Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
                 July 7, 2008

Ah, the Sweet Serenity of Dialogue

by Thomas A. Droleskey

On June 4, 2008, at the request of Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, His Excellency Bernard Fellay, went to Rome accompanied the 2nd Assistant General, Rev. Fr. Alain-Marc Nély.

During the interview, he was given a memorandum in the form of an ultimatum, demanding an answer by the end of the month of June. On June 23, contrary to the established custom, the Italian daily Il Giornale revealed the existence of the ultimatum and, the next day, published its content in its on-line edition. In the days following, the information was broadcast by all of the international press. Thus, to the urgency of the ultimatum was added media pressure.

Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos’ document expressed five demands: besides a positive answer requested before the end of June, the Society of Saint Pius X, in the person of its General Superior, had to commit itself (1) “to give a response proportionate to the pope’s generosity”; (2) “to avoid any public comment which would not respect the person of the Holy Father and would have a negative impact upon ecclesial charity;” (3) “to avoid claiming a magisterium superior to the Holy Father’s and not to set the Society in opposition to the Church;” (4) “to demonstrate its will to act in all honesty and ecclesial charity, and in the respect of the authority of the Vicar of Christ.”

We must observe that the very general -- not to say vague -- character of the demands singularly contrasts with the urgency of the ultimatum. The conditions seem to be meant to obtain an atmosphere favorable to a further dialogue, rather than imply any precise commitment on definite issues. The Society of Saint Pius X wishes that the dialogue be on the doctrinal level and take into accounts all the issues, which, if they were evaded, might jeopardize a canonical status hastily set up. The SSPX considers that the preliminary withdrawal of the 1988 decrees of excommunication would foster serenity in the dialogue.

The SSPX does not claim the exercise of a magisterium superior to the Holy Father’s, nor does it seek to oppose the Church. Following in the footsteps of its founder, it wants to hand down what it has received, namely “what has always been believed everywhere and by all.” It claims as its own the profession of faith addressed by Archbishop Lefebvre to Paul VI on September 24, 1975: “Jesus Christ has entrusted to His Vicar the charge of confirming his brethren in the faith, and has asked him to make sure that every bishop faithfully keep the deposit of the faith, according to St. Paul’s recommendation to Timothy.”

In a letter to Pope Benedict XVI, dated June 26, 2008, Bishop Fellay answered in this sense. Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos acknowledged receipt of the letter the next day.

Until further details are available, we will make no comment.

Fr. Alain Lorans ( DICI)


In other words, it is business-as-usual for the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X as they move ever closer to the One World Church of the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the "serenity" of dialogue? There has been no firm "rejection" of the demands made by Dario Castrillon "Cardinal" Hoyos at the behest of the conciliar Vatican on June 4, 2008, as some have contended in the past ten days or so. The novel process of the conciliar Vatican's attempts to "reconcile" a group claiming to "recognize" a putative Roman Pontiff while at the same time maintaining the "right" to "resist" him when they choose do so will continue in the "serenity of dialogue," according to the official spokesman for the Society of Saint Pius X, Father Alain Lorans.

Serenity of dialogue? It is amazing to behold how the conciliar revolutionaries have been able to use the semantic device of "dialogue" to make matters contained in the Deposit of Faith subject to negotiation and finessing so that those outside of "full communion" with the counterfeit church can achieve a "more perfect communion" without really abandoning their previous positions. Thus it is that the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X are attempting to maintain their own adherence to most of the Deposit of Faith, absent their novel ecclesiology and view of papal infallibility, while entering into a "more perfect communion" with the conciliar authorities whose apostasies they have opposed rather strenuously for thirty-eight years. Perhaps something approximating the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification that was made by the conciliarists and the Lutherans nine years ago could be issued as a result of the "serenity of dialogue" between the the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X and the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

A Catholic's understanding of the Deposit of Faith is non-negotiable. There is nothing for a Catholic to "negotiate" with apostates and blasphemers.We must accept the Faith whole and entire exactly as it has been transmitted to us down from the Apostles through Holy Mother Church under the infallible guidance of the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost. The [First] Vatican Council made this eminently clear:

Hence, that meaning of the sacred dogmata is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by Holy Mother Church, and there must never be an abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.... If anyone says that it is possible that at some given time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmata propounded by the Church which is different from that which the Church has always understood and understands: let him be anathema. [Vatican Council, 1870.]


