The Third Epiphany of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Commemoration of the Chair of Saint Peter, January 18, 2026

Today is the Second Sunday after the Epiphany and the Commemoration of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome. of Saint Paul the Apostle, and of Saint Prisca. 

The Gospel that is read during Holy Mass today ia that of the wedding feast Cana in which Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ elevated marriage to the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony and at which He, acting at the behest of His Most Blessed Mother, performed His first public miracle. This Sunday thus completes the three great manifestations of Our Lord that we celebrate in Christmastide: His manifestation as an Infant to Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthazar, His baptism at the Jordan River by His cousin and precursor, Saint John the Baptist, and the wedding feast of Cana, which is a prefiguring of the Holy Mass and, of course, of the Holy Eucharist.

The account of this miracle provided in Venerable Mary of Agreda’s The Mystical City of God contains a beautiful and quite dogmatic explanation concerning why Our Lord addressed His Most Blessed Mother as “Woman” rather than Mother. Please read this account with care:

322. The evangelist St. John, who at the end of chapter one refers to the vocation of Nathanael (who was the fifth disciple of Christ), begins the second chapter of his evangelical History by saying: And the third day there was a marriage at Cana of Galilee; and the Mother of Jesus was there. And Jesus also was invited, and his disciples, to the marriage (Jn. 2:1-2). Hence it appears the heavenly Lady was in Cana before her most holy Son was invited to the wedding. I was ordered by my superiors to inquire how this harmonizes with what I have said in the preceding chapter and to ascertain what day was meant. Then I was informed that, notwithstanding the different opinions of the commentators, this History of the Queen and that of the Gospels coincide with each other, and that the course of events was as follows: Christ our Lord with his five Apostles or disciples upon entering Galilee went directly to Nazareth, preaching and teaching on the way. On this journey He tarried only a short time, but at least three days. Having arrived at Nazareth He baptized his Blessed Mother, as I have related, and thereupon immediately went forth to preach with his disciples in some of the neighboring places. In the meanwhile the heavenly Lady, being invited to the marriage mentioned by the Evangelist, went to Cana, for it was the marriage of some of her relatives in the fourth degree in the lineage of St. Anne, her mother. While the great Queen was in Cana, the news of the coming of the Redeemer into the world and of his having chosen some disciples had already spread. By the disposition of the Lord, who secretly ordained it for his own high ends, and through the management of his Mother, He was called and invited to the wedding with his disciples.

323. The third day mentioned by the Evangelist as the wedding day of Cana is the third day of the week, and though he does not say this expressly, yet likewise he does not say that it was the third day after the calling of the disciples or his entrance into Galilee. If he had meant this he certainly would have been more explicit. According to the ordinary course, it was impossible for Christ to be present at a wedding on the third day after entering Galilee from Judea at the place where He chose his first disciples, for Cana lay within the limits of the tribe of Zabulon, near the boundary of Phoenicia, far northward from Judea and adjoining the tribe of Aser, a considerable distance from the place where the Savior entered from Judea into Galilee. If the wedding at Cana had been on the third day after the calling of the first disciples, then only two days intervened, whereas the journey from Judea to Cana required three days; moreover, He would first have to be near Cana in order to receive such an invitation, which would likewise require some time. In addition to all this, in order to journey from Judea to Cana of Galilee He would first pass through Nazareth, for Cana is nearer to the Mediterranean sea and to the tribe of Aser, as I have said; hence the Savior of the world would first have visited his most holy Mother, who not being ignorant of his coming (since it is certain She would have known) would have waited for Him without leaving for the wedding while He approached. That the Evangelist does not mention the visit of the Lord to Nazareth, nor the baptism of the heavenly Lady, was not because it did not happen, but because he and the other writers confine themselves to that which pertains to their purpose. St. John himself says they omit the mention of many miracles performed by the Lord (Jn. 20:30), since it was not necessary to describe all of them. By this order of events the Evangelist is understood, and this History is confirmed by the very passage in question.

324. While therefore the Queen of the world was in Cana her most holy Son with his disciples was invited to the marriage, and since in his condescension He had brought about this invitation He accepted it. He went to this wedding in order to sanctify and confirm the state of Matrimony, and in order to begin to establish the authenticity of his doctrine by the miracle which He was to perform and of which He was to declare Himself openly as the Author. Since He had already proclaimed Himself as the Master by admitting his disciples, it was necessary to confirm their calling and give authority to his doctrine so they might receive and believe it, for though He had performed other wonders in private He had not made Himself known as the Author of them in public as on this occasion. Thus the Evangelist says: This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee (Jn. 2:11), and also that this same Lord told his most holy Mother that until then his hour had not yet come (Ib. 4). This miracle took place on the same day on which one year before had happened the Baptism of Christ our Savior. This day was also the anniversary of the adoration of the Kings, and therefore the holy Roman Church celebrates the three mysteries on one and the same day, the sixth of January. Our Lord had now completed the thirtieth year of his life and had begun his thirty-first year thirteen days before, being those from his most holy Nativity to the Epiphany.

325. The Master of life entered the house of the marriage feast, saluting those present with the words: “The peace of the Lord and his light be with thee,” literally fulfilling them by his arrival. He then gave an exhortation to the bridegroom concerning eternal life, instructing him regarding the perfection and holiness of his state of life, and the same was done by the Queen of heaven with the bride, admonishing her with most sweet and efficacious reasonings concerning her obligations. Both of them afterwards fulfilled most perfectly the duties of their state into which they were ushered and for which they were strengthened by the Sovereigns of heaven and earth. I will not detain myself in declaring that this bridegroom was not St. John the Evangelist; it is enough to know (as I have stated in the last chapter) that St. John had come with the Savior as his disciple. On this occasion the Lord did not intend to dissolve the marriage; He came to the wedding in order to authorize and accredit it, sanctifying it and constituting it a Sacrament. Hence He could not have had the intention of separating the two married people immediately after they had entered into this union, nor did the Evangelist ever have any intention of marrying. On the contrary our Savior, having exhorted the betrothed, then offered a fervent prayer and petition to the eternal Father, beseeching Him that in the new law of grace He would pour out his blessing upon human propagation, and thenceforth grant power to the state of matrimony to sanctify those who would receive it in his holy Church, instituting it as one of his Sacraments.

 326. The most blessed Virgin, cooperating in this work and in all others for the benefit of the human race, knew of the desires and prayer of her divine Son and joined Him therein; and since She took upon Herself the duty of making a proper return, which is so much neglected by other men, She broke out in canticles of praise and thanksgiving to the Lord for this benefit, and the Angels at her invitation joined Her in the praise of God. This, however, was known only to the Lord and Savior, who rejoiced in the wise behavior of his most pure Mother as much as She rejoiced in his. Then they spoke and conversed with those who came to the wedding, but always with a wisdom and gravity worthy of themselves and with the intention of enlightening the hearts of all who were present. The most prudent Lady spoke very few words and only when She was asked or when it was very necessary, for She always listened and paid attention without interruption to the doings and sayings of the Lord, treasuring them up and meditating upon them in her most chaste Heart. All the words and behavior of this great Queen during her life furnish an exquisite example of retirement and modesty, and on this occasion She was an example not only for religious, but especially for women in the secular state, if they would only keep this example before them in events such as this marriage feast, thus learning to keep silence, restrain themselves, compose their interior, and allow no levity or looseness to creep into their exterior deportment, for never is moderation more necessary than in times of danger. In women the most precious adornment and the most charming beauty is silence, restraint and modesty, by which many vices are shut out and all the virtues of a chaste and respectable woman receive their crowning grace.

327. At table the Lord and his most holy Mother ate some of the food which they were served, yet with consummate moderation and hiding their abstinence. Although when they were alone they did not eat such food as I have already recorded (187), yet these Teachers of perfection, who did not desire to disapprove of the common life of men, but rather to perfect it, accommodated themselves to all circumstances without any extremes or public singularity whenever it was possible to do so without blame and with perfection. The Lord not only inculcated this by his example, but He commanded his disciples and Apostles to eat what was placed before them on their evangelical tours of preaching (Lk. 10:8), and not to show any singularity in their way of life, such as is indulged in by the imperfect and those little versed in the paths of virtue, for the truly poor and humble must not presume to have a choice in their food. By divine arrangement, and in order to give occasion for the miracle, the wine ran out during the meal, and the merciful Queen said to her Son: They have no wine. His Majesty responded: Woman, what is that to Me and to thee? My hour is not yet come (Jn. 2:3-4). This answer of Christ was not one of reprehension, but contained a mystery, for the most prudent Queen had not asked for a miracle by mere accident but by divine light, for She knew the opportune time for the manifestation of the divine power of her Son was at hand. She was full of wisdom and knowledge concerning the works of the Redemption, and was well informed at what time and on what occasions the Lord was to perform them; hence She could not be ignorant of the proper moment for the beginning of this public manifestation of the power of Christ. It must also be remembered that His Divine Majesty did not pronounce these words with any signs of disapproval, but with a quiet and loving majesty. It is true that He did not address the Blessed Virgin by the name of Mother, but Woman; yet as I have said before, this was because He had begun to treat Her with greater reserve (249). 

