Still Little Word About God and His Law, None About His Justice or His Wrath
Thomas A. Droleskey
Although there is not too much that needs to be added to the brief commentary, To Do The Will Of "The People," Not Of God, leave it to the conciliar revolutionaries to find a way to keep me working when I would much rather be taking several days off from writing. Oh, well, as one of our many legions of former friends, a priest in the Society of Saint Pius X, noted some time ago, "It's rest in peace. Not now. Not now."
The conciliar "archbishop" of New York, Timothy Dolan, continues to refuse invoke the law of God, His justice or His holy wrath when discussing the so-called "law" passed by the New York State Legislature and signed by Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo, who remains in perfectly "good standing" in the conciliar structures despite supporting the execution of innocent preborn children by chemical and surgical means and living in sin with his concubine and having aggressively crusaded in behalf of "marriage" for those engaged in perverse acts against nature, that is really no law at all in the eyes of God and thus has no binding force on men anywhere at any time, including in the State of New York. The "law" passed on Friday evening, June 24, 2011, the Feast of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist, is no law at all. That Timothy Dolan, who has praised the "work" of the pro-abortion, pro-perversity Anti-Defamation League, did not preach about this on what is the Feast of Corpus Christi in the world of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service in the United States of America is a scandal in and of itself:
Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan did not exactly hide his opposition to efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in New York.
Yet on Sunday, Archbishop Dolan made no mention of gay marriage
during the 10:15 a.m. Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral. He did not
criticize state lawmakers, or offer an impassioned defense of the
church’s view of marriage.
It was not until after services when the archbishop tackled the
issue, and explained to reporters why he chose not to do so during his
“This is about prayer,” he said inside the cathedral. “I sort of
needed a good dose of the Lord’s grace and mercy because I’ve been down a
little lately as you can imagine.”
Archbishop Dolan said he was
disheartened that the same-sex marriage bill was passed by the
Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo.
“I would have to say I was sad because it’s not good for the common
good,” the archbishop said. “I think society and culture is at its
Archbishop Dolan acknowledged sensing that his efforts to prevent the
bill’s passage were not going to be fruitful: “We knew it was an
He said his opposition was based on a pro-marriage position, not an
anti-gay bias. “I tell the gay community I love you very much, and
every single morning when I say my morning prayers, I pray for the
health of all New Yorkers and they are part of that,” he said. “I am
very grateful for the presence of so many gay Catholics who are
heroically trying to live their faith.”
Meanwhile, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey said that if he were in Governor Cuomo’s shoes, he would not have signed the bill.
“I believe marriage should be between one man and one woman,” Governor Christie said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I wouldn’t sign a bill like the one that was in New York.” (Archbishop Silent on Gay Marriage.)
Not for the "common good"? All right. Why, "Archbishop" Dolan, why?
This is not for the "common good" as that which is in defiance of the laws of God and thus of the eternal good of souls is injurious to the common good. The common temporal good must be advanced in light 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, as citizens seek to pursue sanctity as befits their state-in-life while they make reparation for their sins as members of the Catholic Church. There is no other way to pursue the common temporal good of men or their nations. None.
Catholics express themselves as Catholics, not as naturalists oozing with "sensitivity" for those who base their human self-identification on inclinations to commit perverse acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that have been responsible for the destruction of men and their cities:
The more closely the temporal power of a nation
aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes
the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of
the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by
the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with
its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the
same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their
obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity
because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good
citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How
grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely
united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and
methods other than those which make for the formation of good
Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason
as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and
tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness
of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to
that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of
conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred
and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the
greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But
the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error," as Augustine was
wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on
the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to
evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit" is open from
which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which
locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation
of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws
-- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other.
Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for
wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil,
namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire
for novelty. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this
time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious
and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach
that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress
altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without
regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at
least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and
false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and
of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the
best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as
attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties,
offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace
may require." From which totally false idea of social government
they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its
effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our
Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of
conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be
legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society;
and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which
should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil,
whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any
of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in
any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think
and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and that
"if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there
will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in
the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very
teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and
wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."
And, since where religion has been removed from
civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation
repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is
darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is
supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some,
utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound
reason, dare to proclaim that "the people's will, manifested by what is
called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law,
free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order
accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are
accomplished, have the force of right." But who, does not see
and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds
of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the
purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such
circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the
unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests? (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)
That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis
absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the
principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in
the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of
man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their
existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a
private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides,
this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits
the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this
life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and
it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to
it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after
this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of
things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme
and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only
place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in
effecting it (Pope Saint Pius X,, February 11, 1906.)
This is how Catholics speak.
Catholics do not speak in the squishy, naturalistic terms of Timothy Dolan, who referred to a "gay community" when no such thing exists. The so-called "gay community" is a collection of unrepentant sinners who are fascists in that they will stop at nothing to convince the rest of society to stop criticizing them. They have been so successful in doing this in many parts of the world that it is considered in some places, such as Canada, to be a "hate" crime to criticize the "gay lifestyle." That day is not too far off here. Indeed, it is a "crime" in the academic and corporate and sports worlds to criticize the sickening, disgusting sins against nature. Such criticism is called "homophobic" and must be punished with various penalties, including monetary fines and, in some instances, "sensitivity training" sessions.
