"To use the words of the fathers of Trent, it is certain that the Church "was instructed by Jesus Christ and His Apostles and that all truth was daily taught it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."[12] Therefore, it is obviously absurd and injurious to propose a certain "restoration and regeneration" for her as though necessary for her safety and growth, as if she could be considered subject to defect or obscuration or other misfortune. Indeed these authors of novelties consider that a "foundation may be laid of a new human institution," and what Cyprian detested may come to pass, that what was a divine thing "may become a human church." -Mirari Vos- Pope Gregory XVI.


"Christ summons the Church to continual reformation as she sojourns here on earth. The Church is always in need of this, in so far as she is an institution of men here on earth.  Thus if, in various times and circuмstances, there have been deficiencies in moral conduct or in church discipline, or even in the way that church teaching has been formulated-to be carefully distinguished from the deposit of faith itself-these can and should be set right at the opportune moment."  -Unitatis Redintegratio, Vatican II-

-Heresy. The church cannot err in the expression of her dogmas. Vatican I teaches they are irreformable of their nature. Another heresy is that the Church always stands in need of renewal and reformation. Plainly false and contradictory of Pope Gregory XVI.

 "Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that "there is one God, one faith, one baptism"[16] may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that "those who are not with Christ are against Him,"[17] and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore "without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate." -Mirari Vos- Pope Gregory XVI

 "But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience." -Lumen Gentium- Vatican II

Heresy: Religious indifference.

The problem with Nishant2011's interpretation of Lumen gentium is that only the new conservative Catholics seem to interpret these passages in this way.  

On the whole, the Conciliar bishops, by their words and actions, show that this docuмent of Vatican II does not require any sort of religious conversion to the Catholic faith and that Muslims and Jєωs can belong to sects that specifically and unambiguously rejects Christ and be saved.  

Though not actually stated here, one might ask a Conciliar Catholic if the Church teaches that a one-month old child of a Muslim or Jєω who died would be saved.  Anyone who is listening to the Conciliar hierarchy would be forced to conclude that such a child would indeed be saved.

I simply cannot understand how someone who must parse the docuмents to find a way to interpret them according to the traditional teachings of the Church can accuse those who read the docuмents as they are and in accordance with the Modernist hierarchy of scrutinizing the docuмents to find fault.

No.  There is nothing in the Vatican II docuмents that is "clear" except that they are not Catholic.

On the whole, the Conciliar bishops, by their words and actions, show that this docuмent of Vatican II does not require any sort of religious conversion to the Catholic faith and that Muslims and Jєωs can belong to sects that specifically and unambiguously rejects Christ and be saved.

 

This is Catholic teaching. The CAN be DESPITE belonging to false religions.

Though not actually stated here, one might ask a Conciliar Catholic if the Church teaches that a one-month old child of a Muslim or Jєω who died would be saved.  Anyone who is listening to the Conciliar hierarchy would be forced to conclude that such a child would indeed be saved.

I would answer that is impossible to know for certain. However, obviously the child never reached the age of reason and never had the opportunity to be baptized. Therefore he still has original sin. So he would go to limbo or, since God is omnipotent, He could extraordinarily save the child since the child has no personal guilt.

I simply cannot understand how someone who must parse the docuмents to find a way to interpret them according to the traditional teachings of the Church can accuse those who read the docuмents as they are and in accordance with the Modernist hierarchy of scrutinizing the docuмents to find fault.

Individual modernist prelates aren't authoritative. Only official docuмents giving official interpretations from Rome under the Pope are authoritative.

Vatican II plainly states that those who persevere in their religion with all sincerity may be saved.

Same difference Santo.