Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
December 29, 2010

To Men of Good Will

by Thomas A. Droleskey

The Modernists completely invert the parts, and of them may be applied the words which another of Our predecessors Gregory IX, addressed to some theologians of his time: "Some among you, puffed up like bladders with the spirit of vanity strive by profane novelties to cross the boundaries fixed by the Fathers, twisting the meaning of the sacred text...to the philosophical teaching of the rationalists, not for the profit of their hearer but to make a show of science...these men, led away by various and strange doctrines, turn the head into the tail and force the queen to serve the handmaid." (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)


The Modernists, much like the demons that inspire them to be puffed up with pride and filled with a spirit of obstinacy, never rest. They never rest in doing what they can to undermine the integrity of the Catholic Faith, to try to "re-examine" what has been handed down us by Holy Mother Church and explicated with such clarity by her Fathers and Doctors. Not even the joyous feast of the Nativity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is considered exempt from being used to drop a drop of poison or two into the well of the Catholic Faith, thereby confusing souls and undermining the trust that Catholics are supposed to place in the guidance that has been provided to them by Holy Mother Church from time immemorial as she has relied upon her Fathers and Doctors to explicate various points contained in the Deposit of Faith that our Newborn King, Christ King, has entrusted to her for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, a man who has made open warfare against the immutability of Catholic doctrine and who has made open, public warfare upon the First and Second Commandments as he has esteemed the symbols of false religions and praised places of false worship as "sacred," never ceases to find an opportunity to place drops of poison into the well of the Catholic Faith.

This is, of course, the man who rejects the Social Reign of Christ the King and has endorsed the condemned theses of religious liberty and separation of Church and State that have been condemned by true pope after true pope prior to the dawning of the age of conciliarism with the "election" of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII on October 28, 1958. It makes perfect sense for him to try to deconstruct the very words contained in the Gospel according to Saint Luke, as he did in his "homily" during the Christmas Midnight staging of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service in the Basilica of Saint Peter in the Vatican yesterday, Saturday, Christmas Day, December 25, 2010:

At the end of the Christmas Gospel, we are told that a great heavenly host of angels praised God and said: “Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!” (Lk 2:14). The Church, in the Gloria, has extended this song of praise, which the angels sang in response to the event of the holy night, into a hymn of joy at God’s glory – “we praise you for your glory”. We praise you for the beauty, for the greatness, for your goodness, which becomes visible to us this night. The appearing of beauty, of the beautiful, makes us happy without our having to ask what use it can serve. God’s glory, from which all beauty derives, causes us to break out in astonishment and joy. Anyone who catches a glimpse of God experiences joy, and on this night we see something of his light. But the angels’ message on that holy night also spoke of men: “Peace among men with whom he is pleased”. The Latin translation of the angels’ song that we use in the liturgy, taken from Saint Jerome, is slightly different: “peace to men of good will”. The expression “men of good will” has become an important part of the Church’s vocabulary in recent decades. But which is the correct translation? We must read both texts together; only in this way do we truly understand the angels’ song. It would be a false interpretation to see this exclusively as the action of God, as if he had not called man to a free response of love. But it would be equally mistaken to adopt a moralizing interpretation as if man were so to speak able to redeem himself by his good will. Both elements belong together: grace and freedom, God’s prior love for us, without which we could not love him, and the response that he awaits from us, the response that he asks for so palpably through the birth of his son. We cannot divide up into independent entities the interplay of grace and freedom, or the interplay of call and response. The two are inseparably woven together. So this part of the angels’ message is both promise and call at the same time. God has anticipated us with the gift of his Son. God anticipates us again and again in unexpected ways. He does not cease to search for us, to raise us up as often as we might need. He does not abandon the lost sheep in the wilderness into which it had strayed. God does not allow himself to be confounded by our sin. Again and again he begins afresh with us. But he is still waiting for us to join him in love. He loves us, so that we too may become people who love, so that there may be peace on earth. (24 December 2010: Christmas - Midnight Service.)


Before a brief commentary is offered on this insidious effort to deconstruct the Gospel according to Saint Luke by the arch-Modernist, Ratzinger/Benedict, it would be useful to remind the very few readers who read these articles that Modernism is a mixture of truth and error. This is what the false "pope" did during his "homily" yesterday morning as he mixed in substantial elements of Catholicism with just a bit of Modernism in order to cast doubt upon the accuracy of the translation provided us by Saint Jerome in his translation of Sacred Scripture, the Latin Vulgate Bible, which is the official translation used by the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, noting full well that other rites have used other translations. Just a bit of poison. That's all. A bit of poison.

Just as the Liturgical Movement that began with the work of the late Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., to revive a love in the Sacred Liturgy that had waned as a result of the coldness of the minimalists known as Jansenists was hijacked by Modernists to make the Catholic Church's liturgical rites vessels into which they could pour their condemned concepts in order to diffuse them among the faithful, so is it the case that the work of translating a new edition of the Latin Vulgate from the original sources that began in 1907 when Pope Saint Pius X authorized scholars in the Order of Saint Benedict to do so was hijacked by Modernists intent on departing from a faithful adherence to Catholic Tradition in order to make it appear that the Catholic Church had been wrong in her use and reliance upon the Latin Vulgate that had been translated by Saint Jerome and was declared the official version of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church by the Council of Trent.

Pope Pius XII, writing in Divino Afflante Spiritu, September 30, 1943, established new parameters for Scriptural research and for new translations from the Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic languages that he believed would be useful in light of relatively new archeological discoveries, noting these discoveries as reason to grant permission for a wider field of exegetical study and translation than was permitted by Pope Leo XIII in Providentissimus Deus, November 18, 1893. He did so, however, by placing a strict proviso on this widened permission:

54. Hence their exegetical explanation should aim especially at the theological doctrine, avoiding useless disputations and omitting all that is calculated rather to gratify curiosity than to promote true learning and solid piety. The literal sense and especially the theological let them propose with such definiteness, explain with such skill and inculcate with such ardor that in their students may be in a sense verified what happened to the disciples on the way to Emmaus, when, having heard the words of the Master, they exclaimed: "Was not our heart burning within us, whilst He opened to us the Scriptures?"[37]


The permission for a widened field of Scriptural exegesis and translations granted by Pope Pius XII in Divini Afflante Spiritu was principally for purposes of scholars, whose research, if orthodox, would be taught in seminaries to help form future priests. Pope Pius XII urged the exegetes and translators to explain the doctrine of Holy Mother Church, not to undermine it as the Modernists have done. No conflict can exist between the Church's doctrinal pronouncements, whether made in dogmatic councils or by our true popes, and the text of Sacred Scripture as God the Holy Ghost, Who cannot contradict Himself, directed the writing and formulation of each infallibly, unerringly.

Pope Pius XII was aware of how his intentions in Divino Afflante Spiritu had been used by some as the pretext to put into question the Church's doctrine and/or to seek to express that doctrine in novel language that lacked the precision of Scholasticism. Indeed, he expressed this concern quite directly when condemning Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict's "new theology" in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950:

22. To return, however, to the new opinions mentioned above, a number of things are proposed or suggested by some even against the divine authorship of Sacred Scripture. For some go so far as to pervert the sense of the Vatican Council's definition that God is the author of Holy Scripture, and they put forward again the opinion, already often condemned, which asserts that immunity from error extends only to those parts of the Bible that treat of God or of moral and religious matters. They even wrongly speak of a human sense of the Scriptures, beneath which a divine sense, which they say is the only infallible meaning, lies hidden. In interpreting Scripture, they will take no account of the analogy of faith and the Tradition of the Church. Thus they judge the doctrine of the Fathers and of the Teaching Church by the norm of Holy Scripture, interpreted by the purely human reason of exegetes, instead of explaining Holy Scripture according to the mind of the Church which Christ Our Lord has appointed guardian and interpreter of the whole deposit of divinely revealed truth.

23. Further, according to their fictitious opinions, the literal sense of Holy Scripture and its explanation, carefully worked out under the Church's vigilance by so many great exegetes, should yield now to a new exegesis, which they are pleased to call symbolic or spiritual. By means of this new exegesis the Old Testament, which today in the Church is a sealed book, would finally be thrown open to all the faithful. By this method, they say, all difficulties vanish, difficulties which hinder only those who adhere to the literal meaning of the Scriptures.

24. Everyone sees how foreign all this is to the principles and norms of interpretation rightly fixed by our predecessors of happy memory, Leo XIII in his Encyclical "Providentissimus," and Benedict XV in the Encyclical "Spiritus Paraclitus," as also by Ourselves in the Encyclical "Divino Affflante Spiritu."

25. It is not surprising that novelties of this kind have already borne their deadly fruit in almost all branches of theology. It is now doubted that human reason, without divine revelation and the help of divine grace, can, by arguments drawn from the created universe, prove the existence of a personal God; it is denied that the world had a beginning; it is argued that the creation of the world is necessary, since it proceeds from the necessary liberality of divine love; it is denied that God has eternal and infallible foreknowedge of the free actions of men -- all this in contradiction to the decrees of the Vatican Council[5] (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)


This is what Ratzinger/Benedict has done throughout the course of his priestly life. It is what he has done throughout the course of his false "pontificate" since April 19, 2005. He has, as has been noted many times on this site, been using his general audience addresses and "homilies" and "encyclical letters" and speeches to give a "papal" imprimatur to the precepts of the "new theology" that were condemned by Pope Pius XII when he, Ratzinger/Benedict, was about to enter his final year of seminary studies prior to his priestly ordination on June 29, 1951. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is indeed a world-class exponent of a new exegesis that places into question the events recorded in Sacred Scripture and how Holy Mother Church, guided infallibly by God the Holy Ghost, has taught us about  their true meaning.

Although Pope Pius XII warned in Divino Afflante Spiritu that exegetes should avoid "useless disputations" on various points contained in Sacred Scripture, Ratzinger/Benedict simply can't help himself from using a "homily" for what he believed to have been a Christmas Midnight "Mass" to engage in a needless discussion of different translations of Verse 14 of Chapter 2 of the Gospel According to Saint Luke before launching into a discussion of grace and free will that, although relevant to the passage, takes attention away from its essential meaning, namely, that the men of good will are those who are open to listening and submitting to the voice of Christ the King as He speaks to them through our true mater and magister on earth, the Catholic Church, as they seek to live in a state of peace with God by persisting in a state of Sanctifying Grace. This meaning holds true even for Ratzinger/Benedict's preferred translation ("peace among men with whom He is pleased") as God is only pleased with men whose immortal souls are in a state of Sanctifying Grace.

Holy Mother Church's Sacred Liturgy has relied upon the translation of this passage from the Gospel According to Saint Luke provided her by Saint Jerome in the Latin Vulgate that was declared by the Council of Trent to be the official translation for use in her Roman Rite:

Moreover, the same sacred and holy Synod,—considering that no small utility may accrue to the Church of God, if it be made known which out of all the Latin editions, now in circulation, of the sacred books, is to be held as authentic,—ordains and declares, that the said old and vulgate edition, which, by the lengthened usage of so many years, has been approved of in the Church, be, in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions, held as authentic; and that no one is to dare, or presume to reject it under any pretext whatever.

Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,—in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, —wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,—whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,—hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published. Contraveners shall be made known by their Ordinaries, and be punished with the penalties by law established. (Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent.)


Ratzinger/Benedict chose to use a Christmas Midnight "Mass" in the Basilica of Saint Peter to engage in a disputation about the reliability of the translation of Verse 14 of Chapter 2 of the Gospel According to Saint Luke. The faithful do not need such a disputation in the course of what purports to be Holy Mass. The faithful need to have their Faith fed by a simple reminder that to be men of good will we must be faithful to everything that has been taught to us by Holy Mother Church without any reservation or dissent whatsoever. Disputations over different translations of a passage of Sacred Scripture belong in the classroom or in conferences among true scholars of Sacred Scripture, not in a "homily," no less one delivered on Christmas Day itself.

The commentary provided by Father George Leo Haydock on the translation and the meaning of "peace to men of good will" feeds the Catholic Faith, accepting the Latin Vulgate translation of the verse as the authoritative according to the consensus of the Fathers of Holy Mother Church:


14 Glory to God in the highest: and on earth, peace to men of good will.

Ver. 14. And on earth, peace to men of good will.[1] I had translated, peace to men of his good will, looking upon the sense to be, that a peace and reconciliation were offered, and given to men from the good will and mercy of God. The ordinary Greek copies altogether favour this exposition. And Bellarmine (lib. ii, de Verb. D. chap. 11.) is so convinced of this sense, that he brings it for an instance of one of those places, in which the true sense of the Latin is to be found by the Greek text; which is many times true: but Bellarmine might not take notice, that several of the best Greek manuscripts are conformable to the Latin Vulgate, and have peace to men of good will; as it is also expounded by divers of the ancient Fathers, that peace is offered to men of good will, to those who by the grace of God are disposed to believe and obey the Gospel-doctrine. And upon this, having advised with others, I did not think fit to change the former Rheimish translation. (Witham) --- The reason why the will is designated in preference to any other power of the soul, is, because the will moves the rest; consequently the goodness or badness of an action depends chiefly on the will. By this also the angels wished to shew, that the peace which Christ came to bring into the world, was the internal peace of our souls, of which the external peace that subsisted under Augustus, was a figure. (Nicholas of Lyra) --- Peace is made on earth, since human nature, before an enemy of God, is now reconciled and united to him by his incarnation. (Theophylactus) --- In this hymn of the angels there is a remarkable difference observable in some of the Greek and Latin copies. The latter have it according to this text, men of good will; the former, good will among men, or to men. Eudokia, signifies the gratuitous benevolence of God towards man. So that this sentence seems divided into three parts: glory to God, peace on earth, and good will to men. (Jansenius, conc. Evang.) --- The birth of Christ giveth not peace of mind, or salvation, but to such as are of good will, because he worketh not our good against our wills, but with the concurrence of our will. (St. Augustine, quæst. ad Simplic. lib. 1. q. 2. t. 4.) (Haydock Commentary on Luke 2.)


The state of true, authentically Catholic Scriptural research has improved since the time of Father George Leo Haydock, who would not have known about the Codex Sinaiticus, which was not discovered until the Nineteenth Century. The Codex Sinaiticus is is a hand copied version of Sacred Scripture in the Greek language that dates from the Fourth Century. The Codex Sinaiticus contains fragments of the Old Testament and most of the New Testament, noting that there are some differences in the text between it and the early Greek translation of the Bible, the Codex Vaticanus Graecus. Biblical scholars have noted great areas of congruence between the Codex Sinaiticus and the translation completed by Saint Jerome from the Greek. This means, of course, that the Codex Sinaiticus verifies the rendering of Luke 2: 14 as "and peace to men of good will," not "with men with whom he is well pleased" and not, as Father Haydock proposed but did not choose to use, "peace to men of his good will."

From whence did that drop of poison found in Ratzinger/Benedict's Christmas Midnight "homily" originate?

Well, as one who reviewed this text prior to posting noted, "Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's favored version of Luke 2: 14 is the same as the Protestant Standard Revised Version (RSV), "which was given subsequent support by the work of the Jesuit Dead Sea-scrolls scholar Ernest Vogt.. . . . Accordingly, the problem is not so much Benedict's theology, as you note, but his appeal to non-Catholic translations (and occult modernism in his reliance on external evidence to "validate" or "confirm" the Church's ages-old interpretation)."

Remember, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believes that the Catholic Church can "learn" from "insights" into Sacred Scripture from non-Catholic scholars, including Jews and modernist Protestants who do not even believe in the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (see Nothing New Under Benedict's Sun and (Communion Without Confession and the 1983 Code of Canon Law). The false "pontiff," therefore, has no problem using the translation of translation of Luke 2: 14 that is found in the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition that originated in the Protestant RSV (a similar translation, " "Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests," is to be found in the hideous New American Bible). As my reviewer noted, this "recourse" to non-Catholic sources is a clear indication that Benedict doesn't trust Tradition." Quite true.

Indeed, Ratzinger/Benedict believes that the Fathers of the Church must be re-read through new lenses as they were time bound in their considerations of Sacred Scripture as the Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas has provided too much of a "filter" on their work that has supposed clouded their original meaning. One of the goals of the "new theology" was to do precisely this, to re-read the Fathers of the Church, something that Pope Pius XII noted in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950:

17. Hence to neglect, or to reject, or to devalue so many and such great resources which have been conceived, expressed and perfected so often by the age-old work of men endowed with no common talent and holiness, working under the vigilant supervision of the holy magisterium and with the light and leadership of the Holy Ghost in order to state the truths of the faith ever more accurately, to do this so that these things may be replaced by conjectural notions and by some formless and unstable tenets of a new philosophy, tenets which, like the flowers of the field, are in existence today and die tomorrow; this is supreme imprudence and something that would make dogma itself a reed shaken by the wind. The contempt for terms and notions habitually used by scholastic theologians leads of itself to the weakening of what they call speculative theology, a discipline which these men consider devoid of true certitude because it is based on theological reasoning.

18. Unfortunately these advocates of novelty easily pass from despising scholastic theology to the neglect of and even contempt for the Teaching Authority of the Church itself, which gives such authoritative approval to scholastic theology. This Teaching Authority is represented by them as a hindrance to progress and an obstacle in the way of science. Some non Catholics consider it as an unjust restraint preventing some more qualified theologians from reforming their subject. And although this sacred Office of Teacher in matters of faith and morals must be the proximate and universal criterion of truth for all theologians, since to it has been entrusted by Christ Our Lord the whole deposit of faith -- Sacred Scripture and divine Tradition -- to be preserved, guarded and interpreted, still the duty that is incumbent on the faithful to flee also those errors which more or less approach heresy, and accordingly "to keep also the constitutions and decrees by which such evil opinions are proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See,"[2] is sometimes as little known as if it did not exist. What is expounded in the Encyclical Letters of the Roman Pontiffs concerning the nature and constitution of the Church, is deliberately and habitually neglected by some with the idea of giving force to a certain vague notion which they profess to have found in the ancient Fathers, especially the Greeks. The Popes, they assert, do not wish to pass judgment on what is a matter of dispute among theologians, so recourse must be had to the early sources, and the recent constitutions and decrees of the Teaching Church must be explained from the writings of the ancients.

19. Although these things seem well said, still they are not free from error. It is true that Popes generally leave theologians free in those matters which are disputed in various ways by men of very high authority in this field; but history teaches that many matters that formerly were open to discussion, no longer now admit of discussion.

20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me";[3] and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)


It is simply part of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's modus operandi to engage in a sort of Hegelian synthesis to arrive at theological conclusions, using spurious translations of Sacred Scripture to attempt to cast "new" light on their meaning, casting aspersion at the same time on the working of God the Holy Ghost in Holy Mother Church's Magisterium over the centuries.

Contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believes that God's favor does rest upon men who persist in false religions. He has blasphemed God personally by saying that Christians and Jews "pray to the same Lord." He has termed places of false worship as "sacred." He believes that those who adhere to false religions can by their "common witness" protect "religious liberty" and thus foster world peace. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is a living contradiction of "peace on earth to men of good will" and even of his own preferred translation of Luke 2: 14, "peace to men with whom God is well pleased as God is pleased only with those who are members of His One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church if they are in a state of Sanctifying Grace.

Readers may recall that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict is the man who helped to broker the terms of the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" that was reached between Catholics and Lutherans in 1999, praising this effort to disparage the work of the Council of Trent repeatedly throughout the course of his false "pontificate," including when he visited the Lutheran "church" in Rome, Italy on March 15, 2010 (see Unity Among Lutherans). He believes that God is well pleased with Lutherans, which is why he can sit so patiently and express words of admiration with "pastors" of Protestant denominations give "sermons" in his presence. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has no understanding of what it takes to be men of good will who are pleasing in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation.

The false "pontiff's" penchant for treating "homilies" as forums for the sorts of lectures that he gave in his years as a professor of theology contrasts with the advice given by a fellow Modernist, the late John Francis Whealon, the conciliar archbishop of Hartford, Connecticut, from December 28, 1968, to August 2, 1998 (Archbishop Whealon, having been consecrated as a bishop in 1961, was a true bishop), at the end of the second of two courses that he taught on the New Testament at Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut, during the 1983-1984 academic year when I was studying there (while driving to Queens, New York, to teach a graduate course on Saturday morning at Saint John's University). Archbishop Whealon, who missed a good deal of the second course in the Spring 1984 Semester because of surgery for colon cancer, being replaced by a conciliar presbyter who was even more of a Modernist than himself, taught every Modernist shibboleth about Scriptural exegesis imaginable. The courses were exercises in pure penance. Surprisingly, however, Archbishop Whealon said the following at the end of the second course: "You can now forget about everything I taught you. Just preach the Gospel to the people without confusing them with all of this" (which prompted me to mutter to myself, "Then why did we have to sit through this for a year?").

That is, Archbishop Whealon, who was a complete and total ecumaniac and one of the many American bishops in the conciliar church who believed in "gender inclusive" language in the liturgy, understood that various  theories about Scriptural research and translation do not belong in the pulpit. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who has spent most of his priestly life in academic and/or administrative work, does not understand this as he continues to promote the condemned principles of his "new theology" that have shaped the work he seems bound and determined to continue until the day of his death.

It matters not that much of Ratzinger/Benedict's Christmas Midnight "homily" was consonant with the Faith or that his discussion of grace and freedom was not erroneous. He did just happen to drop in that bit of poison into the "homily" to put into question the reliability of the Latin Vulgate that was given us by Saint Jerome and ratified by the Council of Trent as he refused to give his hearers the true sense of the sacred text and as he has shown himself to be a man who has shown by his many words and deeds that he is not a man of good will. He is a man who has made war against the Catholic Faith throughout his priesthood.

To be men of good will we must rely upon the maternal intercession of Our Lady, she who wrapped her Newborn Son, Christ the King, in swaddling clothes and placed him with tenderness into the manger that served as His cradle in the stable in the cave in Bethlehem. She wants all men everywhere to be members of the Catholic Church who are as meek and submissive to their mater and magister on earth as she was to the will of God the Father at the Annunciation, and as she was throughout the course of her life here on earth. There is no other path to the Newborn Babe in Bethlehem than that which runs through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, especially as we pray her Most Holy Rosary every day without fail, meditating upon the Joyful Mysteries during this beautiful, holy season of Christmas.

We can give thanks to the good God that, unworthy though we are, we have been the beneficiaries of so great a gift as Himself to teach us how to get home to Heaven as members of the Catholic Church by relying upon the same Most Blessed Mother Who gave birth to Him in Bethlehem. It will be only when all men recognize this fact that there can be true peace on earth, that of Christ the King.

A continued blessed Christmas to you all.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.


Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!


Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, 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.

Saint Thomas a Becket, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints



© Copyright 2010, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.