Promoting "Dialogue" Over "Dogmatism"

by Thomas A. Droleskey

The lords of the counterfeit church of conciliarism have long promoted the false path of "dialogue" as the means to "engage" non-Catholics to determine areas of agreement and disagreement in doctrine and worship. We have been told repeatedly that Catholics can "learn" from the "partners in dialogue."

Here is just one example of the mania for "dialogue" that has been promoted by the currently reigning conciliar "pontiff," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI:

Ever since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has placed special emphasis on the importance of dialogue and cooperation with the followers of other religions. In order to be fruitful, this requires reciprocity on the part of all partners in dialogue and the followers of other religions. I am thinking in particular of situations in some parts of the world, where cooperation and dialogue between religions calls for mutual respect, the freedom to practise one’s religion and to engage in acts of public worship, and the freedom to follow one’s conscience without suffering ostracism or persecution, even after conversion from one religion to another. Once such a respect and openness has been established, peoples of all religions will work together effectively for peace and mutual understanding, and so give a convincing witness before the world.

This kind of dialogue needs to take place on a number of different levels, and should not be limited to formal discussions. The dialogue of life involves simply living alongside one another and learning from one another in such a way as to grow in mutual knowledge and respect. The dialogue of action brings us together in concrete forms of collaboration, as we apply our religious insights to the task of promoting integral human development, working for peace, justice and the stewardship of creation. Such a dialogue may include exploring together how to defend human life at every stage and how to ensure the non-exclusion of the religious dimension of individuals and communities in the life of society. Then at the level of formal conversations, there is a need not only for theological exchange, but also sharing our spiritual riches, speaking of our experience of prayer and contemplation, and expressing to one another the joy of our encounter with divine love. In this context I am pleased to note the many positive initiatives undertaken in this country to promote such dialogue at a variety of levels. As the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales noted in their recent document Meeting God in Friend and Stranger, the effort to reach out in friendship to followers of other religions is becoming a familiar part of the mission of the local Church (n. 228), a characteristic feature of the religious landscape in this country. (Meeting with Religious Leaders in the Waldegrave Drawing Room of St. Mary’s University College in Twickenham (London Borough of Richmond, 17 September 2010.)

 

Did Saint Francis Xavier engage in "dialogue" with the adherents of false religions in India? No, he sought with urgency to convert them unconditionally to the Catholic Faith, the one and only true Faith, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order. (See Without Regard for Results.)

The mania for "dialogue" to "discuss" matters of doctrine that we must accept on the authority of God Who has revealed them to us did not, however, begin with the lords of conciliarism, who are so wedded to this slogan that any thought of actively the conversion of any non-Catholic is considered to be an "offense" against the conciliar falsehood of "religious liberty."

No, here is where the mania for "dialogue" to "discuss" matters that we must accept on the authority of God began:

[6] But a spring rose out of the earth, watering all the surface of the earth. [7] And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul. [8] And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein he placed man whom he had formed. [9] And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold, and pleasant to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. [10] And a river went out of the place of pleasure to water paradise, which from thence is divided into four heads. . . .

[16] And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat: [17] But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death. . . .

[1] Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise? [2] And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: [3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die. [4] And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death. [5] For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.

[6] And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat. [7] And the eyes of them both were opened: and when they perceived themselves to be naked, they sewed together fig leaves, and made themselves aprons. [8] And when they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise at the afternoon air, Adam and his wife hid themselves from the face of the Lord God, amidst the trees of paradise. [9] And the Lord God called Adam, and said to him: Where art thou? [10] And he said: I heard thy voice in paradise; and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.

[11] And he said to him: And who hath told thee that thou wast naked, but that thou hast eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat? [12] And Adam said: The woman, whom thou gavest me to be my companion, gave me of the tree, and I did eat. [13] And the Lord God said to the woman: Why hast thou done this? And she answered: The serpent deceived me, and I did eat. [14] And the Lord God said to the serpent: Because thou hast done this thing, thou art cursed among all cattle, and beasts of the earth: upon thy breast shalt thou go, and earth shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. [15] I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

[16] To the woman also he said: I will multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions: in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children, and thou shalt be under thy husband's power, and he shall have dominion over thee. [17] And to Adam he said: Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat, cursed is the earth in thy work; with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life. [18] Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herbs of the earth. [19] In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return. [20] And Adam called the name of his wife Eve: because she was the mother of all the living.

