Finding Conciliarism's Irreducible Minimum At Long Lost
by Thomas A. Droleskey
If memory serves me correctly, there was once a book, published in 2002, I think, in which one of the to coauthors, trying to find a defense upon which to acquit Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II of the heresy proved in the preceding several hundreds of pages, claimed gratuitously and without a shred of dogmatic evidence or support his contention with any writings from the Church Fathers that his defendant remained as the "pope" as he held to an "irreducible minima" of the Catholic Faith. (I am sure that there are those in cyberspace who can help me out with the name of the book. It is our library. I even endorsed its second printing. I am just not going to look for it right now as the hour is very late.)
The "irreducible minima" defense used to acquit the conciliar "pope" and the counterfeit church they head, however, has not a shred of dogmatic or Patristic evidence to support. Indeed, Pope Leo XIII reminded us in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, that Saint Augustine, who, once again if memory serves me correctly, is one of the Church Fathers, held that those who defect the from the Faith on a single point fell from It in Its entirety:
The Church, founded on these principles and mindful
of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she
has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she
regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who
held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. "There
can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the
whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison,
infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by
Apostolic tradition" (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).
The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who
were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the
Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of
doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius,
Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their
times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to
a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the
very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in
all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic
or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies,
which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one
single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88). (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)
The fact that some of our latter day Modernists by way of the "new theology" that was condemned by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, hold to some tenets of the Faith, although, truth be told, it is not infrequently the case that what appearance to be belief in a tenet of Faith on the part of conciliarists is simply appearance and not reality, does not mean that they are members of the Catholic Church. The latter day apostles of Modernism by way of the "new theology" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism have a compulsion to "redefine" the Faith and to express It thereafter in ambiguous terms that are designed to confuse people into believing them to be profound thinkers who have to be correct because they appear to be "so intellectual." Pope Saint Pius X described such men as follows:
Would that they had but displayed less zeal and energy in propagating
it! But such is their activity and such their unwearying labor on behalf
of their cause, that one cannot but be pained to see them waste such
energy in endeavoring to ruin the Church when they might have been of
such service to her had their efforts been better directed. Their
artifices to delude men's minds are of two kinds, the first to remove
obstacles from their path, the second to devise and apply actively and
patiently every resource that can serve their purpose. They
recognize that the three chief difficulties which stand in their way are
the scholastic method of philosophy, the authority and tradition of the
Fathers, and the magisterium of the Church, and on these they wage
unrelenting war. Against scholastic philosophy and theology they use the
weapons of ridicule and contempt. Whether it is ignorance or fear, or
both, that inspires this conduct in them, certain it is that the passion
for novelty is always united in them with hatred of scholasticism, and
there is no surer sign that a man is tending to Modernism than when he
begins to show his dislike for the scholastic method. Let the Modernists
and their admirers remember the proposition condemned by Pius IX: "The
method and principles which have served the ancient doctors of
scholasticism when treating of theology no longer correspond with the
exigencies of our time or the progress of science." They
exercise all their ingenuity in an effort to weaken the force and
falsify the character of tradition, so as to rob it of all its weight
and authority. But for Catholics nothing will remove the authority of
the second Council of Nicea, where it condemns those "who dare,
after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical
traditions, to invent novelties of some kind...or endeavor by malice or
craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic
Church"; nor that of the declaration of the fourth Council of Constantinople: "We
therefore profess to preserve and guard the rules bequeathed to the
Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, by the Holy and most illustrious
Apostles, by the orthodox Councils, both general and local, and by
everyone of those divine interpreters, the Fathers and Doctors of the
Church." Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius IX,
ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following
declaration: "I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and
ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of the
Church.'' (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
Pope Gregory XVI, writing seventy-five years before Pope Saint Pius X issued Pascendi Dominci Gregis, described certain "thinkers" in his own day in the first half of the Nineteenth Century who present themselves today to be--and are accepted by over ninety-nine percent of Catholics and non-Catholics worldwide as--officials of the Catholic Church when they are but spiritual robber barons who are enemies of Christ the King and thus of the souls He redeemed by means of shedding every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross:
Indeed you will accomplish this
perfectly if, as the duty of your office demands, you attend to
yourselves and to doctrine and meditate on these words: "the universal
Church is affected by any and every novelty" and the admonition
of Pope Agatho: "nothing of the things appointed ought to be
diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved
both as regards expression and meaning." Therefore may the unity which
is built upon the See of Peter as on a sure foundation stand firm. May
it be for all a wall and a security, a safe port, and a treasury of
countless blessings. To check the audacity of those who attempt to
infringe upon the rights of this Holy See or to sever the union of the
churches with the See of Peter, instill in your people a zealous
confidence in the papacy and sincere veneration for it. As St. Cyprian
wrote: "He who abandons the See of Peter on which the Church was
founded, falsely believes himself to be a part of the Church. . . .
