August 19, 1989
by Fr. Lucian Pulvermacher, OFM Cap.
Vatican II Council - Accepts Freedom of
Teaches Heresy and Apostasies
This letter by a true Catholic priest provides proof that
the Novus Ordo is not the true Catholic Church. It shows the errors promulgated
by the Vatican II council, by comparing those teachings with Catholic Church
teachings prior to Vatican II. The priest also tells us about his true Catholic
faith, and he teaches us what we must believe and do in order to be saved.
You will be scandalized in me
Just recently my conscience began to tell me that my life could be a scandal to
some of you. Our Lord Jesus Christ told His Apostles that they would be
scandalized in Him. Later when seeing Him hanging on the cross they would be
tempted to disbelieve in Him. Our Lord had to die on the Cross (fulfilling the
will of His Father in heaven) in order to redeem all mankind. Hence, there was
no option on His part. He had to give that scandal. There was no fault on His
part. That is, however, all together different when one does evil. That scandal
must be avoided. There are even times when one is doing nothing wrong, and still
he is giving scandal. For example, when an old couple have an adulterous
marriage, and they are living together as brother and sister. Once that fact of
the adulterous marriage is known, the fact must be made known that they are
living together as brother and sister. Then the scandal is removed.
I am concerned about people not knowing that what I am doing is good, and it
looks as if I am doing something evil. It looks as if I am a renegade, a man who
had abandoned his faith. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I am keeping
my faith, and I am living it to the best of my ability. It will not come as a
surprise to most of you that the Vatican II Church, and those who belong to it,
have to give up that faith. Let me get behind a private revelation that has the
approval of Pope Pius IX and Pope Leo XIII. At LaSalette, France, on Sept. 19,
1846, among other things Our Lady revealed (in a private revelation) namely,
that Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the anti-Christ. I
must return to Popes Pius IX and Leo XIII. If what was revealed at LaSalette
were against public revelation, those two Popes could not have given it their
approval. I hold that we are living in the time when Rome has lost the
faith and become the seat of the anti-Christ. Please bear with me as I prove
Rome - The Seat of the anti-Christ
When quoting Council Vatican II (a robber council), I am using the book directly
from that council, "The Documents of Vatican II"
by Walter Abbot, Guild Press, New York, with the Imprimatur of Lawrence Cardinal
Shehan, Archbishop of Baltimore, dated Feb. 14, 1966. For those who still have
that faith, my quotations from the above documents will shock you no end.
Furthermore, it should vindicate my stand.
What Vatican II Documents Say
On page 692 No. 12, we read:
"The Church therefore is being faithful to the truth of
the gospel, and is following the way of Christ and the apostles when she
recognizes, and gives support to, the principle of religious freedom as
befitting the dignity of man and as being in accord with divine revelation."
On page 679, No. 2, we read:
"The Synod (of Vatican II) further declares that the right
to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human
person, as this dignity is known through the revealed Word of God and by reason
itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be
recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it is to
become a civil right. …… Therefore, the right to religious freedom has its
foundation, not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very
nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in
those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering
to it. Nor is the exercise of this right to be impeded, provided that the just
requirements of public order are observed."
Finally, Paul VI and the duped Council Fathers concluded this hideous document
on religious freedom with the following confirmation. I can hardly
believe my eyes. Here it is:
"Each and every one of the things set forth in this
Declaration has won the consent of the Fathers of this most sacred Council
(Vatican II). We, too, (referring to the papal "We") by the apostolic authority
conferred on us by Christ, join with the Venerable Fathers in approving,
decreeing, and establishing these things in the Holy Spirit, and we direct that
what has thus been enacted in synod be published to God's glory. - Rome, at St.
Peter's, Dec. 7, 1965 - I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church."
Traditional Catholic Teachings
The above teachings of Vatican II have been condemned by the Church over and
over. Actually, the above teaching is equivalent to saying that one religion is
just as good as another. That also admits that no religion is perfectly correct.
I shall quote the true teachings from the book, "The Sources of Catholic
Dogma", Denzinger, B. Herder Book Co., with the Imprimatur of Bishop Patrick
A. O'Boyle, April 25, 1955. This book has the words from Pope Pius IX's
Encyclical, Quanta Cura, Dec. 8, 1864. We quote from paragraph 1689:
"And also, contrary to the teaching of Sacred Scripture,
of the Church, of the most holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert "that
the best condition of society is the one in which there is no acknowledgment by
government of the duty of restraining, by established penalties, offenders of
the Catholic religion, except insofar as the public peace demands …… And, from
this false idea of social organization they do not fear to foster that erroneous
opinion, especially fatal to the Catholic Church and to the salvation of souls,
called, by Our predecessor of recent memory, Gregory XVI, insanity; namely, that
"liberty of conscience and of worship is the law in every correctly established
society; that the right to all manner of liberty rests in the citizens, not to
be restrained by either ecclesiastical or civil authority; and that by this
right they can manifest openly and publicly and declare their own concepts,
whatever they may be, by voice, by print, or in any other way." While, in truth,
they rashly affirm this, they do not understand and note they are preaching a
"liberty of perdition," and that "if human opinions always have freedom for
discussion, there could never be wanting those who will dare to resist truth,
and to trust in the eloquence of human (al. mundane) wisdom, when faith and
Christian wisdom know from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ how much
it should avoid such harmful vanity."
Over and over we are told that Vatican II was not a dogmatic council. An
overview of some of the above quotations convinces me that it was a dogmatic
council. I shall highlight the very telling words of Vatican II. In number 12
"The Church … is following the way of Christ and the
apostles … (and is) … in accord with divine revelation."
