Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
                 July 21, 2007

Hook, Line and Sinker

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Many of us took the "bait" that was the "party line" of conservative apologists for conciliarism, preferring to think that the clearly ambiguous texts of the "Second" Vatican Council did not present any substantial problems dogmatically. We stood by as one theological "expert" after another tried to assure us that the conciliar documents just needed some "tightening" up here and there. We closed our eyes as the false ecumenism of conciliarism made many of our own efforts to seek converts to the Catholic Church futile as prospective converts wound up being turned away by "pastors" who told them that they were "fine" in the false religions in which they found themselves.

Like the mythical Sisyphus, who was punished eternally by having to push a boulder up a hill only to have it roll back down on him time and time again, we in the "conservative" camp of conciliarism, people who believed ourselves to working in behalf of the Catholic Church, bewailed the "bad" bishops and and worked hard to try to "expose" them to the authorities in the Vatican, where we were greeted with polite contempt over and over again. Little did it dawn on us that the problem rested in conciliarism itself and in the antipopes masquerading as the Successors of Saint Peter. And little could we accept that the Novus Ordo Missae, which caused us so much consternation in parish after parish as a result of what we thought were "liturgical abuses," was the liturgical abuse par excellence. "Things will get fixed," we kept telling ourselves time and time again. "Things will get fixed."

"Things" did not get fixed. Those of us who could be termed "conservatives" watched our blood pressure rise as sacrileges took place in the context of what we believed to be the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (many of which I documented in G.I.R.M. Warfare). Some of us waved copies of Inaestimabile Donum in the faces of the liturgical innovators, thinking that they would "obey the pope" and respect the sacredness of the Mass. We were laughed at, our letters to chancery offices placed in circular files or made into paper airplanes. We had to offer up the outrage of hearing entire articles contained in the Deposit of Faith were denied from the pulpit by "priests" who remained in perfectly good standing after doing so. Life in the conciliar structures was an endless series of conflicts engendered by the adversary to distract Catholics from concentrating on their own personal sanctification. The "battle" for the Faith, as it was seen by us, took on a dimension of its own that transcended almost everything else.

This "battle," a false one as I know now, was fought on the grounds of partisan politics, "winners" and "losers" being pronounced on a weekly or a monthly basis. Ah, we could see "progress" here and there or we could see that there was a distance yet to go.We waited for each new document to come from Rome, expecting that the man upon whom we had projected our own fondest hopes and desires for the Church, Karol Wojtyla, would "take action" and proclaim the bad "bishops" to be the "losers." Instead, of course, the bad "bishops" got promoted as they went beyond even the official apostasies of conciliarism and devastated souls with a most ready abandon. Nothing seemed to be an impediment to the promotion of men who had proven themselves to be the enemies of souls.

There are some "conservatives" who are still fighting the battle to "get the Novus Ordo right," trying to stop "clown" Masses and "rock" Masses" and the incorporation of various pagan rituals into the context of what purport to be offerings of Holy Mass. These people, as I now understand, fight in vain as the forces responsible for the Protestant-Masonic service continue their sacrilegious innovations and abominable novelties unabated in diocese after diocese throughout the world. There are "true believers" in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, however, who believe that their constant battles against these innovations and novelties will "improve" things. They have not. They never will. The forces responsible for these novelties and innovations are preternatural.

What has been the norm in the world of "conservative" Catholics for the past thirty-five to forty years is the future of those Catholics who think that Summorum Pontificum represents a great victory for the cause of Catholic truth, which it does not. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, the Hegelian who believes the truths of the Faith are forged as a result of the clashes among various contradictory ideas, has not changed. He is the same man who wrote the following in Principles of Catholic Theology twenty-five years ago:

Among the more obvious phenomena of the last years must be counted the increasing number of integralist groups in which the desire for piety, for the sense of mystery, is finding satisfaction. We must be on our guard against minimizing these movements. Without a doubt, they represent a sectarian zealotry that is the antithesis of Catholicity. We cannot resist them too firmly. (Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 389-390)


What better way to guard against the "sectarian zealotry" of "integralist groups" than by getting them to believe that he, Joseph Ratzinger, who reject Thomism, the official philosophy of the Catholic Church, as being "too clear and turned in on itself," is now their friend on whose "side" they must now do battle to make sure that the "bad" 'bishops" implement Summorum Pontificum, a process that has now begun in earnest. All manner of reports have surfaced in the past few days concerning the "outrage" that traditionally-minded Catholics in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism are expressing over the decisions of various conciliar "bishops" to interpret the terms of Summorum Pontificum narrowly. And who, precisely, is going to overrule these "bishops"? Not Joseph Ratzinger, who assured the bishops in the latter that accompanied the issuance of Summorum Pontificum that they would retain control over the public offerings of the Mass according to the modernized missal of Angelo Roncalli. And traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures will look in vain to "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei for any relief. Thus, many losing battles will be fought by well-meaning, traditionally-minded Catholics to insist that their local "bishops" follow the "pope." Hmmm, where I have heard this one before?

Meanwhile, however, the conciliar revolution continues unabated, only that more and more voices will be temporized now as they enter into the One World Ecumenical Church, of which the conciliar church is one element. Admitting that a few members of the laity will continue the battle of resisting a "pope" whom they recognize to be "legitimate," most of those Catholics who are celebrating the Motu Mass are going to be silent if their local "bishop" mandates the distribution of what purports to be Holy Communion in the hand and/or forbids kneeling for the reception of Holy Communion in the Motu Masses. Most of the "go-to" Motu Catholics are going be silent if their local "bishop" mandates the use of the readings contained in the Lectionary for the Novus Ordo, permission for which is explicitly contained in Summorum Pontificum, codifying the "indult for the indult" granted by Paul Augustin Cardinal Mayer, O.S.B., the first president of "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei, granted in 1990 for this precise thing.

Indeed, "Bishop" Tod Brown, whose doctrinally and morally corrupt Diocese of Orange (California) has paid out over $85 million to victims of its perverted priests, has announced that he will indeed do what the Diocese of San Jose and the Diocese of Oakland have done since that 1990 "indult for the indult" issued by Cardinal Mayer: incorporate the readings from the Novus Ordo lectionary so that:

“The entire parish community, whether utilizing the forma ordinaria [the Missal of Paul VI] or the public forma extraordinaria [the Missal of Pius V] may be united in heart and mind around a single proclamation of God’s word.”


One wonders what parts of the 1962 Missal are going to get "incorporated" into the forma ordinaria of Annibale Bugnini and friends? None, that's what.

Summorum Pontificum is all about giving traditionally-minded Catholics who an opportunity to feel as though they have won a "victory" when the truth of the matter is that the battle for the Faith they have been fighting is lost. The battle for the Mass in the conciliar structures is lost. For as egregious as the 1962 Missal is (the breaking of the Canon, the codification of the suppression of the feast days of saints, the suppression of the second Confiteor, the elimination of the connection between the Gloria in Excelsis Deo and Ite, Misse Est), representing a step in a continuation of the steps in the direction of the Novus Ordo that were taken by Bugnini and his confreres, Father Ferdinando Antonelli, in the 1950s (and a step that was used in the conciliar church for precisely two to three years prior to its being replaced by the Ordo Missae of 1965), that Missal did retain the cycle of readings that made up the Missal of Saint Pius V, apart from those instances where new feasts, such as for the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Universal Kingship of Jesus Christ, required the composition of new propers. Summorum Pontificum is going to be used to accustom traditionally-minded Catholics to various Novus Ordo novelties, blending the two together over the course of time so that there will indeed be a "synthesis" of the two, one a Mass (if offered by a validly ordained priest) and the other an invalid sacrilege.

The conciliar Vatican's Secretary of State, Tarcisio Bertone, who helped to deconstruct the Third Secret of Fatima along with one Joseph Ratzinger, is admitting quite openly that the revised Good Friday prayer for the conversion of the Jews that exists in the 1962 Missal might be replaced with the following prayer from the Good Friday service in the Novus Ordo (as was pointed out in One Little Morsel could wind up being the case):

Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant.

Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.


These are Bertone's words, contained in a press conference held on Sunday, July 15, 2007:

The problem of the "conversion" can be solved with a decision imposed on everyone, for instance, using the formula of the liturgy for the Good Friday of Paul VI.