328. The mysterious purpose hidden in this answer of Christ was to confirm the disciples in their faith in his divinity, and to manifest Himself to all as the true God, independent of his Mother in his divine being and power of working miracles. Also for this reason He did not call Her Mother but Woman, saying: How does this concern Thee, or what part have we, Thou and I, in this? This was as if He wanted to say: The power of performing miracles I have not received from Thee, although Thou hast given Me the human nature in which I am to perform them; my divinity alone is to perform them, and for it the hour is not yet come. By his words to Her He gave Her to understand that the time for working miracles was not to be determined by his most holy Mother but by the will of God, even though the most prudent Lady would ask for them at an opportune and appropriate time. The Lord desired to have it understood that the working of miracles depended upon a higher than human will, on a will divine and above that of his Mother and altogether beyond it; that the will of his Mother was to be subject to that which was his as the true God. Hence Christ infused into the minds of the Apostles a new light by which they understood the hypostatic union of his two natures, and the derivation of his human nature from his Mother and his divine nature by generation from his eternal Father. 

 329. The great Lady well understood this mystery, and She said with quiet modesty to the servants: Whatsoever He shall say to you, do ye (Jn. 2:5). By these words (in addition to demonstrating her wise insight into the will of her Son, which the most prudent Mother knew) She spoke as Mistress of the entire human race, teaching mortals that in order to provide for all our necessities and poverty it is necessary and sufficient on our part to do all that the Savior and those taking his place shall command. Such doctrine could not come from anyone less than such a Mother and Advocate, who is so desirous of our welfare, and who, since She knows so well what hindrances we place in the way of his great and numerous miracles for our benefit, desires to instruct us to meet properly the beneficent intentions of the Most High in which consists all our good. The Redeemer of the world ordered the servants of the tables to fill with water their jars or water pots (Ib. 7), which according to the Hebrew custom had been provided for the occasion. All having been filled, the Lord bade them draw some of the wine into which the water had been changed (Ib. 8) and bring it to the chief steward of the feast, who was at the head of the table and was one of the priests of the Law. When he tasted the miraculous wine, he called the bridegroom in surprise and said to him (Ib. 10): Every man at first setteth forth good wine, and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse. But thou hast kept the good wine until now.

330. The chief steward knew nothing of the miracle when he tasted the wine because he sat at the head of the table, while Christ and his Mother with his disciples occupied the lower end of the table, practicing the doctrine which He was afterwards to teach us, namely in being invited to a feast we should not seek to occupy the better places but be satisfied with the lowest (Lk. 14:8, 10). But then was made public the miracle our Savior had worked in changing the water into wine, and it manifested his glory, and his disciples believed in Him, as the Evangelist says (Jn. 2:11), because they believed anew and their faith in Him was more confirmed. Not only they but many of the others who were present believed that He was the true Messiah, and they followed Him to the city of Capharnaum whither the Evangelist tells us He, with his Mother and disciples, went from Cana (Ib. 12). There, according to St. Matthew (4:13, 17), He began to preach, declaring Himself the Teacher of men. When St. John says He manifested his glory by this sign or miracle it does not contradict his having wrought miracles before, but supposes them to have been wrought in secret. Nor does he assert that his glory was not shown also in other miracles, but infers merely that He did not wish to be known as their Author because the right time determined by divine Wisdom had not come. It is certain He performed many and admirable wonders in Egypt, such as the destruction of the temples and their idols (Inc. 643, 646, 665). To all these miracles most holy Mary responded with heroic acts of virtue in praise and thanksgiving to the Most High that his holy Name was thus gloriously manifested. She attended to the comfort of the new believers and to the service of her divine Son, fulfilling these duties with peerless wisdom and charity. With burning love She cried out to the eternal Father, asking Him to dispose the hearts and souls of men for the enlightening words of the incarnate Word, and to drive from them the darkness of their ignorance.   

INSTRUCTION GIVEN TO ME BY THE GREAT QUEEN AND LADY OF HEAVEN

331. My daughter, without any excuse is the forgetfulness and negligence shown by each and every one of the children of the Church in regard to the spread and manifestation of the glory of their God by making known his holy Name to all rational creatures. This negligence is much more blamable now since the eternal Word became man in my womb, taught the world, and redeemed it for this very purpose. For this reason His Majesty founded the holy Church, enriched it with spiritual goods and treasures, ministers, and other temporal goods. All these gifts must only serve to preserve the Church with the children it has, but to enlarge it and draw others to the regeneration of the Catholic faith. All must help toward this goal in order to further gather the fruits of the death of their Repairer. Some can do this by prayer and urgent desires for the exaltation of his holy Name, others by almsgiving, others by diligent preaching, and others by fervent works of charity. But if this remissness is perhaps less culpable in the ignorant and the poor, who have none to exhort them, it is very reprehensible in the rich and the powerful, and especially in the ministers and prelates of the Church, whom this obligation binds more fully. Many of them, forgetting the terrible account which they shall have to render, turn the true glory of Christ into their own vainglory. They waste the patrimony of the blood of the Redeemer in undertakings and goals not even fit to mention, and through their fault allow innumerable souls to perish who by proper exertions could have been gained for the holy Church, or at least they lose the merit of such exertions and deprive Christ of the glory of having such faithful ministers in his Church. The same responsibility rests upon the princes and the powerful of the world, who receive from the hands of God honors, riches, and temporal blessings for advancing the glory of the Divinity, and yet think less of this obligation than any other.

332. Do thou grieve for all these evils, and labor as far as thy strength will allow for the glory of the Most High to be manifested, for Him to be known in all nations, and so from the very stones may be generated sons of Abraham (Mt. 3:9), since of all this thou art capable. Beseech Him to send able workers and worthy ministers to his Church (Lk. 10:2) in order to draw men to the sweet yoke of the Gospel (Mt. 11:30), for great and plentiful is the harvest and few are the faithful laborers and zealous helpers for harvesting it. Let what I have told thee of my maternal and loving solicitude in gaining followers for my Son, and in preserving them in his doctrine and companionship, be to thee a living example for thy own conduct. Never let the flame of this charity die out in thy bosom. Let also my silence and modesty at the wedding feast be an inviolable rule for thee and thy religious, always measuring thy exterior actions, circumspection, moderation, and few words by this standard, especially in the presence of men, for these virtues are the court dress with which the spouses of Christ must adorn themselves in order to find grace in his divine eyes. (See The New English Edition of the Mystical City of God, Book Six: The Transfixion, Chapter 1.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., explained that the Apostles believed in Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ after they witness the manifestation of His Sacred Divinity at the wedding Feast in Cana:

The third Mystery of the Epiphany shows us the completion of the merciful designs of God upon the world, at the same time that it manifests to us, for the third time, the glory of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The Star has led the soul to faith; the sanctified Waters of the Jordan have conferred purity upon her; the Marriage Feast unites her to her God. We have been considering, during this Octave, the Bridegroom revealing himself to the Spouse; we have heard him calling her to come to him from the heights of Libanus; and now, after having enlightened and purified her, he invites her to the heavenly feast, where she is to receive the Wine of his divine love.

A Feast is prepared; (John 2) it is a Marriage Feast; and the Mother of Jesus is present at it, for it is just that having cooperated in the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word, she should take part in all that her Son does, and in all the favors he bestows on his elect. But in the midst of the Feast, the Wine fails. Wine is the symbol of Charity or Love, and Charity had failed on the earth; for the Gentiles had never tasted its sweetness; and as to the Synagogue, what had it produced but wild grapes? (Isaiah 5:2) The True Vine is our Jesus, and he calls himself by that name. (John 15:1) He alone could give that Wine which gladdeneth the heart of man; (Psalm 103: 15) He alone could give us that Chalice which inebriateth, (Psalm 22:5) and of which the Royal Psalmist prophesied.

Mary said to Jesus: They have no Wine. It is the office of the Mother of God to tell him of the wants of men, for she is also their Mother. But Jesus answers her in words which are apparently harsh: Woman! what is it to me and to thee? My hour is not yet come. The meaning of these words is that, in this great Mystery, he was about to act not as the Son of Mary, but as the Son of God. Later on, the hour will come when, dying upon the Cross, he will do it as Man, that is, according to that human nature which he has received from her. Mary at once understands the words of her Son, and she says to the waiters of the Feast what she is now ever saying to her children: Do whatsoever he shall say to you.

Now, there were six large waterpots of stone there, and they were empty. The world was then in its Sixth Age, as St. Augustine and other Holy Doctors tell us. During these six ages, the earth had been awaiting its Savior, who was to instruct and redeem it. Jesus commands these waterpots to be filled with water; and yet, water does not suit the Feast of the Spouse. The figures and the prophecies of the ancient world were this water, and until the opening of the Seventh Age, when Christ, who is the Vine, was to be given to the world, no man had contracted an alliance with the Divine Word.

But when the Emmanuel came, he had but to say, Now draw out, and the waterpots were seen to be filled with the wine of the New Covenant, the Wine which had been kept to the end. When he assumed our human nature—a nature weak and unstable as Water—he effected a change in it; he raised it up even to himself, by making us partakers of the divine nature; (2 Peter 1:4) he gave us the power to love him, to be united to him, to form that one Body of which he is the Head, that Church of which he is the Spouse, and which he loved from all eternity, and with such tender love, that he came down from heaven to celebrate his nuptials with her.