Then we go to the final words of the document of Vatican II. Paul VI and the
Council Fathers try to make a dogmatic decree by the words, again following
Christ (so they say):
" … approving decreeing, and establishing these things
in the Holy Spirit, and we direct that what has thus been
enacted in the synod be published to God's glory."
Just looking at the words, we see that Vatican II attempted to make a dogma of
the faith contrary to all former dogmatic decrees. What audacity!
It is against right reason to agree that the Church's former dogmatic teaching
on religious freedom and that of Council Vatican II is the same teaching.
One teaching has to be wrong, and that is the teaching of Council Vatican II. My
faith and reason tell me (and it should tell you too) that I must stay with the
constant tradition of the Church. The last Catholic on earth will believe as the
first Catholics, or he is not a Catholic.
The Teachings ARE Different
Some people tell me that I am not in the Church because I am not subject to the
(heretical) pope. Truly, I am in no way subject to the so-called holders of the
Chair of Peter since the death of Pope Pius XII on the 9th
of October 1958. I am still living in the reign of Pope Pius XII. I say Mass,
administer the Sacraments, observe the calendar and the like, as it was when
Pope Pius XII died.
We Are Subject to Pope Pius XII
At this time I could go through all the arguments that made John XXIII, Paul VI,
and John Paul I non-popes. However, the question before us is John Paul II.
"Father Lucian, you must be subject to John Paul II in order to be in the
Church." Wrong! John Paul II is not the Pope. By teaching everything in Council
Vatican II he is a heretic. My faith will be gone as soon as I admit that
Vatican II taught the truth, namely that all religions are the same. When
Vatican II declared that all religions have a civil right to exist, that makes
all of them to be the same. That is obvious heresy.
The Holy Scriptures tell me what I must do with a heretic. St. Paul tells Titus
(3,10-11): "A man that is a heretic … avoid." Though he were himself an Apostle
or an angel from Heaven, "let him be anathema." The heretic before us is John
Paul II, and I must call him anathema.
A Heretic Cannot Be Pope
For you who have not studied theology, the above argument should be sufficient to
break with John Paul II, for he is not the Pope of the Catholic Church. He is
the "pope" of sect Vatican II. His followers are automatically in that sect, and
on religious grounds I can have no part with you or your "ecclesiastical"
Since this article will be read also by priests, I must bring up a point of
Canon Law. Of course, the only law I recognize is the 1918 Code of Canon Law.
The new code is a product of your Vatican II sect. That code is heretical too,
in that it makes the Vatican II bishops of the world equal
with the Vatican II pope. I have a complete study of that sordid problem.
Priests and Canon Law
We shall make a short study of Canon 188 #4. It reads (in Latin):
"Ob tacitam renuntiationem ab ipso admissam quaelibet
officia vacant ipso facto et sine ulla declaratione, si clericus: #4 A fide
catholica publice defecerit."
The English translation is:
"Through tacit resignation, accepted by the law itself,
all offices become vacant ipso facto and without any declaration if a cleric: #4
Has publicly forsaken the Catholic Faith."
From all the above arguments it should be clear to all of you that John Paul II
(certainly a cleric) has publicly forsaken the Catholic Faith. The one and only
conclusion (again) is that he is not the Pope of the Catholic Church. With John
Paul II out of office, all his bishops, priests and laity are in heresy and
schism. In no way can I have any part with the Vatican II church. The sting of
Canon 188 #4 is that it takes place without any declaration. This is a
qualifying Canon not a penal one. No council or judge is needed. All one needs
is a clear mind and the Catholic faith to see what I am writing about.
The question surfaces: How can you be in the Catholic Church without being
subject to the Pope? As I said before, I am subject to Pope Pius XII. The marks
of a Catholic are three. One must be baptized with the baptism of water. He must
believe all that God teaches through His Church, and finally he must be subject
to the Pope. If I eat meat on any Friday of the year, I sin because that is the
rule in the continuous reign of Pope Pius XII. Once we have a true Pope,
successor of St. Peter and Vicar of Christ living on earth, I must be subject to
his laws. I live without a superior, and I am not a superior to anyone. While
there is no living Pope, I do not see how we can have jurisdiction in the
external form. From my studies, too long for this letter, I conclude that I have
jurisdiction in the internal form. That is why I can hear confession.
The Marks of a True Catholic
I feel sure that all of you know the dogma that states a hard truth of our faith:
"Outside the Church there is no salvation." Knowing that the Vatican II
church is not the Catholic Church, I cannot enter it without leaving the Church
outside of which there is No Salvation.
Some people accuse me of being unable to accept changes. That is both true and
untrue. In matters of faith I may never accept a change. Obviously, if I
did so I would become a heretic. When there are changes in the Church that do
not involve the doctrines of the faith I can and must accept them. If the true
Pope makes more or less fast days, I must accept them. A Pope has an obligation
and a right, of course, to direct all the faithful to their everlasting destiny,
Can the Catholic Church Change?
I have no doubt that some of you have questions that I have not answered. No
article of this size could possibly answer all your questions. I am ready to
answer all honest questions. The Pharisees asked questions to torture Christ;
not so the Apostles. Our social relations remain the same as in the past. Now
you know my faith, and the problem it, of necessity, must create. Through the
intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the Saints, I pray to God that
all of us may be one in the True Faith
on earth so that we may be one in glory in heaven forever. Amen.