Boy, If Only The "Pope" Knew
by Thomas A. Droleskey
As been noted many times on this site, I projected into the mind of the late Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II my fondest desires for the restoration of what I thought was the Catholic Church after the disaster of the "Second" Vatican Council and the "pontificate" of Giovanni Montini/Paul VI. Specifically, I believed that, in additional to appointing "good" bishops to replace the "bad" bishops, Wojtyla/John Paul II was going to "fix" the "abuses" in the liturgical abuse par excellence, the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service.
Why did I believe this? As ever, I am so glad that you asked. I believed this delusion because I took false hope from words such as these, contained in "Pope" John Paul II's 1980 Holy Thursday letter to priests, Dominicae Cenae, February 24, 1980:
As I bring these considerations to an end, I would like to ask forgiveness -- in my own name and in the name of all of you, venerable and dear brothers in the episcopate. for everything which, for whatever reason, through whatever human weakness, impatience or negligence, and also through the at times partial, one-sided and erroneous application of the directives of the Second Vatican Council, may have caused scandal and disturbance concerning the interpretation of the doctrine and the veneration due to this great sacrament. And I pray the Lord Jesus that in the future we may avoid in our manner of dealing with this sacred mystery anything which could weaken or disorient in any way the sense of reverence and love that exists in our faithful people.
What I ignored for a long time after this, however, was the fact that Wojtyla/John Paul II was a full-throated supporter of the liturgical revolution, something that he reiterated throughout the very pages of Dominicae Cenae that seemed to me at the time to things that he "had" to say but did indeed believe to the depth of his conciliar being. The four paragraphs below came just after the passage cited above! I was worse than Mister Magoo:
May Christ Himself help us to follow the path of true renewal towards that fullness of life and of eucharistic worship whereby the Church is built up in that unity that she already possesses, and which she desires to bring to ever greater perfection for the glory of the living God and for the salvation of all humanity.
Permit me, venerable and dear brothers, to end these reflections of mine, which have been restricted to a detailed examination of only a few questions. In undertaking these reflections, I have had before my eyes all the work carried out by the Second Vatican Council, and have kept in mind Paul VI's Encyclical Mysterium Fidei, promulgated during that Council, and all the documents issued after the same Council for the purpose of implementing the post-conciliar liturgical renewal. A very close and organic bond exists between the renewal of the liturgy and the renewal of the whole life of the Church.
The Church not only acts but also expresses herself in the liturgy, lives by the liturgy and draws from the liturgy the strength for her life. For this reason liturgical renewal carried out correctly in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council is, in a certain sense, the measure and the condition for putting into effect the teaching of that Council which we wish to accept with profound faith, convinced as we are that by means of this Council the Holy Spirit "has spoken to the Church" the truths and given the indications for carrying out her mission among the people of today and tomorrow.
We shall continue in the future to take special care to promote and follow the renewal of the Church according to the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, in the spirit of an ever living Tradition. In fact, to the substance of Tradition properly understood belongs also a correct re-reading of the "signs of the times," which require us to draw from the rich treasure of Revelation "things both new and old."Acting in this spirit, in accordance with this counsel of the Gospel, the Second Vatican Council carried out a providential effort to renew the face of the Church in the sacred liturgy, most often having recourse to what is "ancient," what comes from the heritage of the Fathers and is the expression of the faith and doctrine of a Church which has remained united for so many centuries.
How I permitted myself to be deceived. Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II was, quite contrary to my own delusional hopes, propagandizing in behalf of the same kind of "ever-living tradition" as he claimed that the "substance of Tradition properly understood belongs also to a correct re-reading of the 'signs of the times,' which require us to draw the rich treasure of Revelation "things both new and old." It is this "spirit," John Paul II asserted, that must guide a proper implementation of the "liturgical renewal" that has given such great offense to God and has harmed so many souls. Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and his successor as the head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, are joined at the hip in believing in the Modernist concept of a "living tradition" that must be read according to "the signs of the times" that has been anathematized by the Catholic Church:
For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward
- not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence,
- but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.
Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.
The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.
Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .
3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.
And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.
But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1.)
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.)
Fathers Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict and Karol Wojtyla had to take this Oath Against Modernism before they were ordained to the sub-diaconate, diaconate and priesthood. How is the concept of what Wojtyla/John Paul called a "living tradition" that is "re-read" in light of "the signs of the times" or what Ratzinger/Benedict calls the "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity" in concert with keeping "faithfully, entirely, and sincerely" The Oath Against Modernism's pledge that priests will not assert that "dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age"?