[21] And the Lord God made for Adam and his wife, garments of skins, and clothed them. [22] And he said: Behold Adam is become as one of us, knowing good and evil: now, therefore, lest perhaps he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever. [23] And the Lord God sent him out of the paradise of pleasure, to till the earth from which he was taken. [24] And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Genesis 2: 6-10, 16-17; Genesis 3: 1-23.)

 

"Dialogue" began in the Garden of Eden, and it ended with the expulsion by God of His first rational creatures, the very first parents of the human race, Adam and Eve, after the commission of Original Sin. That's what "dialogue" results in: enmity with God Himself as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church, the Catholic Church.

The "dialogue" of civil liberty that beckons us to accept the false notions of "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" and "freedom of religion" is tool used by the devil to confuse and bewilder souls into believing that contraries can be true and that everything concerning religion is a matter of such uncertainty that one person's opinion is, quite of course, as good as another person's. This is the essence of the naturalism of Judeo-Masonry, and it is nothing other than diabolical from beginning to end as men are always seeking an excuse not to take up their cross and follow Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church so that they can live lives of lukewarmness and/or of unrepentant sin while still thinking quite highly of themselves.

Pope Pius IX explained that the "free discussion" of ideas that is championed by Americanists in the counterfeit church of conciliarism and by out-and-out naturalists in the world leads only to the ruin of men and their nations:

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. (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

 

The lords of conciliarism, however, exalt this injurious babbling that they call "dialogue," whether it be in the realm of civil discourse or in the realm of false ecumenism. Everything is open to "dialogue" and "discussion."

Many, although far from all, conciliar "bishops" in the United States of America desire "dialogue" with Catholics in public life who support the chemical and surgical assassination of innocent preborn babies in their mothers' wombs.

Many, although far from all, conciliar "bishops" in the United States of America desire "dialogue" with Catholics who support special "rights," including "marriage," for those engaged in perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.

One of these "bishops" is Donald "Cardinal" Wuerl, the conciliar "archbishop" of Washington, District of Columbia, who has reversed his opposition to a "seminar" to take place at Georgetown University that will discuss, among other things, the issue of "gay marriage":

(RSM News - Dec 7, 2010) The Rainbow Sash Movement wishes to congratulate Cardinal Wuerl of the Archdiocese of Washington for siding with common sense and reason by allowing “Catholics for Equality” a newly formed Washington DC based Gay Catholic political organization, sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign Fund to host an event to be held at Georgetown University Intercultural Center Auditorium University Wednesday, December 8, 2010 8:30 - 10:00 PM .

 

We are glad to see that Cardinal Wuerl is not taking the same position of Archbishop Timothy Dolan  recently elected president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops in promoting intolerance, but allows for vigorous debate.

 

 As a federal appeals court in California heard opening arguments in a landmark gay marriage case on Dec. 6, a shrinking coalition of religious leaders to include Archbishop Dolan released a public letter promoting marriage as "the faithful union of one man and one woman."

 

Archbishop Dolan joins  Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals; George Wood, general superintendent of the Assemblies of God; Harry Jackson, bishop of the Fellowship of International Churches; and Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference in promoting bigotry.

 

One of the nation’s leading Catholic Universities is promoting dialogue over dogmatism a dangerous form of religious fundamentalism in the Church.  People look to this university as a leading example of American Catholicism and reasonableness.

 

The panelist are representative a broad array of opinion not only on Gay Rights in general, but also Gay Marriage in particular to include prochoice concerns as is represented by Andrew Sullivan’s presence on the panel.  

