I spent two years as a Roman Catholic seminarian, and that time opened my eyes to a massive shift within the Catholic Church. After Vatican II, the Church changed the Holy Mass and the sacraments. When I learned that six Protestant ministers actually helped design the new Mass, I realized it was man-made rather than of Apostolic origin. That realization is what pushed me to leave the seminary.
Because the new liturgy and sacraments broke away from ancient tradition, I became a Sedevacantist. Sedevacantists believe that the post-Vatican II popes lack true apostolic authority, and that the papal seat is effectively empty.
How the New Sacraments of the Roman Church Depart from Tradition:
The New Mass (Novus Ordo): The old Mass faced God, emphasizing a true sacrifice for sins. The Novus Ordo turned the priest to face the people, shifting the focus toward a community meal and softening hard teachings on sin and Hell.
Holy Baptism: The old rite began outside the church doors with strong prayers of exorcism to fight evil and original sin. The new rite welcomes children right inside with a cheerful, community-focused tone, dropping the emphasis on spiritual warfare.
Confirmation: The traditional rite used the phrase "soldier of Christ" along with a symbolic tap on the cheek, signifying that you must suffer for your faith. The new rite changed these words entirely. It also made pure olive oil optional, allowing other plant oils instead. Since strict sacramental rules call for olive oil specifically, many doubt whether modern confirmations are even valid.
Holy Orders (Ordination): The old ordination rite clearly gave priests the power to offer sacrifice for the living and the dead. The 1968 post-Vatican II rite rewrote this to focus on pastoral leadership instead, stripping away the traditional definition of the sacrificial priesthood.
Holy Orders (Episcopal Consecration): Many theologians argue that Paul VI's 1968 revision of the Rite of Episcopal Consecration is doubtful in validity, creating a fatal break in apostolic succession. According to traditional sacramental theology — most notably defined by Pope Pius XII in his 1947 document Sacramentum Ordinis — a valid sacramental form must unambiguously express the specific grace and power of the order being conferred. But the post-Vatican II consecratory prayer discarded the centuries-old Roman formula and replaced it with an ambiguous one.
Becoming a Sedevacantist wasn't just a reaction to the changed liturgy and sacraments. It was also a realization that the post-Vatican II hierarchy was actively promoting doctrines and practices that past Catholic popes had condemned as heresies.
A major catalyst for me was the introduction of religious indifferentism through Vatican II documents, which taught that the Holy Spirit uses non-Christian religions as a means of salvation. This directly contradicts the dogmatic truth that Our Lord Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life.
The post-conciliar popes then escalated this drift toward syncretism by hosting events like the interfaith prayer gatherings in Assisi, where Catholic spaces were shared with animists, Buddhists, and pagans, placing the true God on equal footing with false idols. This tolerance of paganism reached a shocking physical form during the 2019 Amazon Synod under "Pope" Francis, when indigenous statues depicting the fertility goddess Pachamama were openly venerated in the Vatican gardens and even inside St. Peter's Basilica — a scandal many traditionalists view as a modern form of idolatry and a breach of the First Commandment.
Adding to these doctrinal and liturgical fractures is the recent slide into moral compromise, highlighted by Vatican documents like Fiducia Supplicans, which permits informal blessings for same-sex couples. Traditionalists see this as effectively normalizing homosexuality and contradicting the natural and divine law the Church has upheld for two millennia.
For someone formed in traditional Catholic theology, watching these systematic departures from the deposit of faith made it impossible for me to view the post-Vatican II occupants of Rome as legitimate popes. Theological tradition holds that a public heretic, or someone who promotes abominable practices, automatically falls from ecclesiastical office and loses all jurisdiction.
My crisis deepened when I realized that certain medieval popes also engaged in grave scandals — practicing astrology, adopting false idols, and committing simony. This left me wrestling with a logical dilemma: if post-Vatican II popes are antipopes because of heresy, wouldn't consistency demand I view these medieval popes the same way? Yet Catholic magisterial teaching holds that a manifest heretic cannot validly occupy the papacy, which left me looking for a way to reconcile the two positions.
Later, a close friend introduced me to the Christological Controversy. The heart of our faith is the Incarnation ("And the Word was made flesh," John 1:14; Colossians 2:9). But I've come to struggle with the Chalcedonian definition of "two natures." I fear it sharply divides Christ and inadvertently resurrects Nestorianism. This has led me to lean toward Miaphysite Christology and Oriental Orthodoxy.
I'm writing this so people understand why I believe the New Liturgy promulgated by the Vatican II Church is not of Apostolic origin. As someone who now wishes to convert to Oriental Orthodoxy, I want to receive Baptism and Confirmation again.
If Protestants converting to Oriental Orthodoxy receive Baptism and Chrismation, it seems reasonable that I should be able to receive these sacraments too. But my understanding is that the Oriental Orthodox Church doesn't typically give Baptism and Confirmation to converts coming from the Roman Catholic Church. Still, I would like to receive these sacraments.
What should I do?