As "private" offerings of Mass according to the 1962 Missal, the modernized version of the Immemorial Mss of Tradition, are forbidden by Summorum Pontificum to take place during the Easter Triduum, the insertion of the Novus Ordo Good Friday prayer for the Jews would be relevant only to the various "Ecclesia Dei" communities (Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, Institute of Christ the King, Good Shepherd Institute, Society of Saint John in Paraguay, et al.), the same communities whose "priests" will be required, if only once a year, to offer the Novus Ordo Missae, a subject about which almost no defender of the Motu Mass has yet commented. More compromise and accommodation will be required of those priests in these communities who have not as of yet "offered" the invalid Protestant and Masonic new order service. More cause for jubilation?

Resistance to Summorum Pontificum is coming from a variety of sources within the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

"Bishop" Robert Morlino of the Diocese of Madison, Wisconsin, has stated that:

Our concrete circumstance and lack of catechetical resources to support such celebrations have led me to the prudent judgement, I believe, that such celebrations should not generally be permitted.


"Bishop" Morlino's reaction is very similar to those of others in the "progressive" wing of the revolution. A more "conservative" wing of the revolution, which I call the "Perestroika Wing," wants the continuation of the revolution with some degree of restraint but without a return to the past. This is the case with the "bishop" of Baker City, Oregon, Robert Vasa, a product of the "conservative" Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, under the late Bishop Glennon Flavin and "Bishop" Fabian Brusekwitz. He used a questions and answers forum called Catholic Answers that Summorum Pontificum is only for those who adhere to the "older tradition," excluding those who are younger or who are simply attracted to the ancient rite. "Bishop" Vasa is also reported to have said that the faithful must be versed in Latin and have a degree of liturgical formation to take advantage of Summorum Pontificum. Go tell that to Saint Therese of Lisieux, who did not really understand Latin all that well but knew that the Mass of the ages was the unbloody representation of Our Lord's Sacrifice of Himself to the Father in Spirit and in Truth on the wood of the Holy Cross to redeem us and to make it possible for us to die in a state of Sanctifying Grace and thus know an unending Easter Sunday of glory in Paradise. Go tell that to illiterate peasants in the Middle Ages who learned the Mass by immersion in it and knew the parts of its very well.

Yes, the battle has been joined. Many thousands upon thousands of people will fight the battle to assert their "rights" under Summorum Pontificum, only to find that this three year experiment, which is all it is, results in the "bishops" getting what they want time and time again. More wasted time. More wasted effort.

Many people, therefore, are sadly falling into this cleverly laid trap set out for them by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI. Just as many "pro-life" Catholics still do not want to see that President George Walker Bush is not a friend of the inviolability of innocent human life, so is it the case that many traditionally-minded Catholics do not want to admit, no less enumerate, and critique the actual terms of Summorum Pontificum, preferring to gloss over the truth in the belief that "things" are getting better. They are not, which is why I was astounded when a layman told me of a sermon, about which he took careful, detailed notes, given by a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X who discussed Summorum Pontificum without mentioning a single, solitary restriction, the height of intellectual dishonesty designed to mislead his sheep. This is the same sort of positivism practiced by career politicians and by the conciliarists when they speak of the "springtime of the Church."

We are eyewitnesses to the beginning of the process of the gradual incorporation of more and more elements from the abomination that is the Novus Ordo service into the offerings of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, about which only those, admitting a handful of exceptions here and there, outside of the conciliar structures will be able to comment and critique. The final assault against what remains of the traditional Roman Rite in the 1962 Missal has begun. And many of those who would have spoken up vociferously against even as late as five year ago believe that they have won a victory of some sort even if "difficulties" remain. What kind of victory is it that elements of that which so many courageous priests rejected as offensive to God and/or completely evil is incorporated into a truncated version of the Mass of Tradition that was meant to serve as "bridge" to the liturgical "reform?"