This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must
be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil
affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest
impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the
death of the soul is worse than freedom of error," as Augustine was wont
to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the
narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil,
propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit" is open from which
John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which
locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation
of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws
-- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for
wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil,
namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire
for novelty. . . .
Nor can We predict happier times for
religion and government from the plans of those who desire vehemently to
separate the Church from the state, and to break the mutual concord
between temporal authority and the priesthood. It is certain that that
concord which always was favorable and beneficial for the sacred and the
civil order is feared by the shameless lovers of liberty.
But for the other painful causes We
are concerned about, you should recall that certain societies and
assemblages seem to draw up a battle line together with the followers of
every false religion and cult. They feign piety for religion; but they
are driven by a passion for promoting novelties and sedition
everywhere. They preach liberty of every sort; they stir up disturbances
in sacred and civil affairs, and pluck authority to pieces.(Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
It is the conciliarists, not those who have rejected their nonexistent authority, who have separated themselves from the See of Peter and who have set themselves up at officials of the Church whose doctrine and liturgy they despise and have endeavored mightily for these past fifty year to "repeal and replace," to borrow a phrase that is being used by the naturalist of the false opposite of the "right" who is in the process of (surprise, surprise) reinventing himself yet again as a "centrist" (which is how he governed in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to provide RomneyCare as the prototype for ObamaCare--see Reinventing Romney).
Saint Francis de Sales explained that those who defect from the Faith or put It in to question in any way are simply not Catholics:
On this day preachers praise the virtue of the
Canaanite woman in various ways. For myself, I will treat of faith,
showing you what it is. I will attempt to show the relationship between
what I have to say to you with what occurred in the Gospel between Our
Lord and the Canaanite woman [Matt. 15: 21-28.] In this way you will
learn the qualities that faith should have.
When the Saviour said: Woman, how great is your
faith, was it because the woman's faith was greater than ours? Certainly
not as regards its object, because faith has for its object the truths
revealed by God or the Church, and it is nothing else but an adhesion of
our understanding to these truths, which it finds both beautiful and
good. Consequently, it comes to believe them, and the will comes to love
them. for just as goodness is the object of the will, beauty is that of
the understanding. In our day-to-day life, goodness is coveted through
our sense appetites and beauty is loved through our eyes. In our
spiritual life, it happens in the same way in regard to the truths of
the faith. These truths are good, sweet, and true, and are not only
loved and desired by the will, but are also valued by the understanding
because of the beauty it finds in them. They are beautiful because they
are true; for beauty is never without truth, nor truth without beauty.
Moreover, beautiful things which are not true are not really beautiful
either. They are false and deceitful.
Now the truths of the faith, being true indeed, are
loved because of the beauty of this truth, which is the object of the
understanding. I say loved, for although the will has goodness for the
direct object of tis love, nevertheless when the beauty of revealed
truths is represented to it by the understanding, it also discovers
goodness there, and loves this goodness and beauty of the mysteries of
our faith. In order to have great faith, the understanding must perceive
the beauty of this faith. For this reason when Our Lord desires to draw
some creature to knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2: 4) he always reveals
its beauty to him. The understanding, feeling itself drawn or
captivated by it, communicates this truth to the will, which accordingly
loves it for the goodness and beauty it recognizes there. Finally, the
love that these two powers have for revealed truths prompts the person
to forsake everything in order to believe them and embrace them. This is
done spiritually. All this helps to explain how faith can be said to be
nothing else but an adhesion of the understanding and will to divine
With reference to its object, faith cannot be
greater for some truths than for others. Nor can it be less with regard
to the number of truths to be believed. For we must all believe the very
same thing, both as to the object of faith as well as to the number of
truths. All are equal in this because everyone
must believe all the truths of faith--both those which God Himself has
directly revealed, as well as those he has revealed through His Church.
Thus, I must believe as much as you and you as much as I, and all other
Christians similarly. He who does not believe all these mysteries is not
Catholic and therefore will never enter Paradise. (Saint Francis de
Sales, The Sermons of Saint Francis de Sales for Lent Given in 1622, republished by TAN Books and Publishers for the Visitation Monastery of Frederick, Maryland, in 1987, pp. 34-37.)
So much for
the utterly absurd claim that there are a "irreducible minima" of truths by
which anyone, no less one of the conciliar "popes," can hold an thus remain a member of the Catholic Church even
though he denies or puts into question many others. Every truth of the Faith. It does not get much clearer, does it?
Gee, what do the conciliarists deny, doubt or put into question?
Well, for the sake of my newfound brevity and my need for a night of rest as it is after Midnight on the Feast of Saint Bruno and the First Sunday of the month of October, the month of Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary, let me provide you with a little reminder, I will simply remind you that the great facade upon which all of the falsehoods of conciliarism (the new ecclesiology, false ecumenism, episcopal collegiality, inter-religious dialogue and "prayer" services, religious liberty, separation of Church and State, placing into question Limbo and attempting to redefine Purgatory--see From Sharp Focus to Fuzziness) reside is the denial of the nature of dogmatic truth, which is the same thing as denying the very nature of God Himself. For a recent reminder of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's warfare on the nature of dogmatic truth, see "Purifying The Memory" In Order To Bury The Truth).
A perfect summary of what the conciliarists believe has been bestowed upon us by participants in the recent conference to commemorate the upcoming fiftieth anniversary of the opening of the "Second" Vatican Council by Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII on October 12, 1962, the Feast of the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary:
The teachings of the Second Vatican Council remain an essential basis
for the new evangelization and ongoing Church renewal, said scholars at the
"Vatican II: For the Next Generation" conference.
Boston College theologian Richard Gaillardetz, speaking at the conference at Saint Paul University Sept. 27-29, compared the council to an "unfinished building site."
In summing up the
contributions of several theologians during the conference before 300
participants, Gaillardetz recalled St. Peter's Basilica in Rome "was built in the 16th century
while the old building was still standing." The work of the council
fathers remains unfinished.
Gaillardetz pointed to six
pillars of Vatican II teaching.
1. Vatican II brought a
more Trinitarian and personalist view of divine revelation, instead of the old
propositional model that equated doctrine with revelation, he said. God is
inviting us into a personal relationship with the Father, through the Son,
Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit.
While doctrine guides
Catholics towards the truth, it can only point to revelation, he said.
2. The council stressed
engagement in dialogue, something Saint Paul University theologian Catherine
Clifford said "deeply marked" the experience of the council fathers
in the 1960s.
"Their experience was
one of deepening awareness of the Church as a communion of all the baptized,
whose inner vitality and outreach are contingent upon the synergetic
cooperation of all as we place our gifts at the service of God's Spirit.
"Without a true dialogue the creative dynamism of that communion is at
Clifford spoke of dialogue
in concentric circles: within the Church; with other Christians; with religious
believers of other faiths; and with the world.
3. The council stressed
baptism as the sacrament through which all the baptized participate in the
priesthood of Christ, so that the gifts of the people of God might be released,
4. The council placed a
new emphasis on the Holy Spirit, Who gives both hierarchic and charismatic
gifts. The gifts that bring order and governance to the Church and those that
reside in the lay faithful come from the same source, Gaillardetz said. The
role of the priest is to test gifts among the faithful, not to extinguish them.
5. The council stressed
ecclesial collegiality while at the same time embracing papal primacy and
infallibility. This was a move away from what Gaillardetz described as a
monarchical model of the Pope that had developed during the feudal era to an
older model of primacy of the Bishop of Rome in unity with the other bishops.
6. The council called the
Catholic Church to "the humility of a pilgrim church." It's not only
that individually we are pilgrim, Gaillardetz said, "The Church itself is
on a journey" until the end of history.
Gaillardetz explained that
these six new pillars are set against the old structure of the Church, which he
called the "Gregorian edifice." Pope Gregory VII established a
monarchical structure to protect the Church against the interference of the
nobility about 1,000 years ago, making him "a quasi-imperial figure."
Prior to that the model
had been collegiality and the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, he said. In the
very early Church, there had been less focus on hierarchy and more on
The older Church model
also had a more static model of the Church as founded by Christ in history
rather than being continually renewed and re-founded by the Holy Spirit since
then, he said.
The older Church model
took an "illuminist theory of divine revelation," in which revelation
came "from on high," illuminating Church leaders, with divine
revelation "trickling down to the rest of us," Gaillardetz said.
"The beauty and substance of divine revelation were identified with
The duty of the lay
people, he noted, was to obey. The council stressed that the Christian faithful
should also be able to discern the truths of the faith.
The sacral nature of the
priesthood separates clergy and people on an ontological basis, he said. We
must believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist to accept that "the
Eucharist transforms us into Christ's Body."
Clifford pointed out Pope
John XXIII made it clear "the council must do more than simply repeat the
teachings of the past," though the Pope carefully distinguished between
the "perennial 'substance' of the faith' and 'the way it was being
The council fathers
"carried out an important balancing act" between
"ressourcement," a going back to the Gospel and Patristic sources,
and "aggiornamento," or the updating of Church teaching to make it
more easily understood by contemporaries, Clifford said. "The Church is
called to mediate a timeless truth in a changing social, cultural, and
"We have a tendency
to answer questions nobody's asking," Gaillardetz said. "We have to
recognize the new contours of human existence, to allow the newspaper to talk
Gaillardetz said the
council calls the Church to "holy conversion." Dialogue is not
relativistic, wishy-washy, or weak, he said. "It's a demanding ecclesial
habit" that requires "eschatological humility" and acknowledges
"we don't have answers to every question."
"Dialogue requires the risk of ongoing conversion, that
ever-deepening penetration into the Paschal mystery," he said. (Vatican II sets agenda for ongoing renewal, scholars say.)
A correspondent wrote to ask, rhetorically, of course, who believes in what these alleged "scholars" asserted at their recently concluded conference at Boston College which advertises itself as a college that is within "the Jesuit, Catholic tradition," an untruth for which they will have to answer to Saint Ignatius of Loyola directly when they die.
Who believes in this mostly accurate summary of the conciliarist credo?
Well, I think I can give you just a few names of the living and the deceased who fall into this category.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
Timothy Michael Dolan
Gerhard Ludwig Muller.
Ah, remember Gerhard Ludwig Muller? Sure you do. Remember? He is the recently appointed prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who has denied the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Mary in an attempt "explain" it in a "mystical" manner. (See Deft? Daft Is More Like It, part two, Daft? Deft Is More Like It, part three, Does The Defense of Catholic Truth Matter To You?, When Will The Madness End?, part one and Memo To Bishop Fellay: Ratzinger/Benedict Really, Really, Really, Really, Really Loves Gerhard Ludwig Muller.)
Well, he is blubbering once again about the on-again/off-again soap opera between the Society of Saint Pius X and his own conciliar church of fakes, phonies and frauds (a soap opera that has been most examined most recently in Back To The Future and will be revisited in part two of this series on Monday or Tuesday of the coming week).
Following the lead of so many other conciliar officials, starting with Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI himself, Muller has caricatured Bishop Richard Williamson's statements on the crimes committed by agents of the Third Reich committed against adherents of the Talmud, calling "Holocaust denial" "absolutely unacceptable," calling to mind Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II's blasphemy of referring to the Auschwitz concentration camp as the "Golgotha of modern time" (see Message of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II on the Fiftieth Anniversary of the End of World War II:
Williamson is a separate problem to this reconciliation process. It is
simply unacceptable that a Christian or even more a bishop — of course
he is not a Catholic bishop, as a bishop is only Catholic when he is in
full communion with the Pope, the Successor of Peter, which Williamson
is not — denies all that the Nazis had done against the Jewish people,
their exterminations. How is it possible to be so cold-hearted about
this? It is absolutely unacceptable, but this is a separate problem.
They [SSPX] need to accept the complete doctrine of the Catholic
Church: the confession of faith, the Creed, and also accept the
magisterium of the Pope as it is authentically interpreted. That is
necessary. They also need to accept some forms of development in the
liturgy. The Holy Father recognized the perennial validity of the
extraordinary form of the liturgy, but they also must accept that the
new ordinary form of the liturgy, developed after the Council, is valid and legitimate. (Gerhard Ludwig Muller on the SSPX and His Patently Heretical Writings. This particular paragraph and others in the interview relating to it will be the focus of part two of this series.)
This is a caricature of what Bishop Williamson said in an interviewed taped at the Society of Saint Pius X seminary in Regensburg, Germany (a city whose conciliar "bishop" at the time was Muller himself), that aired on Swedish television on Wednesday, January 21, 2009. He did not deny all of the crimes committed by the Nazis against adherents of the Talmud. He did not justify those crimes. He merely put into question the nature and extent of those crimes, something that historians have done. To accept the "party line" on the "Golgotha of modern time," however, is the absolute irreducible minimum for being in "full, active and conscious participation" in the life of the counterfeit church of conciliarism. (For a review of the articles written in 2009 about Bishop Williamson's remarks and the conciliar reaction to them, see Those Who Deny The Holocaust, Disciples of Caiphas, Under The Bus, Nothing New Under the Conciliar Sun, Story Time in Econe, Yes, Sir, Master Scribe and No Crime Is Worse Than Deicide
Moreover, of course, Gerhard Ludwig Muller's demands upon the Society of Saint Pius X, whose leaders still, yes, incredibly enough, seem intent on forging ahead with their submersion into the One World Ecumenical Church of conciliarism despite all of the roadblocks that have been erected by Ratzinger/Benedict and his subordinates far, are not made upon the likes of his fellow German, Robert Zollitsch, the conciliar archbishop of Freising in Breisgau, Germany, who denied on Holy Saturday, April 11, 2009, that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ died on the wood of the Holy Cross in atonement for our sins. A full one thousand, two hundred seventy-four days (1,274)--just to let you know that I am keeping a count of the days--has passed without a word of "papal" rebuke offered to Zollitsch. Not a word.
Bishop Williamson? He cannot "return" to a false church that he desires to be in separation from, which is why we must pray that he read Gregorius's The Chair is Still Empty. Yes, it is now possible to assert that conciliarist doctrine admits of one "irreducible minimum" for acceptance, belief in a matter of secular history that is not, quite obviously, contained in the Deposit of Faith. One can believe in the ideology of evolutionism. One can believe in the one conciliarist myth after another. Question a point of secular history? Unacceptable. Intolerable.
Deny the nature of dogmatic truth? Ah, with that, you see, you get to the "pope." Just make sure to be caring about doing a background check on those candidates who apply to be your butler.
When this treachery end? When will otherwise sane, intelligent an otherwise rational human beings stop referring to an arch-heretic, Joseph Ratzinger, as a true Successor of Saint Peter and his fellow band of arch-heretics, men such as Gerhard Ludwig Muller,as "bishops" and officials in the Catholic Church end?
These heretics and blasphemers in the counterfeit church of conciliarism are being bolder and bolder in their evil proclamations. They seem to be unable to hold their tongues even for a moment as they boast of of the revolutionary doctrines that it is not unreasonable to believe that Pope Saint Pius X could foresee as spreading universally at some point if Modernism merely went "underground" without being yanked out by the roots.
When will this treachery?
It will end in God's good time as He sees fit.
Sin abounds in the world. Sin abounds in the lives of Catholics all up and down and across the vast expanse of the ecclesiastical divide. Sin abounds even in our own hearts and souls, especially when we lose sight of the fact that God has known from all eternity that these terrible events through which we are living would occur.
Take heart, however. Yes, take heart with the courage and love of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. It is a privilege, yes, verily a privilege, I tell you, to live in these challenging times as this is time that God has ordained from all eternity for us to be alive. This means that there is work, important work, for each and every one of us to do as we seek to sanctify and save our souls during this time of apostasy and betrayal. We must plant seeds for the restoration of the Church Militant on earth and of Christendom in the world.
No, we may not live long enough to see this restoration. Moses was permitted to see the Promised Land of Canaan but he was not permitted by God to enter because of the infidelity of the Jewish people he had led out of the desert following their liberation from captivity to the Pharaoh, himself an image of he devil. We may not live enough to see the restoration of the Church Militant on earth and of Christendom in the world because of our own infidelities, which is we should and must embrace with gratitude each and every chastisement that comes our way, especially those that bring us low, very low, before our fellow men. Everything is revealed on the Last Day at the General Judgment of the living and the dead. Why not accept the chastisement that comes from recognizing the stupidity and madness of the counterfeit church of concilairism and of those who think that they "resist" and "sift through" the words and actions of a true pope.
Every Rosary we pray will help us console the good God as we seek to make reparation to Him through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for all sins and those of our whole word, especially by praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.
Be cheerful in this time of apostasy and betrayal. There is work to do as we plant seeds for Christ the King through Mary our Immaculate Queen.
What are waiting for?
Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!
Vivat Christus Rex! 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.
Saint Bruno, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints