1. If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema.
2. If anyone is so bold as to assert that
there exists nothing besides matter:
let him be anathema.
3. If anyone says that
the substance or essence of God and that of all things are one and the same:
let him be anathema.

4. If anyone says
that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or
that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally,
that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals:
let him be anathema.
5. If anyone
does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or
holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or
denies that the world was created for the glory of God:
let him be anathema.

I will continue to make my case on the heresies of Vatican II and its docuмents.

Q. 1148. How do we offer God false worship?

A. We offer God false worship by rejecting the religion He has instituted and following one pleasing to ourselves, with a form of worship He has never authorized, approved or sanctioned.

Moreover, they call us Hetaeriasts, or Associators, because, they say, we introduce an associate with God by declaring Christ to the Son of God and God. We say to them in rejoinder: ‘The Prophets and the Scriptures have delivered this to us, and you, as you persistently maintain, accept the Prophets. So, if we wrongly declare Christ to be the Son of God, it is they who taught this and handed it on to us.’ But some of them say that it is by misinterpretation that we have represented the Prophets as saying such things, while others say that the Hebrews hated us and deceived us by writing in the name of the Prophets so that we might be lost.

And again we say to them: ‘As long as you say that Christ is the Word of God and Spirit, why do you accuse us of being Hetaeriasts? For the word, and the spirit, is inseparable from that in which it naturally has existence. Therefore, if the Word of God is in God, then it is obvious that He is God. If, however, He is outside of God, then, according to you, God is without word and without spirit. Consequently, by avoiding the introduction of an associate with God you have mutilated Him. It would be far better for you to say that He has an associate than to mutilate Him, as if you were dealing with a stone or a piece of wood or some other inanimate object. Thus, you speak untruly when you call us Hetaeriasts; we retort by calling you Mutilators of God.’

You evaded the question.  If you concede the individual case is not a denial of dogma, on what grounds do you assert that an unidentified, ambiguous aggregate of individuals?  If you carefully analyze the nature of an heretical sect you will see that the sect itself does not possess a transcendent unity, which the Council clearly abuses this truth by glossing over it, as such it is a mere collection individuals.  

Okay, I would like to know why a transcendent unity is of any value. Why is that germane?

The nature of a heretical sect is that it is a community centered around a denial of one or more articles of faith, and the simultaneous affirmation of some truths of the faith. It has the Nature of a poisoned glass of wine. It affirms much, but the drinking in of its denials is deadly. As such, it is deprived, as a corporate and unique entity ("The Presbyterian Church"), of the grace of the Holy Spirit.

Quote

"The separated churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation.

Quote

THERE is the heresy. For no schismatic or heretical corporate body AS SUCH has received the spirit of Christ.

It doesn't say that, rather such efficacy, if there be any is derived from the Catholic Church.  Nevertheless, there is a gross equivocation of the use of the term "means" for they are obviously not a means of salvation in the same sense as the Catholic Church is the means of salvation.  But evidently, this equivocation has led to the denial of Catholic dogma, but is not, in itself heretical.

Okay, I still disagree with you here. This passage is CLEARLY asserting that these  heretical and schismatic groups ("The Greek Orthodox Church" for example), in SPITE of suffering the "defects" of being heretical and schismatic, AS heretical and schismatic groups have a role to play in the salvation of souls: AS HERETICAL and SCHISMATIC GROUPS. There is not only ambiguous equivocation, there is a clear denial of the uniqueness of the mission of the Catholic Church alone, and an implicit denial of the doctrine Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salva as wella s the Magisterial Teaching of Pius XII in Mystici Corporis Christi.

Quote

In simpler terms, God's utilization of individuals to confer baptism is DEFINTIVELY DIFFERENT from supposing they have received the spirit of Christ and have a role to play in the mystery of salvation.

Merely asserting it is different is not a demonstration of how it is different.  The Spirit of Christ works through the Sacraments in certain cases and as such they allegedly "play a role in the mystery of salvation."  

But the "sacraments" are not LUTHERAN sacraments, they are Catholic sacraments held hostage by heretics.

Okay, here is a demonstration of how they are different: A Lutheran Baptizes a Child, using the necessary form and matter. His intention is presumed due to the proper use of the form. The Child is validly baptized and cleansed of original sin and its just punishments. This salvation, this sanctifying grace came neither from the Lutheran Minister, nor from the Lutheran Church, but through the grace of the Holy Spirit who in this case has allowed a heretic to confect a valid sacrament, ex opere operato, through the very ACT of the work performed. The Baptism has its validity and efficacy immediately from God, the effects of which are not ONLY cleansing one from sin, but joining one to to his true church: The Roman Catholic Church; and not through the ministration of the Lutheran Church or the Lutheran Minister. As such, to say that the Lutheran Church or the Lutheran minister are anything special is to completely abandon the obvious fact: God sometimes utilizes unworthy individuals as secondary instruments of his grace. But this has NOTHING to do with any special significance the Lutheran minister or the Lutheran Church supposedly possesses.

Now, This docuмent is asserting that the CHURCHES, the HERETICAL CHURCHES DO have significance and DO play a role in sanctification of souls in the eyes of God. This is heresy; this is an implicit and tacit denial of the unique mediation of the Holy Spirit in Christ's one true Church; the Roman Catholic Church. AS such, it is heresy.

Again, you have to take the Council on its own terms which is markedly subjective and extremely imprecise in its language.  Heretical sects are, of their very nature, sects of perdition, as per St. Peter.  But the Council doesn't address the essence of things, but rather mere accidentals.  This is part of the reason why Catholics have lost the essence of things; as Romano Amerio put it, the crisis is partly a result of the loss of the essences of things.

I agree, the Council basically abandoned "Essentialism" for "Existentialism," things are described and have value only in their outward appearance. But this very impreciseness of language is a sign of the overarching heresy of modernism promulgated by the council and John XXIII in his opening address to the Council!

We have now a Council that talks "nice" about false religions which completely distorts the Catholic mind, and if taken to extremes results in the loss of faith.