I wasn't asking such a question in 1980 as I was focused on "fixing' the problems in the Novus Ordo service. Our liturgical 'restorer," "Pope" John Paul II, was "acting" to save what I thought was the "church" from the wicked ways of "unfaithful" innovators who had abused what I believed to be the Sacred Liturgy.
The problems did not go away, of course. As has been noted many times on this site, I waved copies of Inaestimabile Donum, issued by the then-named Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship, in the face of priest after priest in the conciliar structures in the 1980s when they did something egregious. They laughed at me. They read me the riot act as to how naive I was. Some said that no pope could ever tell them how to preside at the liturgy. And mine experiences were far from unique. The pages of The Wanderer were replete with such tales 1980s long before I began to make my own journalistic contributions to the field of documenting fruitless efforts to complain about abuses that were caused by the very thing man of us thought could be "fixed" by the good "pope" as he weighed in against the "bad" bishops.
Alas, the most of the conciliar "bishops," especially here in the United States of America, scoffed at Dominicae Cenae and Inaestimabile Donum. A retired admiral in the United States Navy was told by a chancery official in the "conservative" Diocese of Arlington that Inaestimabile Donum had never been "received" canonically by the American 'bishops" and thus were not bound by its reiteration of strictures contained in various postconciliar documents, including the prohibition against altar girls. The admiral was complaining about the antics of a presbyter who had been in Mount Saint Mary's Seminary with me who threatened to deck him for insisting upon kneeling to receive what he thought was Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in Holy Communion. Ah, yes, the peace and serenity that a true offering of Holy Mass is supposed to engender.
The "abuses" did not end. They continued. Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II himself participated in some of the most outrageous liturgical sacrileges that have ever been staged, and that is the proper word to describe his "rock" liturgies and his "youth liturgies" and his liturgies featuring the "inculturation" of the Gospel according to the plans of the now retired Archbishop Piero Marini, a direct acolyte of the nefarious Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, C.M., who planned the Novus Ordo service, and the specific guidelines that permitted such "inculturation of the Gospel" that are found in Paragraphs 395-399 of the 1997 edition of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (which was issued in its definitive English translation in 2002.) Piero Marini, who is no relation to the current "papal" master of ceremonies, "Monsignor" Guido Marini, admitted in 2003 that he used "papal" liturgies as a means to established precedents that would be implemented at the diocesan level. He certainly knew what he was doing as such "papal" travesties did indeed establish perverse precedents that are being followed to this day.
To this day? Isn't Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI "slowing the turning the ship around," isn't he restoring things gradually? Will you permit me to sell you some real estate in Brooklyn, New York, called the Brooklyn Bridge? The belief that the "pope" is "saving the day" today is as delusional as it was when I believed it thirty years ago.
Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II's last "encyclical letter," Ecclesia de Eucharistia, which was issued on April 17, 2003, included an exhortation to the world's conciliar "bishops" observe the "renewed" liturgy's norms and an apology for liturgical "abuses" that was almost identical to the one he had included in Dominicae Cenae twenty-three years before (which prompted me to write an article for The Remnant at the time entitled, "It's Deja Vu All Over Again"):
All of this makes clear the great responsibility which belongs to priests in particular for the celebration of the Eucharist. It is their responsibility to preside at the Eucharist in persona Christi and to provide a witness to and a service of communion not only for the community directly taking part in the celebration, but also for the universal Church, which is a part of every Eucharist. It must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many. A certain reaction against “formalism” has led some, especially in certain regions, to consider the “forms” chosen by the Church's great liturgical tradition and her Magisterium as non-binding and to introduce unauthorized innovations which are often completely inappropriate.
I consider it my duty, therefore to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone's private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated. The Apostle Paul had to address fiery words to the community of Corinth because of grave shortcomings in their celebration of the Eucharist resulting in divisions (schismata) and the emergence of factions (haireseis) (cf. 1 Cor 11:17-34). Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church. Precisely to bring out more clearly this deeper meaning of liturgical norms, I have asked the competent offices of the Roman Curia to prepare a more specific document, including prescriptions of a juridical nature, on this very important subject. No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands: it is too great for anyone to feel free to treat it lightly and with disregard for its sacredness and its universality.
The solution? More documents. More documents to "solve" a problem that has its roots in a rejection of the rigid "formalism" associated with the unvarnished Missal of Pope Saint Pius V. Liberals in the social realm always believe that minor adjustments or changes in various public policies they have implemented to "solve" social problems, each of which has arisen specifically because of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and institutionalized by the inter-related naturalistic forces of Judeo-Masonry. Rather than addressing root causes, therefore, liberal address the symptoms of social problems by means of increasing the size and the scope and the power of government through the state's confiscatory taxing powers without ever once realizing that the problems they seek to address have their remote cause in Original Sin and have as part of the proximate causes the Actual Sins of men and can be ameliorated only by the daily conversion of the souls of men as they seek to cooperate with the graces won for us on the wood of the Holy Cross by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood.
In like manner, of course, the conciliar revolutionaries, who are inebriated with the spirit of Protestantism (Bugnini and Montini/Paul VI both believed that what purported to be the Catholic liturgy had to be "adapted" to Calvinist :liturgy) and who, despite their protestations to the contrary, are also inebriated with the naturalistic spirit of Modernity ("progress," adapting the liturgy to the needs of "modern man," etc.), are unwilling to examine the utter fruitlessness of their efforts to "solve" liturgical problems that have been created, proximately speaking, by their own conciliar revolution against the Faith because the Novus Ordo is indeed the "chosen vessel" by which the spirit of conciliarism was meant to be the means by which the ethos of conciliarism was communicated and reinforced in the minds and the hearts of Catholics attached to the conciliar structures.
"Reforms" are always on the horizon in the conciliar structures. The current false "pontiff," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, is fully committed to what is called now the "ordinary form of the Roman Rite," the Novus Ordo service. Much in the manner of his predecessor, Ratzinger/Benedict is constantly stressing the need for the liturgy to be offered in a dignified manner, doing so when he addressed priests and presbyters of the Diocese of Rome on June 15, 2010:
The Holy Mass, celebrated in the respect of the liturgical norms and with a fitting appreciation of the richness of the signs and gestures, fosters and promotes the growth of Eucharistic faith. In the Eucharistic celebration we do not invent something, but we enter into a reality that precedes us, more than that, which embraces heaven and earth and, hence, also the past, the future and the present. This universal openness, this encounter with all the sons and daughters of God is the grandeur of the Eucharist: we go to meet the reality of God present in the body and blood of the Risen One among us. Hence, the liturgical prescriptions dictated by the Church are not external things, but express concretely this reality of the revelation of the body and blood of Christ and thus the prayer reveals the faith according to the ancient principle "lex orandi - lex credendi." And because of this we can say "the best catechesis on the Eucharist is the Eucharist itself well celebrated" (Benedict XVI, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation "Sacramentum Caritatis," No. 64). It is necessary that in the liturgy the transcendent dimension emerge with clarity, that of the mystery, of the encounter with the Divine, which also illumines and elevates the "horizontal," that is the bond of communion and of solidarity that exists between all those who belong to the Church. In fact, when the latter prevails, the beauty, profundity and importance of the mystery celebrated is fully understood. Dear brothers in the priesthood, to you the bishop has entrusted, on the day of your priestly Ordination, the task to preside over the Eucharist. Always have at heart the exercise of this mission: celebrate the divine mysteries with intense interior participation, so that the men and women of our City can be sanctified, put into contact with God, absolute truth and eternal love.
It's deja vu all over again all over again.
Have we seen the last of balloon liturgies (perhaps "balloon boy" can make an appearance in one of those) and clown liturgies and "rock" liturgies? Judge for yourselves:
Bordello Laterano 1 and
Bordello laterano 2. Where did this travesty take place? At the cathedral of the popes, the Basilica di San Giovanni Laterano. When did it take place? The Feast of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, Friday, June 11, 2010, at a "liturgy" "concelebrated" by conciliar priests and presbyters who are of the "charismatic" bent. Where can you find a synopsis of this liturgy? If you read the Italian language, you can read a description at
Messa in Latino.
Boy, if only the "pope" knew, huh? Oh, you say that the words from his June 15, 2010, address are a direct criticism of the travesty that occurred in that very basilica just four days before? Believe your delusions as I believed mine thirty years go. Sleep well with those delusions. Rest easy. They are delusions. What has happened to "Archbishop" Christoph Schonborn in the nearly five years after the travesties documented here (Catholic Church Conservation)? Not a thing. Nothing ever changes in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. And the things that offend God in the counterfeit church of conciliarism that have been so institutionalized all across the world in the past forty years are without precedent in the history of the Catholic Church. Not even the heretics and schismatics of yore stooped to the level of liturgical depravity as the conciliarists.
Then again, as I try to keep emphasizing, the Protestant Masonic Novus Ordo service is merely the vehicle to communicate the ethos of conciliarism and to inculcate it deep into the hearts and souls of Catholics who are as of yet attached to the structures of its counterfeit church. At the root of conciliarism is a fundamental re-definition of dogmatic truth, as noted above, that has been used to justify "papal" sacrileges, such as esteeming the symbols of false religions and calling places of false worship as "sacred" in the eyes of the true God of Divine Revelation, aberrant or unclear or ambiguous doctrines couched in a novel language that are expressions of the double-mindedness of Modernism.
Let me reiterate what I wrote last week:
Take heart, however, the Catholic Church cannot be responsible for any of this. Who teaches us this? The Fathers of the Council of Trent, who, just by the way, you understand, guided infallibly by none other than God the Holy Ghost:
CANON VII.--If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema. (Session Twenty-Two, Chapter IX, Canon VII, Council of Trent, September 17, 1562, CT022.)
What more can be said? None of the travesties of the past forty years can be sanctioned or permitted in any way by Holy Mother Church, she is as spotless and immaculate as Our Lady herself, who gave this instruction to the Venerable Mary of Agreda as recounted in the latter's The Mystical City of God:
243. And to the greater confusion of the negligent
ministers of the Church in our days, I desire thee to understand, that in his eternal decrees the Most High dispenses his infinite treasures of the souls through the
ministry of the prelates, priests, preachers, and teachers
of his divine word. As far as his will is concerned, they
might all be angelic rather than human in their holiness
and perfection; they might enjoy many privileges and
exemptions of nature and grace, and thus become fit
ministers of the Most High, if only they would not pervert the order of his infinite wisdom and if they lived up
to the dignity to which they are called and chosen before
all others. This infinite kindness of God is just as great
now, as in the first ages of the Church; the inclination of
the highest Goodness to enrich souls is not changed, nor
can it be; his condescending liberality has not diminished;
the love of his Church is always at its height; his mercy
is just as much concerned at the miseries of men, which
in our times are become innumerable; the clamor of the
sheep of Christ is louder than ever; the prelates, priests
and ministers are more numerous than heretofore. If
this is so, to what is to be attributed the loss of so many
souls and the ruin of the Christian people? Why is it,
that the infidels not only do not enter the Church, but
subject it to so much affliction and sorrow? that the prelates and ministers do not shine before the world, exhibiting the splendors of Christ, as in the ages gone
by and in the primitive Church?
244. O my daughter, I invite thee to let thy tears flow
over this loss and ruin. Consider how the stones of the
sanctuary are scattered about in streets of the city (Thren. 4, 1). See how the priests of the Lord have
assimilated themselves to the people (Is. 24, 2), when,
on the contrary, they should raise the people to the holiness, which is due to priesthood. The sacerdotal dignity
and the precious vestments of virtue are soiled by contagion with the worldly ; the anointed of the Lord, consecrated solely to his worship and intercourse, have lapsed
from their noble and godlike station; they have lost their
beauty in debasing themselves to vile actions, unworthy
of their exalted position among men. They affect vanity;
they indulge greed and avarice; they serve their own interest; they love money, they place their hopes in treasures of silver and gold; they submit to the flatteries and
to the slavery of the worldly and powerful; and, to their
still lower degradation, they subject themselves to the petty whims of women, and sometimes make themselves participants in their counsels of malice and wickedness.
There is hardly a sheep in the fold of Christ, which recognizes in them the voice of its Pastor, or finds from
them the nourishment of that redeeming virtue and holiness, which they should show forth. The little ones ask
for bread, and there is none to distribute (Thren. 4, 4).
And if it is dealt out in self-interest or as a compliment, how can it afford wholesome nourishment to the necessitous and infirm from such leprous hands? How shall
the heavenly Physician confide to such administrators the
medicine of life? Or how can the guilty ones intercede
and mediate mercy for those who are less, or even equally, guilty?
245. These are the reasons why the prelates and priests
of our times do not perform the miracles of the Apostles
and disciples, and of those who in the primitive Church
imitated their lives by an ardent zeal for the honor of the
Lord and the conversion of souls. On this account the
treasures of the blood and death of Christ in the Church
do not bear the same fruits, either in his priests and
ministers, nor in the other mortals; for if they neglect
and forget to make them fruitful in themselves, how
can they expect them to flow over on the rest of the human family? On this account the infidels are not converted on learning of the true faith, although they live
within sight of the princes of the Church, the ministers
and preachers of the Gospel. The Church in our times
is richer in temporal goods, rents and possessions; it
abounds with learned men, great prelacies, and multiplied
dignities. As all these advantages are due to the blood
of Christ, they ought all to be used in his honor and service, promoting the conversion of souls, supporting his
poor and enhancing the worship and veneration of his
246. Is this the use made of the temporal riches of
the Church? Let the captives answer, whether they are
ransomed by the rents of the Church; let the infidels testify, whether they are converted, whether heresies are extirpated at the expense of the ecclesiastical
treasures. But the public voice will loudly proclaim, that
from these same treasures palaces were built, primogenitures established, the airy nothingness of noble titles
bought; and, what is most deplorable, it is known to
what profane and vile uses those that succeed in the ecclesiastical office put the treasures of the Church, how
they dishonor the High-priest Christ and in their lives
depart just as far from the imitation of Christ and the
Apostles, as the most profane men of the world. If the
preaching of the divine word by these ministers is so dead
and without power of vivifying the hearers, it is not the
fault of truth or of the holy Scriptures; but it is because
of the abuse and of the distorted intentions of those that
preach it. They seek to compromise the glory of Christ
with their own selfish honor and vain esteem, the spiritual goods, with base acquisition of stipends; and if those two selfish ends are reached, they care not for other results of their preaching. Therefore they wander away
from the pure and sincere doctrine, and sometimes even
from the truth, which the sacred authors have recorded
in the Scriptures and according to which the holy teachers have explained them; they slime it over with their
own ingenious subtleties, seeking to cause rather the
pleasure and admiration of their hearers than their advancement. As the divine truths reach the ears of the
sinners so adulterated, they impress upon the mind rather the ingenious sophistry of the preacher, than the
charity of Christ; they bring with it no force or efficacy
for penetrating the hearts, although full of ingenious artifice to delight the ears.
247. Let not the chastisement of these vanities and
abuses, and of others unknown to the world, astonish
thee, my dearest, and be not surprised, that divine justice
has so much forsaken the prelates, ministers and preachers of his word, or that the Catholic Church, having
such an exalted position in its beginnings, should now be
brought to such low estate. And if there are some priests
and ministers, who are not infected with these lamentable
vices, the Church owes so much the more to my divine
Son in these times, when He is so deeply offended and
outraged. With those that are zealous, He is most liberal; but they are few in number, as is evident from the
ruin of the Christian people and from the contempt into
which the priests and preachers of the Gospel have fallen.
For if the number of the perfect and the zealous workers
were great, without a doubt sinners would reform and
amend their lives ; many infidels would be converted; all
would look upon and hear with reverence and fear such
preachers, priests and prelates, they would respect them
for their dignity and holiness, and not for their usurped authority and outward show, which induces a reverence
too much like worldly applause and altogether without
fruit. Do not be afraid or abashed for having written all
this for they themselves know that it is the truth and thou dost not write of thy own choice, but at my command.
Hence bewail such a sad state, and invite heaven and
earth to help thee in thy weeping ; for there are few who
sorrow on account of it, and this is the greatest of all the
injuries committed against the Lord by the children of
the Church. (The Venerable Mary of Agreda, The Mystical City of God: Book IV: The Coronation, pp. 232-236.)
Let those who have the supernatural eyes of the soul to see that these words of Our Lady apply now just as much as they did in the time they were spoken accept that fact. Others will just have move along to some other portal on the internet to find comforting words of false reassurance that "Pope" Benedict XVI is a great "restorer" of the Catholic Faith.
We must pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, accept with joy and with gratitude each of the sufferings and calumnies and difficulties that come our way as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
The path to Heaven can be trod only by those who are willing to bear the Cross and to lift it high in their daily lives. considering it our privilege to hear the Immemorial Mass of Tradition offered at the hands of true bishops and priests who reject conciliarism, seeking only to live in such a way that we will be ready at all times to die in a state of Sanctifying Grace as a member of the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.
It's the Faith that matters, the entire Faith without any compromises, now and for all eternity.
Aren't we willing to suffer some more for the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary?
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Our Lady of Fatima, 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 Juliana Falconieri, pray for us.
Saints Gervase and Protase, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints