Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
                 July 9, 2007

Strictly by the Script

by Thomas A. Droleskey

The human capacity for self-delusion is seemingly infinite. Sadly, this continues to be demonstrated day in and day out in the context of the naturalist shell game known as American politics. All manner of self-delusional Catholics, for example, continue to think that President George Walker Bush is "pro-life" despite his support as a matter of principle for the surgical assassination of innocent preborn children in their mothers' wombs by surgical means and despite his support for the funding of the chemical assassination of innocent preborn children by means of domestic and international "family planning" programs and despite the carnage he has visited upon Iraq in the name of spreading the American concepts of "civil liberty" and "democracy." No amount of rational argumentation or presentation of empirical evidence seems to be able to "break through" skulls that prefer to believe in fantasies than to face the actual truth of the matter.

To wit, I had a conversation with a traditionally-minded Catholic "Bushie" in early-2001, explaining precisely what would be happening during the Bush years. This was too much for the person to hear. "I need to have some hope," the person said to me. "I need to have hope that things will get better." Very nice, except for the fact that we do not suspend rationality and close our eyes to facts in order to place false hopes in the career politicians of American naturalism and pluralism and religious indifferentism and reflexive slavery to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. An article (No Rational Basis) I wrote the day after that conversion put the matter in some context at the time, although it was not until a month later, in April of 2001) that my arguments were strengthened when Howard Phillips, the President of the Conservative Caucus Foundation, revealed that Bush's actual Executive Order re-instating the Reagan era Mexico City policy forbidding American taxpayer dollars to be distributed to "family planning" agencies abroad that performed or referred for surgical abortions was a complete and total sham, permitting employees of such organizations to meet with clients off of the premises of their agencies on their own time so to "counsel" them as to where to find a baby-killer.

The same irrationality has been present for a long time in "conservative" Catholic circles as otherwise right-thinking Catholics projected their fondest hopes for Holy Mother Church into the mind and the heart of the late Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II. I know all about this, thank you very much. I was a superb practitioner of this form of delusion until Wojtyla permitted altar girls in 1994. Indeed, a conciliar priest with whom I was in seminary--and who has gained a bit of national prominence in the past ten years or so-- said the following after the altar girls decision, "Tom, I'm praying to Saint Joseph for a quick and happy death for the man [John Paul II]. It's time for him to go." That priest, however, remained a papal cheerleader publicly. And while I made my break with papalotry at that time, it took me several more years before I began to realize that the whole construct of conciliarism was the problem and that Wojtyla was not simply being "weak" in the face of demands by conciliar revolutionaries but was one himself from the very beginning. The rest, as they say, is history.

Well, the same irrationality is being practiced in some instances by well-meaning traditionally-minded Catholics in the aftermath of the release of Father Joseph Ratzinger's most recent motu proprio, Summorum Pontificum, which is being heralded by some as the "liberation" of the modernized, 1962 Missal of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition when it is no such thing. As explained in Mister Potter's Big Cigar two days ago, Summorum Pontificum is only a three year experiment to permit the "private" offerings of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, save for the three days of the Paschal Triduum, and to permit its offering publicly in parish settings on Sundays if the demand for this exists"stably" (which might mean that only those who are enrolled--and financially contributing--parishioners of a particular parish will have the "right" to approach a conciliar pastor).

The price of this three year experiment, which may result in the inclusion of various features from the Novus Ordo Missae into the offering of the Motu Mass, is the recognition of the "value and holiness" and the doctrinal soundness of the new order service, which must be demonstrated tangibly by priests in the "indult" communities by their having to offer this abomination, if only annually at the "Chrism Mass." Meaning no disrespect to anyone who is in the throes of jubilation at present, please pardon me if I have recourse to my particular nature as a New Yorker and scream, "Are you out of your minds to think that this a victory for the cause of the Catholic Faith? Are we to ignore a demand for priests who know that the Novus Ordo is, at least minimally, offensive to God and harmful to souls to violate their consciences and touch that which they know has undermined Catholic doctrine and is sacrilegious of is nature? George W. Bush's master hoodwinker, Karl Rove, could not have planned this better himself.

So what if Father Ratzinger repeats his long-held views on the aesthetics of the liturgical "reform" and discusses the "beauty" of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition? So what? Has the fight for the Mass of Tradition over these last four decades been about aesthetics or doctrinal truth? Remember, it is Ratzinger's assertion that the Immemorial Mass of Tradition is just another form of the "one" Roman Rite, the other being the Novus Ordo Missae, which was planned most explicitly to be a revolution against the Mass of our fathers. The Novus Ordo Missae is not founded in and is not meant to express the perennial truths of the Catholic Faith. It is meant of its nature to be the chief vehicle for the promotion of the ethos of conciliarism, which is why Ratzinger wrote to his conciliar "bishops" to tell them that they will need "patience" to "improve" the "attitudes" of those "attached" to the old Mass who have been guilty of "exaggerations," meaning that traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures who see doctrinal problems with the "Second" Vatican Council and the Protestant-Masonic Novus Ordo service need to be re-educated. This is far more insidious than the explicit list of conditions contained in 1984's Quattuor Abhinc Annos and 1988's Ecclesia Dei Afflicta.

Undaunted, however, all of these insidious provisions are being ignored as well-meaning people suspend rationality and insist that the "liberation of the Mass" is at hand. Some are even pointing to the virulent opposition  to Summorum Pontificum from well-known "progressives" to come to the defense of Ratzinger/Benedict, which is exactly what Ratzinger's carefully prepared script calls for these good people to do. Ratzinger knew full well that there would be a furious reaction to Summorum Pontificum on the part of some of his conciliar "bishops," most of whom are remaining mute while the "talking" is done by their allies in the ultra-Modernist conciliar media and/or by various priests and other high-ranking "academics" in conciliar colleges and universities. Indeed, Ratzinger is counting on this furious reaction from ultra-Modernists so as to solidify his position with traditionally-minded Catholics in the structures of his counterfeit church, thus indemnifying himself from a critical examination of the actual conditions of Summorum Pontificum and how each is premised upon an acceptance of the "value and holiness" of the Novus Ordo service. Oh, yes, things are going strictly by the script as far as Father Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is concerned.

This is all so analogous to what happens whenever a phony pro-life politician, who is actually simply less pro-abortion than those who support baby-killing unconditionally without any restrictions, does something deemed to be "pro-life." Screams of protest are heard from completely pro-abortion politicians and their mouthpieces in the media. The various "talking head" programs feature endless debates on the matter. Fundraising letters are posted on the websites of various advocacy groups to support or oppose this or that position. And to what end? To the end of simply enabling those who hold civil power and who have the means to influence the shaping of public opinion in the media to continue their own careers as nothing changes to advance the common temporal good of society.

Look at all of the irrationality that took place in the wake of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart, which upheld the constitutionality of the partial, incomplete ban on partial birth abortions while at the same reaffirming a woman's "right" to kill her preborn baby in most other circumstances. As was noted in An Illusion of a Victory, three months ago:

Some "true believers" in the American constitutional processes will contend that there is "just one victory" in a long battle to restore full legal protection to the preborn. How can this be any kind of victory when the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Gonzales v. Carhart reaffirms the "right" of women to "choose" to kill their children, albeit with some regulations here and there (parental notification or consent with a "judicial bypass, a twenty-four or forty-eight hour waiting period, information on what an abortion is and surgical complications arising therefrom, the places and conditions under which babies may be killed in the second and third trimester), under cover of law is beyond me. Justice Kennedy went to great lengths to explain exactly how available baby-killing has become in this country, which is one of the reasons he joined Chief Justice John Roberts and fellow Associate Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito in upholding the constitutionality of the partial birth abortion ban legislation. According to Kennedy, you see, access to abortion will not be impeded by the partial birth abortion ban, which, as he sees it, is a way for the American public to express its outrage over a particular type of child-killing and to place some limits on the use of that form of child-killing:

It was reasonable for Congress to think that partial-birth abortion, more than standard D&E, undermines the public's perception of the doctor's appropriate role during delivery, and perverts the birth process.(Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, Gonzales v. Carhart.)

Undermines the public's perception of the doctor's appropriate role during delivery, and perverts the birth process? Sentimentality and emotionalism have replaced the rule of law according to the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and the natural law, which binds all men in all nations in all circumstances at all times without any exception whatsoever. To justify a morally flawed bill that does not even fully outlaw the child-killing procedure described as "undermining the public's perception of the doctor's appropriate role during delivery" is itself perverse and absurd. The only logical conclusion one can draw from this is that forms of child-killing that are publicly acceptable, largely because it is out of view and done on tiny human beings who cannot speak for themselves,will remain perfectly legal as they do not undermine "the public's perception of the doctor's appropriate role" before delivery of a child. Such is the monstrous way in which jurists reason in a world where men and their nations are not subordinate to the Catholic Church in her exercise of the Social Reign of Christ King in all that pertains to the good of souls.


Given the reaction in most "establishment" pro-life circles that a major victory had been won for the babies in Gonzales v. Carhart. Only Mrs. Judie Brown, the foundress and President of the American Life League, had the courage to ask whether anyone had actually read the text of the decision in this case. Others simply propagated delusional propaganda that had nothing to do with the actual fact of the Court's decision. And so it is time and time again in the hallowed halls of naturalist politics in the United States of America and in the world. False opposites convince the average citizen that real disputes are taking place when the truth of the matter is that the devil is advancing his agenda every single day of the year precisely because the authentic voice of the Catholic Church, which has condemned naturalism and championed the cause of the confessionally Catholic state, has been eclipsed by its counterfeit usurper now headed by Father Joseph Ratzinger.

Well, the thoroughly predictable and expected opposition to Summorum Pontificum on the part of those conciliar revolutionaries who do not share Father Joseph Ratzinger's love of the "aesthetics" of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, to put the matter most mildly, serves Ratzinger's purposes so very well. He knows that there are people who hate any version of the Mass of all ages. Ratzinger is most willing to take the "heat" from these people in order to neutralize traditionally-minded opposition to the Novus Ordo service and to the ethos of conciliarsm, especially by "bringing in" the Society of Saint Pius X and getting its bishops and priests to agree to that which the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre steadfastly refused to do: to offer even one Novus Ordo service. The One World Church of conciliarism has plenty of room for a diversity of doctrinal beliefs and liturgical "forms" within one rite. It has no room whatsoever for those who point out that Catholicism has nothing to do with the artificial religion of the Antichrist that is conciliarism.

I was re-reading a book in the wee hours of this morning, July 9, 2007, that detailed the numerous doctrinal deficiencies in the writing and the speeches of one Joseph Ratzinger. The author, who is not a sedevacantist and is very much opposed to sedevacantism, came to many of the same conclusions about Ratzinger's Modernism that are shared by those who accept the Catholic doctrine that heretics cannot hold ecclesiastical office legitimately. Nothing has changed about or in the mind of Father Joseph Ratzinger because he appears to most Catholics to be the Vicar of Christ. He remains the same Modernist who desires to resist "integralists" by breaking down their resistance to his novelties and errors by giving them a little piece of candy so that they can suspend rationality and to do with him what they refused to do with Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II: to project their fondest hopes for the Church, which they love sincerely with all of their hearts, into Ratzinger's mind and heart.

Those who drop even a little bit of poison into the well of Catholicism fall from the Faith. The works of several non-sedevacantist Catholics prove how Joseph Ratzinger has dropped lots of poison in the well of Catholicism. These words of Pope Leo XIII, contained in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, prove that that those who fall from the Faith in one thing fall from it in its entirety:

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 next paragraph in Satis Cognitum explained how souls cannot be united in perfect charity unless mind agree in faith:

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).

Wherefore, from the very earliest times the fathers and doctors of the Church have been accustomed to follow and, with one accord to defend this rule. Origen writes: "As often as the heretics allege the possession of the canonical scriptures, to which all Christians give unanimous assent, they seem to say: 'Behold the word of truth is in the houses.' But we should believe them not and abandon not the primary and ecclesiastical tradition. We should believe not otherwise than has been handed down by the tradition of the Church of God" (Vetus Interpretatio Commentariorum in Matt. n. 46). Irenaeus too says: "The doctrine of the Apostles is the true faith...which is known to us through the Episcopal succession...which has reached even unto our age by the very fact that the Scriptures have been zealously guarded and fully interpreted" (Contra Haereses, lib. iv., cap. 33, n. 8). And Tertullian: "It is therefore clear that all doctrine which agrees with that of the Apostolic churches - the matrices and original centres of the faith, must be looked upon as the truth, holding without hesitation that the Church received it from the Apostles, the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God....We are in communion with the Apostolic churches, and by the very fact that they agree amongst themselves we have a testimony of the truth" (De Praescrip., cap. xxxi). And so Hilary: "Christ teaching from the ship signifies that those who are outside the Church can never grasp the divine teaching; for the ship typifies the Church where the word of life is deposited and preached. Those who are outside are like sterile and worthless sand: they cannot comprehend" (Comment. in Matt. xiii., n. 1). Rufinus praises Gregory of Nazianzum and Basil because "they studied the text of Holy Scripture alone, and took the interpretation of its meaning not from their own inner consciousness, but from the writings and on the authority of the ancients, who in their turn, as it is clear, took their rule for understanding the meaning from the Apostolic succession" (Hist. Eccl., lib. ii., cap. 9).


Perhaps there are those who want to contend that everyone (bishops, priests, consecrated religious, lay men and women) in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism are of one mind in the Catholic Faith. Such is not the reality. Sure, there are differences in the various sedevacantist groups on interpretations and applications of this or that point of doctrine or pastoral practice. The shepherd has been struck and the sheep are stricken, leading to regrettable differences at time when Catholics who understand conciliarism to be evil to fight amongst themselves a good deal of the time. Point noted.

It is only in the conciliar structures, however, that you are going to find people in perfectly "good standing" who go well beyond the official novelties of conciliarism as they believe in and propagate most openly abject denials of articles contained in the Deposit of Faith (the Resurrection of Our Lord, the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary and/or her Perpetual Virginity, Transubstantiation, the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture, Papal Infallibility, Papal Primacy, among many others) and promote various evils (abortion, contraception, perversity) under cover of law. It is frequently the case that the Modernists who go beyond the "official" novelties of the counterfeit church of conciliarism cannot even agree amongst themselves as to the specific articles of the Faith that they reject and mock and scorn.

This sort of cacophony is not of God. It is the fruit of the ethos of conciliarism, which has opened the gates of Hell to every heresy and abomination imaginable. Those who believe that a heavily-conditioned, three year period of experimentation with the offering of a modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition while recognize the "value and the holiness" of the very vessel that has given full reign to conciliarism are simply not looking at the truth of our situation, becoming diverted in many instances by the reaction from the "left" that Father Joseph Ratzinger has known all along would occur and thus rally "traditionally-minded troops" to his side in defense of his own subjective love of aesthetics.

Some have pointed out that the opposition from the "left" that is being manifested at present will result in the hastening of the disintegration of the conciliar church. Father Anthony Cekada has mentioned this in The Motu Mass Trap, and it is a point well taken. However, that is not what Ratzinger intends. He intends to neutralize traditionally-minded opposition to the Novus Ordo service and to the entire ethos of conciliarism. The fact of opposition from the "left" exists should be noted with a bit of relish, I will admit. It should not be used, however, as a pretext to wave the "papal" flag and to ignore the simple fact that Summorum Pontificum is a trap designed to force traditionally-minded Catholics to make their "peace" with the Novus Ordo Missae and the entire ethos of conciliarism once and for all.

These words from the Gospel According to Saint Matthew are very appropriate at this time:

For there shall be then great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be. And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened. Then if any man shall say to you: Lo here is Christ, or there, do not believe him. For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Behold I have told it to you, beforehand. (Mt. 24: 21-25)

Saint John Fisher made no compromise with the "Anglican Mass." We can make no compromises with its direct descendant, the Novus Ordo. Compromises with a sacrilegious abomination do not advance the cause of the Catholic Faith in any way whatsoever. Compromises with a "Mass" that has robbed Catholics of a belief in the Real Presence and the nature of the priesthood and of the Mass itself are not of God.

May Our Lady continue to fortify us during this time when the forces of darkness are attempting to use their preternatural powers to deceive so many people that a false peace is now at hand. May we simply keep her company at the foot of her Divine Son's Most Holy Cross as we pray as many Rosaries as our states-in-life permit. Our confidence in her will not go without its reward as make reparation for our own sins to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.


Viva Cristo Rey!

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 John Fisher, pray for us.

Saint Thomas More, pray for us.

Saint Maria Goretti, pray for us.

Saint Athanasius, pray for us.

Saint Irenaeus, pray for us.

Saints Monica, pray for us.

Saint Jude, pray for us.

Saint John the Beloved, pray for us.

Saint Francis Solano, pray for us.

Saint John Bosco, pray for us.

Saint Dominic Savio, pray for us.

Saint  Scholastica, pray for us.

Saint Benedict, pray for us.

Saint Joan of Arc, pray for us.

Saint Antony of the Desert, pray for us.

Saint Francis of Assisi, pray for us.

Saint Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.

Saint Bonaventure, pray for us.

Saint Augustine, pray for us.

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, pray for us.

Saint Francis Xavier, pray for us.

Saint Peter Damian, pray for us.

Saint Frances Xavier Cabrini, pray for us.

Saint Lucy, pray for us.

Saint Monica, pray for us.

Saint Agatha, pray for us.

Saint Anthony of Padua, pray for us.

Saint Basil the Great, pray for us.

Saint Philomena, pray for us.

Saint Cecilia, pray for us.

Saint John Mary Vianney, pray for us.

Saint Vincent de Paul, pray for us.

Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.

Saint Athanasius, pray for us.

Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, pray for us.

Saint Isaac Jogues, pray for us.

Saint Rene Goupil, pray for us.

Saint John Lalonde, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel Lalemont, pray for us.

Saint Noel Chabanel, pray for us.

Saint Charles Garnier, pray for us.

Saint Anthony Daniel, pray for us.

Saint John DeBrebeuf, pray for us.

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, pray for us.

Saint Dominic, pray for us.

Saint Hyacinth, pray for us.

Saint Basil, pray for us.

Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.

Saint Sebastian, pray for us.

Saint Tarcisius, pray for us.

Saint Bridget of Sweden, pray for us.

Saint Gerard Majella, pray for us.

Saint John of the Cross, pray for us.

Saint Teresa of Avila, pray for us.

Saint Bernadette Soubirous, pray for us.

Saint Genevieve, pray for us.

Saint Vincent de Paul, pray for us.

Pope Saint Pius X, pray for us

Pope Saint Pius V, pray for us.

Saint Rita of Cascia, pray for us.

Saint Louis de Montfort, pray for us.

Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, pray for us.

Venerable Pauline Jaricot, pray for us.

Father Miguel Augustin Pro, pray for us.

Francisco Marto, pray for us.

Jacinta Marto, pray for us.

Juan Diego, pray for us.


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

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

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

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

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

Response: As we have hoped in Thee.

Verse: O Lord hear my prayer.

Response: And let my cry come unto Thee.

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

Response:  Amen.  


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