Rocky Roads in Rocky Times
by Thomas A. Droleskey
 The kingdom of heaven is like to an householder, who went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.  And having agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.  And going out about the third hour, he saw others standing in the market place idle.  And he said to them: Go you also into my vineyard, and I will give you what shall be just.  And they went their way. And again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did in like manner.
 But about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing, and he saith to them: Why stand you here all the day idle?  They say to him: Because no man hath hired us. He saith to them: Go you also into my vineyard.  And when evening was come, the lord of the vineyard saith to his
steward: Call the labourers and pay them their hire, beginning from the
last even to the first.  When therefore they were come, that came about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.  But when the first also came, they thought that they should receive more: and they also received every man a penny.
 And receiving it they murmured against the master of the house,  Saying: These last have worked but one hour, and thou hast made them
equal to us, that have borne the burden of the day and the heats.  But he answering said to one of them: Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst thou not agree with me for a penny?  Take what is thine, and go thy way: I will also give to this last even as to thee.  Or, is it not lawful for me to do what I will? is thy eye evil, because I am good?
 So shall the last be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen. (Matthew 20: 1-16.)
Fallen human nature takes its toll on each of us in many ways depending our own particular natures and the darkening of our intellects, the weakening of our wills and the disordering of our appetites and passions. More generally, of course, our disordered self-love that is one of the vestigial after-effects of Original Sin inclines mere creatures to think themselves superior to their Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier, believing they are the arbiters of right and wrong and can pass infallible and eternally binding judgments on the subjective value of the life and work of others. It is an easy step for one who thinks himself superior to the God Who created, Redeemed and Sanctified Him to think himself superior to others.
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ warned against the Pharisaical tendency of fallen men to snub their noses at others by ignoring them or scoffing at them or engaging in backbiting while pretending to be the friends who are but the object of scorn and derision behind closed doors. Truth be told, of course, many of us have played the role of Pharisaical hypocrites in our lives even though we may have committed horrible sins of omission and commission that the very people about whom we have been two-faced and/or overtly contemptuous would never even contemplate committing. We do not take Our Lord's warnings to avoid Pharisaical hypocrisy seriously at all:
And to some who trusted in themselves as just, and despised others, he spoke also this parable:  Two men went up into the temple to pray: the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
 The Pharisee standing, prayed thus with himself: O God, I give thee
thanks that I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, unjust,
adulterers, as also is this publican.  I fast twice in a week: I give tithes of all that I possess.  And the publican, standing afar off, would not so much as lift up his
eyes towards heaven; but struck his breast, saying: O God, be merciful
to me a sinner.  I say to you, this man went down into his house justified rather than
the other: because every one that exalteth himself, shall be humbled:
and he that humbleth himself, shall be exalted. (Luke 18: 9-14)
As it is now five years since I made the first tentative steps in public on this site to discuss the possibility that the canonical doctrine of sedevacantism applies in these times of apostasy and betrayal, I can report that I have discovered a great deal of resentment on the part of those who consider themselves "superior" because they had seen the truth of our ecclesiastical situation longer, if not for the entirety of their lives.
To be sure, we did encounter more than a handful of Catholics, most of whom had been familiar with my work in The Wanderer and The Remnant and Catholic Family News and had been praying that the scales would fall from my eyes, were very friendly, supportive and congratulatory. One prelate told me he would sometimes read my articles in The Wanderer and say to himself, "What is he doing writing for The Wanderer?, also telling me that he had clipped articles of mine from time to time that were useful in the preparation of a sermon or two. A priest said that he had cancelled his subscription to Catholic Family News after my articles stopped appearing there in 2006. Yet another priest, who was perhaps the most welcoming and friendly of them all back in 2006, said that his recently deceased father had said after reading my articles, "He's so close. We'll just have to pray him in." This welcoming spirit of charity and of forgiveness was quite a consolation.
There were and continue to be, however, the bumps along the rocky road in these rocky roads provided by those who consider themselves the "older sedes" and thus are, more or less, the "gatekeepers" of who is "legit" and who is not. Indeed, we encountered open resentment, scorn, mockery and even ostracism from some who almost literally turned up their noses and as they turned their backs at the very sight of us. "Who does he think he is?" "Why did it take him so long to see the truth?" "Why should I listen to anything he says or anything he writes." "All he does is beg for money. He doesn't really work." These were among the more subdued reactions that were related to me by friends of ours who had spoken to those who were deriding us after leaving the "resist but recognize" camp. The murmuring we have experienced has been quite similar to that expressed by the workers against those who had come in at the "eleventh hour" in the parable that Our Lord told to teach us that we should welcome with open arms anyone who embraces the truth with open arms. He does so. Why can't we?
This is all, of course, within the Providence of God. Humiliation is good for the soul, especially for the soul of one who needs to have his disordered self-love and pride beaten down on a regular basis. We bear no malice for anyone who responded to our entry into sedevacantist chapels with such talk and treatment. Our sins deserve far, far worse than sticks and stones and ostracism. The intentions of all hearts and the circumstances of all lives will be revealed only on the Last Day at the General Judgment of the living and the dead. It is enough to wait until then before finding how just how accurate our assessments of the lives and work of others have been light in of the justice and mercy of the Divine Redeemer Himself, Christ the King.
I do, however, want to provide a brief review of some of our experiences of the past five years by way of explaining our current location in the Midwest near a small chapel where the prelate in charge is concerned only about getting his sheep home to Heaven and nothing else.
Truth Must Take Us Where It Will No Matter the Consequences
Despite my sins, which have been so many over the course of my nearly sixty years of life, I have tried to defend the truths of the Holy Faith as best as I have been able at various points in my life.
Although my late parents were not truly observant Catholics, they were blessed with enough of the sensus Catholicus to take their two sons to the Baptismal font and to enroll them in a Catholic grammar school in the 1950s in the years just before the onset of the conciliar revolution. It is at Saint Aloysius School in Great Neck, New York, that I learned my Catholic Faith from the Baltimore Catechism. And it was nothing other than the gratuitous graces sent to me by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces, that I was able to understand those truths and to attempt to cooperate with those graces to resist the entreaties of the world.
My class at Saint Aloysius was well prepared to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation on March 21, 1961, the Feast of Saint Benedict, as we were instructed by our priests and religious to resist all peer pressure, to prefer even death itself than to compromise on any point of the Faith for the sake of human respect or to preserve our “reputation” in the eyes of others. This instruction, along with my parents’ own warnings, given as early as November of 1955 as they discussed the harm of Elvis Presley and “rock and roll” music at the dinner table, helped me to resist the drug and “music” culture of the 1960s that swept over so many people of my own generation at the time. It was not easy, humanly speaking, to be considered “different” and to be ridiculed almost endlessly while in a public high school from 1965 to 1969. However, I knew that I had to stand steadfast against things that I knew to be offensive to Our Lord and His Most Blessed Mother.
A conciliar presbyter with whom I was friendly for two decades asked me in 1980 upon first meeting him why we, who were born in the same year of 1951, had maintained the Faith while most others of our generation had not. “Grace, Father,” I told him. “And we can lose the graces that have been sent to us. We can go backward. It is far easier to resist the false currents of the world and its culture than it is to stand firm against them as soldiers in the Army of Christ. It is far easier to seem ‘non-threatening’ to others by making this or that compromise than it is to seek to walk the rocky road that leads to the narrow gate of Life Himself.”
This commitment to truth, which some in sedevacantist circles have disparaged as “idealism,” led me to be open to listen, at the very least, to those who were attempting to convince me as early of 1976 that what appeared to be the Catholic Church was in fact her counterfeit ape. I was not ready to accept what they told me. I argued with them. However, I listened, finding myself now making some of the very same arguments that others had made back in 1976 and again in 1985-1986.
The path of my return to the Tradition of my youth began when my acceptance of the American founding as compatible with the truths of the Catholic Faith was challenged in the middle-1980s on several occasions, including when a scholar discussing a paper I had delivered at the annual Fellowship of Catholic Scholars meeting that was taking place in Los Angeles, California, said to me very bluntly, “You need to read the Social Encyclical Letters.”
That one comment changed the course of my entire academic career.
Although I had been teaching for over a decade at that point and had been endeavoring to teach political science through the eyes of the Catholic Faith, being absolutely hated by a lot of my political science colleagues for doing so even at supposedly Catholic institutions, I had been very much influenced by the entire ethos of the heresy of Americanism into believing that it was “good enough” for Catholics to have a “say” in public debate, that it could be through the “market place of ideas” that the day could be won for the Faith in this country. I was disabused of this naturalism as I read the encyclical letters, coming to understand that every nation’s civil government has an obligation to recognize the true Church as its civil officials seek to pursue the common temporal good in light of the pursuit of man’s Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven.
Catholicism is indeed the one and only foundation of personal and social order, something that Pope Saint Pius X made abundantly clear in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:
“Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact.”
It was Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King and his open, unapologetic endorsement and propagation of the false, naturalistic, anti-Incarnational, religiously indifferentist and semi-Pelagian principles of the modern civil state, including that of the Constitution of the United States of America, that provided me with the impetus to take yet another look at the arguments in behalf of sedevacantism in the latter part of 2005 and the early part of 2006.
Of particular concern to me was the false “pontiff’s” December 22, 2005, Christmas address to his conciliar curia which gave his “papal” seal of approval to his lifelong denial of the nature of dogmatic truth, which he repackaged as his philosophically absurd and dogmatically condemned “hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity,” wherein he specifically referred to the principles of the American founding as the basis of a true understanding of Church-State relations. It was also in that same 2005 address to the conciliar curia that Ratzinger/Benedict said that what he considered to be the “church” had to reconsider its “relationship with the faith of Israel” in light of the crimes of the Third Reich of Adolf Hitler.
I saw no means of reconciling Ratzinger/Benedict’s clear rejection of Catholic Social Teaching on the true nature of Church-State relations with these words of Pope Pius XI, contained in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 22, 1923:
“Many believe in or claim that they believe in and hold fast to Catholic doctrine on such questions as social authority, the right of owning private property, on the relations between capital and labor, on the rights of the laboring man, on the relations between Church and State, religion and country, on the relations between the different social classes, on international relations, on the rights of the Holy See and the prerogatives of the Roman Pontiff and the Episcopate, on the social rights of Jesus Christ, Who is the Creator, Redeemer, and Lord not only of individuals but of nations. In spite of these protestations, they speak, write, and, what is more, act as if it were not necessary any longer to follow, or that they did not remain still in full force, the teachings and solemn pronouncements which may be found in so many documents of the Holy See, and particularly in those written by Leo XIII, Pius X, and Benedict XV.
“There is a species of moral, legal, and social modernism which We condemn, no less decidedly than We condemn theological modernism.
“It is necessary ever to keep in mind these teachings and pronouncements which We have made; it is no less necessary to reawaken that spirit of faith, of supernatural love, and of Christian discipline which alone can bring to these principles correct understanding, and can lead to their observance. This is particularly important in the case of youth, and especially those who aspire to the priesthood, so that in the almost universal confusion in which we live they at least, as the Apostle writes, will not be "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." (Ephesians iv, 14) (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)
Having satisfied myself that the conciliar “popes” had defected from the Faith on this and many other matters long before their apparent “elections” to the papal throne convinced me that I had to make inquiries of clergy who rejected the legitimacy of these spiritual robber barons before I made any public statements on the matter.
Discovering A Lack of Understanding of the Social Reign of Christ the King
Although the ecclesiastical position of the Society of Saint Pius X is founded on the false principles of Gallicanism that were condemned by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794, I was nonetheless edified by the commitment of many of its priests to the Social Reign of Christ the King during the three years were traveled in Society circles. Indeed, the best sales for my books were made in the chapels of the Society of Saint Pius X.
It was, therefore, very shocking to find such a poor understanding of the Social Reign of Christ the King when we started to assist at Holy Mass offered by true priests who made no concessions to conciliarism or to the nonexistent legitimacy of the conciliar officials. Many of the members of the laity were as immersed in the ways of the popular culture as were those I had known during my days as “conservative” Novus Ordo Catholic in the 1970s and 1980s and in my days as an “indulterer” from 1991 to 2002. There was not only a lack of the fact that a rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King was of the essence of Modernist thought, there was an open hostility on the part of many Catholics to even speaking about the sacred rights of Our Divine King. One Catholic father was shushed by another when talking about the Social Reign of Christ the King around a campfire near Auriesville, New York, on a parish outing, saying, "Not in front of the children, please."
Some members of the laity in some sedevacantist chapels protested with shouts, “I never heard this when I was growing up.” Well, that’s precisely the problem. The true American bishops in the decades prior to the “Second” Vatican Council never taught about the Social Reign of Christ the King, something that Pope Leo XIII noted very directly when he reminded the bishops of this country that they had to teach his own social encyclical letters that he knew they were ignoring:
“As regards civil affairs, experience has shown how important it is that the citizens should be upright and virtuous. In a free State, unless justice be generally cultivated, unless the people be repeatedly and diligently urged to observe the precepts and laws of the Gospel, liberty itself may be pernicious. Let those of the clergy, therefore, who are occupied with the instruction of the multitude, treat plainly this topic of the duties of citizens, so that all may understand and feel the necessity, in political life, of conscientiousness, self restraint, and integrity; for that cannot be lawful in public which is unlawful in private affairs. On this whole subject there are to be found, as you know, in the encyclical letters written by Us from time to time in the course of Our pontificate, many things which Catholics should attend to and observe. In these writings and expositions We have treated of human liberty, of the chief Christian duties, of civil government, and of the Christian constitution of States, drawing Our principles as well from the teaching of the Gospels as from reason. They, then, who wish to be good citizens and discharge their duties faithfully may readily learn from Our Letters the ideal of an upright life.” (Pope Leo XIII, Longiqua Oceani, January 6, 1895.)
It was in this same encyclical letter that Pope Leo, after praising the natural virtue of George Washington and noting that the Church was unopposed by the Constitution, explained the situation of the Church in the United States of America is not what Ratzinger/Benedict termed it in 2005 to be, a “model” for the rest of the world:
“Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced. The fact that Catholicity with you is in good condition, nay, is even enjoying a prosperous growth, is by all means to be attributed to the fecundity with which God has endowed His Church, in virtue of which unless men or circumstances interfere, she spontaneously expands and propagates herself; but she would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority.” (Pope Leo XIII, Longiqua Oceani, January 6, 1895.)
I found it quite disheartening, even dispiriting, that Bishop Clarence Kelly, for example, was intellectually dishonest enough to excise this latter part of Paragraph Six of Longiqua Oceani from a written elegy of praise for the American founding that I had seen in 2006, choosing to note only Pope Leo XIII’s limited praise of George Washington’s natural virtues and the existence of a well-ordered republic without providing the caveat quoted above. He is not alone in doing so.
“What,” I told Sharon at the time, “is the sense of separating oneself from Benedict when one is possessed of the same spirit of Americanism as he is?”
Some would protest that no true pope has declared in so many words that the American founding is antithetical to Catholic Social Teaching as the first political expression of the rotten fruit of Protestantism and the rise of the naturalism of Freemasonry. I have answered this rather shallow observation many times by noting that no true pope has declared in so many words that the “Second” Vatican Council defected from the Faith or that there would be a papal vacancy lasting over half a century. We have had to use the reason that God has given us to understand the teaching of Holy Mother Church and the writings of her learned Fathers and Doctors and theologians to come to this conclusion, and the same is true when it comes to recognizing the heresies of Americanism flowed from the Potomac into the Tiber prior to the “Second” Vatican Council just as surely as the heresies from the Rhine in Ratzinger’s own native Germany did.
Truth must take us where it will. Even though my continued steadfastness in behalf of the Social Reign of Christ the King, elucidated in hundreds upon hundreds of carefully documented articles and in scores of lectures, has marginalized me in many sedevacantist circles, I keep uppermost in my mind the simple fact that, despite all of the lack of understanding of Catholic Social Teaching that I have seen in many sedevacantist venues that this detracts nothing from the simple fact that Ratzinger is a heretic with whom no one should want to be in association.
Extra Cappellam Nulla Salus
Another disturbing characteristic that I discovered when we ventured into sedevacantist chapels five years ago was the all-too-prevalent attitude of so many sedevacantist clergy that can be summarized as “extra cappellam nulla salus.”
This was what we found when speaking with a priest of the Society of Saint Pius V priest at the same time I was speaking with a Thuc-line bishop, discovering thereafter that the priest looked askance at all Thuc-line clergy and that some Thuc-line clergy viewed their chapels as the true Barque of Peter outside of which Catholics place their souls at peril of eternal loss, an attitude that has been, of course, discussed on this site in the past. The anti-Thuc propaganda has been answered quite decisively by Mr. Mario Derksen in his Open Letter to Bp. Clarence Kelly on the Thuc Bishops.
I also discovered in some places a misplaced desire to return to a Catholicism of the 1950s whose contentment with minimalism paved the way for the ready acceptance of the spirit of the Novus Ordo and the whole ethos of conciliarism in the 1960s and thereafter, while those Catholics who dressed more modestly than the majority and refused to participate in the ways of the popular culture (rock "music," television, motion pictures, etc.) are viewed as "Jansenists" who should be shunned.
One who is not convinced that Joseph Ratzinger cannot be “Pope” Benedict XVI would be so scandalized by the internecine warfare and cultural liberalism within some sedevacantist camps as to be tempted to run yelling and screaming away from attitudes that are antithetical to the Catholic Faith and thus to the sanctification and salvation of the souls redeemed at so high a price, the cost of the shedding of every single drop of Our Lord’s Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross. The problem of the warring camps has been exacerbated in some places by the terrible abuse of the sheep, including their expulsion from chapels and the misuse of the Sacred Tribunal of Penance.
Obviously, none of us suffers as his sins deserve. Each cross that we are asked to carry is a great gift given us by God Himself to offer back to Him through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Each person who is a thorn in our side is actually an instrument chosen by God Himself to sanctify us as we are pruned, as our disordered self-love is crushed and as we are humiliated before men the way that our sins caused Him to be humiliated during His Passion and Death.
It is, though, not asking too much to expect our shepherds to be less concerned about their idiosyncratic theological positions and/or clerical power than about treating us, the sheep, with just a modicum of decency, no less of love as their brothers and sisters in Christ the King.
Seeking a Refuge
Some of us, however, want nothing to do with the false “pontiff” or the false ecclesiology of the Society of Saint Pius X. Desiring just to save our souls under the guidance of true shepherds who have no affiliation with the conciliar church at all. We want a refuge from the spirit of “extra cappellam nulla salus” and/or abusive conditions wherein the sheep are always being viewed with fear and loathing. We want a place where the Natural Law right of parents to discharge their duties as the principal educators of their children is respected, where the striving for academic excellence as befits redeemed creatures is not disparaged as secondary to recreational activities. We simply want to go home to Heaven as members of the Catholic Church who are ready at all times to die in a state of Sanctifying Grace as we fulfill our obligations as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
The past five years have taken us to many places.
Words cannot even begin to express the deep affection we have for our beloved Bishop Robert F. McKenna, O.P., a valiant son of Saint Dominic de Guzman whose devotion to Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary is inspirational. It was very difficult to leave Connecticut when the frostbite that had turned many of my toes black showed no signs of abating and as the costs of living in Connecticut skyrocketed. Barring some unexpected financial windfall from massive sales of There Is No Shortcut to Cure This Condition: A Catholic Man's Lifelong Battle of the Bulge, the cost of gasoline at this time will prohibit us from going back East again for quite a long time. We miss our truly good shepherd, Bishop McKenna, and our many friends at Our Lady of the Rosary Chapel and in our native northeast. We remember Bishop McKenna and Father Adan Rodriguez in our prayers every day.
Our trip down south in late-February after our former residence on wheels had broken down in Ohio on our way out of Connecticut (yes, details in the travelogue that will be completed at some time this month, maybe, perhaps, possibly, if, that is, the man who thinks that he is the "pope" decides to take a rest for a few days or so) gave us an opportunity to visit dear friends in Vicksburg, Mississippi, and to see our good friend Father Francis Miller, O.F.M., who works so tirelessly to serve the souls at the wonderfully hospitable Christ the King Church in Lafayette, Louisiana. It was always so good to visit our friends in Acadiana, including one of the best waiters in the whole country, "Mister Lester," as he is called, at Prejean's in Lafayette, where we went on a few mornings after Holy Mass at Christ the King Church.
This reflection, though, would be intellectually dishonest if I did not mention the time that we spent in several traditional venues in the past five years from which we are now estranged. Although the circumstances that caused this estrangement have been well documented, we, contrary to various accusations, bore no malice at all for anyone with whom we disagreed, first in the private forum and then, regrettably, in the public forum. Indeed, we will always have gratitude for valuable lessons learned and for the glories give to God in the offering of Holy Mass. It is my most fond hope that there will never be an occasion in the future to have to spend good Catholic time on such matters. It is enough that we pray for each other here in this passing, mortal vale of tears, praying as well that a good reconciliation will take place at the General Judgment of the Living and the Dead on the Last Day if one is not meant to occur before that time.
As I, a nobody, a cipher whose mere name is a killer for the sale of any books, see it, the warring groups who reject the legitimacy of the "pontificates" of the conciliar "popes" have spent too much time, both publicly and privately, shooting at each other. I want peace. Just peace. I want to go to Mass and go home after we spend our time before Our Lord's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament. Enough of the warfare that has occupied so much of time and effort when our focus must be on opposing not each other but the man below (center of the photograph) is mocks the Faith and thus is a menace to the sanctification and salvation of souls:
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI at the Blue Mosque, Istanbul, Turkey, November 30, 2006.
Get the picture? He's the enemy of Christ the King and the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood, not our fellow fully traditional Catholics (and not even those who, like so many of us who have come in at the "eleventh hour," have not accepted the truth that those who defect from the Faith cannot hold ecclesiastical positions in the Catholic Church legitimately). We need to pray for each other as we seek to make reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.
Yes, it is often a rocky road that leads to the Narrow Gate of Life Himself. Our Lord Himself told us that this would be the case:
 Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the
way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat.  How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!  Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. (Matthew 7: 13-15.)
Isn't getting to Heaven the only thing that is supposed to matter to us?
Thus, we must lift high the crosses that are sent to us, doing so with joy and gratitude as we beg Our Lady's help to persevere on the rocky road that leads to Heaven, always, always mindful that none of us suffers as our sins deserve and that not one thing we suffer in this life is the equal of the sorrow and pain and torture that one of our least Venial Sins imposed upon Our Lord in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and caused His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart to be thrust through and through with those Seven Swords of Sorrow.
Let us give thanks to God through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for living in these challenging times as it is precisely at this point in salvation history that He had ordained us from all eternity in which to live and thus to sanctify and save our souls as we cling to true bishops and true priest who make no concessions to conciliarism whatsoever.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.