Exchange with a woman who is having a problem with the idea of sedevacantism

[While this woman was harping on her understanding of fidelity to the Chair of Peter, I sensed from what she was saying that she rejected Vatican II and many of the official teachings of her “Popes”. So, to illustrate her inconsistency, I asked her the following question]:

Do you accept: Vatican II; that non-Catholics can receive Communion; and that Muslims and Catholics worship the same God? -Bro. Peter Dimond

MF:

Dear Bro Dimond: I don't accept the DOCUMENTS of Vatican II as being anything but a nice try by the devil to force an unholy course on the Church. For those who took the option and ran with it, it seems to me that God is allowing Vatican II to still do His Will by revealing hearts. But since nothing was doctrinal, the documents are meaningless, even though it has all had a devastating effect. I believe Vatican II was a true Council that went sour because it was hijacked by rebels. But God can and still will use it for good. Battle lines were drawn. Nuns who ripped off their habits and turned their convents into ashrams took one side and others are trying to stay firm on the other. It reminds me so much of what protestants do with the Bible misinterpret it and then bash everyone else over the head. But that doesn't mean the Bible isn't the Word of God. Those who seek His Truth with sincerity will have it. But the documents of Vatican II are not any that we have to concern ourselves with in the least, since they weren't doctrinal. Just a lot of work the enemies did to try to get a firmer foothold. It worked, but it won't hold. Non-Catholics receive Communion? No way! And why would they want to if everything is only about the Holy Spirit and me personally, and not the objective physical presence of Jesus? What freaks who would do that. Muslims worship a demonic being. Not a Triune God? How much trouble did Jesus go to to try to teach us that reality? So whoever they worship is not the same God. I've read the Koran. It is vile, nasty filth. And I've read about Mohammad. An exorcist might be able to confirm that he was probably possessed. I mean that in all seriousness. MF

MHFM: Your response was similar to what I expected. You cannot have it both ways. If you accept these Antipopes as true Popes you must accept their authoritative teaching. Otherwise, you reject Papal Infallibility. Vatican II was solemnly and infallibly promulgated by Paul VI if he was a true Pope. If Paul VI was a true Pope, it is a true ecumenical council to whose teaching you are bound. This has been proven in the following article and by the quotes below. Paul VI solemnly declared that Vatican II was to be "religiously observed" by all the faithful.

Was Vatican II infallible?

EACH ONE OF THE 16 DOCUMENTS OF VATICAN II ENDS WITH THESE WORDS SHOWING PAUL VI’S SOLEMN APPROVAL: “EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THE THINGS SET FORTH IN THIS DECREE HAS WON THE CONSENT OF THE FATHERS. WE, TOO, 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... I, PAUL, BISHOP OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.” Antipope Paul VI again declares that Vatican II is to be Religiously Observed

Antipope Paul VI, “Papal” Brief declaring Vatican II Council closed, Dec. 8, 1965: “At last all which regards the holy Ecumenical Council has, with the help of God, been accomplished and ALL THE CONSTITUTIONS, DECREES, DECLARATIONS, AND VOTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE DELIBERATION OF THE SYNOD AND PROMULGATED BY US. Therefore, we decided to close for all intents and purposes, WITH OUR APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, this same Ecumenical Council called by our predecessor, Pope John XXIII, which opened October 11, 1962, and which was continued by us after his death. WE DECIDE MOREOVER THAT ALL THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED SYNODALLY IS TO BE RELIGIOUSLY OBSERVED BY ALL THE FAITHFUL, for the glory of God and the dignity of the Church… WE HAVE APPROVED AND ESTABLISHED THESE THINGS, DECREEING THAT THE PRESENT LETTERS ARE AND REMAIN STABLE AND VALID, AND ARE TO HAVE LEGAL EFFECTIVENESS, so that they be disseminated and obtain full and complete effect, and so that they may be fully convalidated by those whom they concern or may concern now and in the future; and so that, as it be judged and described, ALL EFFORTS CONTRARY TO THESE THINGS BY WHOEVER OR WHATEVER AUTHORITY, KNOWINGLY OR IN IGNORANCE, BE INVALID AND WORTHLESS FROM NOW ON. Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, under the [seal of the] ring of the fisherman, December 8… the year 1965, the third year of our Pontificate.”

But you reject Vatican II. Thus, you reject the authoritative teaching of your "Pope." You are proving our point that they are not true Popes. You are a sedevacantist without admitting it. But if you obstinately hold that they are true Popes – in the face of all the evidence – while you reject the teaching to which they bind you, you then reject the dogma of Papal Infallibility. You also mentioned that you absolutely reject the idea that non-Catholics can lawfully receive Communion and that Muslims and Catholics together worship the same God. But the Vatican II "Popes" have authoritatively taught that non-Catholics can receive Communion and that Muslims and Catholics together worship God. This was solemnly taught in Vatican II, the New Catechism promulgated by the “apostolic authority” of John Paul II, and in many encyclicals of the Vatican II Antipopes. There is no doubt that if the Vatican II “Popes” are true Popes the Catholic Church teaches that non-Catholics may lawfully receive Holy Communion. But this is impossible, since the Church has taught the opposite for 2000 years – and this is a matter inextricably bound up with Faith. Here is a table which illustrates what I’m talking about:

	Non-Catholics may lawfully receive Holy Communion	Christ united Himself with each man in the Incarnation	Muslims and Catholics together worship the One True God
Encyclical	Antipope John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint (# 46), May 25, 1995: “… Catholic ministers are able, in certain particular cases, to administer the Sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance and Anointing of the Sick to Christians who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church...”	Antipope John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis (# 13), March 4, 1979: “… by his Incarnation, he, the Son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man.”	Antipope John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (# 47): “…Muslims who, like us, believe in the just and merciful God.”
Authoritative Catechism	Antipope John Paul II, Catechism of the Catholic Church (# 1401): “… Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church…”	Antipope John Paul II, Catechism of the Catholic Church (# 521): “By his Incarnation, he, the Son of God, has in a certain way united himself with each man.”	Antipope John Paul II, Catechism of the Catholic Church (# 841): “… Muslims… together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”	Antipope John Paul II, Fidei Depositum, Oct. 11, 1992: “The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved June 25th last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of Catholic doctrine… I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith.”
Vatican II Document	Antipope Paul VI, Vatican II document Orientalium Ecclesiarum # 27: “… the sacraments of Penance, Holy Eucharist, and the anointing of sick may be conferred on eastern Christians who in good faith are separated from the Catholic Church...”	Antipope Paul VI, Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes # 22: “For by His incarnation the Son of God united Himself in some way with every human being.”	Antipope Paul VI, Vatican II document Lumen Gentium # 16: “… Muslims… profess to hold the faith of Abraham and along with us they worship the one merciful God who will judge mankind on the last day.”	Antipope Paul VI, at the end of every Vatican II document: “EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THE THINGS SET FORTH IN THIS DECREE HAS WON THE CONSENT OF THE FATHERS. WE, TOO, 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... I, PAUL, BISHOP OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.”

If a Pope teaches something in encyclicals plus a Catechism plus many speeches plus a General Council solemnly promulgated by his predecessor then there is absolutely no doubt that such a teaching constitutes a teaching of the Catholic Magisterium. Hence, if the Vatican II “Popes” are true Popes, then Muslims and Catholics have the same God and non-Catholics can lawfully receive Communion. But you reject this completely. You thus prove our point that the Vatican II Antipopes cannot be true occupants of the Chair of St. Peter, since every Catholic is forced to depart from and reject their official teachings. The teaching of the Chair of Peter (e.g., the teaching of Paul IV) requires us to reject as invalid a heretic who is allegedly elected. So, don’t tell me that he is the Pope while you reject his official teachings and the entire Faith of all the Bishops under him. You are simply proving the point that they are not true Popes.