What's to "negotiate," with or without a spirit of "serenity of dialogue," with apostates who do not believe that this perpetually binding dogmatic decree about the nature of dogmatic truth? What's to negotiate with apostates whose very words, both in speech and in writing, are the embodiment of the Modernist principles condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, and the principles of the New Theology that were condemned by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950? Those who desire to be in the "good graces" of the counterfeit church of conciliarism need not worry about seeking some way to "finesse" points of doctrine to provide them with figurative "fig leaves" by which they can cloak the nakedness of their surrender to the forces of Modernism and the New Theology. They should merely wave the white flag and surrender entirely. The Catholic Faith is never negotiable, which is why it is long, long past the time for the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X to admit that the apostates with whom they seek to "negotiate" in a spirit of "serenity of dialogue" have expelled themselves from the Catholic Church (see Number 9, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896) and that it is impossible for them to exercise any authority at all in the Catholic Church.

Ah, the sweet serenity of "dialogue." The conciliarists themselves have engaged in that "dialogue" with all manner of heretics and infidels in the past forty years. Conciliar "pontiffs" have most serenely praised voodoo witch doctors and shamans and other assorted practitioners of diabolical worship. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has most serenely walked into a mosque after he took off his shoes so as to signify that he believed he was entering into a "holy" place, even going to far as to turn in the direction of Mecca and assume the Mohammedan prayer position so as not to offend his infidel host. Who cares about offending God? Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has twice entered into a Talmudic synagogue with the utmost of serenity and was most serene and supine as he, who considers himself to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, was treated as an inferior to his Talmudic hosts. This same putative "pontiff" has with great serenity and equanimity and even joy esteemed the symbols of five false religions, including Talmudic Judaism and Mohammedanism, in Washington, District of Columbia, on Thursday, April 17, 2008. This is the man with whom the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X want to engage in the "serenity of dialogue?"

Those who wish such "serenity of dialogue" to bear the "fruit" of a mutually agreeable "reconciliation" with the authorities of the counterfeit church of conciliarism will see the Society of Saint Pius X take its place along with the "Catholic" Charismatic Renewal, Opus Dei, Focolare, Cursillo, the Sant'Egidio Community, the Shalom Catholic Community, the Chemin Neuf Community, the International Community of Faith and Light, Regnum Christi, Communion and Liberation, the Emmanuel Community, the Seguimi Lay Group of Human-Christian Promotion, and. among many, many others, the recently approved Neocatechumenal Way, whose multiple doctrinal errors have aroused harsh and exacting criticism from a number of conciliar "bishops" who have not lost the sensus Catholicus entirely. All aboard for the One World Church Express, y'all, after the sweet serenity of dialogue has been concluded. The destination is simply a place on the ecclesiastical Titanic along with these other groups and "movements" that have nothing at all to do with the Catholic Faith, and each of which will be represented later this month at World Youth Day in Sydney, Australia, much to the delight of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.

Although some believe that the "liberation" of the modernized--and increasingly more modernized--version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition will stamp out the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service, the truth of the matter is that the fullness of the Catholic Faith is not being taught in most Motu Mass locations. How can it be taught?

How can a priest, whether ordained validly or not, who owes obedience to his local "bishop" or to the "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei seek to defend the honor and majesty and the glory of the Most Blessed Trinity when He is blasphemed by a putative "pontiff." He must be silenced lest his people lose "the Mass," subordinating the integrity of the Faith to interests of short-term strategic expediency that is designed of its nature to accustom Catholics to silence in the face of outrages against God as the "price" of admission to and retention in "good standing" in the One World Church that is the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

How can a priest in a Motu community who understands the offense given to God by the Novus Ordo service complain about having to concelebrate the Novus Ordo service at least once a year when this is the expressed wish of the one he recognizes as the Sovereign Pontiff in the latter's accompanying letter to Summorum Pontificum a year ago today? And how will any priest in the Society of Saint Pius complain when asked to asked to concelebrate that Novus Ordo service at least once a year, especially if Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's desire, which has been leaked rather curiously in the midst of the communications that have flowed back and forth between His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior-General of the Society of Saint Pius X, and Dario Castrillon "Cardinal" Hoyos, the "President" of Pontifical Council Ecclesia Dei, to have the "Eucharistic Prayer" of the Novus Ordo service recited in Latin (and with the words qui pro vobis et pro multis in the attempted consecration of the wine in the chalice into the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ) becomes a reality?

