The Great Schism Of Roncalli
And Of The Roman Modernists

©Lucio J. Mascarenhas, formerly "Prakash". 5th. October, 2002.

"We believe, not because you told us, but because we have seen it for ourselves." (John 4: 39-42)

Part I: The Catholic Faith

The Faith of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is the 'Deposit of the Faith' received from the Apostles. This Deposit is made up of various doctrines, which form an integral whole called the Catholic Faith, or the Deposit of the Faith.

This Deposit Is also called Public Revelation, or that Message revealed by God and prescribed by Him as necessary to be believed by all men for their salvation. Other messages from God, not necessary to be generally believed by men for salvation, are Private Revelations. The denial of a teaching (doctrine) of the Church is called Heresy. Technically, a heresy is any idea that contradicts the Deposit of the Faith, even if only one Particular doctrine is contradicted. Thus Pope Leo XIII in his Encyclical 'Satis Cognitum' tell us "such is the nature of the faith that nothing is more impossible than to believe this and to reject that... If then there is a point that been evidently been revealed by God and if we refuse to believe in it, we believe absolutely nothing of the divine faith." When one believes in a heresy publicly or severely violates Church discipline or separates oneself from the Church in any way, (such as by joining a schismatic or heretic), one enters into Schism. Technically, schism is separation from the body of the Church.

"When," says St Cyprian, "the devil saw that the worship of idols was abolished, and the heathen temples emptied, he bethought him of a new poison, and led men into error under cover of the Christian religion, the poison of false doctrine and pride, through which more than two hundred churches have started up in opposition to the true Church founded by Christ." (pg. 242 in Spirago-Clarke's "The Catechism Explained') These are some fundamental Catholic doctrines:

1. The Doctrine of the Unity of the Church: which teaches that the true Church is One, i.e. perfectly united in itself, and not including heretics and schismatics. God commands us that those who do not obey the Church are to be considered as heathens. Breakaway groups are not branches of the true Church, but are as much strangers (heathen) to it as those never been its members. The Unity of the Church is an accomplished fact, uninterrupted from Christ and by Him guaranteed till His Return.

Thus we see, in "The Catechism Explained' the following statement: (pg 243)"The true Church is One. She has at all times and in all places the same doctrine, the same means of grace, and only one head. Truth can only be one; hence the teaching of the Church cannot change. Christ wished His Church to be one; for that He prayed at the Last Supper; "There shall be one fold and one shepherd." He appointed one head for the whole Church. The Catholic Church is One: her Catechisms the wor1d over teach precisely the same doctrine. Everywhere the holy sacrifice is offered, and the sacraments given in the same way; the same ceremonies and feasts are observed all over the world. All Catholics acknowledge the Pope as head of the Church. If there were antipopes it is nonetheless true that someone was the true Pope; the existence of many pretenders to a throne does not exclude the claim of the true king. Nor can heresy destroy this unity, for the heretic who refuses to submit is no longer a member of the Church. None need accuse the Church for want of progress because it holds fast by its old established doctrines, there is no progress in giving up the truth and adopting error."

2. The Doctrine That Error Has No Rights: Man is not free to worship as he likes. God made man and God alone can prescribe the manner in which He is to be worshipped. This doctrine also permits, even enjoins the legitimate Church the control, repression or destruction, according to necessity, of false religions.

From Old Testament times, God has commanded His people to worship Him not only individually, but also as a nation. This requirement has not been done way with by the New Dispensation of our Lord Jesus Christ, but still holds. Thus the representatives of God's Church have always counseled and persuaded states and statesmen to establish the true Religion and Church as the state religion, being specifically moved in this by the Holy Faith. The Divine Order of things commands the superordination of God's Church to states.

3. The Doctrine of the Finality of Public Revelation: Public Revelation has come to a full stop with the death of the last Apostle, and cannot be added to, subtracted from or otherwise amended. (Spirago-Clarke's The Catechism Explained, pages 80-83.)

4. The Doctrine That Outside the Church Is No Salvation: Jesus Christ teaches us that He is the Truth, the Way and the Life. And "there is is no other name under heaven given to men", other than of Christ Jesus, "by which we can be saved." (Acts 4:12) Jesus Christ administers His saving grace through His Church, which He founded and guaranteed from failure and defects, to which He has entrusted His gospel and mission, and through which He acts in the world. Thus His Church "believes, professes and preaches that no one remaining outside it, not just pagans, but also Jew or heretics or schismatics, can become Partakers of eternal life, but they will go to the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devils (Matt. 25: 41) unless before the end of life they are joined to the Church. For union with the body of the Church is of such importance that the sacraments of the Church are helpful to salvation only for those remaining in it; and fasts, almsgiving, other works of piety, and the exercise of Christian warfare bear eternal rewards for them alone. And no one can be saved, no matter how much alms he has given, even if he sheds his blood for the name of Christ, unless he remains in the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.' ('The Church Teaches,' pg 78, Decree for the Jacobites, Council of Florence.)

Just as our Lord Jesus Christ based His claim on God the Father, so His Church bases its claim on our Lord Jesus Christ, as is evidenced by the Bible. 'Bible Christians' who claim to follow the bible, thus commit the same crime as the Jew of Jesus' time in rejected Him, when the Bible itself witnesses to the Catholic Church.

5. The Doctrine of the Integrity of Public Revelation: which teaches that Public Revelation is Integral or Indivisible. Therefore, if one rejects or amends, adds to or subtracts from, even only one doctrine of the Deposit of the Faith, his personal belief loses its identity with the Holy Faith as revealed by God, and becomes a heresy or false religion. (See Pope Leo XIII as quoted above, from Satis Cognitum.)

6. The Doctrine of the Free Will of Man: which teaches us that every man has been gifted with the faculty of Free Will, such that he is (physically) free to chose and act, whether it be according to God's Will or in opposition to it.

Part II: The Prohibition Against Unlawful Assemblies

God has revealed to man the manner in which He is to be worshipped, forbidding all other forms — manmade — of worship. To disobey God is to be joined to the disobedience of the devils — the fallen angels. Thus we are told that "what the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to the devils and not to God." (1 Corr. 10: 20)

St Augustine elaborates, describing every liturgical action conducted in violation of God's commands as 'Partaking of the unlawful ritesof the proud demons.'

Technically, this crime is called 'Communicatio in sacris', and by God's Law it incurs immediate and automatic excommunication. This ban not only covers the liturgies of the pagans, but even of the infidels ('Jews' & 'Islamists'), as also of the heretics and schismatics. This is true even when the celebrators of these liturgies possess valid orders (priesthood) and truly confect the Eucharist, as it is among most schismatics (e.g. the various 'Greek Orthodox' sects).

Although Christ is made truly present in their consecrated hosts, because these liturgies are conducted in schism, and thus in opposition to Christ's Positive Will, they do not give the Participants in these liturgies Divine Grace but bring them damnation. These liturgies and the Participation thereof are grave and monstrous crimes against God, and any Catholic Participant, being a Catholic, is more guilty then the non-Catholics, besides incurring automatic and immediate excommunication. For "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of the devils, you cannot be Partakers of the table of the Lord and of the devils." (1 Corr. 10:21)

St Augustine teaches that 'Children baptized in non-Catholic churches are thus constituted Catholics, and 'cease to be members of the Catholic Church only when, after reaching the age of reason, they make formal profession of heresy' or schism, 'as, far example, by receiving communion in a non-Catholic 'Church.' This prohibition also includes accepting or eating the things 'consecrated' in these unlawful liturgies, if one knows it to be such, or if one has been specifically informed of this. (1 Corr. 10: 21 - 33 & 1 Corr. 8). Most of the martyrs were offered relief from persecution if they took Part in unlawful liturgies or consumed their communions (prasad), but they cbose to be loyal to God and die for it rather than sin. Thus the Apostles (except John), Mauritius, Lawrence, Sebastian, and thousands of others, their names too myriad to be put down here. 0f these, the Apostles Thomas and Bartholomew, John Britto, the Cuncolim, Colvale & Corjuem Martyrs suffered at the hands of the Hindus, while the Thane Martyrs & the Holy Orphans of Agassi suffered at Muslim hands in India.

Part III: The Consequences of Disobedience

As the Doctrine of the Integrity of Public Revelation, i.e. of the deposit of the Faith, teaches, one ceases to be a Catholic or Christian when one publicly contradicts even a single Particular doctrine in anyway.

It is therefore merely necessary to prove heresy in regards to one doctrine in order to prove that the subject, as an individual or as a group, it is in Heresy.

The Catholic Church, up to the end of reign of Pope Pius XII in mid-October 1958, did not deviate in the least from the Apostolic Faith. However, upon his death, the man elected pope, Angelo Joseph Roncalli (who took the name "John XXIII") began a movement called the Aggiornomento, or "Bringing Up to Date", or "Remaking the Faith", also called the "Renewal", under which sweeping changes were brought about in the doctrines of the Church.