"Archbishop" Timothy Dolan's concern for the "health" of all New Yorkers is touching. Why can't he just say that chastity is the one and only way to avoid being stricken with diseases that are transmitted by sins against Holy Purity? Why? Because he is constitutionally incapable of speaking in this way. That's why.
Those who are unchaste and persist in their unchastity unrepentantly kill their souls and put their bodies at risk. Those who are perversely unchaste carry within themselves the very destruction of their bodies. Is it any accident that the following passage from Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans is omitted from the biennial cycle of Sunday readings and the triennial cycle of weekday readings in the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service?
For this cause God delivered them up to
shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into
that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also,
leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one
towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and
receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.
And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered
them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not
convenient; Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication,
avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit,
malignity, whisperers, Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud,
haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish,
dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. Who,
having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do
such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but
they also that consent to them that do them. (Romans 1: 18-32.)
Those who are unchaste must be exhorted to quit their immoral behavior, seeking out the Mercy of the Divine Redeemer in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance at the hands of a true priest as he acts in persona Christi as an alter Christus, resolved from thence on to live penitentially as the consecrated slaves of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as their state-in-life permits. You will hear no such exhortations from the lips of Timothy Dolan.
We do not base human self-identification on the basis of an inclination to commit various sins. If we did, of course, perhaps we could refer to the "blasphemers' community" and the "killers' community" and the "thieves' community" and the "adulterers' community" and the "gossipers' community" and the "enviers' community." (Well, come to think of it, the counterfeit church of conciliarism is a collection of blasphemers, isn't it?) Human self-identification is not based on the inclination to commit any sins, and for Timothy Dolan or anyone else, including the conciliar 'bishop" of Brooklyn, Nicholas Anthony DiMarzio, to refer to the "gay community" is an affront to God, Who abhors the sin of Sodom.
How do Catholics speak to sinners? How did Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ speak to sinners whilst He walk the face of the earth?
Our Lord did not reaffirm Saint Mary
Magdalene in her sin of adultery. He did not applaud her. He did not
excuse the gravity of violating the Sixth Commandment. He did not
explain away her sin by saying that she was genetically-predisposed to
commit it or that it was "impossible" for her to keep from committing
it. Our Lord, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made Man in His
Most Blessed Mother's Virginal and Immaculate Womb by the power of the
Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, said the
following to her:
Go, and now sin no more. (John 8: 11.)
Our Lord told His friend from
Bethany to reform her life, to quit her sins once and for all. He tells us, each of whom is a sinner (and I am one of the worst and most miserable, truth be told) the same thing in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance as we resolve to
amend our lives as we pray the Act of Contrition as a true priest
administers Absolution upon our immortal souls, thereby applying the
merits His own Most Precious Blood upon them.
And just as an aside to Christopher Christie, the Governor of the State New Jersey, it matters not what you believe about marriage. It's what God has defined. End of argument. You are unafraid, Governor Christie, to take on the thugs in the state employees' labor unions. Why be afraid to state the truth that sins against nature are repugnant in the sight of God and destructive of entire civilizations, that no kind of "special rights" can be conceded by the civil law to those to engage in such sins?
Not to be outdone in all of the naturalism, however, is the aforementioned conciliar "bishop" of Brooklyn, Nicholas Anthony DiMarzio, who wrote the following that appeared in the online edition of the New York Daily News yesterday, Sunday, June 26, 2011, the Sunday within the Octave of Corpus Christi (and the External Solemnity of the Feast of Corpus Christi here in the United States of America where this great feast has, most tragically, never been a Holy Day of Obligation):
The children of our state deserve the best. We put in place public
policies to ensure that children have the proper nutrition, the best
education available and are safe from harms way.
There is no
question that our society genuinely values the young. Yet, despite these
efforts, the number of young people suffering from emotional disorders
is disconcerting and our teen suicide rate is alarming.
and psychologists agree that stable families where a mother and father
live together in a loving union are a key predicator of a child's future
health, well-being and success.
In other words, this is the best
or ideal circumstances for our children for which we should all strive.
This arrangement just seems to be built into our DNA.
we no longer understand the primary purpose of marriage as the
institution by which a man and woman bring new life into the world and
teach the child to become a productive citizen.
In striving for
that end, the man and woman discover their own mutual consolation.
Tragically, we somehow have come to view marriage as legitimizing our
individual need for love and affection.
As a consequence we have
all witnessed the surge in numbers of divorce, single parenthood and
cohabitation outside of marriage. Not even thirty years ago this would
have been almost unthinkable and certainly scandalous.
I believe the passage of same sex marriage is another "nail in the coffin" of marriage.
is destructive because we fail to view marriage in the context of a
vocation: a calling to participate in the great enterprise of forming
the next generation.
Marriage is reduced to an empty honor.
who opposes Same-sex Marriage are not callous to the very real human
longings for friendship, affection and belonging that proponents of this
legislation espouse as the rational "Marriage Equality".
we like other New Yorker discuss these issues with our friends, family,
co-workers and loved ones who have same-sex attractions. We have in part
failed as the proponents of the historical understanding of marriage as
that between a man and a woman precisely because we have sought to be
sensitive to those who have same-sex attractions. Perhaps we must now
speak more forcefully and clearly.
As the chief shepherd of the Catholics in our City's two most populous boroughs, Brooklyn and Queens, the decision of our Catholic Governor and State Legislature
to overturn the common understanding of marriage that, despite many
developments over thousands of years, has always been understood between
a man and woman. That there was virtually no public debate on the issue
and that the entire matter was concluded in just over thirty-minutes
late on a Friday evening is disgraceful.
As a protest, I have
asked my collaborators not to bestow or accept honors, nor to extend a
platform of any kind to any state elected official, in all our parishes
and churches for the foreseeable future.
Our children in NY State deserve the best and unfortunately there seem to be very few if any "Profiles in Courage." (Brooklyn Bishop calls gay marriage law sinful; the title of this article is inaccurate as there was no reference whatsoever made to sin in its text.)
Stable families? Keeping children safe? What about pleasing God? What about His justice? What about His holy wrath?
While "Bishop" DiMarzio is correct in stating that the primary end of marriage is to bring new life into the world, he is quite wrong in stating parents do so in order to teach their children to become "productive citizens." Parents are called to welcome children generously to prepare them to be citizens of Heaven by living as saints here on the saint of this earth as members of His Catholic Church. And it is the consciousness of our membership in the Catholic Church that impels us to live as good citizens here on earth as seek admission as citizens of Heaven for all eternity.
No talk of this, though, from "Bishop" DiMarzio.
"Bishop" DiMarzio is also as incorrect in accepting the propaganda of "same-sex attractions" as his provincial superior across the Brooklyn Bridge, Timothy Dolan. Those are inclined to commit perverse sins against nature acquire this inclination, which is why there must be such propagandizing in its behalf in the concentration camps known as public schools, propagandizing that is also to be found throughout the so-called "religious education" programs within the counterfeit church of conciliarism, especially in its high schools and universities and colleges and many, if not the lion's share, of its seminaries and religious communities.
"Bishop" DiMarzio seems to be ignorant or dismissive of the good work that has been done by the Catholic Medical Association debunking the propaganda of the allegedly "innate" nature of "same-sex attractions" (HOMOSEXUALITY AND HOPE: Statement Of The Catholic Medical Association). The contention that perverse inclinations are something that people are "born with" is asserted in the Catechism of the Conciliar Church,
to be sure. However, this assertion is without scientific foundation.
The conciliar "bishop" of Brooklyn is just as much of a naturalist as Timothy Dolan in speaking of our "common understanding of marriage" as though any reference to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as Our Lord entrusted them to His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication did not matter in public discourse.
"Bishop" DiMarzio, please consider these words of our true popes:
The chief elements of this duty consist in
professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in
propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often
said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian
wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally
received, inherent power to drive away error. So soon as Catholic truth
is apprehended by a simple and unprejudiced soul, reason yields assent. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)
As with individuals, so with nations.
These, too, must necessarily tend to ruin if they go astray from "The
Way." The Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, is King and
Lord of the earth, and holds supreme dominion over men, both
individually and collectively. "And He gave Him power, and
glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve
Him" (Daniel vii., 14). "I am appointed King by Him . . . I will give
Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the
earth for Thy possession" (Psalm ii., 6, 8). Therefore the law of Christ
ought to prevail in human society and be the guide and teacher of
public as well as of private life. Since this is so by divine decree,
and no man may with impunity contravene it, it is an evil thing for the
common weal wherever Christianity does not hold the place that belongs
to it. When Jesus Christ is absent, human reason fails, being bereft of
its chief protection and light, and the very end is lost sight of, for
which, under God's providence, human society has been built up. This
end is the obtaining by the members of society of natural good through
the aid of civil unity, though always in harmony with the perfect and
eternal good which is above nature. But when men's minds are clouded,
both rulers and ruled go astray, for they have no safe line to follow
nor end to aim at. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)
No conciliar "bishop" anywhere on the face of this earth speaks in such terms. Such is the extent of the state of apostasy to be found within the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Such words are anathema to men who dare to speak in ways that have been anathematized by the Catholic Church.
Common understanding? What about the Order of Creation (Nature) and the Order of Grace (Redemption)? Did not God Himself ordain the male and the female to be complementary to each other as man and wife?
The Brooklyn "bishop's" public musing that he has been "too sensitive" to the concerns of those who have "same-sex attractions" is laughable. Forceful? Is he serious? Look at how the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, inspired Moses to refer to the effects of this contemptible sin on the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha in the Book of Genesis:
And when the men rose up from thence, they turned
their eyes towards Sodom: and Abraham walked with them, bringing them on
the way. And the Lord said: Can I hide from Abraham what I am about to
do: Seeing he shall become a great and mighty nation, and in him all the
nations of the earth shall be blessed? For I know that he will command
his children, and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord,
and do judgment and justice: that for Abraham's sake the Lord may bring
to effect all the things he hath spoken unto him. And the Lord said: The cry of Sodom and Gomorrha is multiplied, and their sin is become exceedingly grievous.
I will go down and see whether they have done
according to the cry that is come to me: or whether it be not so, that I
may know. And they turned themselves from thence, and went their way to
Sodom: but Abraham as yet stood before the Lord. And drawing nigh he
said: Wilt thou destroy the just with the wicked? If there be fifty just
men in the city, shall they perish withal? and wilt thou not spare that
place for the sake of the fifty just, if they be therein? Far be it
from thee to do this thing, and to slay the just with the wicked, and
for the just to be in like case as the wicked, this is not beseeming
thee: thou who judgest all the earth, wilt not make this judgment.
And the Lord said to him: If I find in Sodom fifty
just within the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake. And
Abraham answered, and said: Seeing I have once begun, I will speak to my
Lord, whereas I am dust and ashes. What if there be five less than
fifty just persons? wilt thou for five and forty destroy the whole city?
And he said: I will not destroy it, if I find five and forty. And again
he said to him: But if forty be found there, what wilt thou do? He
said: I will not destroy it for the sake of forty. Lord, saith he, be
not angry, I beseech thee, if I speak: What if thirty shall be found
there? He answered: I will not do it, if I find thirty there.
Seeing, saith he, I have once begun, I will speak
to my Lord. What if twenty be found there? He said: I will not destroy
it for the sake of twenty. I beseech thee, saith he, be not angry, Lord,
if I speak yet once more: What if ten should be found there? And he
said: I will not destroy it for the sake of ten. And the Lord departed,
after he had left speaking to Abraham: and Abraham returned to his
place. (Genesis 16: 16-33)
And he said to him: Behold also in this, I have
heard thy prayers, not to destroy the city for which thou hast spoken.
Make haste and be saved there, because I cannot do any thing till thou
go in thither. Therefore the name of that city was called Segor. The sun
was risen upon the earth, and Lot entered into Segor. And the
Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrha brimstone and fire from the Lord out
of heaven. And he destroyed these cities, and all the country about,
all the inhabitants of the cities, and all things that spring from the
And his wife looking behind her, was turned into a
statue of salt. And Abraham got up early in the morning and in the
place where he had stood before with the Lord, He looked towards Sodom
and Gomorrha, and the whole land of that country: and he saw the ashes
rise up from the earth as the smoke of a furnace. (Genesis 19: 21-28.)
Forceful? "Bishop" DiMarzio should familiarize himself with these words of Pope Saint Pius V concerning how this sin was dealt with by the authorities of the Catholic civil state during the era of Christendom:
That horrible crime, on account of which corrupt and obscene cities were destroyed by fire through divine condemnation, causes us most bitter sorrow and shocks our mind, impelling us to repress such a crime with the greatest possible zeal.
Quite opportunely the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] issued this decree: "Let any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature . . . be removed from the clerical order or forced to do penance in a monastery" (chap. 4, X, V, 31). So that the contagion of such a grave offense may not advance with greater audacity by taking advantage of impunity, which is the greatest incitement to sin, and so as to more severely punish the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime and who are not frightened by the death of their souls, we determine that they should be handed over to the severity of the secular authority, which enforces civil law.
Therefore, wishing to pursue with the greatest rigor that which we have decreed since the beginning of our pontificate, we establish that any priest or member of the clergy, either secular or regular, who commits such an execrable crime, by force of the present law be deprived of every clerical privilege, of every post, dignity and ecclesiastical benefit, and having been degraded by an ecclesiastical judge, let him be immediately delivered to the secular authority to be put to death, as mandated by law as the fitting punishment for laymen who have sunk into this abyss. (Pope Saint Pius V,
Horrendum illud scelus, August 30, 1568)
I am not suggesting the revival of this penalty in a world where it would not be understood and where the offender would be made a "martyr" for the cause of perversity, only pointing out the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that clerics and others in ecclesiastical authority who are guilty of serious moral crimes are deserving of punishment, not protection, by their bishops, and should, like any member of the laity, be put to death. Such is the difference yet again between Catholicism and conciliarism.
In this vein, therefore, "Bishop" DiMarzio's order to his diocesan institutions and parishes not to bestow or to accept awards or honors from elected officials in the State of New York is ludicrous. If you believe yourself to be the actual, honest-to-goodness Bishop of Brooklyn and that you are a Successor of the Apostles in the Catholic Church, why not simply excommunicate anyone and everyone in your diocese who voted for the bill in the New York State Senate and the New York State Assembly? Why? Because Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI wouldn't like that. That's why.
Ah, some will say, the eight "bishops" of the New York State "Catholic" Conference issued a "powerful" statement just as the New York State Senate was approving passage of the bill in question? All right. Let's take a look at that statement:
We bishops share with so many of you deep disappointment
in the presumption of our state’s elected officials in the radical
redefinition of marriage. Yet we are heartened by the vigor with which
so many faithful Catholic New Yorkers fought to preserve the true
meaning of marriage.
Many surely believed that Catholics would simply shrug their shoulders
and go along with this radical act of social engineering. Yet you did
not do that. Together with people of other faith traditions, you spoke
out. Thousands of you, by phone, email, letter or in-person visits to
your legislators, and through social media like Facebook and Twitter, as
well as hand-signed petitions in the back of your church, let you
convictions be known.
We are grateful to you, as we are to the many legislators in the state
Senate and Assembly who voted to reject this bill. We know the pressure
that was brought to bear on them, and we admire their courage and yours
in attempting to defend marriage and protect religious freedom. Their
integrity and yours was called into question by many. Both you and they
were accused of bigotry for simply defending the timeless understanding
The proponents of so-called “same-sex marriage” portrayed their cause as
a matter of “civil rights.” Redefining marriage has nothing to do with
civil rights. The Catholic Church has a proud history in this country’s
civil rights movement for African-Americans. However, this situation is
in no way analogous. In the first case, a race of people was shamefully
made to endure hundreds of years of slavery and systemic persecution
and discrimination. Today’s debate focuses on a small group of persons,
whose human rights must always be respected and defended by us all, but
who claim a civil right to redefine marriage for all of society based on
a private and personal preference.
As so many of you have let us know, this is not just a “Catholic issue.”
Yet for us Catholics, there is particular disappointment with those
elected officials who publicly profess fidelity to our Catholic religion
but whose public stance is at odds with a fundamental teaching of that
faith. The definition of marriage resides in the plan of God for
humankind. It is at the very least presumptuous for the state to
attempt to redefine it.
From this sad moment in our state’s history, let it be our prayer that we witness a new appreciation for authentic marriage as understood by our Catholic faith and revealed to us by God
through nature. We have seen so many threats to marriage in recent
years, from widespread cohabitation, to infidelity, to exploding
out-of-wedlock birth rates, to pornography and other addictions that
undermine family and married life. Sadly, we have even seen rates of
Catholic marriages plunge over the last four decades by nearly 60
percent. And now we see the state presume to alter what God already has
defined and common sense can recognize as right and true.
While our culture seems to have lost a basic understanding of marriage,
we Catholics must not. We must be models of what is good, holy and
sacred about authentic sacramental marriage. Let this moment where
marriage is being attacked from without become a moment of renewal from
within – in our Church, in our communities and in our families – where
marriage is indelibly marked by fidelity, sacrifice and the mutual love
of husband and wife leading to children.
The Church does not seek to be at odds with the society and culture.
The Church welcomes the opportunity to be part of the public dialogue
and listens respectfully to all positions. But the Church cannot do
otherwise than stand against the claims of any culture and any society
that attempts to define a relationship into being what it is not. To
that extent we members of the Catholic Church are called to be in
opposition to the prevailing culture. And sadly we are called to do so
again. We know well that marriage always has been, is now and always
will be the life-long, life-giving union of one man and one woman. No
act of government can change that reality. With respect for the dignity
of every person, we proclaim this truth and we will be faithful to its
meaning and to its observance in all that we say and do. (A Message to Catholic New Yorkers from the Bishops of New York State.)
Take just a closer look at the fine print.
The truth of marriage is not "understood" by the Catholic Church. It has been revealed by God and thus taught by her magisterium, which is infallible. The Catholic Church does have to "understand" anything about marriage. She teaches definitively what has been revealed to her by God Himself.
Words matter. Words count.
I will grant, however, that there is a reference, however fleeting that the true purposes of marriage have been "revealed to us by God through nature," a reference that was nowhere to be found in public utterances of Timothy Dolan and Nicholas DiMarzio in recent days.
The "message" also omits any reference to the rampant rates of divorce extant in this country, less yet to the fact that the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the United States of America has added to this epidemic by its annulment factories that have even made their way into some traditionalist circles, yes, both in the "resist-but-recognize" movement and in a few sedevacantist venues here and there. And it was the Diocese of Brooklyn that served as the prototype for all other annulment factories, earning it the title as the "Reno of the East" as early as the middle-1970s.
Indeed, Father Thomas William Coyle, an elderly Redemptorist who was the chancellor of the Diocese of Fargo when I worked as "Bishop" James Sullivan's Director of Communications from September of 1988 to August of 1989 (continuing in a ghost-writing capacity for another ten years after that via the old-fashioned phone modem and a "dos" matrix dot screen computer), told me a story that had been related to him by the ultra-progressive conciliar bishop of Brooklyn, from September 12, 1968, to February 20, 1990, Francis John Mugavero, under whose insidious watch the lavender crowd made great inroads as he presided over the first true annulment factory in this country.
According to Father Coyle, Bishop Mugavero (who was a true bishop) was walking in "mufti" (lay clothes) with several other priests (also in lay clothing) while on a visit to Spain in the late-1970s shortly after President Francisco Franco had died but before the first divorce law had been passed by the Cortes (the national legislature) and signed into law in 1981 by that Catholic infidel named King Juan Carlos, who also signed Spain's baby-killing law just last year (see King Juan Carlos, Meet Pope Leo XIII). Fluent in Spanish and Italian, Bishop Mugavero encountered the pastor of a small parish in a rural Spanish community. Bishop Mugavero, who did not identify himself as a bishop, asked the priest what married couples did when they wanted to get divorced. "I tell them," the priest explained to Mugavero, "to go to the Diocese of Brooklyn. They can get an easy annulment there." Mugavero was actually proud of the international reputation of his "marriage tribunal."
The counterfeit church of conciliarism has indeed helped to undermine the integrity of marriage by means of its annulment factories and its embrace of much of the feminist agenda and with its inverting the ends proper to marriage. Making matters worse is that married couples have been reaffirmed in their practice of contraception in the confessional by many priests and presbyters in the conciliar structures and that the children that Catholic couples in the conciliar structures have seen fit to welcome into this world have had their innocence and purity undermined by explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Worst of all, though, is the fact that these couples have deprived of the Most Blessed Sacrament and, in at least in most instances, true Absolution administered by a true priest.
The "statement's" claim that the Catholic Church does not "seek to be at odds with society and culture" ignores entirely the fact that contemporary "culture," such as it is, is founded upon a rejection of the Social Kingship of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, a Kingship that is rejected by the conciliar revolutionaries themselves. Culture is meant to be informed and directed by the Catholic Faith, meaning that conflicts between the two, although not impossible because of fallen human nature, ought to be a rarity, not commonplace. It is only because of the Protestant Revolution and its aftermath that helped the forces of naturalism, at work during certain elements of the Renaissance, to organize into a coherent mass as Judeo-Masonry that culture is at odds with the Faith today.
The conciliar "bishops" of the State of New York, who are inheritors of the Americanist heresy that was propagated by their predecessors in the Catholic Church in this country, especially Archbishop John Ireland and Francis Cardinal Spellman and Richard Cardinal Cushing, among so many others, and who are faithful sons of the conciliar revolution, are far, far from the teaching of the Catholic Church concerning her proper relationship to the civil state and popular culture:
your Republic is .progressing and developing by giant strides is patent
to all; and this holds good in religious matters also. For even as your
cities, in the course of one century, have made a marvellous increase
in wealth and power, so do we behold the Church, from scant and slender
beginnings, grown with rapidity to be great and exceedingly flourishing.
Now if, on the one hand, the increased riches and resources of your
cities are justly attributed to the talents and active industry of the
American people, on the other hand, the prosperous condition of
Catholicity must be ascribed, first indeed, to the virtue, the ability,
and the prudence of the bishops and clergy; but in so slight measure
also, to the faith and generosity of the Catholic laity. Thus, while the
different classes exerted their best energies, you were enabled to
erect unnumbered religious and useful institutions, sacred edifices,
schools for the instruction of youth, colleges for the higher branches,
homes for the poor, hospitals for the sick, and convents and
monasteries. As for what more closely touches spiritual interests, which
are based upon the exercise of Christian virtues, many facts have been
brought to Our notice, whereby We are animated with hope and filled with
joy, namely, that the numbers of the secular and regular clergy are
steadily augmenting, that pious sodalities and confraternities are held
in esteem, that the Catholic parochial schools, the Sunday-schools for
imparting Christian doctrine, and summer schools are in a flourishing
condition; moreover, associations for mutual aid, for the relief of the
indigent, for the promotion of temperate living, add to all this the
many evidences of popular piety.
The main factor, no doubt, in bringing things into
this happy state were the ordinances and decrees of your synods,
especially of those which in more recent times were convened and
confirmed by the authority of the Apostolic See. But, moreover (a fact
which it gives pleasure to acknowledge), thanks are due to the equity of
the laws which obtain in America and to the customs of the well-ordered
Republic. For the Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and
government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation,
protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of
the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance. 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.)
Pope Leo XIII was warning the
likes of John Ireland, the arch-Americanist Bishop and Archbishop of
Saint Paul from 1884 to 1918 and James "Cardinal" Gibbons, the Americanist Archbishop of Baltimore from 1877 to 1921 that the growth of the Catholic Church in
the United States of America was not the result of the "free exercise of
religion" clause in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States of America but of the graces won for us on Calvary by the
shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross. "Religious
liberty" as enshrined in the Constitution of the United States of
America was not the reason that the Catholic Church had experienced such
growth. God Himself was responsible for effecting this growth in spite of, not because of, the "dissevered and divorced" status of the Church from the civil state in the United States of America. The men who think that they represent the Catholic Church but who are actually heresiarchs do not understand that the conflict that exists at this time between the Catholic Faith and popular culture is the result of the false premises of the American founding that their false "pontiff" views as the model for a "healthy secularity." Some healthy secularity. They are incapable of understanding that the very false premises of the modern civil state that their "pope" embraces and they exalt are responsible, proximately speaking, for placing Catholics into conflict with the popular culture and civil law. They are just incapable of seeing this. Incapable.
The "message" issued by the "bishops" of the New York State Catholic Conference thus errs when claiming that the matter of "gay marriage" is not a Catholic issue. Au contraire It most certainly is. Why? Ah, well, it is the rejection of Catholicism by the lords of Protestantism and the barons of Judeo-Masonry that have brought us to this point, and it is only Catholicism that can get us out of the mess that has been created by the rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King. "Bishops" of the State of New York, meet Pope Saint Pius X:
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. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they
are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where
differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the
influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the
action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to
provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the
excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed,
all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious
convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe
their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.
This being said, what must be thought of the promiscuity in which young
Catholics will be caught up with heterodox and unbelieving folk in a
work of this nature? Is it not a thousand-fold more dangerous for them
than a neutral association? What are we to think of this appeal to all
the heterodox, and to all the unbelievers, to prove the excellence of
their convictions in the social sphere in a sort of apologetic contest?
Has not this contest lasted for nineteen centuries in conditions less
dangerous for the faith of Catholics? And was it not all to the credit
of the Catholic Church? What are we to think of this respect for all
errors, and of this strange invitation made by a Catholic to all the
dissidents to strengthen their convictions through study so that they
may have more and more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to
think of an association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may
express themselves openly and in complete freedom? For the Sillonists
who, in public lectures and elsewhere, proudly proclaim their personal
faith, certainly do not intend to silence others nor do they intend to
prevent a Protestant from asserting his Protestantism, and the skeptic
from affirming his skepticism. Finally, what are we to think of a
Catholic who, on entering his study group, leaves his Catholicism outside the door so as not to alarm his comrades who, “dreaming of disinterested social action, are not inclined to make it
serve the triumph of interests, coteries and even convictions whatever
they may be”? (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
The "message" of the conciliar "bishops" of the State of New York, each of whom is a faithful son of the "Second" Vatican Council and its false ethos, ignores these plain words of Pope Benedict, Benedict the Fifteenth, that is, who explained what happens when men and their nations separate themselves from the true religion:
Let the Princes and Rulers of peoples remember this truth, and
let them consider whether it is a prudent and safe idea for governments
or for states to separate themselves from the holy religion of Jesus
Christ, from which their authority receives such strength and support.
Let them consider again and again, whether it is a measure of political
wisdom to seek to divorce the teaching of the Gospel and of the Church
from the ruling of a country and from the public education of the young.
Sad experience proves that human authority fails where religion is set
aside. The fate of our first parent after the Fall is wont to come also
upon nations. As in his case, no sooner had his will turned from God
than his unchained passions rejected the sway of the will; so, too, when
the rulers of nations despise divine authority, in their turn the
people are wont to despise their human authority. There remains, of
course, the expedient of using force to repress popular risings; but
what is the result? Force can repress the body, but it cannot repress
the souls of men. (Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914.)
The inability of the conciliar "bishops" and their chancery factotums to speak to think and to speak in clear, precise and bold terms as Catholics is, of course, because they are not members of the Catholic Church, having defected from the Holy Faith on numerous points that have been explained on this site to the point of exhaustion. The vipers who run the chancery office in the Archdiocese of Boston had the unmitigated gall to denounce the "vitriol" of "bloggers" who denounced the rescheduling of a Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service heralding the "gay" lifestyle by having a spokesflack, Terence Donilon, write as follows to a man who had complained about this travesty:
'May I ask what you have done today to
build up our Church? To serve the poor, evangelize the faith, spread
the beauty of our Church? I'm concerned that you have joined a
cooperative of anonymous bloggers and critics who are more interested in
spreading vitriol in the name of 'defending' the Church. Do you
honestly think we in the leadership are out to do harm to the teachings
of the Church? If you feel that way I want to say in the strongest terms
that you insult our faith and our Church with such vitriol.
'I hope and pray you find some peace in the fact that the cardinal has
brought us back from some of the darkest moments in the history of the
archdiocese. These attacks remind me of my days in politics when anyone
could say anything as long as it got into the public arena and harmed
your opponent. The one difference is we are not opponents. We are part
of one, true Catholic family. Please think about these attacks and the
harm they are causing to our faith.' (see a "conservative" Catholic columnist's article about this at: Boston Archdiocese Attacks "Vitriol" of Bloggers.)
Behold the fruit of Americanism! Those who seek to prevent a tragedy are denounced as the "troublemakers" while those who are promoting it believe that they are "building up the Church." Americans are so filled with the emotionalism and sentimentality that is so much a part of Americanism that those who see travesties and call them by their proper names are said to be the ones causing problems. Imagine what Terence Donilon would have said about Saint Jerome (Putting Love of God Above All Else) or Saint Nicholas of Myrna or Saint John Mary Vianney or Padre Pio, each of whom denounced sin and error in completely unsparing terms. Would have have denounced them as spreading 'vitriol"?
It is, when all is done and said, impossible for men who commit blasphemies against Christ the King by praising false religions and having participated in "inter-religious" prayer services and by accepting each of the conciliar errors (the new ecclesiology, the redefinition of the nature of dogmatic truth, religious liberty, false ecumenism, separation of Church and State, episcopal collegiality, etc.) to defend a Catholic Faith from which they defect on numerous points. It is impossible for men who are at work with God by means of false doctrine and hideous "worship" to retard social evils that are accelerating precisely because of their apostasies, blasphemies, sacrileges and other abominations.
As I note all of the time on this site, each of us has much for which to make reparation, which is why we must live more and more penitentially as we seek to fly unto the tender mercies of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Most of us have, if we are
truly honest with ourselves, been rather callously indifferent about sin at various times in our own lives and, very
likely, in the lives of others. We must indeed embrace a spirit of true penance
for those sins as we accept the Adorable Will of God however He manifests it to us,
especially when He asks us to carry our crosses as we remember that
nothing we suffer--not one little thing or one great thing--is the equal
of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Lord to suffer in His
Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death. We must always say
"Blessed be the adorable Will of God" when we are afflicted, recognizing
that our sins deserve far, far worse than we can ever suffer in this
passing, mortal vale of tears.
We must, therefore, make reparation for our sins and
those of the whole world, recognizing as well that we have indeed
perhaps been accessories (by counsel, by command, by consent, by
provocation, by praise or flatter, by concealment, by partaking, by
silence, by defense of the ill done) to the sins of others, including
the sins of the conciliar revolutionaries against the First Commandment,the gateway to all of the heresies of conciliarism and to all of its false pastoral practices, if we have been silent in the wake of these grave sins that offend God
so gravely and mislead souls so severely.
Our goal in life is to praise the Most Blessed
Trinity for all eternity in Heaven. We can only do that, however, if we
please God here on earth by cleaving to the truly good shepherds who
make never mix truth with error and who never make any compromises with
the ethos of conciliarism that has suborned grave sins against the First
Commandment on a regular basis.
Father Benedict Baur, O.S.B., wrote the following meditation in The Light of the World for Trinity Sunday, which we observed on Sunday, June 19, 2011, that should serve as an inspiration to us:
Today's feast is celebrated in honor of the Father
and the Son and the Holy Ghost, the Triune God, in thanksgiving for His
eternal mercy, because of which He has created us, redeemed us, and
"O depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the
knowledge of God" (Epistle). With St. Paul and Holy Mother the Church we
stand in awe at the depth of the divine mercy, of the divine wisdom,
and of the divine knowledge. We are amazed at the great wisdom and love
of God as manifested in His selection of men, particularly in His
selection of the Gentiles in preference to the chosen people of Israel,
as the recipients of His grace and redemption. The heathens were the
first to wander away from God, and God selected the Israelites as His
chosen people. But Israel in turn rejected Christ and salvation, and
because of the infidelity and the unbelief of the Jews, the gospel was
given to the Gentiles. "For God hath concluded all in unbelief (both
Jews and heathens) that He may have mercy on all" (Rom. 11:32). At the
end of time both the Jews and the heathens will belong to Christ. "O
depths of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God. How
incomprehensible are His judgments, and how unsearchable His ways! For
who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been His counsellor? Or
who hath first given to Him, and recompense shall be made him? For of
Him and by Him and in Him are all things to Him be glory forever"
(Epistle). "Blessed be the Holy Trinity and undivided unity; we will
give glory to Him because He hath shown His mercy to us" (Introit.)
This is the God to whom we are consecrated. He has
in His infinite mercy made us sharers of His divine life. We have been
baptized "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Ghost" (Gospel), and we share in the inexhaustible riches of the life of
the Holy Trinity: we have even been made"partakers of the divine
nature" (II Pet. 1:4). Therefore by virtue of our baptism we belong, not
to ourselves, not to created things, not to men, not to the world nor
to Satan, but to God. At the time of our baptism we renounced all these
things, and since then we believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in
the Holy Ghost. We have been consecrated to Them, and we belong entirely
to Them. Anything less than God is unworthy of us, and God alone can
satisfy us, not only during our earthly sojourn, but also in heaven,
where we shall one day share the inexhaustible riches of the holy and
blissful life of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. This life
comes to us entirely through the mercy of God. "Blessed be the Holy
Trinity and undivided unity; we will give glory to Him because He hath
shown His mercy to us" (Introit).
This is a day for giving thanks to the Father and the
Son and the Holy Ghost. During the course of the Church year we have
been made aware of the innumerable blessings of love and mercy conferred
by God on us, on the Church, and on all mankind. "For God so loved the
world as to give His only-begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in Him
may not perish, but may have life everlasting" (John 3:16).
This is a day for renewing our consecration to God.
We should renounce the world with our whole heart, and break away
effectually from all that can be displeasing to Him. As on the day of
our baptism, we should repeat: "I believe in the Father, and in the Son,
and in the Holy ghost." This belief implies more than the admission
that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost exist and constitute God
in three persons. It implies that I live for the Father and the Son and
the Holy Ghost, by whom I have been sanctified, and to whom I have been
consecrated by my baptism. This consecration we renew again today, and
we should ratify it daily and make it more effective through the devout
participation in the Mass. When we say the preliminary prayers at the
foot of the altar, we rid ourselves of all attachments to the world,
reject all infidelity, and renounce all that is alien to our state as
creatures consecrated to God. At the Offertory we lay our hearts at the
side of the bread and wine that we may make a new consecration and
dedication of ourselves to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy
Ghost. During the Consecration of the Mass, the sacrifice fire of our
Lord and Savior will descend from heaven upon our offering, enkindling
it with the fire of His love, and He will bear it up to heaven. We, too,
are consecrated and offered up to the Father. We live, now no longer
for ourselves, but for God alone.
The dedication of ourselves to God is strengthened
and sealed by the Lord at the time of Holy Communion. This earthly
consecration extends through Holy Communion to the eternal communion in
Heaven, where we shall enjoy the companionship of God the Father, God
the Son, and of God the Holy Ghost. Then we shall see Him just as He is,
face to face. For all eternity we shall share His life, His glory, His
divine knowledge, and the mansions of His eternal love. This glorious
reward the Son of God earned for us while on earth, by His life, His
suffering, and His death. "We bless the God of heaven, and before all
living we will praise him: because He hath shown His mercy to us"
(Communion). (Father Benedict Baur, O.S.B., The Light of the World, Volume II, pp. 6-8.)
"We should renounce the world with our whole heart, and break away effectually from all that can be displeasing to Him." We have displeased God many times by means of our own sins. In his
ineffable Mercy, Our Lord sent Our Lady to Saint Dominic de Guzman so
that we could be given her Most Holy Rosary to be chief means after Holy
Mass and Eucharistic piety by which to make reparation for our sins
and those of the whole world.
Shouldn't we want to the console the good
God by our Rosaries as we seek to make reparation for our sins and as we
pray for the day when everyone in the world will start and end their
days with the very Sign of our salvation, the Sign of the Cross, as they
say reverently and devoutly the Name of the Most Holy Trinity in which
we were Baptized and thus had Original Sin flooded out of our immortal
souls as the very inner life of that Most Blessed Trinity was flooded
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
May Our Lady help us to persevere as we seek to save our souls under the yoke of good shepherds who care about our salvation and not about their privileges, conscious of the necessity of fulfilling her Fatima Message as best we can in our homes that are enthroned to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!
Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints