Pope Francis may be the epitome of Vatican II

[Stone]

If Vatican II could be personified, Pope Francis would probably be that personification. He professes, imitates, and emulates all of the errors of that pernicious Council... he invokes the Second Vatican Council in every encyclical (often quoting exclusively Vatican II documents, to the exclusion of all pre-Vatican II Church teaching), he advances the Vatican II 'theology,' and he uses Vatican II as a pretext to every controversial thing he does.

But because so many are unfamiliar with the documents of the Second Vatican Council and it's 'teachings,' it often appears as if Pope Francis errors' are completely of his own volition. But this is not often the case. Take for example his latest scandalous comments.

In Pope Francis’ Wednesday Audience on 2 February, he claimed the “communion of saints” includes those who have “denied the faith” and “denied their baptism.”

Let us consider, dear brothers and sisters, that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature; only the manner of being together with each of them changes, but nothing and no one can break this bond. “Father, let us think about those who have denied the faith, who are apostates, who are the persecutors of the Church, who have denied their baptism: Are these also at home?”. Yes, these too, even the blasphemers, everyone. We are brothers. This is the communion of saints. The communion of saints holds together the community of believers on earth and in heaven.

But these recent scandalizing comments can also be found to have their roots in the Second Vatican Council.

The following is from the SiSiNoNo series on the Errors of Vatican II, highlighting nearly the same error:

• Vatican II is guilty of the deadly Article 39 in Gaudium et Spes which in the conclusion of its third chapter titled "Man's Activity in the Universe" (GS §§33-39), proposes a final perversion of the idea of the Kingdom of God taught by the Church. This Chapter III contains the outline of the idea of the collective salvation of humanity, and also that all of God's creation was made for man. This is achieved by misinterpreting Romans 8:21 to say that "all of creation," created by God to serve man, will equally obtain eternal salvation.
  
  We know neither the moment of the consummation of the earth and of man nor the way the universe will be transformed. The form of this world, distorted by sin, is passing away and we are taught that God is preparing a new dwelling and a new earth in which righteousness dwells, whose happiness will fill and surpass all the desires of peace arising in the hearts of men. Then with death conquered the sons of God will be raised in Christ and what was sown in weakness and dishonor will put on the imperishable: charity and its works will remain and all of creation, which God made for man, will be set free from its bondage to decay (LG §39).
  
  Article 39 continues with another strange idea:
  

  We have been warned, of course, that it profits man nothing if he gains the whole world and loses or forfeits himself. Far from diminishing our concern to develop this earth, the expectancy of a new earth should spur us on, for it is here that the body of a new human family grows, foreshadowing in some way the age which is to come. That is why, although we must be careful to distinguish earthly progress clearly from the increase of the kingdom of Christ, such progress is of vital concern to the kingdom of God, insofar as it can continue to the better ordering of human society.

  
  This appears to mean that the "new earth" is already present in the "present earth," since "the body of the new human family grows [here], foreshadowing in some way the age which is to come." Take note that the prefiguring of the Kingdom of God is not given by the Church Militant (which is the orthodox teaching), but by the growth of "the body of a new family." And this growth of the body of a new human family is calculated on universal progress, universal fraternity, and to human and Christian freedom (LG§§13,36; GS §§30,34,38).
  
  This is to say, the Kingdom of God which is partially realized is this world, is no longer made up of the Church Militant, but of humanity. Humanity is the subject which brings about the Kingdom, and which will enter it one day en masse. In fact, Article 39 of LG concludes:
  

  When we have spread on earth the fruits of our nature and our enterprise-human dignity, brotherly communion, and freedom-according to the command of the Lord and in his Spirit, we will find them once again, cleansed this time from the stain of sin, illuminated and transfigured, when Christ presents to his Father and eternal and universal kingdom "of truth and life, a kingdom of holiness and grace, a kingdom of justice, love and peace." Here on earth the kingdom is mysteriously present; when the Lord comes it will enter into its perfection.

  
  This is a naturalistic, millenarian vision that calls for the religion of Humanity. It is completely foreign to anything the Catholic Church has ever taught. It is the complete antithesis to the exclusively supernatural reality of the Kingdom of God and of the consummation of the end of time which has been revealed to us by Our Lord and always maintained by the Church.
  

Because of the scandal brought about with such regularity from this Pope, it is easy to vilify the man, rather than realizing the root cause of his errors. They are not his own most of the time. He simply is repeating the Conciliar errors, the same ones that Archbishop Lefebvre fought so hard against. Recall the words of his famous 1974 Declaration: 

“We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it. ... This reform, since it has issued from Liberalism and from Modernism, is entirely corrupt. It comes from heresy and results in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is thus impossible for any faithful Catholic who is aware of these things to adopt this reform, or to submit to it in any way at all. To ensure our salvation, the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, is a categorical refusal to accept the reform. ... That is why we hold fast to all that has been believed and practiced in the faith, morals, liturgy, teaching of the catechism, formation of the priest and institution of the Church, by the Church of all time; to all these things as codified in those books which saw day before the Modernist influence of the Council.” (Declaration of Faith, November 21, 1974)

It has been 57 years since the end of the Second Vatican Council and untold damage has been done under these Conciliar popes. Some think Francis is the worst of them so far. That may be so. He certainly does seem like he personifies and perfects these past years of treachery and assaults against the Faith. But I think this title might be more accurately reserved for Pope Paul VI, under whose pontificate the worst of the damage was done. Perhaps that is why the good Lord allowed Archbishop Lefebvre to live under that pontificate and not Pope Francis'. Pope Francis is 'simply' continuing the destruction begun under Paul VI!

Mary, Virgin most faithful, pray for us!