Mind you, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is deadly serious about effecting a "reform of the reform." He has no intention of letting even his own "modernizations" to the modernization of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition promulgated by Angelo Roncalli/John XXXIII stand on their own indefinitely. He has made this quite clear, and the "leak" about his desire to have the "Eucharistic Prayer" recited in Latin in the Novus Ordo service (which would not undo the other offenses that said service gives to God and would not even be valid in most cases as most of the priests who would be reciting such a prayer would not be ordained validly) is only further proof of the fact that the following two statements are entirely accurate:

"Neither the Missal of Pius V and John XXIII -- used by a small minority -- nor that of Paul VI -- used today with much spiritual fruit by the greatest majority -- will be the final 'law of prayer' of the Catholic Church." (Father Federico Lombardi, Zenit, July 15, 2007.)

From this point of view, then, the new prayer for the Jews in the liturgy in the ancient rite does not weaken, but postulates an enrichment of the meaning of the prayer in use in the modern rite. Exactly like in other cases, it is the modern rite that postulates an enriching evolution of the ancient rite. In a liturgy that is perennially alive, as the Catholic liturgy is, this is the meaning of the coexistence between the two rites, ancient and modern, as intended by Benedict XVI with the motu proprio "Summorum Pontificum."

This is a coexistence that is not destined to endure, but to fuse in the future "in a single Roman rite once again," taking the best from both of these. This is what then-cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 2003 – revealing a deeply held conviction – in a letter to an erudite representative of Lefebvrist traditionalism, the German philologist Heinz-Lothar Barth. (Sandro Magister, A Bishop and a Rabbi Defend the Prayer for the Salvation of the Jews.)


While there will be great exclamations of hosannas all throughout the Motu world--and by many in the Society of Saint Pius X--about the leaked desire of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who is now giving out what purports to be Holy Communion on the tongue exclusively and as to those who assist at his Masses kneel at an altar rail, to have the Eucharistic Prayer recited in Latin in the Novus Ordo service, this news leak is more desire than substance, and very much timed to soothe those in the Society of Saint Pius X who want no part of any "regularization" with the conciliar Vatican.

Although Ratzinger/Benedict can "lead" by "example," if you will, by wearing more and more traditional vestments and by having Catholics kneel at the altar rail as they receive what purports to be Holy Communion on the tongue to those assisting at his Masses, thereby demonstrating what he wants in a "reform of the reform," the ultra-progressive revolutionaries who are opposed to any changes in the Novus Ordo service in the direction of Catholic tradition will shed their blood to prevent the use of the Latin language in the "Eucharistic Prayer" of the Novus Ordo service. Ratzinger/Benedict knows this to be the case, knowing also that such opposition will make him "look good" to traditionally-minded Catholics in the Motu world and with at least some who are attached to the Society of Saint Pius X, resulting in at least some of these traditionally-mined Catholics into being more silent about his forays into esteeming false religions and promoting the ability of those false religions to be "instruments" in the building of the "better world." This news leak is designed to provide cover for Bishop Fellay as he continues to engage in his "negotiations" with the conciliar Vatican in a spirit of "serenity of dialogue." 

No amount of cosmetic changes can make the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service a legitimate form of Catholic worship. It is founded in a desire to attack the Catholic Faith and to make what purports to be a rite of the Catholic Church acceptable to Protestants. Can the Novus Ordo ever be acceptable to God? Father Martin Stepanich, O.F.M., S.T.D., put the answer to that question in one word when I posed it to him on Saturday, July 5, 2008, "Never!"

Lost in this insane show of gamesmanship is the integrity of the Faith, which Ratzinger/Benedict attacks at its very roots by denying the nature of dogmatic truth, thereby attacking one of the very essences of God Himself, His immutability, in the process. Ratzinger/Benedict's "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity" is incompatible with the dogmatic decree of the [First] Vatican Council cited above, and it is incompatible with these provisions of The Oath Against Modernism, issued by Pope Saint Pius X on September 1, 1910, that he swore to uphold before being ordained to the priesthood on June 29, 1951:

Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. . . .

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. (The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.)


Has Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI ever believed this? Judge for yourselves:

In theses 10-12, the difficult problem of the relationship between language and thought is debated, which in post-conciliar discussions was the immediate departure point of the dispute.

The identity of the Christian substance as such, the Christian 'thing' was not directly ... censured, but it was pointed out that no formula, no matter how valid and indispensable it may have been in its time, can fully express the thought mentioned in it and declare it unequivocally forever, since language is constantly in movement and the content of its meaning changes. (Fr. Ratzinger: Dogmatic formulas must always change.)