1. Roncalli publicly taught, and his followers publicly teach that the Unity of the Church is not an accomplished fact, that that it is to be achieved, and that by the merger (or, as they prefer to say, 'Reintegration') of the various 'Christian' bodies. (For evidence that Roncalli taught this heresy, see the article Roncalli. His followers adopted this heresy as their official faith at 'Vatican II': the decree 'Unitatis Redintegratio', pgs 341—366 in Abbott’s version and pgs 408-424 in Flannery's.)

2. Roncalli's followers publicly teach that man is free to believe and worship as he likes, and that the Doctrine 'Error has no rights' was wrong and that they have abolished it. They teach that the various religions have equal rights to liberty in the eyes of goverments, and that states must be neutral, treating all religious equally. ('Vatican II': Declaration 'Dignitatis Humanae Personae', pgs 675-696 in Abbott and pgs 703-714 in Flannery.)

3. Roncalli's fol1owers publicly teach that man may gain salvation through the practice of any religion whatsoever - through the so-called 'fellow-Christian' churches and even through the various paganisms or the falsely so-called Judaism and Islam. They teach that conversions from these heresies are not necessary and that their adherents can gain salvation by conscientiously practicing their heresies. Thus they have almost entirely abandoned proselytism, replacing it with 'dialogues.'

Thus Vatican II, treating of the heretics and schismatics that falsely style themselves 'Christians,' maintains that even after their formal profession of heresy or schism by communicating in a heretical or schismatic sect, they remain incorporated in Christ (by their valid baptisms) and that "they thereforehave a right to be called Christians," and are to be accepted as our 'brethren'. (Unitatis Redintegratio, pg 411, para 1, Flan.) Vatican II goes on to teach that these heretics and schismatics also validly "carry out many liturgical actions of the Christian religion," and that "these liturgical actions most certainly ... bring about a life of grace, and ... gives access to the community of salvation." Further, they teach, the Holy Spirit "has not refrained from using than as means of salvation." (Unitatis Redintegratio, pg 411, paras 2 & 3, Flan.)

As regards their policy towards 'non-Christian' heresies - Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, etc, the Polist actor and present antipope of the Roncallists or Roman Modernists, Charles Voltiva ('John-Paul the 2nd') has been consistently teaching the Universalist heresy - that all men will be saved. However, according to Voltiva's version of Universalism, all men are already saved by and in Jesus Christ. Thus is his book, The Sign of Contradiction, published before his 'election', he teaches, taking up Vatican 2's teaching, 'By his incarnation, the Son of God has in a certain way united himself with each man," (Constitution 'Gaudium et Spes', pg 811, para 3), that the birth of the Church ... coincided with the birth of the 'new man' — whether or not man was aware of such a rebirth and whether or not heaccepted it." ('Sign of Contradiction', pg 91). Voltiva goes on to quote Vatican II - Jesus Christ "has restored in the children of Adam that likeness to God which had been disfigured ever since the first sin." (‘Sign...' pg 101, ‘Gaudium...' pg 811, para 3, Flan.) Voltiva has repeatedly taught this heresy since his 'election'. (See Fr Louis-Marie de Blignieres, 'John-Paul II and Catholic Doctrine').

4. Roncalli's followers publicly teach that the Holy Spirit moves men to those acts of worship, which, according to what God Himself has revealed, are rejected by Him as unlawful and forbidden. They teach that these liturgies convey grace to their Participants, and that it is lawful to Partake of them.

As a result of these teaching, those former Catholics who accept and follow Roncalli and Vatican II, have been co-worshipping with their brethren of the Protestant, 'Orthodox' and other sects, as also with the Jews, Muslims and Pagans. Together with the Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc, they have allowed the Pentecostal heresy to enter their sect under the name of the 'Charismatic Renewal' or the 'Spiritual Renewal.'

5. The Roncallists, when challenged on their public contradiction of Apostolic Doctrines, claim the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the exercise of Papal Infallibility as their authority for changing doctrines. But the Council of the Vatican, 1869-70, which defined Papal Infallibility, specifically taught that "... the Holy Spirit was promised to the successorsof St Peter not that they might make known new doctrine by His Revelation, but rather, that with His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully explain the Revelation or the Deposit of Faith that was headed down through the Apostles." Public Revelation has come to a full stop, and neither pope nor any Council can add, subtract or otherwise amend it. Thus, the Roncallists, adding to their crimes, openly deny the Doctrine of the Finality of Public Revelation by claiming that 'Vatican II' and theRoncallist 'popes' who authorized it, received and promulgated new Revelation - Public Revelation - which amend the Deposit of the Faith.

