistic' system'.
A state of perfect indifference with regard to the world. We do not free ourselves from evil from the good that comes from God; we liberate ourselves only through detachment from the world, which is bad.
Yet Nostra Aetate mentions the "divine" in Buddhism! Well, in a very little measure there are traces of truthful divine concepts.
They share the existance of good an devil, the importance of personal conscience, introspection, the belief in the afterlife and the immortal soul (also in Hinduism).
They also have meta-physical automatic personal Justice (Karma).
Yet, Buddhist "monks" perform a satanic ritual once a year (they might not even be aware of this), but that doesn't compromise the few truthful concepts in their religion.
The same goes for Hinduism, where their gods are in fact demons, except maybe a couple related to true revelations received by all peoples, about the first coming Jesus from Mary, but later distorted (Ancient Egypt).
Protestant congregations have prayers, weekly worship (though not the one God desires), the Word of God (though censoring and not including 7 books of the Bible, even quoted by the New Testament), and 2 of the 7 sacraments: baptism and marriage (though most marriages don't receive the grace of sacramental marriage because of not being able to confess mortal sins). Their lack of the guide of the Holy Spirit through the Seat of Peter, ended up in 40 thousand denomiations where every pastor is like a little usurper Pope.
The Orthodox churches, rejected the Biblical teaching of the infallibility of the Seat of Moses, replaced by the Seat of Peter, and therefore are split in national churches and are stuck in a 1000 year old frozen theology.
The best way to visualize it is Don Bosco's 2 pillars dream: inside a sea storm, compared to the huge ark of the Catholic Church anchored to the pillars of the Eucharist and Mary, the little 40 thousand boats of protestant denominations are better than swimming in the storm by oneself.
The only "religion" that has no truth at all is satanism/luciferianism, but for that very reason it's a sect, not a religion (re-ligare means re-linking to God).
Only the Catholic Church has all means of salvation. No other Church can have something positive which the Catholic Church doesn't.
4. Can we expect errors in Councils?
Vatican II is greatly misunderstood not because of what was actually written, but because of what was falsely alleged to be written.
All of the disasters and horrors claimed to have originated in Vatican II, came in fact, from those labelling their own mistakes, profanations, blasphemies and sins, as "in the spirit of Vatican II" (not the Holy Spirit, but the evil spirit).
The Church does not err in matters of faith and morals. Yet, we can't expect Bishops, Cardinals, and even the Pope to be infallible when writing about other topics, e.g. science. For instance, Pope Francis believing the Climate Action scam (decarbonization):
If you are interested in the topic I'll write more on my substack:
For a better understanding of all these matters, nothing better than the revelations of Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich (archive.org), allegedly the best Bible guide you'll ever find in the history of the Church:
Next Feb 2024 it's 200 years from her death.
We are planning a Congress on her and her visions.
If anybody is interested write to f.nazar at gmail with subject Emmerich, we need translators from German to other languages, speakers... everything (it will be 100% non-profit and hopefully 100% free).
We've got no resources, so unless generous donors, it will probably be online only.
Please pray for it's fruitful success for the Church and for the efforts on ecumenism and interreligious dialogue.
Ave María, gratia plena ...