Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
                  April 16, 2007

Sed Libera Nos a Malo

by Thomas A. Droleskey

We pray in the Pater Noster to be delivered from evil (sed libera nos a malo). It is almost a year ago now that we began to be delivered from the absurdity of the illogic of the world in which one "recognizes" a man as the Vicar of Christ while distancing himself from the "Mass" that the "pontiff" offers and from the "bishops" he appoints to govern and to teach in the name of the "Catholic" Church. There has never been a time in the history of the Catholic Church when ordinary Catholics have had to parse every word uttered and every document issued by reigning"pontiffs," doing so for over four decades.

Although it is still necessary to point out the specific heresies and errors propagated by Joseph Ratzinger, such as referring to the heretical and schismatic" "patriarch" of Constantinople a "pastor" in the "Church of Christ" (meaning that one can be a pastor of the "Church of Christ" without believing in papal primacy, papal infallibility, the Catholic doctrines on Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception and Our Lady's Bodily Assumption into Heaven, Purgatory, the Filioque, and the indissolubility of a ratified, consummated, sacramentally-valid marriage, among other defects from the Catholic Faith), there is indeed a wonderful peace in one's soul when one recognizes that the Catholic Church, which cannot give us a defective liturgy or ambiguities or errors in her official documents, is not the author of the massive betrayals and apostasies of the conciliarist era. While we must oppose error and defend the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church, Our Lord does not want us to spend our lives in constant conflict in our parishes. He wants us to live in blessed peace, the peace that comes from the surety, certainty and clarity of the Catholic Faith, the peace that comes from the offering of the Mass of the ages by authentically ordained Catholic priests who make no concessions at all, whether implicit or explicit, to conciliarism or to the legitimacy of the conciliar shepherds, whose very own words have passed judgment on themselves as being outside of the pale of the Catholic Church.

As I have noted on many occasions in the past year, Pope Leo XIII put the lie to the false assertion, one that lacks any support in Patristics whatsoever, that one remains a Catholic in good standing as long as he maintains belief in a certain minimum number of articles of the Catholic Faith. Pope Leo pointed out in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, that the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church holds as outside of the Church anyone who dissents from even one article contained in the Deposit of Faith. No solemn declaration is necessary. Those who dissent from even one article of the Faith separate themselves from the body of believers, thus disqualifying themselves from holding ecclesiastical office. They have passed judgment on themselves by their own words and deeds, as Pope Leo noted in Satis Cognitum:

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" (11-12).


You see, the conciliarists would have us believe that one can be a Catholic and believe that the Catholic Church is a series of "concentric" circles that permit those who hold heretical views to be considered as being in "imperfect communion" with the Catholic Church, making a mockery of the consistent, perennial teaching of the Catholic Church on the nature of her Divine Constitution, disparaging her mark of Unity.

The conciliarists would have us believe that one can be a Catholic and believe that dogmatic pronouncements and papal encyclical letters are subject to deconstruction and reinterpretation in light of the needs of "modern" man, making a mockery of the very nature of truth and of the immutability of God Himself, defying the anathemas of the Vatican Council concerning this very falsehood.

The conciliarists would have us believe that one can be a Catholic and believe that proselytism of Protestants and Jews and the Orthodox is forbidden, making a mockery of the authentic missionary work of the Catholic Church and the witness given by countless millions of Catholics over the centuries and leaving countless billions of souls alive at this time to wander aimlessly in life without having their intellects enlightened by the Deposit of Faith and their wills strengthened by belief in, access to and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace.

The conciliarists would have us believe that one can be a Catholic and believe that false religions have the right to propagate themselves in civil society and that their false ideas can "contribute" to the pursuit of the "common good," making a mockery of the condemnation of the heresy of religious liberty offered by one pope after another prior to the advent of conciliarism.

The conciliarists would have us believe that one can be a Catholic and believe that the civil state has no obligation to recognize the true Church and/or that it is beneficial for the Church and for the civil state for there to be such a lack of recognition, making of mockery of the consistent condemnation of the separation of Church and State offered by one pope after another prior to conciliarism, trampling on the rights of the Social Reign of Christ the King and of Mary our Immaculate Queen.

The conciliarists would have us believe that it is not necessary a liturgy purporting to belong to the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church can omit the Offertory of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition of the Roman Rite and that the words of Consecration can be changed, thereby making a mockery of the entire doctrine of the Church, expressed by Pope Saint Pius V in De Defectibus (1570):

Defects on the part of the form may arise if anything is missing from the complete wording required for the act of consecrating.  Now the words of the Consecration, which are the form of this Sacrament, are: Hoc est enim Corpus meum, and Hic est enim Calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti: mysterium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.  If the priest were to shorten or change the form of the consecration of the Body and the Blood, so that in the change of wording the words did not mean the same thing, he would not be achieving a valid Sacrament.  If, on the other hand, he were to add or take away anything which did not change the meaning, the Sacrament would be valid, but he would be committing a grave sin.


(Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas has covered this issue at great length in Comments on the Eucharistic Form of the Consecration.)

The conciliarists would have us believe that the Catholic Church was wrong to have included "legends" about the lives of the saints in the Collects of the Mass, no less wrong to have included "legendary" saints in her liturgical calendar, making a mockery of her acceptance of these "legends" and of these saints over the centuries.

The conciliarists would have us believe that the Catholic Church can issue a "Code of Canon Law" and an "Ecumenical Directory" that permit what purports to be Holy Communion to be distributed in some circumstances to non-Catholics, making of mockery of Paragraph 21 of Canon 731 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law, which simply reaffirmed the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church that the administration of Holy Communion to a non-Catholic is a mortal sin.

The conciliarists would have us believe that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass must incorporate on an ever changing basis various pagan rituals and practices, thus making a mockery of the efforts of Catholic missionaries to eradicate these rituals and practices from the lives of the people they converted to the true Faith over the centuries. These missionaries, who understood that Holy Mass must communicate the transcendence and glory and immutability and universality of God Himself and of the Sacrifice of the Cross He offered to redeem us, must have been wrong to seek to lift their converts up to the glories of Heaven rather than remain immersed in the superstitions of demonic worship and practices.

The conciliarists would have us believe that the dogmatic decrees of the Council of Trent, such as the one on Justification, do not bind the Catholic Church in perpetuity, that such things as the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" can correct those decrees, meaning that God the Holy Ghost got it wrong at the Council of Trent!

It has never before been the case in the history of the Catholic Church that such things have been propagated by the highest-ranking ecclesiastical officials, including those who have been accepted by most Catholics as "popes," and by the documents that have been promulgated by those ecclesiastical officials. The contradiction by Roman officials of defined dogmas and of the actual liturgical tradition of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church is without precedent

Reacting to the rejection and contradiction of Lamentabili Sane, July 3, 1907, and Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, Pope Saint Pius X minced no words in stating what happens to those who dare to accept Modernist principles and thus reject and contradict the restatement of Catholic truths in these two documents. This is what Pope Saint Pius X wrote in Praestantia Scriptura, November 18, 1907:

Moreover, in order to check the daily increasing audacity of many modernists who are endeavoring by all kinds of sophistry and devices to detract from the force and efficacy not only of the decree "Lamentabili sane exitu" (the so-called Syllabus), issued by our order by the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition on July 3 of the present year, but also of our encyclical letters "Pascendi dominici gregis" given on September 8 of this same year, we do by our apostolic authority repeat and confirm both that decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and those encyclical letters of ours, adding the penalty of excommunication against their contradictors, and this we declare and decree that should anybody, which may God forbid, be so rash as to defend any one of the propositions, opinions or teachings condemned in these documents he falls, ipso facto, under the censure contained under the chapter "Docentes" of the constitution "Apostolicae Sedis," which is the first among the excommunications latae sententiae, simply reserved to the Roman Pontiff. This excommunication is to be understood as salvis poenis, which may be incurred by those who have violated in any way the said documents, as propagators and defenders of heresies, when their propositions, opinions and teachings are heretical, as has happened more than once in the case of the adversaries of both these documents, especially when they advocate the errors of the modernists that is, the synthesis of all heresies.


Here is just one example of how a notorious contradictor of Lamentabili Sane and Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Joseph Ratzinger, boldly staked out his position in defiance of Praestantia Scriptura:

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)


Here is condemned proposition numbers seven and eight in Lamentabili Sane, July 3, 1907:

7. In proscribing errors, the Church cannot demand any internal assent from the faithful by which the judgments she issues are to be embraced.

8. They are free from all blame who treat lightly the condemnations passed by the Sacred Congregation of the Index or by the Roman Congregations.


Here is Pope Pius XII's statement in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, on the binding nature of what is contained in papal encyclical letters that have been dismissed as "obsolete" by the likes of Joseph Ratzinger and his fellow "new" theologians:

Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me"; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians.


Joseph Ratzinger, as has been noted on this site endlessly, rejects the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the obligation of the civil state to recognize the true Church and to subordinate itself in all that pertains to the good of souls to her infallible authority. He made this clear in Principles of Catholic Theology:

If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the text (Gaudium et Spes) as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the texts on religious liberty, and world religions) it is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of countersyllabus. Harnack, as we know, interpreted the Syllabus of Pius IX as nothing less than a declaration of war against his generation. This is correct insofar as the Syllabus established a line of demarcation against the determining forces of the nineteenth century: against the scientific and political world view of liberalism. In the struggle against modernism the twofold delimitation was ratified and strengthened. Since then many things have changed. The new ecclesiastical policy of Pius XI produced a certain openness toward a liberal understanding of the state. In a quiet but persistent struggle, exegesis and Church history adopted more and more the postulates of liberal science, and liberalism, too, was obliged to undergo many significant changes in the great political upheavals of the twentieth century. As a result, the one-sidedness of the position adopted by the Church under Pius IX and Pius X in response to the situation created by the new phase of history inaugurated by the French Revolution and was, to a large extent, corrected via facti, especially in Central Europe, but there was still no basic statement of the relationship that should exist between the Church and the world that had come into existence after 1789. In fact, an attitude that was largely pre-revolutionary continued to exist in countries with strong Catholic majorities. Hardly anyone will deny today that the Spanish and Italian Concordat strove to preserve too much of a view of the world that no longer corresponded to the facts. Hardly anyone will deny today that, in the field of education and with respect to the historico-critical method in modern science, anachronisms existed that corresponded closely to this adherence to an obsolete Church-state relationship. Only a careful investigation of the different ways in which acceptance of the new era was accomplished in various parts of the Church could unravel the complicated network of causes that formed the background of the "Pastoral Constitution". and only thus can the dramatic history of its influence be brought to light.


Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789. Only from this perspective can we understand, on the one hand, the ghetto-mentality, of which we have spoken above; only from this perspective can we understand, on the other hand, the meaning of the remarkable meeting of the Church and the world. Basically, the word "world" means the spirit of the modern era, in contrast to which the Church's group-consciousness saw itself as a separate subject that now, after a war that had been in turn both hot and cold, was intent on dialogue and cooperation. From this perspective, too, we can understand the different emphases with which the individual parts of the Church entered into the discussion of the text. While German theologians were satisfied that their exegetical and ecumenical concepts had been incorporated, representatives of Latin American countries, in particular, felt that their concerns, too, had been addressed, topics proposed by Anglo-Saxon theologians likewise found strong expression, and representatives of Third World countries saw, in the emphasis on social questions, a consideration of their particular problems. (pp. 381-382)


Pope Pius XI condemned in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922, a rejection of the Church's Social Teaching that is so manifest in the entire life's work of Joseph Ratzinger, who seeks to adapt the condemned inter-denominational principles of the Sillon as the means to fight secularism:

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.


Pope Leo XIII condemned Joseph Ratzinger's "reconciliation" with the "new era inaugurated in 1789," calling it an alliance with the devil himself. Writing in Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892, Pope Leo stated in no uncertain terms:


Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God.


The contrast is clear. Which statement is eternally Catholic? Which statement helps to feed the madness that Modernity hath wrought, that it is possible for man to know order in his own life and peace in the world absent membership in the Catholic Church and adherence to the perennial teachings entrusted to her by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made Man in Our Lady's virginal and immaculate womb by the power of the Holy Ghost at the Annunciation?


Pope Saint Pius X, writing in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907, would have to be wrong about his critique of Modernism for Joseph Ratzinger's defense of the ethos of conciliarism that he helped to create to be correct:


But it is not only within her own household that the Church must come to terms. Besides her relations with those within, she has others with those who are outside. The Church does not occupy the world all by herself; there are other societies in the world., with which she must necessarily have dealings and contact. The rights and duties of the Church towards civil societies must, therefore, be determined, and determined, of course, by her own nature, that, to wit, which the Modernists have already described to us. The rules to be applied in this matter are clearly those which have been laid down for science and faith, though in the latter case the question turned upon the object, while in the present case we have one of ends. In the same way, then, as faith and science are alien to each other by reason of the diversity of their objects, Church and State are strangers by reason of the diversity of their ends, that of the Church being spiritual while that of the State is temporal. Formerly it was possible to subordinate the temporal to the spiritual and to speak of some questions as mixed, conceding to the Church the position of queen and mistress in all such, because the Church was then regarded as having been instituted immediately by God as the author of the supernatural order. But this doctrine is today repudiated alike by philosophers and historians. The state must, therefore, be separated from the Church, and the Catholic from the citizen. Every Catholic, from the fact that he is also a citizen, has the right and the duty to work for the common good in the way he thinks best, without troubling himself about the authority of the Church, without paying any heed to its wishes, its counsels, its orders -- nay, even in spite of its rebukes. For the Church to trace out and prescribe for the citizen any line of action, on any pretext whatsoever, is to be guilty of an abuse of authority, against which one is bound to protest with all one's might. Venerable Brethren, the principles from which these doctrines spring have been solemnly condemned by Our predecessor, Pius VI, in his Apostolic Constitution Auctorem fidei.


Separation of Church and State? A "healthy secularity?" Catholicism? "Legitimate developments of doctrine?" Nonsense. There are diabolical concepts promoted by a number of the devil's minions, both witting and unwitting, including the scions of conciliarism, to separate themselves from the entire ethos of Christendom, which is dismissed and condemned as "triumphalistic," as a new modus vivendi is to be found with the "real world" as it exists today.

To be delivered the captivity of the absurdities of conciliarism is a great grace from Our Lord and His Most Blessed Mother, through whose loving hands all of the graces won for us on the wood of the Holy Cross by her Divine Son flow into our hearts and souls. Our Lord does not want us having to spend our lives having to "fight for the Faith" in parishes that are, for the most part, populated by invalidly ordained priests offering an invalid, sacrilegious "Mass" that contains one innovation, both authorized and improvised, after another. I remember attending a Novus Ordo Easter Vigil "Mass' at Saint Mary's Cathedral in Fargo, North Dakota, on Saturday, March 25, 1989, and being outraged when the choir invoked the names of Martin Luther King, Jr., Oscar Romero, and the names of the four women, including three nuns, killed in El Salvador on December 2, 1980, in the "Litany of the Saints." This was done in the presence of the conciliar bishop, James Sullivan, I was serving as his director of communications at the time, prompting me to seek a return to academe posthaste. And this is to say nothing of the gargantuan battles fought over the years concerning such sacrileges as "Communion in the hand" and "Communion under both species" and altar girls. This is not how Our Lord wants us to spend our lives. He wants us to spend our lives delivered from such evils, concentrating on the sanctification and the salvation of our immortal souls.

Although ashamed that I hesitated for so long to examine publicly the doctrinal principles supporting the sedevacantist thesis, which even the likes of the late curial cardinal Mario Francesco Pompedda admitted in 2005 was the canonical doctrine of the Catholic Church ("It is true that the canonical doctrine states that the see would be vacant in the case of heresy," Zenit, February 8, 2005), it has been truly liberating to know once and for all that the Catholic Church is not the author of the novelties and errors and the heresies of the past forty-plus years. We are so much in the debt of Bishops Daniel Dolan and Donald Sanborn and Robert McKenna and Mark Pivarunas and to so many wonderful priests who are defending the fullness of the Catholic Faith while making no concessions to conciliarism or to the legitimacy of the conciliar shepherds. In addition to the excellent resources found at Traditional Latin Mass Resources and Traditional Catholic Sermons Home and CMRI Index (Religious Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen, Latin Mass), a superb way of reviewing the history of the twenty authentic councils of the Catholic Church and contrasting them with the "Second" Vatican Council, is Fathers Francisco and Dominic Radecki's Tumultuous Times. Clarity and sanity prevail when one sees that conciliarism is a false religion that must be rejected in its entirety as a mockery of the Catholic Faith of diabolical invention and maintenance.

We must pray for our relatives and our friends in this time of crisis and apostasy and betrayal, never being discouraged when our efforts to convince them of the heretical nature of conciliarism or our efforts to get them out of the Novus Ordo or the indult or a "resist and recognize" chapel seem to bear no fruit. Consider this dialogue between Our Lord and Saint Gertrude, the great Thirteenth Century apostle of His Most Sacred Heart:

The Saint answered: "If it be really true, my God, that Thou, in Thy goodness, dost thou speak through me, how is it that my words have so little effect on some persons, notwithstanding the ardent desire I have to lead them to glorify Thee and to save themselves?" Our Lord replied: "Marvel not if your words are sometimes fruitless, and produce no effect, since, when I dwelt among men, My own words, though uttered with the fervor and power of the Godhead, produced not the fruit of salvation in the hearts of all. It is through My Divine Providence that all things are arranged and perfected in the fitting time, as appointed by Me." (The Life and Revelations of Saint Gertrude the Great, reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers, p. 25.)


Mind you, as far as I am aware, none of us is being spoken to by God Himself as Saint Gertrude was. The point that Our Lord made to Saint Gertrude, though, is quite applicable to whatever efforts we make to help anyone see the truth about anything concerting Faith and morals, including, for example, our efforts to convince our pro-abortion relatives and friends that the Fifth Commandment prohibits the direct, intentional taking of all innocent human life as the first and only object of a human action without any exception whatsoever. Whatever efforts we make, including those to help people investigate the sedevacantist thesis, to help people see the truth clearly are never wasted. Those of us who are totally consecrated slaves of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, whether according to the formula of Saint Louis de Montfort or that of Father Maximilian Kolbe, surrender ourselves totally to Our Lady's patronage, trusting that she will use the fruit of whatever efforts we make in defense of the Faith in ways that will only be made manifest to us in eternity, please God we persevere until the end in states of Sanctifying Grace as members of the Catholic Church. We must not look for results. We must never grow discouraged or despondent. We must simply try to be faithful, understanding that the graces won for us on Calvary by the shedding of every single drop of Our Lord's Most Precious Blood are sufficient for us in this time of apostasy and betrayal. The final victory belongs to Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. Why do we doubt that this victory will be manifest in God's good time?

Indeed, Pope Pius XI reminded us in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925:

We may well admire in this the admirable wisdom of the Providence of God, who, ever bringing good out of evil, has from time to time suffered the faith and piety of men to grow weak, and allowed Catholic truth to be attacked by false doctrines, but always with the result that truth has afterwards shone out with greater splendor, and that men's faith, aroused from its lethargy, has shown itself more vigorous than before.


Let us be aroused from lethargy as the totally consecrated slaves of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, offering acts of reparation for our own sins and those of the whole world to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through that same Immaculate Heart of Mary. May we never tire of defending the Faith and of praying to be delivered from the multi-faceted, sophisticated layer of heresies and errors and novelties and conciliarism as we worship in the catacombs where true bishops and true bishops feed us with the true Faith and place on our tongues the actual Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the Divine Redeemer in Holy Communion. May we continue to pray that all Catholics will be delivered from the evils of conciliarism as the fruit of the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, thus inaugurating the Reign of Mary Immaculate and the Social Reign of Christ the King and His Most Sacred Heart.

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 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 Justin the Martyr, pray for us.

Saint  Scholastica, pray for us.

Saint Benedict, pray for us.

Saint Anthony of Padua, 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 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.

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.