Blasphemy Against the Holy Ghost

Further, they blaspheme the Holy Spirit, when they make Him the author of their heresies. They make God, who is unchanging, a liar, when they claim He gave them this New Gospel, which contradicts the gospel He first gave us.

Saint Paul tells us, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel to you other then that which w have preached to you, let him be anathema! As we have said before, so I say again: If anyone preach a gospel to you other then that which you have received, let him be anathema!" (Gal. 1: 8-9)

Also, the Roncallists leave themselves with no locus standi, since, if the old gospel was defective, what guarantee have they that their new gospel is not? But their gospel gives them no comfort here, while the gospel of Christ gives us an unimpeachable guarantee of inerrancy!

Part IV - Psuedo-Pastoralism Of The Roncallists

Roncalli and his sectarians claim that what they are doing is "Pastoralism" in opposition to Dogmaticism.

But it is precisely the duty of the Pastor or Shepherd to govern the flock - feed it, tend it, guard it, correct it from error, etc.

Thus true Pastoralism is not the opposite of Dogmaticism, but goes hand in hand with it, for the Shepherd is dogmatic about what is good and what is bad for the flock - unless he be a thief and a pretender, really come to prey on the flock. Thus this claim to "Pastoralism" is just some more pure baloney meant to deceive the sheep — precisely the "sheeps' clothings" in which the Roncallist wolves disguise themselves.

Part V - Developement of Doctrines

In each of the above cases, I have shown how Roncalli and his klepts have contradicted the eternal doctrines of the Faith. The Roncallists make another defense, claiming the new teachings constitute legitimate 'progress' or 'development of doctrines.'

Catholicism is no stranger to this argument('doctrinal development'); it is an integral Part of Catholic Apologetics. Catholicism has had to defend itself against the charge of ever inventing articles of faith, such as Papal Infallibility (1870), the Immaculate Conception of our Lady (1854) and her Assumption (1950). Doctrinal Development is the Catholic response to these attacks.

The Development of Doctrine argument begins by admitting that many of the impugned doctrines were never explicitly taught at the Church's founding.

Nevertheless, they were implicitly taught, being contained in the explicit doctrines of earlier times in seed form. Jesus Christ promised that while He was going back to His Father, He was sending His Church the Holy Spirit to continuously guide it over the ages.

Jesus told His Apostles that there are "many things I have yet to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when the Holy Spirit has come, He will teach you all the truth." (John 16: 12-13)

While it is true that (the Public Part) of Divine Revelation has ended, it is not true that there is no further interaction between God and man (ie. the Protestants’ implicit heresy of Nihilism). Soon after the foundation of the Church, it was found necessary to summon a General or Ecumenical Council to clarify some disputes: this was the Council of Jerusalem recorded in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 15). But it is absurd to conceive that the Holy Spirit ceased to guide the Church after the last book of the New Testament was written down, or to conceive that the Church was frozen into place after this last book, without any disputes needing redressal. But it is obvious that the Church was created a living entity, and that Councils after this Council of Jerusalem would have as much authority as it did.

The Church has never promulgated doctrines except in response to a need to clarify disputes. Further, never was any doctrine promulgated which could not be legitimately and solely proved to have developed from previously established doctrines, so that new doctrines never contradicted the older ones. Every time the Church promulgated a new doctrine it first carefully proved it to be a legitimate development from previously established doctrines.

The Roncallist klepts claim their teachings to be legitimate developments. But, unlike previous developments, these openly contradict previous doctrines in a manner that cannot be explained away. Neither have the klepts, as they themselves acknowledge, been able to state or explain the process of development from the old doctrines to the new. Thus Hans Kung, one of the klepts at Vatican II, tells us that "Vatican II completely reversed the position of Vatican I without explanation," and that "the Council bishops said, 'It's too complicated to explain how you can go from a condemnation of religious liberty to an affirmation of it purely by the notion of progress."' Indeed they cannot! This quotation is from Michael Davies' book, 'Archbishop Lefebvre and Religious Liberty.' Davies goes onto quote other klepts at 'Vatican II' - Yves Cougar and John Murray, who also acknowledge that the development processes have not been described. Indeed it is not even attempted. 'Vatican II' blithely makes incredulous acrobatic leaps; quoting texts from various Catholic sources as supporting texts for its teachings which blatantly contradict them, exact1y how robbers behave.