St. Matthew, the Evangelist of the Humanity of our Lord, has received from the Holy Ghost the commission to announce to us the Mystery of Faith by the Star; St. Luke, the Evangelist of Jesus’ Priesthood, has been selected, by the same Holy Spirit, to instruct us in the Mystery of the Baptism in the Jordan; but the Mystery of the Marriage Feast was to be revealed to us by the Evangelist John, the Beloved Disciple. He suggests to the Church the object of this third Mystery by this expression: This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and he manifested his glory. (John 2:1-2) At Bethlehem, the Gold of the Magi expressed the Divinity of the Babe; at the Jordan, the descent of the Holy Ghost and the voice of the Eternal Father proclaimed Jesus (known to the people as a carpenter of Nazareth) to be the Son of God; at Cana, it is Jesus himself that acts, and he acts as God, for, says St. Augustine, He who changed the water into wine in the waterpots could be no other than the same who, every year, works the same miracle in the vine. Hence it was that, from that day, as St. John tells us, his disciples believed in him, (John 2:10-11) and the Apostolic College began to be formed. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Second Sunday after the Epiphany.)

Yes, this miracle is a foretaste of the Holy Eucharist as every time a true priest utters the words of consecration over the host and then the wine mixed with a drop of water in the chalice He becomes Incarnate--Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity-under the appearances of the mere elements of the earth. This miracle of Transubstantiation has been believed by Holy Mother Church from the very beginnng and, to combat the hereies of Martin Luther, was defined solemnly at the Council of Trent as follows:

And because that Christ, our Redeemer, declared that which He offered under the species of bread to be truly His own body, therefore has it ever been a firm belief in the Church of God, and this holy Synod doth now declare it anew, that, by the consecration of the bread and of the wine, a conversion is made of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His blood; which conversion is, by the holy Catholic Church, suitably and properly called Transubstantiation. (Council of Trent, Thirteenth Session, Chapter IV, On Transubstantiation, October 11, 1561.)

The Council of Trent anathematized anyone who disbelieves the doctrine of Transubstanitation was foreshadowed at the wedding feast in Cana:

CANON I.-If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema.

CANON lI.-If any one saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood-the species Only of the bread and wine remaining-which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation; let him be anathema.

CANON III.-If any one denieth, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema.

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that, after the consecration is completed, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not in the admirable sacrament of the Eucharist, but (are there) only during the use, whilst it is being taken, and not either before or after; and that, in the hosts, or consecrated particles, which are reserved or which remain after communion, the true Body of the Lord remaineth not; let him be anathema.

CANON V.-If any one saith, either that the principal fruit of the most holy Eucharist is the remission of sins, or, that other effects do not result therefrom; let him be anathema.

CANON VI.-If any one saith, that, in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, is not to be adored with the worship, even external of latria; and is, consequently, neither to be venerated with a special festive solemnity, nor to be solemnly borne about in processions, according to the laudable and universal rite and custom of holy church; or, is not to be proposed publicly to the people to be adored, and that the adorers thereof are idolators; let him be anathema.

CANON VII.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the sacred Eucharist to be reserved in the sacrarium, but that, immediately after consecration, it must necessarily be distributed amongst those present; or, that it is not lawful that it be carried with honour to the sick; let him be anathema.

CANON VIII.-lf any one saith, that Christ, given in the Eucharist, is eaten spiritually only, and not also sacramentally and really; let him be anathema.

CANON IX.-If any one denieth, that all and each of Christ’s faithful of both sexes are bound, when they have attained to years of discretion, to communicate every year, at least at Easter, in accordance with the precept of holy Mother Church; let him be anathema.

CANON X.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the celebrating priest to communicate himself; let him be anathema.

CANON XI.-lf any one saith, that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burthened with mortal sin, how contrite even soever they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated. (Council of Trent, Thirteenth Session, Chapter IV, On Transubstantiation, October 11, 1561.)

Yet it is that more than handful of conciliar officials have dared to deny the doctrine of Transubstantiation, including an Italian liturgist, Andre Grillo, who said the following nine years ago:

"Transubstantiation is not a dogma, and as an explanation [of the Eucharist] it has its limits. For example, it contadicts metaphysics." (As found at Italian Liturgist Alleged to Be Working On Ecumenical Mass Reportedly Said Transubstantiation Is Not A Dogma.)

It would be very instructive to take a trip down the memory lane to an article written by the late editor of Catholic Family News, John Vennari, which discussed of the late Father Eugene Heidt by the conciliar “archbishop” of Portland, Oregon, a man by name of William Levada, since deceased, who had been named by the "restorer of tradition," Ratzinger/Benedict as his successor to serve as the prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on May 13, 2005:

Archbishop Levada, while Ordinary of Oregon, also had run-ins with Father Eugene Heidt, a feisty traditional priest. Levada eventually illicitly “suspended” Father Heidt for his no-compromise adherence to Tradition. Before the “suspension”, during a meeting with the Archbishop, Father Heidt complained that the Archbishop’s Pastoral Letter on the Eucharist contained no mention of Transubstantiation. Levada replied that Transubstantiation is a “long and difficult term” and that “we don’t use it any more”. (John Vennari, Invincible or Inculpable, Catholic Family News, June, 2005.)

No, it is not only wild Italian liturgists who reject the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation, which was undermined in many subtle ways by Levada’s mentor, the late Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI. Bishop Donald J. Sanborn explained how the now the dead antipope's denials of Our Lord’s Bodily Resurrection were related to his subtle denials of the doctrine of Transubstantiation:

Ratzinger’s inability to think of Christ’s Resurrection as a reunion of His body and soul, which is the Catholic dogma, has an effect on what he thinks about the Holy Eucharist and upon the general resurrection from the dead.

1. Transubstantiation. Repeatedly Ratzinger has made the statement, regarding the Eucharist, that “Christ is in the bread.” This is a heretical statement, because there is no bread according to Catholic dogma. The whole substance of the bread is changed into the whole substance of the Body of Christ.

But given Ratzinger’s idea about the resurrected Christ, it is easy to see how he cannot believe in transubstantiation, since what rose from the dead is not the same thing as Christ’s body and blood at the Last Supper. It took an evolutionary leap into a new dimension. (I wish Ratzinger would take an evolutionary leap into a new dimension…) (Modernism Resurrected: Ratzinger on the Resurrection.)

The late Jorge Mario Bergoglio, though, repeated the “God is in the bread” heresy concerning the Holy Eucharist over and over again, including on June 6, 2021, which the Solemnity of Corpus Christi within the counterfeit church of conciliarism:

And thus, with simplicity, Jesus gives us the greatest sacrament. His is a humble gesture of giving, a gesture of sharing. At the culmination of his life, he does not distribute an abundance of bread to feed the multitudes, but he splits himself apart at the Passover supper with the disciples. In this way Jesus shows us that the aim of life lies in self-giving, that the greatest thing is to serve. And today once more we find the greatness of God in a piece of Bread, in a fragility that overflows with love, overflows with sharing. Fragility is precisely the word I would like to underscore. Jesus becomes fragile like the bread that is broken and crumbled. But his strength lies precisely therein, in his fragility. In the Eucharist fragility is strength: the strength of the love that becomes small so it can be welcomed and not feared; the strength of the love that is broken and shared so as to nourish and give life; the strength of the love that is split apart so as to join us in unity. (Angelus, 6 June 2021.)

Liar.

Heretic.

Like Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, the deceased Jorge Mario Bergoglio believed in the Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation (a term that Lutheran “theologians,” not unsurprisingly, reject), not the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation. Luther contended that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in a consecrated host, which retains the substance of bread and wine that remained unchanged at the consecration. “God is not present in a little piece of bread” as the act of a consecration by a true priest at a true offering of the Holy Mass makes Our Lord present Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in the consecrated host, which retains only the accidents of bread and wine, not the substance of their elements. A consecrated host is ontologically different than before its consecration as the miracle of Transubstantiation has taken place.

Although various Church councils condemned Eucharistic heresies in the past (those of John Wycliffe and John Hus were condemned for such heresies), it was as early as the Eleventh Century that Pope Saint Gregory VII required the following oath of belief in Catholic teaching about the Holy Eucharist to be taken by Berengarius of Tours in 1079, a year after he had promised the Holy Father that he, had preached against the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, would retract his false teaching:

355 I, Berengarius, in my heart believe and with my lips confess that through the mystery of the sacred prayer and the words of our Redeemer the bread and wine which are placed on the altar are substantially changed into the true and proper and living flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, our Lord, and that after consecration it is the true body of Christ which was born of the Virgin and which, offered for the salvation of the world, was suspended on the Cross, and which sitteth at the right hand of the Father, and the true blood of Christ, which was poured out from His side not only through the sign and power of the sacrament, but in its property of nature and in truth of substance, as here briefly in a few words is contained and I have read and you understand. Thus I believe, nor will I teach contrary to this belief. So help me God and these holy Gospels of God. (Henry Denzinger, Enchirdion Symbolorum, thirteenth edition, translated into English by Roy Deferrari and published in 1955 as The Sources of Catholic Dogma--referred to as "Denziger," by B. Herder Book Company of St. Louis, Missouri, and London, England, No. 355, p. 144.)

Similarly, Pope Martin V, presiding over the Eighth Session Council of Constance, issued the Bull Inter Cunctus and In Eminentis on February 22, 1415, to condemn the errors of John Wycliffe about the Holy Eucharist:

[Sentence condemning various articles of John Wyclif]

We learn from the writings and deeds of the holy fathers that the catholic faith without which (as the Apostle says) it is impossible to please God , has often been attacked by false followers of the same faith, or rather by perverse assailants, and by those who, desirous of the world’s glory, are led on by proud curiosity to know more than they should; and that it has been defended against such persons by the church’s faithful spiritual knights armed with the shield of faith. Indeed these kinds of wars were prefigured in the physical wars of the Israelite people against idolatrous nations. Therefore in these spiritual wars the holy catholic church, illuminated in the truth of faith by the rays of light from above and remaining ever spotless through the Lord’s providence and with the help of the patronage of the saints, has triumphed most gloriously over the darkness of error as over profligate enemies. In our times, however, that old and jealous foe has stirred up new conflicts so that the approved ones of this age may be made manifest. Their leader and prince was that pseudo-christian John Wyclif. He stubbornly asserted and taught many articles against the christian religion and the catholic faith while he was alive. We have decided that forty-five of the articles should be set out on this page as follows.

1. The material substance of bread, and similarly the material substance of wine, remain in the sacrament of the altar.

2. The accidents of bread do not remain without their subject in the said sacrament.

3. Christ is not identically and really present in the said sacrament in his own bodily persona. (Council  of Constance, Eigth Session, February 22, 1415.)

This is clear.

The late Argentine Apostate, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, stood as condemned as John Wycliffe, and he also stood condemned and anathematized by the Council of Trent for his stubbornly repeated heresy that Our Lord “is in the bread.” There is only the appearance of bread after consecration. There is no bread left. The host is transubstantiated entirely into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:

In the first place, the holy Synod teaches, and openly and simply professes, that, in the august sacrament of the holy Eucharist, after the consecration of the bread and wine, our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and man, is truly, really, and substantially contained under the species of those sensible things. For neither are these things mutually repugnant,-that our Saviour Himself always sitteth at the right hand of the Father in heaven, according to the natural mode of existing, and that, nevertheless, He be, in many other places, sacramentally present to us in his own substance, by a manner of existing, which, though we can scarcely express it in words, yet can we, by the understanding illuminated by faith, conceive, and we ought most firmly to believe, to be possible unto God: for thus all our forefathers, as many as were in the true Church of Christ, who have treated of this most holy Sacrament, have most openly professed, that our Redeemer instituted this so admirable a sacrament at the last supper, when, after the blessing of the bread and wine, He testified, in express and clear words, that He gave them His own very Body, and His own Blood; words which,-recorded by the holy Evangelists, and afterwards repeated by Saint Paul, whereas they carry with them that proper and most manifest meaning in which they were understood by the Fathers,-it is indeed a crime the most unworthy that they should be wrested, by certain contentions and wicked men, to fictitious and imaginary tropes, whereby the verity of the flesh and blood of Christ is denied, contrary to the universal sense of the Church, which, as the pillar and ground of truth, has detested, as satanical, these inventions devised by impious men; she recognising, with a mind ever grateful and unforgetting, this most excellent benefit of Christ. (The Council of Trent.)

This is why We need to pray today on the Commemorated Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome, for the restoration of a true pope on the Throne of Saint Peter, something that will occur in a truly miraculous manner.

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., provided us with a marvelous reflection on the history and significance of this day:

The Archangel Gabriel told the Blessed Virgin Mary, in the Annunciation, that the Son Who was to be born of Her should be a King, and that of His Kingdom there should be no end. Hence, when the Magi were led from the East to the Crib of Jesus, they proclaimed in Jerusalem that they came to seek a King. But his new Empire needed a capital; and whereas the King, Who was to fix His throne in it, was, according to the eternal decrees, to re-ascend into Heaven, it was necessary that the visible character of His Royalty should be left here on earth, and this even to the end of the world. He that should be invested with this visible character of Christ our King would be the Vicar of Christ.

Our Lord Jesus Christ chose Simon for this sublime dignity of being His Vicar. He changed his name into one which signifies the Rock, that is “Peter;” and in giving him this new name, He tells us that the whole Church throughout the world is to rest upon this man as upon a Rock which nothing shall ever move (Matt. 16: 18). But this promise of Our Lord included another; namely, that as Peter was to close his earthly career by the cross, He would give him Successors in whom Peter and his authority should live to the end of time.

But again, there must be some mark or sign of this succession, to designate to the world who the Pontiff is on whom, to the end of the world, the Church is to be built. There are so many Bishops in the Church; in which one of them is Peter continued? This Prince of the Apostles founded and governed several Churches; but only one of these was watered with his blood, and that one was Rome; only one of these is enriched with his Tomb, and that one is Rome; the Bishop of Rome, therefore, is the Successor of Peter, and consequently the Vicar of Christ. It is of the Bishop of Rome alone that it is said: Upon thee will I build My Church; and again: To thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven (St. Matthew 16: 19); and again: I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not; do thou confirm thy brethren (St. Luke 22: 32); and again: Feed my lambs; feed my sheep. (St. John 21: 15, 17).

Protestantism saw the force of this argument, and therefore strove to throw doubts on St. Peter’s having lived and died in Rome. They who labored to establish doubts of this kind rightly hoped that, if they could gain their point, they would destroy the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and even the very notion of a Head of the Church. But History has refuted this puerile objection, and now all learned Protestants agree with Catholics in admitting a fact which is one of the most incontestable, even on the ground of human authority.

It was in order to nullify, by the authority of the Liturgy, this strange pretension of Protestants, that Pope Paul IV, in 1558, restored the ancient Feast of St. Peter’s Chair at Rome, and fixed it on the 18th of January. For many centuries the Church had not solemnized the mystery of the Pontificate of the Prince of the Apostles on any distinct feast, but had made the single Feast of February 22nd serve for both the Chair at Antioch and the Chair at Rome. From that time forward, the 22nd of February has been kept for the Chair at Antioch, which was the first occupied by the Apostle.  (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome, January 18.)

A Brief Interjection:

I interject at this point to note that the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome was abolished by the Consilium that planned the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical travesty as it was an stumbling block, if you will, in the path of false ecumenism, and it was under the supposed “restorer of tradition,” Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI that the since abolished “Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei” required the “Ecclesia Dei” communities to observe only the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Antioch on February 22 and to celebrate only the Feast of Saint Prisca on January 18. False ecumenism rules the day in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, a point that I made repeatedly in G.I.R.M. Warfare: The Conciliar Church's Unremitting Warfare Against Catholic Faith and Worship.

Returning now to Dom Prosper Gueranger’s reflection on today’s feast, the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome:

To-day, therefore, the Kingship of our Emmanuel shines forth in all its splendour, and the children of the Church rejoice in finding themselves to be Brethren and fellow-citizens, united in the Feast of their common Capital, the Holy City of Rome. When they look around them, and find so many sects, separated from each other, and almost forced into decay, because they have no centre of union — they give thanks to the Son of God, for his having provided for the preservation of his Church and Truth, by his instituting a visible Head who never dies, and in whom Peter is for ever continued, just as Christ himself is continued in Peter. Men are no longer sheep without a Shepherd; the word, spoken at the beginning, is uninterruptedly perpetuated through all ages; the primitive mission is never suspended, and, by the Roman Pontiff, the end of time is fastened on to the world’s commencement.

“What a consolation for the children of God!” cries out Bossuet, in his Essay on Universal History, “and what conviction that they are in possession of the truth, when they see, that from Innocent the Eleventh, who now (1681) so worthily occupies the first See of the Church, we go back, in unbroken succession, even to St. Peter, whom Jesus appointed Prince of the Apostles; that from St. Peter, we come, traversing the line of the Pontiffs who ministered under the Law, even to Aaron, yea, even to Moses; thence, even to the Patriarchs, and even to the beginning of the world!”

When St. Peter entered Rome, he came to realize and explain the destinies of this Queen of Cities; he came to promise her an Empire even greater than the one she already possessed. This new Empire is not to be founded by the sword, as was the first. Rome has been hitherto the proud mistress of nations; henceforth she is to be the Mother of the world by Charity; and though all peaceful, yet her Empire shall last to the end of time. Let us listen to St. Leo the Great, describing to us in one of the finest of his Sermons, and in his own magnificent style, the humble yet all-eventful entrance of the Fisherman of Genesareth into the Capital of the Pagan world:

“The good and just and omnipotent God, Who never refused His mercy to the human race, and instructed all men in general in the knowledge of Himself by His super-abundant benefits, took pity, by a more hidden counsel and a deeper love, on the voluntary blindness of them that had gone astray, and on the wickedness which was growing in its proneness to evil; and sent therefore into the world His co-equal and co-eternal Word. The Word being made Flesh did so unite the Divine and human nature, as that the deep abasement of the one was the highest uplifting of the other.

But, that the effect of this unspeakable gift might be diffused throughout the entire world, the providence of God had been preparing the Roman Empire, which had so far extended its limits, as to embrace in itself all the nations of the earth. For nothing could be better suited to the divine plan, than the confederation of various kingdoms under one and the same Empire; and the preaching of the gospel to the whole world would the more rapidly be effected by having the several nations united under the government of one common City.

But this City, ignoring the author of this her promotion, whilst mistress of almost every nation under the sun, was the slave of every nation’s errors; and prided himself on having got a grand religion, because she had admitted every false doctrine. So that, the faster the devil’s hold of her, the more admirable her deliverance by Christ.

For, when the twelve Apostles, after receiving, by the Holy Ghost, the gift of tongues, divided among themselves the world they had to evangelise — the most blessed Peter, the Prince of the Apostolic order, was sent to the Capital of the Roman Empire, in order that the light of truth, which had been revealed for the salvation of all nations, might the more effectively flow, from the head itself, into the whole body of the world.

The fact was, that there were, in this City, people belonging to every nation, and the rest of the world soon learnt whatever was taught at Rome. Here, therefore, were to be refuted the opinions of philosophy; here, the follies of human wisdom to be exploded; here, the worship of devils to be convicted of blasphemy; here, the impiety of all the sacrifices to be first abolished; for, it was here that an official superstition had systematised into one great whole the fragmentary errors of every other portion of the earth.

To this City, therefore, most blessed Apostle, Peter, thou fearest not to come! The companion of thy glory, Paul the Apostle, is not with thee, for he is busy founding other Churches; yet, thou enterest this forest of wild beasts, and, with greater courage than when walking on the waters, thou settest foot on this deep stormy sea! Thou, that didst tremble before a servant-girl in the house of Caiphas, art fearless now before this Rome, this mistress of the world. Is it, that the power of Claudius is less than the authority of Pilate? or the cruelty of Nero less than the savageness of the Jews ? Not so: but the vehemence of thy love made thee heedless of thy risks; and having come that thou mightest love, thou forgottest to fear. Thou didst imbibe this sentiment of fearless charity, on that day, when the profession of thy love for thy Master was made perfect by the mystery of his thrice put question. And what asks he of thee, after thus probing thy heart, but that thou feed the the sheep of Him thou lovest, with the food, whereon thyself hadst feasted.

Then, too, there were the miracles thou hadst wrought, the gifts of grace thou hadst received, the proofs of the great works thou hadst achieved — all giving thee fresh courage. Thou hadst taught the truth to such of the children of Israel as had embraced the faith; thou hadst founded the Church of Antioch, where first began the glorious Christian title; thou hadst preached the gospel in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia; and assured of the success of thy work, and of the many years thou hadst yet to live, thou didst bring the trophy of the Cross of Christ into the very walls of Rome, where the counsels of God had already determined that thou shouldst have both the honour of power, and the glory of martyrdom.” – St Leo, Sermon 82, On the Feast of the Apostles, Peter and Paul.

The future of the human race, now under the guidance of the Church, is, therefore, centred in Rome, and the destinies of that City are interwoven with those of her undying Pontiff. We, the children of the Church, though differing in race, and tongue, and character, yet are we all Romans by holy religion; as Romans, we are united, by Peter, to Christ; and this our glorious name is the link of that great Fraternity of Catholics throughout the world.

Jesus Christ by Peter, and Peter by his successor — these are our rulers in the order of spiritual Government. Every Pastor, whose authority emanates not from the See of Rome, is a stranger to us, and an intruder. So likewise, in the order of our Faith, that is, of what we believe, Jesus Christ by Peter, and Peter by his successor, teach us divine doctrine, and how to distinguish truth from error. Every Symbol of Faith, every doctrinal judgment, every teaching, contrary to the Symbol, and judgments, and teachings of the See of Rome, is of man, and not of God, and must be rejected, hated, and anathematised. On the Feast of St. Peter’s Chair at Antioch, (February 22,) we will speak of the Apostolic See, as the one only source of governing power in the Church; to-day, we will consider and honour the Chair at Home as the source and rule of our Faith. Here, again, let us borrow the sublime words of St. Leo, and hear him discuss the claims of Peter to Infallibility of teaching. The Holy Doctor will teach us how to understand the full force of those words, which were spoken by our Lord, and which he intended should be, for all ages, the grand charter of Faith.

“The Word made Flesh was dwelling among us, and he, our Saviour, had spent his whole self for the reparation of the human race. There was nothing too complicated for his wisdom, nothing too difficult for his power. The elements were subject to him, Spirits ministered to him, Angels obeyed him, nor could the mystery of human Redemption be ineffectual, for God, both in his Unity and Trinity, was the worker of that mystery. And yet, Peter is chosen from the rest of the entire world, to be the one, the only one, put over the vocation of all nations, and over all the Apostles, and over all the Fathers of the Church: that so, whilst there were to be many Priests and many Pastors in the people of God, Peter should govern, by the special power given to him, all those whom Christ also rules by his own supreme power. Great and wonderful, dearly Beloved, is this fellowship with Christ’s power granted, by divine condescension, to this man! Moreover, if our Lord willed that there should be something in common to Peter and the rest of the Princes of his Church, it was only on this condition — that whatever he gave to them, he gave to them through Peter.”

(St Matthew 16:16) which when he had said, our Lord thus answered him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona; because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father, who is in heaven; (St Matthew 16:17) that is, blessed art thou, in that my Father hath taught thee, and human opinion hath not misled thee, but heavenly inspiration hath instructed thee; not flesh and blood, but He, whose Only Begotten Son I am, hath shown me to thee. And I say to thee: that is, as my Father hath manifested to thee my divinity, so do I now declare to thee thine own dignity. That thou art Peter (the Rock): that is, though I am the immoveable Rock, (1 Corinthians 10:4) the Corner-Stone, (Ephesians 2:20) who make both one, (Ephesians 2:14) and the Foundation, other than which no man can lay; (1 Corinthians 3:11) yet, art thou, also, a Rock, because thou art solidly based by my power, and what I have by right, thou hast by participation. And upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it: (St Matthew 16:18) that is, I will construct an everlasting temple upon thy Strength, and my Church, which is to reach to heaven, shall grow up on the firmness of this thy faith.

On the eve of his Passion, which was to test the courage of his disciples, our Lord said to Peter: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. And thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren. (St Luke 22:31-32) All the Apostles were in danger of being tempted to fear, and all stood in need of the divine help, for the devil desired to sift and crush them all; and yet, it is especially for Peter that our Lord is careful; it is for Peter’s faith that he offers an express prayer; as though the others would be sure to be firm, if the mind of their leader were unflinching. So that, the strength of all the rest is in Peter, and the assistance of divine grace is distributed in this order — Peter is to receive firmness through Christ, and he himself then give it to the Apostles.” (St Leo, Sermon 4)

In another of his Sermons, the same holy Doctor explains to us, how it is that Peter ever lives and ever teaches in the Chair of Rome. After having cited the passage from the sixteenth chapter of St. Matthew, (verses 16-19,) he says: “This promise, of Him who is truth itself, must, therefore, be a permanent fact — and Peter, the unceasing Rock of strength, must be the ceaseless ruler of the Church. For we have only to consider the pre-eminence that is given him, and the mysterious titles conferred on him, and we at once see the fellowship he has with our Lord Jesus Christ: he is called the Rock (Peter); he is named the Foundation; he is appointed keeper of the gates of heaven; he’ is made judge, with such power of loosing and binding, that his sentence holds even in heaven. These commissions, and duties, and responsibilities, where-with he was invested, he discharges with fuller perfection and power, now that he is in Him and with Him, from whom he received all these honours. If, therefore, we do anything that is right, if we decree anything that is right, if, by our daily supplications, we obtain anything from the divine mercy — it is his doing and his merit, whose power lives, and whose authority is supreme, in this his own Chair. All this, dearly Beloved, was obtained by that confession, which, being inspired into the Apostle’s heart by God the Father, soared above all the incertitudes of human opinions, and drew upon him, who spoke it, the solidity of a Rock, that was to be proof against every attack. For, throughout the whole Church, Peter is every day still proclaiming: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God; and every tongue, that confesses the Lord, is guided by the teaching of this word. This is the faith which conquers the devil, and sets his captives free. This is the faith which delivers men from the world, and takes them to heaven, and the gates of hell cannot prevail against it. For such is the solidity wherewith God has strengthened it, that neither heretical depravity has been able to corrupt, nor pagan perfidy to crush, it.” (St Leo, Sermon 3) Thus speaks St. Leo. “Let it not, therefore, be said,” observes Bossuet, in his Sermon on the Unity of the Church, “let it not be said, or thought, that this ministry of Peter finishes with his life on earth. That which is given as the support of a Church which is to last for ever, can never be taken away. Peter will live in his successors; Peter will speak, in his Chair, to the end of time. So speak the Fathers; so speak the six hundred and thirty Bishops of the Council of Chalcedon.” And again: Thus, the Roman Church is ever a Virgin-Church;  the Faith of Rome is always the Faith of the Church; what has once been believed, will be forever believed; the same voice is heard all over the world; and Peter, in his successors, is now, as he was during his life, the foundation on which the Faithful rest. Jesus Christ has said that it shall be so; and heaven and earth shall pass away rather than his word.”

Full of gratitude, therefore, to the God of truth, who has vouchsafed to raise up this Chair in his Church, we will listen, with submission of intellect and heart, to the teaching which emanates from it. Rejecting with indignation those dangerous theories, which can only serve to keep up sects within the Church; and confessing, with all the past ages, that the promises made to St. Peter continue in his successors; — we will conclude, aided by the twofold light of logic and history, that the teachings, addressed to the Church by the Roman Pontiff, can never contain error, and can contain nothing but the doctrine of truth. Such has always been the sense of the Church, and her practice has been the expression of her spirit. Now, if we acknowledge a permanent miracle in the uninterrupted succession of the Bishops of Rome, in spite of all the revolutions of eighteen centuries — we acknowledge it to be a still higher prodigy, that, notwithstanding the instability of man’s opinions and judgments, the Chair of Rome has faithfully preserved the truth without the slightest admixture of error, whereas the sees of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople, were scarcely able to maintain the true Faith for a few centuries, and have become, so frequently, those Chairs of ‘pestilence spoken of by the Royal Prophet. (Psalms 1:1.)

We are in that season of the ecclesiastical year, which is devoted to honouring the Incarnation and Birth of the Son of God, and the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin: it behoves us to remember, especially on this present Feast, that it is to the See of Peter that we owe the preservation of these dogmas, which are the very basis of our holy religion. Rome not only taught them to us when she sent us the saintly missioners who evangelised our country; but, more-over, when heresy attempted to throw its mists and clouds over these high Mysteries, it was Rome that secured the triumph to truth, by her sovereign decision. At Ephesus — when Nestorius was condemned, and the dogma, which he assailed, was solemnly proclaimed, that is, that the Divine Nature and the Human Nature, which are in Christ, make but one Person, and that Mary is, consequently, the true Mother of God — the two hundred Fathers of that General Council thus spoke: — “Compelled by the Letters of our Most Holy Father Celestine, Bishop of the Roman Church, we have proceeded, in spite of our tears, to the condemnation of Nestorius.” At Chalcedon — where the Church had to proclaim, against Eutyches, the distinction of the two Natures in the Incarnate Word, God and Man — the six hundred and thirty Fathers, after hearing the Letter of the Roman Pontiff, gave their decision, and said: “Peter has spoken by the mouth of Leo.”

Here, then, is the privilege of Rome: to watch, by Faith, over the eternal interests of mankind, as she watched previously, for long ages, and by the sword, over the temporal interests of the then known world. Let us love and reverence this City, our Mother and our Guide. To-day we are called upon to celebrate her praise; let us do so with filial affection. Let us listen to some of the ancient Hymns in honour of St. Peter, and of which some were used in the Liturgy of certain Churches. First of all, there are the admirable verses of Prudentius, which form the Prayer of St. Lawrence for christian Rome, and which the Poet supposes him to be making as he is burning on the gridiron. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome, January 18.)

Our Lady knew that the bridal couple’s wedding feast in Cana was running out of wine before the bride and groom did. She beseeched her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to assist them. Unable to refuse her anything, Our Lord complied, thereby performing his first public miracle, which was a foreshadowing of the Holy Eucharist, at her humble behest.

Similarly, Our Lord will not His dear Blessed Mother’s request for the restoration of a true pope on the Throne of Saint Peter sooner rather than later if he beseech her with humility and with confidence, especially through her Most Holy Rosary as His own consecrated slaves that her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

As goes Holy  Mother Church so goes the world, and the world is in a mess today because the Principle of Unity that is meant to serve as the clarion of voice of the Sacred Deposit of Faith and the defender of the Holy Faith against all heresies and errors, including those of Modernity and Modernism, is lacking that men are seeking salvation in all the wrong places as they deify themselves and thus unwitting make of themselves and others the victims of their own iniquities.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us. 

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Prisca, pray for us.

Appendix

Reflections on Saints Prisca, Marius, Canute, and Wulstan

Saint Prisca (Saint Priscilla), whose feast was commemorated today, that is, Sunday, January 18, 2026, the Second Sunday after the Epiphany and the Commemoration of the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter, refused to do what "Saint" John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio did frequently, namely, to deny Christ the King before men in order to appear "respectful" of those who "believe differently."

Father A. J. O'Reilly, drawing upon The Acts of the Martyrs, provided us with the details of Saint Prisca's glorious martrydom in his The Martyrs of the Coliseum: 

At the time Claudius was Caesar, he issued a new and most impious edict to the whole world, that the Christians should offer sacrifice to the gods or be put to death. He ordered his presidents and judges to carry out his law, that he might destroy the the worship of the Christians; he enjoined on them, moreover, that those consenting to the sacrifice should be considered worthy of great honour, while non-conformists should be treated with the utmost cruelty. In order to manifest the earnestness of his impious law, this Emperor Claudius held sacrifices in the Temple of Apollo, and at the same time ordered the soldiers to seize all who were known to be Christians, men and women, and by dint of terror and direful tortures force them to sacrifice to the gods.

There were then malignant men who ardently desired to destroy the Christian worship; and coming to a certain church, they found the blessed Prisca, praying. She was of noble blood; her father had been thrice consul, and was exceedingly rich. This holy child was in her seventh year, and was adorned with the grace of god and the most perfect purity of morals. The ministers of the Emperor said to her: "Our Emperor Claudius has commanded you to sacrifice voluntarily to the gods?" The blessed Prisca said with a joyful heart" "First let me enter the holy universal Church, that I may commend myself to my Lord Jesus Christ, and then we will go in peace. It is necessary that, in the name of our Lord, I confound your unworthy Emperor, and assist in the triumph of Jesus. And returning to the church, she completed her prayers.

Having finished her petition, she went with them to the Emperor. the ministers, entering into the apartments of Claudius, said to him: "This girl is willing to obey the commands of your majesty." On hearing this he rejoiced exceedingly, and ordered her to be brought into his presence. When she was brought into the palace before him, he said: "Thou art great, O god Apollo! and glorious above all the gods, who has brought me this illustrious virgin, so beautiful and with such good dispositions." Then turning to blessed Prisca, he said" "I have arranged to have you brought to me, to make you my mistress, and the sharer in the power of my kingdom." To this Prisca said: "But I will sacrifice without blood, and only to the immaculate God, my Lord Jesus Christ."

The Emperor, hearing these things, and not understanding their meaning, ordered her to be led to the Temple of Apollo that she might sacrifice to him. The holy virgin being ordered to enter the temple, said with a cheerful countenance to the Emperor: "Do you also enter, and all the priests of Apollo, that you may see how the omnipotent and immaculate Lord is pleased with the sacrifices of His faithful." The Emperor ordered all who had gathered round to watch what she was going to do.

Blessed Prisca said: "Glory be to Thee, O glorious Father! I invoke Thee, I implore Thee, cast down this motionless and dumb idol, the vile emblem of falsehood and corruption; but do Thou, O Lord, hear me, a sinner, that this Emperor may know how vain is the hope he has placed in his idols, and that he ought to adore no other god but Thee alone."

When she had prayed thus, there was immediately a great earthquake, so that the whole city was shaken; the statue of the god shook, and fell to the ground; in like manner the fourth part of the temple was destroyed, and overwhelmed a multitude of people, together with the priests of the idol.

The Emperor was terrified, and fled. Prisca said to him: "Stay, Emperor, and assist; your Apollo is broken to pieces, and you may now gather up the fragments, moreover, his priests are destroyed in the same ruin; let him come now and assist them."

And the demon who dwelt in the idol cried out with a loud voice: "O virgin Prisca! handmaid of the great God who reigns in heaven, thou who keepest His commandments and hast stripped me of my habitation!--I have lived here for sixty-seven years, and under Claudius Caesar twelve. Many martyrs have come and have not exposed me. Having under me ninety-three other most impious spirits, I order each of them to sacrifice to me daily fifty souls of men. O Emperor, persecutor of the Christians! thou hast found a holy soul, through whom thou wilt finish thy reign in disgrace." These words were spoken by a loud voice and great lamentation; terrible darkness surrounded those who were present, and they went away in great trepidation and doubt.

The Emperor, not understanding that it was by the divine power that the idol had been overthrown, ordered her to be buffeted on the face; and when the executioners had beaten her for some time, they lost their strength and cried out: "Woe to us sinners! surely we suffer more than this girl: she i snot hurt, and we are in pain. We beseech thee, O Emperor, to have her taken from us." But the Emperor, enraged against them, ordered the face of the blessed Prisca to be beaten still more. Looking towards heaven, the holy virgin said--

"Blessed art Thou, O Lord Jesus Christ! for Thou givest eternal peace to those who believe in Thee." And when she had said this, she was surrounded with a bright light, and a voice from heaven was heard saying--

"Daughter, be of good courage and fear nothing, for I am the God whom thou invokest, and I will never abandon thee."

After these things the Emperor was enraged almost to madness.

The next day, sitting before his tribunal, the Emperor said: "The that wicked little sorceress be brought in, that we may see some more of her charms."

When she was brought before him, he said to her: "Will you consent to live with me, and sacrifice to the gods?"

But she firmly replied: "Cease, most impious of men, and son of a satanic father! Are you not ashamed to insult a helpless girl and ill treat her thus, when you know she will never consent to sacrifice to your idols?"

Then the Emperor in a fury ordered her to be stript and to be beaten with whips. The child's body appeared as white as snow, and so bright was the bright light that issued from her, that the eyes of the beholders were dazzled. Whilst they were beating her, the holy virgin said: "I have cried with my voice to the Lord, and He heard me in the combat of my passion."

The Emperor, hearing her pay thus, said: "Do you think you will seduce me with your magic?"

But blessed Prisca answered: "Thy father Satan is the prince of all darkness; he loves fornicators and embraces magicians." The Emperor then ordered her to be beaten with rods, but the Saint, hearing this new punishment, smiled and said: "O unjust and impious man, enemy of God and inventor of evils! you are too blinded to know the blessings you are procuring for me from the Eternal Creator." (Father A. J. O'Reilly, The Martyrs of the Roman Coliseum.) 

Why, ladies and gentlemen, are so many Catholics fearful of the likes of the petty caesars who are said to pose "greater evils" even though the supposedly "lesser evils" are in total agreement with their false opposites that the Catholic Faith is not now nor can ever be the unifying principle of any nation, including the United States of America?

Why are we not as willing as Saint Prisca to suffer torture and death in order to bear witness to the Holy Faith?

Why all of the fear and histrionics?

As has been noted in many other articles on this site, the conciliar "popes" are as one with the anti-Incarnational premies of the Judeo-Masonic civil state of Modernity. They do not believe that the Cathoic is now nor can ever be the unifying principle of any nation as to assert this would be to violate the tenets of "religious liberty."

Saint Prisca did not believe in religious liberty. She believed in bearing a courageous witness to the Holy Faith, enduring many attempts to kill her before she did indeed become a martyr for the Faith. As is recorded in The Martyrs of the Roman Coliseum: 

Then the Emperor, enraged beyond measure, ordered her to be led outside the city to be beheaded. The holy martyr Prisca, rejoicing said: "O Lord Jesus Christ, Redeemer of all, I praise Thee, I adore Thee, I beseech Thee, I implore Thee, who hast liberated me from all the evils intended for me. Save me now, O Lord Jesus Christ, with whom there is no acceptation of persons; perfect me in the confession of Thy name; order me to be received into Thy glory, that I may happily escape the evils by which I am surrounded; and reward the impious Claudius according to his works towards Thy helpless handmaid!" And having said this she turned towards the executioners and addressed them thus: "Fulfil the orders you have received.: And thus did the blessed Prisca end her life by the sword; and a voice was heard from heaven, saying: "Because thou hast fought for My name, Prisca, enter into the kingdom of heaven with all My saints." And when this was said, the executioners fell and their faces and died. 

Then it was announced to the Bishop of Rome by a Christian who watched in concealment, how they led the blessed Prisca along the Ostian Way, to about the tenth milestone, and there beheaded her, and took away her life. The Bishop, having heard this, went with him to the place he mentioned, and they found her body between two eagles, once at her head and the other at her feet, guarding it, lest the beasts should touch it. There was a dazzling light round her head, and her face smiled in the Holy Spirit. Then the Bishop himself and his companion dug a grave, and buried her in the spot.

When the Emperor heard all these things, he was struck the same day with terrible grief in his heart, and like a rabid dog ate his own flesh, and groaning and trembling, he cried: "Have pity on me, O God of the Christians! I know I have transgressed Thy precepts, O Christ, and blasphemed Thee; I have persecuted Thy name, and have ungratefully sinned against Thee; Thou rewardest me as I have desired." He expired, convulsed and writhing in agony, and a terrible voice was heard saying, "Enter, Emperor, into the furnace of hell; to to exterior darkness, for gloomy places of pain are prepared for thee." There was a great earthquake, and there believed that day, of those who were in Rome, on account of the voice that was heard from heaven, more than five thousand, not counting women and children. the martyrdom of the blessed Prisca took place on the 18th day of January. (Father A. J. O'Reilly, The Martyrs of the Roman Coliseum.)

No, Saint Prisca was not a practitioner of false ecumenism. She was a faithful Catholic who hated and mocked false religions, which is precisely the opposite of what the conciliar "popes" have done.

The Roman Martyrology is replete with like rebukes to everything that, for example Jorge Mario Bergoglio said and did and I mean absolutely everything.

Unlike the conciliar “popes,” who have engaged in acts of idolatry by entering into places of false worship and esteeming the images of symbols found in such dens of the devil, our saints have given up their very lives and endured the harshest of tortures to avoid even giving a momentary appearance of approval to any kind of false religion, its images and its rites.

Such is the case also of the saints whose feast is celebrated tomorrow, Monday, January 19, 2026, Saints Marius, his wife, Saint Martha, and their two sons, Saints Audifax and Abachum, who were martyred during the year 270 A.D. during the reign of Emperor Claudius II (Claudius Gothicus), after refusing to sacrifice to the idols.

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., related the heroism of Saint Marius and his companions, the very members of his own family, in The Liturgical Year, which includes the lesson from Matins for today’s Divine Office:

Christians from all parts of the world have ever flocked to Rome as to the rock of faith and the foundation of the Church, and honoured with the greatest reverence and piety the spot hallowed by the sepulchre of the Prince of the Apostles. These words of Holy Church are exemplified in the Martyrs of to-day. Fired with ambition to have some part and fellowship in the glorious Society of the holy Apostles and Martyrs, they left all things and hastened to the Eternal City, there to receive in the fullest measure what they sought. Like the Magi of old they came from the far East. The star of faith had shone for them, and in obedience to its call they set forth in all eagerness to offer their gifts of homage and loyalty to the divine King in the person of His Vicar and his suffering members. Such generosity was not left unrewarded; our Emmanuel crowned it with the laurels of martyrdom admitting them into that cloud of witnesses that ever stand about him. Let us keep before our minds with our Lord, the author and finisher of their faith, this great and glorious band of martyrs, so that we too may ever run unwearied and with courage so that we too may ever run unwearied and with courage and patience in the fight proposed to us.

The following lesson is given in the office:

Marius was a Persian of high rank, who came to Rome in the reign of the Emperor Claudius, with his wife Martha, who was equally noble, and their two sons Audifax and Abachum, to pray at the graves of the Martyrs. Here they comforted the Christians who were in prison, and whom they relieved by their ministrations and alms, and buried the bodies of the Saints. For these acts they were all arrested, but no threats or terrors could move them to sacrifice to idols. They were accordingly mangled with clubs, and drawn with ropes, after which they were burnt by applying plates of red-hot metal to their bodies, and their flesh partly torn off with metal hooks. Lastly their hands were all cut off, and they were fastened together by the neck, in which state they were driven through the city to the thirteenth mile-stone on the Cornelian Way, a place now called Santa Ninfa, where they were to die. Martha addressed a moving exhortation to her husband and sons to hold out bravely to the last, for the love of Jesus Christ; and was then herself drowned. The other three martyrs were next beheaded in the same sand-pit. Their bodies were thrown into a fire. The lady Felicity of Rome collected the half-burnt remains, and caused them to be buried at her own estate. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Volume III: Christmas—Book II, pp. 337-338.)

The conciliar "popes" have considred religious differences to be a matter of individual thoughts or “feelings,” leading to an obligation on the part of “believers” to respect all “religions” as pleasing to God and thus capable of promoting peace and justice.

Pope Leo XIII explained in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885, that such practical religious indifferentism leads to the triumph of practical atheism in men and their nations:

To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name.Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885. See also Practical Atheism as the Lowest Common Denominator and Not A Mention of Christ the King.)

The saint who is commemorated tomorrow, Monday, Januuary 19, 2026, after Saint Marius and his Companions, Saint Canute IV, King of Denmark, was killed as a result of a scheme hatched by his own brother, Olaf, who despise the fact that Saint Canute sought to reproach sinners and to call them to conversion. In other words, Olaf was a figure of Jorge the Oaf, who believed that efforts to convert non-Catholics and those Catholics who are living dissolute lives are examples of “idolatry” and “judgmentalism.”

We turn once again to Dom Prosper Gueranger’s The Liturgical Year:

The Magi Kings as we have already observed, have been followed to the Crib of Jesus by saintly Christian monarchs on the Church’s Calendar during the season which is consecrated to the Mystery of his Birth. The eleventh century is one of the most glorious of the Christian era, and gave, both to the Church and the various states of Europe, a great number of saintly Kings. Among them Canute the Fourth of Denmark stands pre-eminent by reason of the aureole of his martyrdom. He had every quality which forms a Christian prince: he was a zealous propagator of the faith of Christ, he was a brave warrior, he was pious, and he was charitable to the poor. His zeal for the Church (and in those days her rights were counted as the rights of the people) was made the pretext for putting him to death: he died in the midst of a sedition as a victim sacrifice for his people’s sake. His offering to the new-born King was that of his blood; and in exchange for the perishable crown he lost, he received that which the Church gives to her Martyrs, and which can never be taken away. The history of Denmark in the eleventh century is scarce known by the rest of the world; but the glory of that country’s having had one of kings a Martyr is known throughout the whole Church, and the Church inhabits the whole earth. This power, possessed by the Spouse of Christ of conferring honour on the name and actions of the servants and friends of God, is one of the grandest spectacles out of heaven; for when she holds up a name as worthy of honour, that name becomes immortalized, whether he who bore it were a powerful king or the poorest peasant.

We find the following life of this holy King given in the Lessons until recently used in the Breviary:

Canute the Fourth, son of Sweyn Estrithius, King of Denmark, was conspicuous for his faith, piety, and purity of life, and even from this infancy gave proof of exceeding holiness. Having been elected by the votes of the people to the throne held by his father, he at once began zealously to promote religion, to add to the revenues of the Churches, and to provide the same with costly fittings and furniture. Being also inflamed with zeal for the propagation of the faith, he refused not to enter into just war with barbarous nations which, when he had conquered and subdued, he subjected to the law of Christ. Having obtained several glorious victories, and increased the riches of the treasury, he laid his regal diadem at the feet of a crucifix, offering himself and his kingdom to him who is the King of kings and Lord of lords. He chastised his body by fasting, hair-shirts and disciplines. He was assiduous in prayer and contemplation, liberal in his alms to the poor, and ever kind to all, never deviating from the path of justice and the divine commandments.

By these and other such virtues the holy King made rapid strides to the summit of perfection. Now it happened that William, Duke of Normandy, invaded the kingdom of England with a formidable army, and the English sought assistance from the Danes. The King resolved to grant them his aid, and intrusted the expedition to his brother Olaf. But he, from the desire of getting possession of his throne, turned his forces against the King, and stirred up the soldiers and the people to rebellion. Neither were there wanting motives for this rebellion; the for the King had issued laws commanding the payment of ecclesiastical tithes, the observance of the commandments of God and his Church, and the infliction of penalties on defaulters; all which were made a handle of by perverse and wicked malcontents, for spreading discontent, exciting the people to revolt, and at last, to plot the death of the saintly King.

Foreknowing what was to happen, the King saw that he would soon be put to death for justice’ sake. Having foretold it, he set out to Odense, where, entering into the Church of St. Alan the Martyr, as the place of combat, he fortified himself with the Sacraments, and commended his last struggle to our Lord. He had not long been there, when a band of conspirators arrived. They endeavoured to set fire to the Church, to burst open the doors, and to force an entrance. But failing in this, they scaled the windows, and with great violence, threw a shower of stones and arrows upon the holy King, who was on his knees, praying for his enemies. Wounded by the stones and arrows, and at least pierced through with a spear, he was crowned with a glorious martyrdom, and fell before the altar with his arms stretched out. Gregory the Seventh was the reining Pontiff. God showed by many miracles how glorious was his Martyr; and Denmark was afflicted with a great famine and sundry calamities, in punishment of the sacrilegious murder which had been perpetrated. Many persons, who were afflicted with various maladies, found aid and health by praying at the tomb of the Martyr. On one occasion, when the Queen endeavoured during the night to take up his body secretly and carry it to another place, she was deterred from her design by being struck with fear at the sight of a most brilliant light, which came down from heaven. (Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Canute, King of Denmark, January 19.)

Yes, Saint Canute IV, King of Denmark, was resented because he enjoined his people to obey God’s Commandments. Jorge Mario Bergoglio has no use for the Ten Commandments as he truly believes that their strict observance is impossible and that those who demand such strict adherence are “Pharisees.”

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s prayer to Saint Canute is one that we should make our own:

O holy king! The Sun of Justice had risen upon thy country, and all thy ambition was that they people might enjoy the fullness of its light and warmth. Like the Magi of the East, thou didst lay thy crown at the feet of the Emmanuel, and at length didst offer thy very life in his service and in that of his Church. But thy people were not worthy of thee; they shed thy blood, as the ungrateful Israel shed the Blood of the Just One who is now born unto us, and whose sweet Infancy we are now celebrating. Thou didst offer thy martyrdom for the sins of thy people offer it now also for them, that they may recover the true faith that have so long lost. Pray for the Rulers of Christian lands, that they may be faithful to their duties, zealous for justice, and may have respect for the liberty of the Church. Ask for us of the Divine Infant a devotedness in his cause like that which glowed in thy breast; and since we have not a crown to lay at his feet, pray for us that we may be generous to give our whole heart. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Volume III: Christmas—Book II, pp. 339-342.)

The people of Denmark preferred to remain in the darkness of their sins. They did not want to have their consciences singed with the burning torch of truth spoken by their own king, Saint Canute IV.

The late "Pope Francis"  believed that was “merciless” to singe the consciences of hardened sinners, which is why he went out of his way to embrace them even as they sin without demanding them to amend their lives by quitting their sins. Life is, as he said so many times, a big “party,” right?

Wrong.

The Roman Martyrology today also contains the name of the great Saint Wulstan, to whom we have prayed every day for the past nineteen years now since we learned of his life and his example.

Saint Wulstan was a truly humble priest, monk, and prior who became the Bishop of Worcester, England, before the Norman invasion in 1066, a time of great tumult for his own Anglo-Saxon people as they came to be governed by foreigners from across the English Channel. He did not castigate the conquerors, however, as he wanted to be able to exhort them in behalf of the cause of justice and the good of souls, a zeal that won for him the respect of King William I, sometimes referred to as William the Conqueror, who sought out the counsel of this humble and pious shepherd of his flock.

Dom Prosper Guerganer’s The Liturgical Year contains his own summary of Saint Wulstan’s life and the reading in the Divine Office that are no longer to be found in the Matins for this day:

Several dioceses in England celebrate on this day the feast of Saint Wulstan, Bishop of Worcester. The last of the Anglo-Saxon saints, Wulstan was worthy to close the long line of men and women who had earned for the country the proud title of “Insula Sanctorum.” His character as sketched by a contemporary is singularly attractive. A simple man, strong in his simplicity, yet kindly and gifted with a merry wit, he held straight on his course in God’s service as a priest, monk, prior, and bishop, spending himself in the laborious offices of his ministry, much more intent on the burdens of his position than on emoluments. A love of beauty ran through his life and manifested itself in building fine churches, in his care of books, in his love for the freshness of children.

In his long life of eighty-seven years Wulstan saw the gradual passing of the old order, the reigns of Ethelebert, Canute, Edward the Confessor and of his friend King Harold down to the fateful day when power passed into Norman hands [1066]. With all his love for his own land and dynasty the Saint gave not time to useless regrets. He had warned the people that for their sins the country would fall under the dominion of strangers, and when the conquest became a fact he threw his great influence into support of the new dynasty. But he was no time-server, and had no hesitation in confronting the Conqueror to demand redress of injustice done to his See. King William learned to admit the sturdy Saxon prelate, and Wulstan, instead of sharing the fate of nearly all the native bishops who were removed and replaced by Normans, remained in his See and was made the King’s lieutenant for the Midlands.(Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Volume III: Christmas—Book II, pp. 343-345.)

The following are the lessons of Saint Wulstan.

Wulstan whilst a simple priest had acquired to himself a great renown for holiness. Afterwards having become a monk of Worcester Prior, he was in a short time raised to the government of the same church. Almost entirely ignorant of secular learning, he gave himself wholly to spiritual science. He was numbered among the most eloquent speakers of the English language, in proof of which, this is principally to be remembered, that by his assiduous preaching he converted the citizens of Bristol, whom neither the regal nor the pontifical power could withdraw from the infamous slave trade.

Being made bishop, he sedulously fulfilled all the duties of a good shepherd. He began to visit all parts of his diocese, to give ordinations, to dedicate churches, to reprove sinners, and to animate the souls committed to his care, both by word and example, to the desire of eternal life. It frequently happened that he fasted from sunrise till nightfall whilst he was occupied in confirming children to the number of two or three thousand who were brought from all parts. Such was his meekness and zeal for souls in hearing confessions that persons came to him from all parts of England, and by his admonitions sinners amended their crimes by worthy deeds of penance.

Neither did he whilst watching over the salvation of others neglect his own. He served God by the constant celebration of Mass, by assiduous prayer, by continued abstinence from flesh-meat and by overflowing charity to the needy. The more humbly he esteemed himself, by so much the more his virtues were proclaimed by all, so that not only the English and Normans, but the kings and rulers of foreign nations also commended themselves to his prayers. He died, a very old man, in the year from the Incarnation of our Lord, one thousand and ninety-five, and was buried in the church of Worcester. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Volume III: Christmas—Book II, pp. 343-345.)

Yes, each of the saints mentioned above serve as rebukes, both individually and collectively, to the religious indifferentism, the blasphemies, the heresies, and the scandalous sacrileges promoted by the conciliar "popes," including Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, who has condemned "proselytizing" as had Karol Jozef Wojtyla, Joseph Alois Ratzinger, and Jroge Mario Bergoglio before him.

Saint Wulstan reproved sinners.

Bergoglio patted them on the back.

May the Rosaries we pray this day help to make reparation for the crimes of the conciliar revolutionaries and thus for restoration of a true pope on the Throne of Saint Peter, who will certainly seek  the conversion of men and their nations to the true Faith, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Prisca, pray for us.

Saints Marius, Martha, Audifax and Abucham, pray for us.

Sant Canute, King of Denmark, pray for us.

Saint Wulstan, pray for us.