Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
                 July 14, 2007

"Reconciliations" at the Price of Truth

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Ever the Modernist revisionist, Father Joseph Ratzinger sees his efforts to "reconcile" underground Catholics in Red China with the bishops and priests of the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association and his efforts to reconcile what he sees as "disaffected" traditionally-minded Catholics with the "value and holiness" of the Novus Ordo Missae (and the doctrinal "exactitude of the "Second Vatican Council) as doing something he believes was not done in the past. That is, Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believes that ruptures in the past could have been prevented or healed after having occurred if the leaders of the Catholic Church had not been so hasty, so rigid, if you will, to assert the "claims" of Catholicism.

Consider this passage from the letter Father Ratzinger wrote to the world's conciliar "bishops" that accompanied the issuance of Summorum Pontificum a week ago today, July 7, 2007:

I now come to the positive reason which motivated my decision to issue this Motu Proprio updating that of 1988. It is a matter of coming to an interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church. Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden.  This glance at the past imposes an obligation on us today: to make every effort to enable for all those who truly desire unity to remain in that unity or to attain it anew. 


This is, of course, but a continuation of the late Karol Wojtyla's ceaseless, unremitting efforts to "apologize" for almost everything in the past that was authentically Catholic or "triumphalistic," to use Wojtyla's pet slogan about the matter. In the warped view of the conciliar revolutionaries, you see, unadulterated Catholicism unnecessarily "divides" people. Church leaders in the past did not, for example, engage in "inter-religious dialogue." They sought the unconditional conversion of the Jews (Saint Peter on Pentecost Sunday, Saint Vincent Ferrer in the Iberian Peninsula) or the Protestants (Saint Peter Canisius, Saint Francis de Sales) or the Orthodox (Saint Josaphat) or pagans (Saint Patrick, Saint Boniface, Saint Hyacinth, Saint Francis Xavier, the North American Martyrs, Saint Francis Solano) or heretics (Saint Augustine, Saint Jerome, Saint Athanasius, Saint Basil. Saint Dominic). Pope Urban II was perhaps "too quick" to launch the Crusades in 1095 in order to wage a true holy war against the Mohammedan infidels. Perhaps Pope Leo IX did not "do enough" to prevent the Greek Schism in 1054. Pope Leo X might have acted "too hastily" in excommunicating Father Martin Luther, O.S.A. Pope Saint Pius V could have effected "reconciliation" in England if he had not excommunicated Queen Elizabeth I in 1570.

Modernists are full of pride. One of the essences of the Modernist personality, as described by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907,  is its desire to look at history through the lenses of its own philosophical and theological predilections, believing that "things" in the past would have better if Church leaders only had the benefit of their own "wisdom" and insights:

But the dominion of philosophy over history does not end here. Given that division, of which We have spoken, of the documents into two parts, the philosopher steps in again with his dogma of vital immanence, and shows how everything in the history of the Church is to be explained by vital emanation. And since the cause or condition of every vital emanation whatsoever is to be found in some need or want, it follows that no fact can be regarded as antecedent to the need which produced it -- historically the fact must be posterior to the need. What, then, does the historian do in view of this principle? He goes over his documents again, whether they be contained in the Sacred Books or elsewhere, draws up from them his list of the particular needs of the Church, whether relating to dogma, or liturgy, or other matters which are found in the Church thus related, and then he hands his list over to the critic. The critic takes in hand the documents dealing with the history of faith and distributes them, period by period, so that they correspond exactly with the list of needs, always guided by the principle that the narration must follow the facts, as the facts follow the needs. It may at times happen that some parts of the Sacred Scriptures, such as the Epistles, themselves constitute the fact created by the need. Even so, the rule holds that the age of any document can only be determined by the age in which each need has manifested itself in the Church. Further, a distinction must be made between the beginning of a fact and its development, for what is born in one day requires time for growth. Hence the critic must once more go over his documents, ranged as they are through the different ages, and divide them again into two parts, separating those that regard the origin of the facts from those that deal with their development, and these he must again arrange according to their periods.

Then the philosopher must come in again to enjoin upon the historian the obligation of following in all his studies the precepts and laws of evolution. It is next for the historian to scrutinize his documents once more, to examine carefully the circumstances and conditions affecting the Church during the different periods, the conserving force she has put forth, the needs both internal and external that have stimulated her to progress, the obstacles she has had to encounter, in a word, everything that helps to determine the manner in which the laws of evolution have been fulfilled in her. This done, he finishes his work by drawing up a history of the development in its broad lines. The critic follows and fits in the rest of the documents. He sets himself to write. The history is finished. Now We ask here: Who is the author of this history? The historian? The critic? Assuredly neither of these but the philosopher. From beginning to end everything in it is a priori, and an apriorism that reeks of heresy. These men are certainly to be pitied, of whom the Apostle might well say: "They became vain in their thoughts...professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.'' At the same time, they excite resentment when they accuse the Church of arranging and confusing the texts after her own fashion, and for the needs of her cause. In this they are accusing the Church of something for which their own conscience plainly reproaches them.


Just by way of a very important reminder, which is being offered for the sake of those who have the intellectual honesty to see the degree to which Father Joseph Ratzinger's entire philosophical and theological outlooks are shaped by Modernism, here is Ratzinger's view of the papal decrees and encyclical letters of the Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries that he deems to be "outdated:"

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)


What is true of dogma and papal pronouncements on it for Ratzinger is also true of history. Ratzinger truly believes that the historical events mentioned above might have turned out "differently" if the false principles of the counterfeit church of conciliarism had been at work. He is, of course, correct about this. Things would have turned out "differently." The Catholic Church would have surrendered to heretics and apostates and infidels in the name of a false brand of "reconciliation" and "peace." 

The following scenarios might have developed if the false principles underlying Father Ratzinger's letter to Catholics in Red China and underlying Summorum Pontificum had been applied in the case of the Protestant Revolt in England in the Sixteenth Century, to take just one of the historical events listed above that conciliarists believe could have been "decided" differently if there had been, in their warped view, a greater effort on the part of Church leaders to effect reconciliation:

1) Pope Clement VII should have granted King Henry VIII's petition for a decree of nullity of his marriage to Queen Catherine of Aragon.

2) Failing that, efforts should have been made to reconcile Catholics in the underground in England with Anglican officials after Henry's death in 1547.

3) Part of those efforts should have included encouraging Catholics who had remained faithful to Rome to worship in the Anglican form of the Mass. Perhaps Popes Paul III or Julius IIII could have issued such a "motu proprio" so that there could be "two forms of the one Roman Rite" in England, so that Catholics who had resisted the Protestant Revolt in England could be encouraged to give up and to reconcile to the people who had persecuted them so fiercely (in the spirit of Ratzinger's letter to the Catholics of Red China). Oh, and, yes, I realize that there were regional variations in the offering of the Mass of Tradition prior to the issuance of Quo Primum by Pope Saint Pius V in 1570. We are talking here is about a putative "reconciliation" between the Mass of Tradition as it was maintained by Catholics in the underground in England and the Anglican "Mass" that had incorporated a good deal of Protestant theology, which is precisely what was incorporated into the Novus Ordo Missae and what Catholics seeking "recognition" from the conciliar robber barons at the present moment are supposed to overlook because Ratzinger has stated that there are no doctrinal defects in the new order service.

4) Failing such an effort between 1547 and 1553, Popes Julius III and Marcellus II and Paul IV should have sought to temporize Queen Mary Tudor's restoration of England to the Catholic Church between 1553 and 1558. According to the conciliarist view, you see, Queen Mary, who put to death around 300 people who were responsible in large measure for the slaughter of over 72.000 Catholics between 1534 and 1547 during her father's wicked reign, tried to do too much too fast, obviously.

5) The bloody persecutions of Catholics undertaken by Queen Elizabeth I following the death of Queen Mary might not have occurred if Pope Saint Pius V had not taken such a dim view of her officially establishing Protestantism in England, thereby building on the introduction of various Protestant elements of worship and doctrine that had begun during the reign of her father, King Henry VIII (who probably thought he was a Catholic until the day he died), and of her half-brother, Edward VI. Pope Saint Pius V was, therefore, "intemperate" to have issued the following decree of excommunication against Queen Elizabeth I on March 5, 1570:


He that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and on earth, commited one, holy, Catholike and Apostolike Church, out of which there is no salvation, to one alone upon earth, namely to Peter the chiefe of the Apostles, and to Peters Successour the Bishop of Rome, to be governed in fulnesse of power. Him alone he made Prince over all people, and all Kingdomes, to pluck up, destroy, scatter, consume, plant and build, that he may containe the faithfull that are knit together with the band of charity, in the unity of the spirit, and present them spotlesse and unblameable to their Saviour. In discharge of which function, We which are by Gods goodnesse called to the gouvernement of the aforesayd Church, do spare no paines, labouring with all the earnestnesse that Unity and the Catholike Religion (which the Author thereof hath for the tryall of his childrens faith, and for our amendment, suffered to be punished with so great afflictions) might be preserved uncorrupt. But the number of the ungodly hath gotten such power that there is now no place left in the whole world which they have not assayed to corrupt with their most wicked Doctrines; amongst others, Elizabeth the pretensed Queene of England, the servant of wickednesse, lending thereunto her helping hand, with whom as in a Sanctuary the most pernicious of all have found a refuge. This very woman having seazed on the Kingdome, and monstrously usurping the place of supreme head of the Church in all England, and the chiefe authority and jurisdiction thereof, hath againe brought backe the sayd Kingdome into miserable destruction, which was then newly reduced to the Catholike Faith and good fruits. For having by strong hand inhibited the exercise of the true Religion, which Mary the lawfull Queene of famous memory,had by the helpe of this See restored after it had bene formerly overthrowne by Henry the eighth, a revolter therefrom; and following and embracing the errors of Heretikes, she hath removed the royall Councell consisting of the English Nobility, and filled it with obscure men being Heretikes, suppressed the embraces of the Catholike Faith, placed dishonest Preachers, and Ministers of impieties, abolished the sacrifice of the Masse, Prayers, Fastings, choyce of meates, unmaried life, and the Catholike rites and Ceremonies, commanded Bookes to be read in the whole Realme containing manifest Heresie; and impious mysteries and institutions by her selfe entertained and observed according to the Praescript of Calvin, to be likewise observed by her Subjects; presumed to throw Bishops, Parsons of Churches, and other Catholike Priests, out of their Churches and beneficies, and bestow them and other Church-livings upon Heretikes, and to determine of Church causes, prohibited the Prelats, Clergie and people to acknowledge the Church of Rome, or obey the preceps and Canonicall sanctions thereof; compelled most of them to condescend to her wicked Lawes, and to abjure the authority and obedience of the Bishop Rome, and to acknowledge her to be sole Lady in Temporall and Spirituall matters, and this by Oath; imposed penalties and punishments upon those which obeyed not, and exacted them of those which perservered in the Unity of the Faith and their obedience aforesayd, cast the Catholike Prelats and Rectors of Churches in prison, where many therein beeing spent with long languishing and sorrow, miserably ended their lives. All which things, seeing they are manifest and notorious to all Nations, and by the gravest testimonie of very many so substantially proved that there is no place at all left for excuse, defence or evasion. We seeing that impieties and wicked actions are multiplied one upon another, and moreover that the persecution of the faithfull, and affliction for Religion, groweth every day heavier and heavier through the instigation and meanes of the sayd Elizabeth; because We understand her minde to be so hardened and indurate that she hath not onely contemned the godly requests and admonitions of Catholike Princes concerning her healing and conversion, but also hath not so much as permitted the Nuncios of this Sea to crosse the seas into England, are constrained of necessity to betake our selves to the weapons of Justice against her, not being able to mitigate our sorrow that we are drawne to take punishment upon one, to whose Ancestors the whole State of all Christendome hath beene so much bounden. Being therefore supported with His authority, whose pleasure it was to place Us (though unable for so great a burthen) in this supreme throne of Justice, We doe out of the fulnesse of our Apostolike power declare the aforesayd Elizabeth being an Heretike, and a favourer of Heritikes, and her adherents in the matters aforesayd, to have incurred the sentence of Anathema, and to be cut off from the Unity of the body of Christ. And moreover We do declare Her to be deprived of her pretended Title to the Kingdome aforesayd, and of all Dominion, Dignity, and Priviledge what soever; and also the Nobility, Subjects, and People of the sayd Kingdome, and all others which have in any sort sworne unto Her, to be for ever absolved from any such Oath, and all manner of duty of dominion, alleageance, and obedience. As We also doe by authority of these presents absolve them, and do deprive the same Elizabeth of her pretended title to the Kingdome, and all other things abovesayd. And We do command and interdict all and every the Noblemen, Subjects, People, and others aforesayd that they presume not to obey her, or her monitions, Mandates, and Lawes; and those which shall doe the contrary, We do innodate with the like sentence of Anathema. And because it were a matter of too much difficulty, to conveigh these presents to all places wheresoever it shall be needfull, our will is that the copies thereof under a publike Notaries hand, and sealed with the seale of an Ecclesiasticall Prelate, or of his Court, shall carry altogether the same credit, with all people, iudictally and extrajudically, as these Present should doe, if they were exhibited or shewed.Given at Rome at Saint Peters in the yeare of the incarnation of our Lord one thousand five hundreth sixty nine, the fifth of the Kalends of March, and of our Popedom the fifth yeare.


This is what you call a Catholic decree! Such a decree, however, is far, far too "harsh" for Father Joseph Ratzinger and his fellow conciliarists. Pope Saint Pius V should have permitted "inter-religious dialogue" with the Protestants who were advising Queen Elizabeth I. The martyrdom of so many Catholics under her bloody, cruel reign, which featured the sadistic tortures imposed by the "priest-catcher," Richard Topcliffe, whom Elizabeth authorized to create a torture chamber in his own residence, which he used with savage fury against priests and Catholics who refused to renounce the Faith, could have been prevented, Ratzinger seems to be saying, if only Catholics in the past had been less insistent on on having things the "Catholic" way all of the time. There should have been room for a "synthesis of faith," if you will. Now that he and his conciliarist ilk, being the true interpreters of history, know better it is up to them to apply them to the "painful" disputes of our own day.

As the true Faith can never be extinguished from the face of the earth, of course, there would have been brave Catholics in England during the reigns of King Henry VIII and Edward VI and Queen Elizabeth I who would not have acquiesced had a conciliarist-style "reconciliation" based on Hegelian principles and pure positivism been forged by the popes of their day. These Catholics would have been tortured by Richard Topcliffe and others. Queen Elizabeth, being of evil intent, would have continued doing what she wanted to do, knowing that she had escaped "excommunication:" and that a Rome possessed of the conciliarist worldview, not wanting to lose England to the Faith, would give into her time and time again.

Although the scenario painted above did not occur in England in the Sixteenth Century it is occurring now in Red China and as a result of Summorum Pontificum. Catholics in Red China  who have suffered so much in the underground there are supposed to begin the difficult process of "reconciliation" with
"bishops" and "priests" who have been subservient to the interests of a "church" created by the Communist Chinese regime and who are thus duty-bound not to speak against Communism or the anti-life policies of the nefarious government that has been imposing a veritable reign of terror on its billions of citizens since 1949. What is happening in Red China at present is indeed what would have happened in England if the brave Catholics there has been forced to surrender their adherence to Catholic truth in the name of the false spirit of "reconciliation" that is at the heart of conciliarism.

Blessed Edmund Campion, S.J., would have been considered by the conciliarists far too triumphalistic in his "brag" So would any Catholic in Red China at present who seek to destroy an open public sanitary facility in the city of Chongqing (the virtue of modesty prevents me from using the actual name of the facility) that blasphemes in the most vile manner the Mother of God herself. No, such regrettable things just have to be tolerated as "reconciliation" is effected. And while it is certainly true that the Catholics who were living underground in England  in the Sixteenth Century did not advertise the fact that they were Catholic and they did not openly criticize the Protestant authorities in most instances, they were not forced by the Catholic Church to pretend that Protestantism was not a threat to their Faith or that it would not be an act of apostasy to "worship" in the Anglican "Church."

Catholics in Red China are being told simply to forget about Communism and its outrages. "Reconciled" "brothers" there are supposed to be silent as

The forced abortion campaign hit the southern Chinese province like a deadly hurricane. The provincial government decided that too many babies were being born. Local officials were warned that population control quotas had to be met or their heads would be on the chopping block. They reacted by hunting down and arresting hundreds of women for the crime of being pregnant. Taken by force to hospitals and clinics, these were aborted against their will. It did not matter whether the women were past the point of viability, or even whether they were already in labor. Their babies were killed all the same. 

The above could stand as an accurate description of what I witnessed in China's Guangdong province in 1979-80. In reality, it is what is happening right now in the neighboring province of Guangxi. And what has happened in county after county, province after province, over the past 27 years. The one-child terror campaign that started back in 1980 continues to the present day, violating women and tearing apart families throughout China.

In fact, the only thing unusual about this latest campaign is how quickly news of these atrocities spread outside of China. Guangxi province is not far from Hong Kong. No sooner had the campaign begun in May of this year than word reached the former British colony and from there the outside world. Guangxi, like Guangdong and Hong Kong, is Cantonese speaking. It is also one of the more developed regions of China, where many people have cell phones and access to the Internet. It was by these means that the victims of the terror campaign communicated their suffering to the outside world.  

National Public Radio, the taxpayer-funded alternative to Rush Limbaugh, actually ran a story on the campaign on its Morning Edition show. This described in harrowing detail the plight of Guangxi resident Wei Linrong.  She and her husband, Liang Yage, already had one child but wanted a second. Mrs. Liang was arrested when she was seven months pregnant and forced to abort her child.  The Liangs are Christian, NPR reported, and do not believe in abortion. (Steven W. Mosher, Population Research Institute Weekly Briefly, July 9, 2007, not yet linked online.)

The formerly underground Catholic bishops in Red China must now put aside their sensus Catholicus as they seek "reconciliation" with their brethren in the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association who have been supportive of the Communist government's population policies. This sort of "reconciliation" is at the price of truth. It is not of God. It is not of the spirit of the martyrs of the Church, starting with those who chose death rather than to worship the false gods of the Roman Empire in the first centuries of the Church before the Edict of Milan was issued by Emperor Constantine in 313 A.D.

Similarly, traditionally-minded Catholics in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, some of whom have been treated with great contempt by conciliar "bishops" and their chancery factotums, must now "reconcile" with the very Mass that owes so much to Thomas Cranmer in order to be served by "bishops" consecrated in a rite that bears strong similarities to the invalid rite contained in the Edwardine Ordinal that was condemned by Popes Julius III and Paul IV, as noted by Pope Leo XIII in Apostolicae Curae, September 18, 1896:

The authority of Julius III and of Paul IV, which we have quoted, clearly shows the origin of that practice which has been observed without interruption for more than three centuries, that Ordinations conferred according to the Edwardine rite should be considered null and void. This practice is fully proved by the numerous cases of absolute re-ordination according to the Catholic rite even in Rome . . . .

For the full and accurate understanding of the Anglican Ordinal, besides what we have noted as to some of its parts, there is nothing more pertinent than to consider carefully the circumstances under which it was composed and publicly authorized. It would be tedious to enter into details, nor is it necessary to do so, as the history of that time is sufficiently eloquent as to the animus of the authors of the Ordinal against the Catholic Church; as to the abettors whom they associated with themselves from the heterodox sects; and as to the end they had in view. Being fully cognizant of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between "the law of believing and the law of praying", under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers. For this reason, in the whole Ordinal not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood (sacerdotium), and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice but, as we have just stated, every trace of these things which had been in such prayers of the Catholic rite as they had not entirely rejected, was deliberately removed and struck out.

In this way, the native character or spirit as it is called of the Ordinal clearly manifests itself. Hence, if, vitiated in its origin, it was wholly insufficient to confer Orders, it was impossible that, in the course of time, it would become sufficient, since no change had taken place. In vain those who, from the time of Charles I, have attempted to hold some kind of sacrifice or of priesthood, have made additions to the Ordinal. In vain also has been the contention of that small section of the Anglican body formed in recent times that the said Ordinal can be understood and interpreted in a sound and orthodox sense. Such efforts, we affirm, have been, and are, made in vain, and for this reason, that any words in the Anglican Ordinal, as it now is, which lend themselves to ambiguity, cannot be taken in the same sense as they possess in the Catholic rite. For once a new rite has been initiated in which, as we have seen, the Sacrament of Order is adulterated or denied, and from which all idea of consecration and sacrifice has been rejected, the formula, "Receive the Holy Ghost", no longer holds good, because the Spirit is infused into the soul with the grace of the Sacrament, and so the words "for the office and work of a priest or bishop", and the like no longer hold good, but remain as words without the reality which Christ instituted.

Many of the more shrewd Anglican interpreters of the Ordinal have perceived the force of this argument, and they openly urge it against those who take the Ordinal in a new sense, and vainly attach to the Orders conferred thereby a value and efficacy which they do not possess. By this same argument is refuted the contention of those who think that the prayer, "Almighty God, giver of all good Things", which is found at the beginning of the ritual action, might suffice as a legitimate "form" of Orders, even in the hypothesis that it might be held to be sufficient in a Catholic rite approved by the Church.

With this inherent defect of "form" is joined the defect of "intention" which is equally essential to the Sacrament. The Church does not judge about the mind and intention, in so far as it is something by its nature internal; but in so far as it is manifested externally she is bound to judge concerning it. A person who has correctly and seriously used the requisite matter and form to effect and confer a sacrament is presumed for that very reason to have intended to do (intendisse) what the Church does. On this principle rests the doctrine that a Sacrament is truly conferred by the ministry of one who is a heretic or unbaptized, provided the Catholic rite be employed. On the other hand, if the rite be changed, with the manifest intention of introducing another rite not approved by the Church and of rejecting what the Church does, and what, by the institution of Christ, belongs to the nature of the Sacrament, then it is clear that not only is the necessary intention wanting to the Sacrament, but that the intention is adverse to and destructive of the Sacrament. . . .

We decree that these letters and all things contained therein shall not be liable at any time to be impugned or objected to by reason of fault or any other defect whatsoever of subreption or obreption of our intention, but are and shall be always valid and in force and shall be inviolably observed both juridically and otherwise, by all of whatsoever degree and preeminence, declaring null and void anything which, in these matters, may happen to be contrariwise attempted, whether wittingly or unwittingly, by any person whatsoever, by whatsoever authority or pretext, all things to the contrary notwithstanding.


Thus it is that Father Joseph Ratzinger is implementing a program of "reconciliation" that he would have liked to have seen implemented centuries ago, thereby preventing "splits." However, what good is it to maintain a false "unity" when matters of truth are denied or treated in a Hegelian manner so as to convince people that truth can be one thing at one point in time and another at a different point in time depending upon the circumstances of the moment. The way is thus left wide open for the obliteration of all doctrinal truth as Catholics around the world, including those in the underground in Red China and those who are attached to the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that was promulgated by Angelo Roncalli in 1962, are reconciled in a de facto manner to the One World Church, as prophesied by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique:

What are they going to produce? What is to come of this collaboration? A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.

We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the "Kingdom of God". - "We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind."

And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.


The Catholic Church never compromises with evil. She never incorporates heresies into her doctrine and into her worship. Never. She never forces her children to be "reconciled" to others while "finessing" matters of doctrine and worship. Never.

The poor Catholics of the underground in Red China who have suffered so much have thus been sold out in the name of "reconciliation." They will be at the mercy of Communist officials.

Traditionally-minded Catholics in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism have been sold out, left to fend for themselves as each conciliar "bishop" interprets Summorum Pontificum differently. Some conciliar "bishops" will permit more than one Sunday "offering" of the modernized version of the Mass of Tradition dioceses while others will not. Some conciliar "bishops," such as Donald Truman of the Diocese of Erie, Pennsylvania, have announced that their will be only one such Mass if priests pass a test in Latin and a test in the rubrics of the Mass offered according to the 1962 Missal (those "priests" who have learned, say, the rubrics prior to Angelo Roncalli's false reign will fail that test). The battles will go on and on and on, both sides claiming to be loyal to the "pope" and to the true spirit of the "Second" Vatican Council.

Well-meaning people will be waving copies of Summorum Pontificum in the face of "bishops" and pastors just as I used to wave copies of Inaestimabile Donum (an instruction from the the then named Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship), April 17, 1980, think that Karol Wojtyla wanted to end liturgical "abuses" in what I now recognize to be the liturgical abuse par excellence, the Novus Ordo service. Various people will think that they are living in an age of "reconciliation" and "peace" when the actual truth of the matter is that they have been deceived into compromising the Faith in ways that would have been unimaginable to those who shed their blood in its holy defense over the course of two millennia.

Those of us who have come to recognize the simple fact that those who have defected from the Faith cannot hold ecclesiastical office legitimately must intensify our prayers of reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. We must express our gratitude daily for having been led to the catacombs where we are so served so valiantly and faithfully by exemplary stewards of the Deposit of Faith and masterful administrators of the mysteries of salvation contained in the Sacraments.

While we pray earnestly for our fellow Catholics who do not want to see the problems of the moment or who want to excuse or deny the Modernist bent of Joseph Ratzinger at every turn, we must recognize that our prayers for others mean nothing if we do not seek to save our own souls, starting with our devotion to the legitimate offering on a daily basis of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition in the catacombs without making a moment's concession to conciliarism or its false shepherds. Our love of Holy Mass and our attentiveness to Eucharistic piety will lead us to make more and more sacrifices each day, particularly by praying as many Rosaries as our states-in-life permit.

We pray, therefore, to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for a true reconciliation with others premised upon a complete an unconditional acceptance of the totality of the perennial, immutable teaching of the Catholic Church, which reconciliation is purchased not at the price of truth has been won at the price of the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Truth Himself, Truth Incarnate, Truth Crucified and Resurrected, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.


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 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 Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.

Saint Bonaventure, 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 Vincent de Paul, pray for us.

Saint Vincent Ferrer, 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.

Saint Vincent de Paul, 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 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.