Other klepts blandly declare that the 'Vatican II Council' has stated that there is a progress or development of doctrine (without actually demonstrating the process of this development) and that that is sufficient authority for its acceptance. Not so. No Council and no pope, or any one for that matter, yes, "not even an angel from heaven" can reveal new doctrines, but everything proposed for our belief they must prove to have developed from previous doctrines, and must not cancel any previous doctrines, or w are obliged to reject them! This is precisely what the klepts cannot do, showing their claims to be empty!


To sum up our indictment of the Roncallists: It is sufficient to prove heresy with regards to one Particular doctrine to prove that the subject is in heresy and therefore in schism. Here, we have proved that the Roncallists are in heresy with regards to five doctrines. Therefore, concluding from the above it is obvious that Roncalli and his followers - the 'Vatican II Council' and Roncalli's 'successors', Montini, Luciani & Voltiva (under the names 'Paul VI', 'John-Paul I' and John-Paul II') are in heresy and in schism, together with all those who follow them.

Is this possible? Can popes become heretics? The teachings of the Church, from the beginning to our day, of the Doctors of the Faith and of the popes, say yes! In essence, the matter is simple. Popes, even after assuming office, retain their Free Will, and, as such, are fully capable of sinning, even up to denying the doctrines of the Church, thus becoming heretics. But a heretic is by definition, a non-member of the Church, and offices of the Church can be held only by its members. Therefore, anyone who publicly defects from the faith, automatically and immediately ceases to hold any office he may have held as a Catholic. Of course, the 'election' of a public heretic, i.e. a non-Catholic, is in itself null and void. The practical result of these principles is this: Roncalli ceased to be pope when he became a public heretic, by denying the Doctrine of the Unity of the Church (see pg 3, para 4 above) while his 'successors' - Montini, Luciani & Voltiva - by adopting Roncalli's and Vatican 2's heresies even before their 'elections' were rendered public heretics and thus excluded from becoming popes!

There are some people who will object that since the popes possess the charism of Infallibility, they cannot fall from the faith. But there is no real difficulty here. These people merely confuse Papal Infallibility with Indefectibility. Indefectibility is divine protection from falling away from the faith. But this charism is not given to any Individual, not even to popes, but only to the Church in general (as opposed to Particular or local churches). Individuals possess free will and are therefore entirely capable of falling away. Even St Paul the Apostle refused to claim personal indefectibility, when the Apostles were vehicles of Divine Revelation. To claim or to attribute personal indefectibility to any man is to err into heresy. (Only the Particular or local Church of Rome, from among local churches, possesses indefectibility.)

According to the Catholic Enyclopaedia, 1913, "An exceptional situation might arise were a pope to become a public heretic, i.e. were he publicly and officially to teach some doctrine clearly opposed to what has been defined as 'de fide catholica'. But in this case many theologians hold that no formal sentence of deposition would be required, as, by becoming a public heretic, the pope would ipso facto, cease to be pope." Taking all this into consideration, we are forced to conclude that the Roncallists are in schism and constitute a heretical sect. As such we are strictly bound to reject them.

But what of the millions who never apparently formally consented to the Roncallists' schism, but nevertheless mistakenly followed them?

These too are culpable.

They all knew, or ought to have known their faith and their catechism, and they ought to have seen that what the Roncallists were doing, perverting doctrines, the sacraments, traditions and practices of the Church, was wrong and protested, and when protests failed, publicly separated themselves from these heretics, as God commands us to do. So these people have no excuse, and cannot pretend to be still 'Catholic.'

But these people could not remain with the Roncallists unless they personally consented and Partook of the crimes of the Roncallists! Therefore, regardless of their claims to be still 'Catholic,' they are, at the least schismatic and largely even heretics, and are to be regarded and treated as such. To them, as to all other heretics, I once again extend God's invitation to abandon Satan and his works, and join themselves to the one and only true Church of God, outside of which there is no salvation. Let every man choose whom he shall serve, God or Satan. As for me, I choose God.

They are foolish men who adhere to these antipopes. You call them ‘Fathers’, but when you ask them for bread, they give you a stone; ask for fish and theygive you a snake; ask for an egg and they give you a scorpion. Staying with them is, then, unprofitable.
©Lucio J. Mascarenhas, formerly "Prakash". 5th. October, 2002.
Hosted by