The text [of the Second Vatican Council] also presents the various forms of bonds that rise from the different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms -- perhaps for the first time with this clarity -- that there are decisions of the Magisterium that cannot be a last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. Its nucleus remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times have influenced, may need further ramifications.

“In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last century about religious liberty, as well as the anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all, the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time. As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz said, for example, that the Church's anti-Modernist decisions render the great service of preserving her from immersion in the liberal-bourgeois world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they become obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at the proper moment.” (L'Osservatore Romano, July 2, 1990.)


"Reconciling" in the sweet "serenity of dialogue" with a man who holds such views means being silent about Pope Saint Pius X's own explicit condemnation of them:

Hence it is quite impossible [the Modernists assert] to maintain that they [dogmatic statements] absolutely contain the truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sense in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his relation to the religious sense. But the object of the religious sense, as something contained in the absolute, possesses an infinite variety of aspects, of which now one, now another, may present itself. In like manner he who believes can avail himself of varying conditions. Consequently, the formulas which we call dogma must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. Here we have an immense structure of sophisms which ruin and wreck all religion.

It is thus, Venerable Brethren, that for the Modernists, whether as authors or propagandists, there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church. Nor, indeed, are they without forerunners in their doctrines, for it was of these that Our predecessor Pius IX wrote: "These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery susceptible of perfection by human efforts." On the subject of revelation and dogma in particular, the doctrine of the Modernists offers nothing new. We find it condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX, where it is enunciated in these terms: ''Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the progress of human reason"; and condemned still more solemnly in the Vatican Council: ''The doctrine of the faith which God has revealed has not been proposed to human intelligences to be perfected by them as if it were a philosophical system, but as a divine deposit entrusted to the Spouse of Christ to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence also that sense of the sacred dogmas is to be perpetually retained which our Holy Mother the Church has once declared, nor is this sense ever to be abandoned on plea or pretext of a more profound comprehension of the truth." Nor is the development of our knowledge, even concerning the faith, barred by this pronouncement; on the contrary, it is supported and maintained. For the same Council continues: "Let intelligence and science and wisdom, therefore, increase and progress abundantly and vigorously in individuals, and in the mass, in the believer and in the whole Church, throughout the ages and the centuries -- but only in its own kind, that is, according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same acceptation." (Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)


Was Pope Saint Pius X wrong? Was he? Would Pope Saint Pius X countenance any kind of "negotiations," no less undertaken by a society bearing his own sainted name, with an apostate who holds these very condemned views to the core of his being? He would never countenance any such "dialogue" with those who have defected from the Catholic Faith.

As I have noted so frequently on this site in the past two years, we are grateful for the courage exhibited by stalwart defenders of the Faith who recognized apostasy for what it was back in the 1960s and thereafter, determining to have nothing at all to do with conciliarism or the apostates masquerading as ecclesiastical officials of the Catholic Church. Father Martin Stepanich, O.F.M., S.T.D., noted to us a few days ago that it was difficult at first to determine what exactly was happening in the early-1960s but that things got clearer with the passage of time that none of what was happening could come from the Catholic Church, which must always remain unspotted by error or any taint of doctrinal corruption.

With nine days to go before the Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, one of the ways that can help to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world is to implore the help of Our Lady under this powerful title. It was as Our Lady of Mount Carmel that the Mother of God appeared to Saint Bernadette Soubirous for the last time on July 16, 1858, nearly one hundred fifty years ago now, and it was as Our Lady of Mount Carmel that she appeared to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos for the last time on October 13, 1917. It is therefore a very wonderful idea to pray the following Novena, which was distributed by a Catholic last evening:

First Day—July 7

O Beautiful Flower of Carmel, most fruitful vine, splendor of heaven, holy and singular, who brought forth the Son of God, still ever remaining a pure virgin, assist us in our necessity! O Star of the Sea, help and protect us! Show us that you are our Mother! (pause and mention petitions) Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be… Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Second Day—July 8

Most Holy Mary, Our Mother, in your great love for us you gave us the Holy Scapular of Mount Carmel, having heard the prayers of your chosen son Saint Simon Stock. Help us now to wear it faithfully and with devotion. May it be a sign to us of our desire to grow in holiness. (pause and mention petitions) Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Third Day—July 9

O Queen of Heaven, you gave us the Scapular as an outward sign by which we might be known as your faithful children. May we always wear it with honor by avoiding sin and imitating your virtues. Help us to be faithful to this desire of ours. (pause and mention petitions) Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Fourth Day—July 10

When you gave us, Gracious Lady, the Scapular as our Habit, you called us to be not only servants, but also your own children. We ask you to gain for us from your Son the grace to live as you children in joy, peace and love. (pause and mention petitions) Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Fifth Day—July 11

O Mother of Fair Love, through your goodness, as your children, we are called to live in the spirit of Carmel. Help us to live in charity with one another, prayerful as Elijah of old, and mindful of our call to minister to God's people. (pause and mention petitions)
Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Sixth Day—July 12

With loving provident care, O Mother Most Amiable, you covered us with your Scapular as a shield of defense against the Evil One. Through your assistance, may we bravely struggle against the powers of evil, always open to your Son Jesus Christ. (pause and mention petitions) Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Seventh Day—July 13

O Mary, Help of Christians, you assured us that wearing your Scapular worthily would keep us safe from harm. Protect us in both body and soul with your continual aid. may all that we do be pleasing to your Son and to you. (pause and mention petitions) Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Eighth Day—July 14

You give us hope, O Mother of Mercy, that through your Scapular promise we might quickly pass through the fires of purgatory to the Kingdom of your Son. Be our comfort and our hope. Grant that our hope may not be in vain but that, ever faithful to your Son and to you, we may speedily enjoy after death the blessed company of Jesus and the saints. (pause and mention petitions) Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.

Ninth Day—July 15

O Most Holy Mother of Mount Carmel, when asked by a saint to grant privileges to the family of Carmel, you gave assurance of your Motherly love and help to those faithful to you and to your Son. Behold us, your children. We glory in wearing your holy ha bit, which makes us members of your family of Carmel, through which we shall have your powerful protection in life, at death and even after death. Look down with love, O Gate of Heaven, on all those now in their last agony! Look down graciously, O Virgin, Flower of Carmel, on all those in need of help! Look down mercifully, O Mother of our Savior, on all those who do not know that they are numbered among your children. Look down tenderly, O Queen of All Saints, on the poor souls! (pause and mention petitions)Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be…Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.


Prayers to Our Lady of Mount Carmel

Thou who, with special mercy, look upon those clothed in thy beloved Habit, cast a glance of pity upon me. Fortify my weakness with thy strength; enlighten the darkness of my mind with thy wisdom; increase my faith, hope and charity. Assist me during life, console me by thy presence at my death, and present me to the August trinity as thy devoted child, that I may bless thee for all eternity in Paradise. Amen.

Flos Carmeli

This is the prayer of St. Simon Stock, to whom the Scapular devotion with its promise was given. It has for seven centuries been called a prayer to the Blessed Mother which has never been known to fail in obtaining her powerful help.

O beautiful Flower of Carmel, most fruitful Vine,
Splendor of Heaven, holy and singular, who
brought forth the Son of God, still ever remaining
a Pure Virgin, assist me in this necessity.

O Star of the Sea, help and protect me!
Show me that thou art my Mother.

O Mary, Conceived without sin,
Pray for us who have recourse to thee!

Mother and Ornament of Carmel, Pray for us!
Virgin, Flower of Carmel, Pray for us!
Patroness of all who wear the Scapular, Pray for us!
Hope of all who die wearing the Scapular, Pray for us!
St. Joseph, Friend of the Sacred Heart, Pray for us!
St. Joseph, Chaste Spouse of Mary, Pray for us!
St. Joseph, Our Patron, Pray for us!
O sweet Heart of Mary, be my Salvation!


We must indeed use the shield of the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and the weapon of her Most Rosary, given, respectively by Our Lady to Saint Simon Stock in 1251 and to Saint Dominic de Guzman forty-three years before, in the year 1208, as we protect ourselves from the apostasies and betrayals and sacrileges of the present moment. We know that Our Lady's Immaculate Heart will triumph at the end. May we be some small instruments in planting a few seeds, given to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through that same Immaculate Heart, for the day when the Church Militant on earth, now in the throes of her Mystical Passion, Death and Burial, will, please God and by her own intercession, know a mystical Resurrection wherein there will be no further talk of the insanity of "serenity of dialogue," only a firm proclamation and adherence to the Deposit of Faith as It has been entrusted to her magisterial authority for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.

Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us!

Viva Cristo Rey!

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.

Saints Cyril and Methodius, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints


© Copyright 2008, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.