The chief difficulty, of course, is the very simple fact that Joseph Ratzinger wants to neutralize traditionally-minded Catholics into accepting the revolution "as seen in light of tradition." This would be akin to Napoleon Bonaparte asking Pope Pius VII to view the French Revolution "in light of the tradition of France" as he sought to further institutionalize its effects in the framework of his own imperious rule. Ratzinger wants traditionally-minded Catholics to ignore the fact that he is know what he has always been, the Modernist who was under suspicion of heresy by the Holy Office of the Inquisition in the 1950s:

Joseph Ratzinger does not believe that truth exists independently of human acceptance of it. He believes that truth is perceived in the mind and that can only be grasped imperfectly at any point in time, thus necessitating "adjustments" and "reinterpretations." This is not Catholicism. Consider once again his own words:

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)


This is not so, condemned by the [First] Vatican Council and by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907. Does not this matter to anyone any longer? Does it not matter that a man who believes that false religions have a civil "right" to propagate their falsehoods openly and that their false ideas can contribute to the common good ignores the condemnations of the Catholic Church about "religious liberty" as obsolete? Does it not matter that Joseph Ratzinger rejects these words of Pope Saint Pius X, contained in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906, endorsing separation of Church and State while claiming that the civil state has the responsibility to pursue justice in this world only without a word about helping man to pursue his Last End?

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. "Between them," he says, "there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.-"Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur." He proceeds: "Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them.... As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. -- "Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere.... Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error."


One man said recently that he is willing to live with some poison in order to achieve a "greater good." Oh, really. Perhaps these words from Pope Gregory XVI's Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832, will serve as a reminder that no sane man seeks to imbibe poison simply because some antidote may be available:

Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again?


Ultimately, however, little drops of poison have been placed into the well of the Faith through the priesthood of Joseph Ratzinger. A book, written by a non-sedevacantist that will not be named, has over ten pages devoted to a scathing analysis of the doctrinal orthodoxy of Joseph Ratzinger. Another book, written by yet another non-sedevacantist, is entirely about the theological errors of Joseph Ratzinger, who is continuing to push the conciliar revolution as traditionally-minded Catholics begin to fight their endless battles with the 'bad" bishops:

Rome - Pope Benedict XVI may be about to appoint women to some of the Vatican's top posts, a leading cardinal suggested in remarks carried by Italian newspapers Thursday. 'Everybody knows we are discussing new appointments at the Vatican,' said Tarcisio Bertone, who as its secretary of state is one of the Vatican's most influential figures after the pope, 'I certainly think some of these will be taken by women.'

Bertone singled out women's charisma, potential and sense of responsibility as qualities that could help them 'render great services' to the pope and the Church. The Vatican hierarchy is by tradition dominated by males.

And while congregations - the most important departments within the Roman Curia - must by rule by headed by ordained priests, there is no specific reason why women should not be allowed to take up key roles within other offices.

At the moment, top female officials are scarce. One notable exception is Mary Ann Glendon, an American who in 1994 was appointed by the late Pope John Paul II to head the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, an important body charged with advising the pope on such issues as globalisation and technological advances.


Why not? After all, women have invaded the preserve of the sanctuary during the offering of the Novus Ordo service. They serve as chancellors and vice-chancellors in conciliar dioceses in the United States of America. They serve as "administrators" of parishes, which make them, in effect, de facto "pastors" who boss the "sacramental" functionaries (the "presiders" of the Mass) around. Why not have top posts in the conciliar Vatican staffed by women? It's all about appearing sensitivity to matters of "equality" rather than upholding the distinctions that God had made between men and women in the Order of Creation and the Order of Redemption. Just one more step in the conciliar revolution of the overturning of the roles proper for men and women to play in the Church and in the world.

Women have demonstrated "great services" to the Catholic Church by imitating Our Lady and seeking to serve Holy Mother Church as mothers or consecrated religious or as single women, such as the late Mary Fabyan Windeatt (who wrote those marvelous children's books about the lives of the saints), who devoted their lives to the Faith in simple yet supernaturally profound ways. One can always count on the conciliar revolutionaries for seeking to jump on the revolutionary trends of thirty or forty years ago, eschewing Catholic tradition for the fad of the moment.

Lest anyone think this to be a diminution of women and their abilities, think again. For all of the holy influence she wielded with the powerful in the Church and in the civil state, Saint Catherine of Siena, for example, never wanted to hold any office, whether ecclesiastical or civil. Catholics of all stations in life sought her out for advice, knowing that she could read their souls. Saint Catherine of Siena, who was bold enough to get Pope Gregory XI out of Avignon and back to Rome, only wanted to do God's will, never seeking any position within the Church for herself at all. Yes, some resented her influence. Still and all, however, Saint Catherine of Siena wanted at all times only to perform the Spiritual and the Corporal Works of Mercy, not to seek a "position" for herself.

Oh, yes, drops of poison continue to be placed in the well of the Faith by Joseph Ratzinger and his conciliarist revolutionaries as so many traditionally-minded Catholics accept Summorum Pontificum hook, line and sinker. It is not how "little" of the Faith that defines one as being a Catholic. It is whether one holds everything that the Catholic Church has taught in exactly the same meaning and sense in which it has been taught that defines one as being Catholic, as the Oath Against Modernism states very clearly:

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.


It is pointless to argue with those who do not see this. What can be hoped for is that more and more people will see through the trap set for them by Summorum Pontificum and will recognize that these words, written by Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, apply to Joseph Ratzinger and explain why we must have nothing to do with conciliarism or its false shepherds:

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).

The need of this divinely instituted means for the preservation of unity, about which we speak is urged by St. Paul in his epistle to the Ephesians. In this he first admonishes them to preserve with every care concord of minds: "Solicitous to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph. iv., 3, et seq.). And as souls cannot be perfectly united in charity unless minds agree in faith, he wishes all to hold the same faith: "One Lord, one faith," and this so perfectly one as to prevent all danger of error: "that henceforth we be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive" (Eph. iv., 14): and this he teaches is to be observed, not for a time only - "but until we all meet in the unity of faith...unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ" (13). But, in what has Christ placed the primary principle, and the means of preserving this unity? In that - "He gave some Apostles - and other some pastors and doctors, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ"


As seen above, the conciliarists can't even agree on the interpretation of Summorum Pontificum at the same time they are trying to reiterate Lumen Gentium while making it appear that something has changed when it hasn't. Our Lord wants us to concentrate on the sanctification of our immortal souls, not fighting endless battles in a false church that is being used by the adversary at the present time to lead more and more people out of the catacombs so that they can be deprived of true sacraments offered to them by true bishops and priests. Each of us must work out our salvation in fear and in trembling. Life is short enough without having to worry about which false "bishop" is going to do this or that about Summorum Pontificum.

Take it from one who fought battles for over twenty years in the conciliar structures to get "things" "right:" Our Blessed Lord and His Most Blessed Mother have given us true shepherds and true priests to serve us in this time of apostasy and betrayal. It took me long enough to see this. My family little family is very grateful for the help that has been given us by these shepherds in the past year to see things clearly and to live so much at peace in the midst of the storm around us. We continue to learn as we immerse ourselves ever more fully in the depths of the authentic Tradition of the Catholic Church.

As we offer our acts of reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, may we take consolation at a time when some believe that Our Lord has been mystically buried in the Tomb following His mystical death in the Church Militant on earth by keeping Him company in His Real Presence in a true Catholic church or chapel and by clinging ever more dearly to Our Lady, especially through her Most Holy Rosary, as we await the Resurrection of the Mystical Body of Christ that is the Catholic Church.

Vivat Christus Rex!

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 Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Praxedes, pray for.

Saint Jerome Emilian, pray for us.

Saint Margaret of Antioch, pray for us.

Saint Mary Magdalene, pray for us.

Saint Simon Stock, pray for us.

Saint John of the Cross, pray for us.

Saint Teresa of Avila, pray for us.

Saint Therese Lisieux, pray for us.

Saint Camillus de Lillus, pray for us.

Saint Vincent de Paul, pray for us.

Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.

Saint Bonaventure, pray for us.

Saint Athanasius, pray for us.

Saint Irenaeus, pray for us.

Saints Monica, pray for us.

Saint Jude, pray for us.

Saint John the Beloved, pray for us.

Saint Francis Solano, pray for us.

Saint John Bosco, pray for us.

Saint Dominic Savio, pray for us.

Saint  Scholastica, pray for us.

Saint Benedict, pray for us.

Saint Joan of Arc, pray for us.

Saint Antony of the Desert, pray for us.

Saint Francis of Assisi, pray for us.

Saint Gertrude the Great, pray for us.

Saint Clare of Assisi, pray for us.

Saint Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.

Saint Augustine, pray for us.

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, pray for us.

Saint Francis Xavier, pray for us.

Saint Peter Damian, pray for us.

Saint Frances Xavier Cabrini, pray for us.

Saint Lucy, pray for us.

Saint Monica, pray for us.

Saint Agatha, pray for us.

Saint Anthony of Padua, pray for us.

Saint Basil the Great, pray for us.

Saint Philomena, pray for us.

Saint Cecilia, pray for us.

Saint John Mary Vianney, pray for us.

Saint Athanasius, pray for us.

Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, pray for us.

Saint Isaac Jogues, pray for us.

Saint Rene Goupil, pray for us.

Saint John Lalonde, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel Lalemont, pray for us.

Saint Noel Chabanel, pray for us.

Saint Charles Garnier, pray for us.

Saint Anthony Daniel, pray for us.

Saint John DeBrebeuf, pray for us.

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, pray for us.

Saint Dominic, pray for us.

Saint Hyacinth, pray for us.

Saint Basil, pray for us.

Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.

Saint Sebastian, pray for us.

Saint Tarcisius, pray for us.

Saint Bridget of Sweden, pray for us.

Saint Gerard Majella, pray for us.

Saint John of the Cross, pray for us.

Saint Teresa of Avila, pray for us.

Saint Bernadette Soubirous, pray for us.

Saint Genevieve, pray for us.

Pope Saint Pius X, pray for us

Pope Saint Pius V, pray for us.

Saint Rita of Cascia, pray for us.

Saint Louis de Montfort, pray for us.

Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, pray for us.

Venerable Pauline Jaricot, pray for us.

Father Maximilian Mary Kolbe, pray for us.

Padre Pio, pray for us.

Father Miguel Augustin Pro, pray for us.

Francisco Marto, pray for us.

Jacinta Marto, pray for us.

Juan Diego, pray for us.


The Longer Version of the Saint Michael the Archangel Prayer, composed by Pope Leo XIII, 1888

O glorious Archangel Saint Michael, Prince of the heavenly host, be our defense in the terrible warfare which we carry on against principalities and powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, spirits of evil.  Come to the aid of man, whom God created immortal, made in His own image and likeness, and redeemed at a great price from the tyranny of the devil.  Fight this day the battle of our Lord, together with  the holy angels, as already thou hast fought the leader of the proud angels, Lucifer, and his apostate host, who were powerless to resist thee, nor was there place for them any longer in heaven.  That cruel, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil or Satan who seduces the whole world, was cast into the abyss with his angels.  Behold this primeval enemy and slayer of men has taken courage.  Transformed into an angel of light, he wanders about with all the multitude of wicked spirits, invading the earth in order to blot out the Name of God and of His Christ, to seize upon, slay, and cast into eternal perdition, souls destined for the crown of eternal glory.  That wicked dragon pours out. as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity.  These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on Her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck the sheep may be scattered.  Arise then, O invincible Prince, bring help against the attacks of the lost spirits to the people of God, and give them the victory.  They venerate thee as their protector and patron; in thee holy Church glories as her defense against the malicious powers of hell; to thee has God entrusted the souls of men to be established in heavenly beatitude.  Oh, pray to the God of peace that He may put Satan under our feet, so far conquered that he may no longer be able to hold men in captivity and harm the Church.  Offer our prayers in the sight of the Most High, so that they may quickly conciliate the mercies of the Lord; and beating down the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, do thou again make him captive in the abyss, that he may no longer seduce the nations.  Amen.

Verse: Behold the Cross of the Lord; be scattered ye hostile powers.

Response: The Lion of the Tribe of Juda has conquered the root of David.

Verse: Let Thy mercies be upon us, O Lord.

Response: As we have hoped in Thee.

Verse: O Lord hear my prayer.

Response: And let my cry come unto Thee.

Verse: Let us pray.  O God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, we call upon Thy holy Name, and as suppliants, we implore Thy clemency, that by the intercession of Mary, ever Virgin, immaculate and our Mother, and of the glorious Archangel Saint Michael, Thou wouldst deign to help us against Satan and all other unclean spirits, who wander about the world for the injury of the human race and the ruin of our souls. 

Response:  Amen.  



© Copyright 2007, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.