 

This is another example of change in the church bubbling up from the pews of our parishes.  To find out more about the Rainbow Sash Movement and how you can join us please visit our web page at Rainbow Sash Movement. (Gay Catholics welcome Cardinal’s Wuerl’ s Change of Heart on the discussion of Gay Rights.)

 

There is no need to repeat here points that have been made in numerous recent articles on this site dealing with the matter of perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandment (see, for example,If Them, Why Not Others?, Let the Olympic Games of Absurdity Begin!, Razing The Last Bastions, Nothing New Under Benedict's Sun, Words and Actions Without Consequences, and Memo to Patrick Joseph Quinn III (and Charles Bernard Rangel)). There is only a need here, as I see it, to note that the confusion in the counterfeit church of conciliarism is such that one lord, "Archbishop" Timothy Dolan, the "happy 'bishop'" who is a full-throated conciliarist, is lambasted for stating the simple truth that marriage is the "faithful union of one man and one woman," while another lord, Donald "Cardinal" Wuerl, who is, it should be presumed as opposed to the perverse concept of "marriage" as is "Archbishop" Dolan, is hailed for being "open" to a public "discussion" of a matter about which there is nothing to "discuss." There is only the law of God and nature to be obeyed. That is all.

Steeped in the false ethos of "academic freedom" and "diversity" and the "need" to "listen" to others so that the truth can be explained to them as they make their "concerns" and "feelings" known in public venues such as a Catholic university, men such as Donald Wuerl, who has been a firm proponent of the corruption of the innocence and purity of children by means of the diabolical rot represented by the explicit teaching of matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, want to make it appear that they will not "interfere" with the "right" of those  who "disagree" with matters contained within the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law to air their "opinions" openly. This is all from the devil, and, to make advertence once again to Pope Pius IX, the one and only result can be a situation wherein "there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, doing so, I should add, to the full approval of applause of the multitudes in most instances.

Donald "Cardinal" Wuerl has refused to deny what purports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service to Catholics in public life. His predecessor, Theodore "Cardinal" McCarrick, stressed the "need" to engage these politicians in "constructive dialogue." Talk about the Olympic Games of Absurdity. Catholics in public life who support baby-killing know that the Catholic Church teaches. They simply do not care. Why should they care as they are permitted to remain in completely good "canonical standing" as members of what they think, albeit falsely, is the Catholic Church.

Similarly, members of the "Rainbow Sash Movement" are not considered to be "outside of the Church" as are the nasty little creatures who are disparaged as sedevacantists but who are actually ordinary Catholics who dissent from nothing contained in the Deposit of Faith. Members of the "Rainbow Sash Movement" are in completely "good standing" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. And the "movement" itself has much support in conciliar chancery offices and parishes and universities and colleges and seminaries.

The supposedly new "organization," "Catholics for Equality," is just another means to promote the same diabolical message that has been promoted for four decades now by "Dignity USA." It stands to reason that "Catholics for Equality" has gotten--or will receive--major grants from same pro-abortion, pro-perversity organizations that have helped the organization called "Catholics for Choice" sustain itself over the past thirty-seven years. The founder of what used to be called "Catholics for a Free Choice" (now called "Catholics for Choice), Frances Kissling, has yet to be excommunicated as a member of the conciliar church, something that she actually boasted about in 2007 when she passed her pro-death baton on to her vice president, a woman named Joan O'Brien (see What does a girl have to do to get excommunicated?).

This is what Pope Pius XI  taught us concerning any "discussion" on matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments:

51. Armed with these principles, some men go so far as to concoct new species of unions, suited, as they say, to the present temper of men and the times, which various new forms of matrimony they presume to label "temporary," "experimental," and "companionate." These offer all the indulgence of matrimony and its rights without, however, the indissoluble bond, and without offspring, unless later the parties alter their cohabitation into a matrimony in the full sense of the law.

52. Indeed there are some who desire and insist that these practices be legitimatized by the law or, at least, excused by their general acceptance among the people. They do not seem even to suspect that these proposals partake of nothing of the modern "culture" in which they glory so much, but are simply hateful abominations which beyond all question reduce our truly cultured nations to the barbarous standards of savage peoples.

53. And now, Venerable Brethren, we shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due to the offspring, which many have the boldness to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrating the marriage act. Some justify* this criminal abuse on the ground that they are weary of children and wish to gratify their desires without their consequent burden. Others say that they cannot on the one hand remain continent nor on the other can they have children because of the difficulties whether on the part of the mother or on the part of family circumstances .

54. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.

55. Small wonder, therefore, if Holy Writ bears witness that the Divine Majesty regards with greatest detestation this horrible crime and at times has punished it with death. As St. Augustine notes, "Intercourse even with one's legitimate wife is unlawful and wicked where the conception of the offspring is prevented. Onan, the son of Juda, did this and the Lord killed him for it."[45]

56. Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.

57. We admonish, therefore, priests who hear confessions and others who have the care of souls, in virtue of Our supreme authority and in Our solicitude for the salvation of souls, not to allow the faithful entrusted to them to err regarding this most grave law of God; much more, that they keep themselves immune from such false opinions, in no way conniving in them. If any confessor or pastor of souls, which may God forbid, lead the faithful entrusted to him into these errors or should at least confirm them by approval or by guilty silence, let him be mindful of the fact that he must render a strict account to God, the Supreme Judge, for the betrayal of his sacred trust, and let him take to himself the words of Christ: "They are blind and leaders of the blind: and if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit.[46] (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930.)

"Catholics for Equality"? No! Catholics for Perversity. And those "bishops," priests or presbyter who are responsible for promoting this so-called seminary are in league with the devil and will indeed have to "render a strict account to God, the Supreme Judge, for their betrayal of their sacred trust as they are "blind and leaders of the blind who are, objectively speaking, heading for the pit of eternal hellfire.

Promoting "dialogue" over "dogmatism"? Go tell that to Elias promoted belief in the true God in opposition to the false gods of Baal on Mount Carmel which is one of the reasons why the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel has been given to us as a salutary protection against the wiles of false ecumenism and, it should be added, against the diabolical of "discussion" on matters that are irreformable because they have been revealed by God and/or inhere in the very nature of things (see the end of the story about the life and death of Father Vincent Bowes, O.C.D., for elaboration on this point, Bookended From Birth to Birth).

We live in times that are very similar to those that existed near the end of the Roman Empire in the West. Dom Prosper Gueranger provided a very penetrating analysis of the decadence extant in ancient Rome in his commentary on the feast day of Saint Cecilia, November 22:

In an age so blindly abandoned as ours to the worship of the senses, is it not time to protest by the strong lessons of our faith, against a fascination which even the children of the promise can hardly resist? Never since the fall of the Roman Empire have morals, and with them the family and society, been so seriously threatened. For long years literature, the arts, the comforts of life, have had but one aim: to propose physical enjoyment as the only end of man's destiny. Society already counts an immense number of members who live entirely a life of the senses. Alas for the day when it will expect to save itself by relying on their energy! The Roman Empire thus attempted several times to shake off the yoke of invasion: it fell, never to rise again.

 

Will the same be written one day of the United States of America?

Dom Prosper Gueranger's description of ancient Rome, especially in the last paragraph quoted above, could be a description of the United States of America as its has degenerated more and more over the decades as a result of its false premises that stem from the heresies of the Protestant Revolt and the anti-Incarnational naturalism of Modernity, so exemplified by Judeo-Masonry, and by the counterfeit church of conciliarism's madness of "dialogue."

We must remain perfectly calm in the midst of this confusion as we trust in the woman who was conceived today without any stain of Original or Actual Sin, the New Eve who has crushed the head of the serpent, the devil. We must trust with childlike confidence in the motherly intercession of the Patroness of the United States of America, Our Lady under her title as the Immaculate Conception, which is what she proclaimed herself to be to the fourteen year old Bernadette Soubirous in the Grotto of Massabielle near Lourdes, France, on March 25, 1858. We are children. We are Our Lady's children. Don't we trust in our Blessed Mother during this times of apostasy and betrayal? How can we not suffer the present age well and with joy and with gratitude when we have so great a Mother who has brought forth so great a Redeemer, Christ the King?

Father Charles Arminjon related the attitude that Catholics have in the midst of the storms of the present world, a world that will pass away soon enough, by contrasting the worldly man with the man of Faith:

One thing is certain: there has never been, and never will be, moral sublimity, heroic holiness, or virtue worthy of the name that does not have its principle or draw its growth and strength in suffering freely accepted or dauntlessly undergone.

How is it that our will is often wavering and undecided, that our life is strew-n with such strange fluctuations and such unhappy fickleness, that we are so dejected by insignificant things, that an inconsiderate word is said to us, or a change in the serenity of the sky, is enough to make us go from the height of joy to the depths of gloom? The cause of these fluctuations and changes is simply the repugnance and instinctive horror we feel toward suffering.

By the assiduous care we take to refuse the slightest hardship and the least injury, and to keep away from us anything that seems even in the smallest degree demanding, we create for ourselves a state of abject bondage. Our heart falls under the sway of as many tyrants as there are impressions, each of which in turn grips us in its influence. No virtue can subsist in such fickle souls, no high position is compatible with a character that drifts along with ever current and turn of fortune.

Thus, the man in this state turns aside from stern duties and becomes a slave to the most futile fantasies. Forgetting that human life is a reality and not fiction, he seeks diversion in frivolous amusements, squanders his best years in pleasures and idleness and boredom, and consumes fruitlessly the talent that God had entrusted to him. In this enfeebling frame of mind, a man need only come before him with threatening words and the power to interfere with his repose, interests, or pleasures, and that man will at once be his master, will have full power to subject him to a degrading bondage or to unspeakable tortures.

How far removed from the inexhaustible pettiness of these flabby, effeminate souls is the firm, high-minded attitude of him who, by dint of doing battle with suffering, has become, as it were, insensitive to its wounds and blows? How fine it is to see him serene and majestic amidst storms and the agitation of passions, fulfilling the words of the wise man: "Whatsoever shall befall the just man, it shall not make him sad."

Calmly he [the man of Faith] hears the noise of revolutions, and sees republics and dynasties pass; it is as if the scene of men's vain and conflicting interests lay in the nether regions beneath his feet. No disturbance on this earth moves him, because he had learned to see events in the infinite wisdom that governs all thing by its providence, and which permits evil only in order to draw good from it by a striking manifestation. He carries within himself a kind of sanctuary of peace and happiness. Mankind and the elements combined are powerless to offend or harm him. Is he sent into exile? he will reply with a great bishop" For me, the whole earth is my native land and my exile. Is he stripped of his goods? He has learned how to possess them without permitting them to enthrall his heart. Is he put to death? Death, for him, is the transfiguration to a better life, emancipation from his sufferings.

Such was the serenity and heroic constancy of St. John Chrysostom, banished by Eudoxia, Empress of Constantinople:

When I was fleeing the town, I did not feel my misfortune at all, and I was interiorly inundated with the most indescribable consolations. If he Empress sends me into exile--I said to myself--I shall consider that the earth and all that it contains is the Lord's. If she has me thrown into the sea, I shall remember Jonah. If she orders me to be stoned, I shall be the companion of St. Stephen. If she has been beheaded, I shall have the glory of St. John the Baptist. If she strips me of what I possess, I shall reflect that I came forth naked from the bowels of the earth, and must return to it naked and stripped of everything. (Father Charles Arminjon, The End of the Present World and the Mysteries of the Future Life, translated by Susan Conroy and Peter McEnerny. Manchester, New Hampshire: Sophia Institute Press, 2008, pp. 282-284.)

 

Let us, therefore, trust in Our Lady, whose Immaculate Heart was pierced by Seven Swords of Sorrow, to help us to promote Catholic dogmatism over the madness of "dialogue," remaining perfectly calm in the storms around us as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits, eager to suffer and to suffer even some more as the consecrated slaves of Christ the King through that same Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, she who is Our Immaculate Queen.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

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.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints