Sanctioning Apostasy With Sanctimony

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Defaming The English Martyrs, published on October 29, 2009, discussed the pending transfer of members of one false sect, Anglicanism, into another false church, that of conciliarism. Still Defaming The English Martyrs, published on November 10, 2010, evaluated Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's "apostolic constitution," Anglicanorum Coetibus, issued on November 9, 2009, the Feast of the Dedication of the Basilica of Saint John Lateran and the Commemoration of Saint Theodore, that provided the building blocks of a false "unity" according to the precepts to the "new ecclesiology."

Anglicanorum Coetibus represents the conciliar Vatican's attempt to offer terms and conditions to "Anglo-Catholics" whereby they could maintain their "Anglican" "identity" and "tradition" while being offered "full communion" with the conciliar church, which is, of course, just as false as the so-called "Anglican Church" from which the Anglo-Catholics are fleeing. A number of questions, however, were raised by the issuance of Anglicanorum Coetibus, among them were the following as I had outlined them in Still Defaming The English Martyrs:

1.1) Unlike the Orthodox, who have sacramental rites that developed under the inspiration of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, when the Eastern churches were united to the Catholic Church, the "traditions" of Anglicanism are man-made and were meant to be a publicly manifest rejection of Catholicism, which is why so many scores of thousands of Catholics were willing to suffer the most cruel tortures and inhumane executions to bear their own visible, tangible rejection of those man-made "traditions."

1.2) The passage of time does not confer legitimacy on that which has its very origins from the devil in a rejection of the Catholic Faith and the authority of the Catholic Church. Has the passage of time conferred legitimacy on the "Anglican Book of Common Prayer"? If not, then why should it receive "protection"  in the counterfeit church of concilairism that presents itself to the world as the Catholic Church?

1.3) Pope Saint Pius V declared the books of Anglican liturgy to be heretical:

Prohibiting with a strong hand the use of the true religion, which after its earlier overthrow by Henry VIII (a deserter therefrom) Mary, the lawful queen of famous memory, had with the help of this See restored, she has followed and embraced the errors of the heretics. She has removed the royal Council, composed of the nobility of England, and has filled it with obscure men, being heretics; oppressed the followers of the Catholic faith; instituted false preachers and ministers of impiety; abolished the sacrifice of the mass, prayers, fasts, choice of meats, celibacy, and Catholic ceremonies; and has ordered that books of manifestly heretical content be propounded to the whole realm and that impious rites and institutions after the rule of Calvin, entertained and observed by herself, be also observed by her subjects. She has dared to eject bishops, rectors of churches and other Catholic priests from their churches and benefices, to bestow these and other things ecclesiastical upon heretics, and to determine spiritual causes; has forbidden the prelates, clergy and people to acknowledge the Church of Rome or obey its precepts and canonical sanctions; has forced most of them to come to terms with her wicked laws, to abjure the authority and obedience of the pope of Rome, and to accept her, on oath, as their only lady in matters temporal and spiritual; has imposed penalties and punishments on those who would not agree to this and has exacted then of those who persevered in the unity of the faith and the aforesaid obedience; has thrown the Catholic prelates and parsons into prison where many, worn out by long languishing and sorrow, have miserably ended their lives. All these matter and manifest and notorious among all the nations; they are so well proven by the weighty witness of many men that there remains no place for excuse, defense or evasion. (Regnans in Excelsis, the decree issued by Pope Saint Pius V on March 5, 1570, excommunicating Queen Elizabeth I.)

 

How has the passage of time corrected the heretical content of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer (which is a replacement for the four parts of the liturgy used in the Catholic Church: the Breviary, the Missal, the Pontifical, and the Ritual)? Obviously, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believes that "beauty" can exist in a liturgy without regard to truth, heedless of the fact that nothing can be beautiful if it is not true and that the liturgy is meant to protect the Faith, which is beautiful because it is true.

1.4) The Anglican liturgy (referred to as the Anglican "use" "Mass" in the conciliar structures, a "rite" whose theological deficiencies were assessed quite critically in an article in The Latin Mass: A Journal of Catholic Culture about five or six years ago) was a precursor and progenitor of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service itself.

 

Anglicanorum Coetibus is indeed a slap in the face to the courage of the English Martyrs as it confers the appearance of "Catholic" legitimacy on liturgical rites declared to be heretical by Pope Saint Pius V in  Anglicanorum Coetibus. This unspeakable act of betrayal of the blood of the English Martyrs and their brave stand in fidelity to the integrity of Catholic Faith and Worship is typical of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's lifelong, Modernist contempt for anything and everything that stands in the way of a "unity" that is premised upon the acceptance of the philosophical absurdity that "good" is to be found in error.

Left totally unanswered in Anglicanorum Coetibus is what rite of "episcopal consecration" will be used to consecrate "bishops" attached to the Anglican Ordinariate in the conciliar structures. Will the Anglicans be allowed to use a rite of "episcopal consecration" that was declared null and void in the following words of Pope Leo XIII in Apostolicae Curae, September 18, 1896:

Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the decrees of the pontiffs, our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by our authority, of our own initiative and certain knowledge, we pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void. . . .

We decree that these letters and all things contained therein shall not be liable at any time to be impugned or objected to by reason of fault or any other defect whatsoever of subreption or obreption of our intention, but are and shall be always valid and in force and shall be inviolably observed both juridically and otherwise, by all of whatsoever degree and preeminence, declaring null and void anything which, in these matters, may happen to be contrariwise attempted, whether wittingly or unwittingly, by any person whatsoever, by whatsoever authority or pretext, all things to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

Or will the Anglicans be required to use the conciliar rite of "episcopal consecration" that is almost identical to the one condemned by Pope Leo XIII in Apostolicae Curae? Either way, of course, those who are "consecrated" in the Anglican Ordinariate attached to the "Worldwide Conciliar Communion" won't be bishops any more then than they were in the "Worldwide Anglican Communion." Same ship, different deck. That's all.

 

The leader of the "Anglo-Catholics, "Bishop" David Hepworth, has, acting in behalf of those attached to his breakaway group of Anglicans, submitted his petition to the conciliar Vatican by way of response to Anglicanorum Coetibus. "Bishop" Hepworth's explanation of his petition is quite interesting in that it shows the schismatic mindset that has characterized the false religion of "Anglicanism" that was created by an immoral, lustful, bloodthirsty English tyrant, King Henry VIII, when he had Parliament declare himself to be "supreme head of the church" in England in 1534. "Bishop" Hepworth refuses to understand or accept the fact that the Anglican sect is false of its very nature, that it is has no right to exist, that its "traditions" are founded in whole or in part on a rejection of Catholic Faith and Worship, that everyone in this false, heretical, schismatic "church" must convert unconditionally to the true Church, the Catholic Church, as have others in the past, including Edmond Campion, Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, John Henry Cardinal Newman, Father Frederick Faber, and Gilbert Keith Chesterton, among so many others. Being received into the Catholic Church is very easy: one abjures one's past errors as one makes a profession of Faith in everything taught by the Catholic Church without any reservation or qualification whatsoever.

As we know, however, things in the false church of conciliarism usually are most complex. The pending "reception" of the Anglo-Catholics is premised upon their retaining liturgical rites that were deemed heretical by Pope Saint Pius V and upon maintaining "traditions" that were such blatant rejections of Catholic Faith and Worship that thousands upon thousands of Catholics (over 72,000 alone between 1534 and 1547) preferred imprisonment, torture, and execution to giving even the appearance of approving them. Although I have used the following quotation several times in the past, it is worth using yet again as readers forget and as the apostasies of conciliarism tend to make Catholics as a whole forget the the passage of time can never erase the validity of the witness given by the English martyrs, Catholics who refused to make any compromises or concessions to Anglicanism in the slightest:

A lady was lately told that she should be let out of prison if she would just once allow herself to be seen walking through an Anglican church. She refused. She had come into prison with a sound conscience and would depart with it, or die. In Henry's day [King Henry VIII], the whole kingdom, with all its bishops and learned men, abjured its faith at one word of the tyrant. But now, in his daughter's days [the daughter was Queen Elizabeth], boys and women boldly profess their faith before the judges and refuse to make the slightest concession even at the threat of death.

"The adversaries are very mad that by no cruelty can they move a single Catholic from his resolution, no, not even a little girl. A young lady of sixteen was questioned by the sham bishop of London about the Pope, and answered him with courage, and even made fun of him in public, and so was ordered to be carried to the public prison . . . On the way she cried out that she was being carried to that place for her religion." (Letter of Blessed Edmond Campion, S.J., to his Jesuit superiors in Rome, quoted in Father Harold C. Gardiner, S.J., Edmund Campion, Hero of God's Underground, Vision Books: Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1957.)

 

It is a very sad commentary on the extent of the state of apostasy that is upon us that so few Catholics see any disparity between the steadfast resolve of Catholics in Elizabethan England to make any compromises with Anglicanism and the ready willingness of conciliar officials to make such compromises as a matter of routine, including treating Anglican clergy in a de facto manner as legitimate ministers of God as one conciliar "pope" after another has imparted "joint blessings" with the laymen posing as the "archbishop of Canterbury."

Of particular interest in in this regard is "Bishop" David Hepworth's explanation of how members of his "Traditional Anglican Communion's" clergy would have their "orders" recognized by the conciliar church in response to Anglicanorum Coetibus, a subject that has been, not uncharacteristically, oversimplified and misrepresented on a traditional web portal noted for sensationalizing the news, thus casting aspersions on the integrity of all Catholics who seek to restore the Church Militant on earth by a commitment to truth without any efforts at textual manipulation or sensationizing. Here is the text of Hepworth's "explanation" on the status of the Anglican "clergy" in the conciliar church upon being their reception into its false structures:

One of the most controversial aspects of the Anglican/Roman relations in the past century has been that of Anglican orders. Rome ruled in 1896 that Anglican orders were null and void.

The Anglican response at the time was a beautifully written argument. More significantly, Anglicans began to seek the involvement in their Episcopal and priestly ordinations of bishops whose orders Rome recognized.   This was a tacit admission that there might be value in the Roman argument, while arguing against the Roman argument. A very Anglican position!

In more recent times, because of this involvement of others in Anglican ordinations, some Anglican clergy entering into full communion with the Catholic Church have been conditionally ordained rather than ordained absolutely. In very recent years, this practice has been abandoned and absolute re-ordination has been adopted.

There are several reasons for this. The first is the practical abandonment of apostolic practice and belief in the Anglican Communion in the matter of the sacrament of Holy Order.   Not only the ordination of women to all three sacred orders, but the redefining of the Anglican understanding of itself as part of the “Church Catholic” that the ordination of women has necessitated, has introduced more than grave doubt about the validity of any Anglican Communion ordinations. It is now difficult to determine whether any particular Anglican Bishop has any intention to do as the Church has always done, when he (or she) specifically intends to do that which the Church has never done. The almost complete elimination of what was once a dominant Anglo-Catholicism from many provinces of the Anglican Communion has removed the clearest statement of Catholic belief about Holy Orders from the Anglican consciousness.

Our own Traditional Anglican Communion has been very careful to do the best that was available.  At that original meeting in Rome, we were encouraged to use consecrating bishops from the Polish National Catholic Church.  We already had, and we received an assurance that Rome recognised their orders.  We have used Anglican Rites for ordination that have been submitted by Anglican authorities to Rome in the early days of ARCIC.

We have done our best, in the context of an ecclesial body actively seeking catholic unity.  Our conversations about the situation regarding Orders that we have conferred are serious and continuing.

The following points are important:

• For some 30 years, Rome has required Anglican priests who are ordained as priests in full communion with the Catholic Church to date their ordination from the Anglican ordination.
• Re-ordination is an issue because the church requires absolute certainty in the matter of future sacramental life. I have been told that the TAC should understand this because we ourselves moved beyond the Anglican Communion in order to ensure the validity of sacramental life. Rome is now seeking the same assurance.
• The present Pope has written meaningfully of the situation of the sacramental life within churches separated from fullness of communion with the Catholic Church. There is no denial of the fact that God acted through our ministry to confer sacramental grace.
• There is quite deliberately not a judgement on the past, which is left to God and His Providence, but there is a demand for certainty in the future. It is my wish, and I believe the wishes of my fellow bishops, that every deacon and priest in our Communion has a certainty of validity that rests, not on the winning of a theological argument, not on the best that was available at the time, but on the indisputable certainty of Catholic practice. I have said to a number of priests that when they are saying Mass in the crypt of St Peter’s on the tombs of the Apostles, I want them to be able to look to one side and the other and to know with absolute certainty that their priesthood has the same objective reality as the priesthood of those on either side.

 

Finally, I commend this development to your prayers and the deepest parts of your conscience. I believe with all my heart that this is a work of God and an act of great generosity by Pope Benedict. The Anglican tradition that we treasure will only survive, I believe, across the generations yet to come if it discovers the protection of apostolic authority. It is my cherished wish that each of us can stand at the altar with our fellow Christians and receive the same Eucharistic Christ. That is the ultimate test of unity. In the centuries since the church in the West became fractured there has been no offer such as the one that is now before us. For Anglicans, Unity has been a dream beyond reach. Now it is a dream that can be fulfilled. I understood when I became a member of the Traditional Anglican Communion (in a dark period of my life when it became impossible to practice my priesthood in a diocese about to ordain women) that this was a Communion heading towards a goal. It had separated from the Anglican Communion. Instead of drifting at the whim of wave and wind, it had chosen to head towards the only realistic destination, that from which Anglicans had separated centuries before. I was grasped by that vision of those who founded this Communion. We are now in the waves just beyond the harbour entrance. Pray God that we have the courage to enter and make our homes. (On the Gathering of Anglicans .)

 

It is no wonder that the "Anglo-Catholics" are such a perfect match for the conciliarists as both use casuistry (specious reasoning) and hubris (exaggerated pride and self-importance) to justify positions that are contradictory to each other.

To wit, David Hepworth boasts of some members of the Anglican "clergy" having sought orders from validly but illicitly consecrated bishops, which, he tells us, is both a recognition that there might be "value" in of Pope Leo XIII's infallible declaration of the invalidity of Anglican "orders" in Apostolicae Curae, September 18, 1896, and a rejection of what he calls an "argument" (solemn papal declarations are not "arguments"), which he says is a very "Anglican" position! Of course it is. Anglicanism, like all other false religions, is not bound to a faithful, unconditional acceptance of the teachings and declaration of the Catholic Church as pronounced by her Roman Pontiffs and in her true councils. Anglicanism was born and has maintained itself in the illogic and irrationality of the Protestant Revolution, which made war against the Divine Plan that God Himself specifically instituted to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church.

No one can show "respect" for Apostolicae Curae by claiming that is "argument" has value while rejecting it. You're "gonna" fit right into the conciliar structures, "Bishop" Hepworth. You have the double-mindedness of Modernism, which, of course, is nothing other than quintessential Protestant rationalism. Efforts to "transmit" holy orders by using the Anglican "ordinal" are invalid on their face. End of "argument."

There are two other aspects to "Bishop" Hepworth's explanation of his petition to the conciliar Vatican that bear examination here.

The first of these aspects involves the advice he was given by officials in the conciliar Vatican to have the clergy associated with the "Traditional Anglican Communion" to receive holy orders from the bishops of the schismatic and heretical Polish National Catholic Church. Just consider this, my few readers. Just consider this. Men who believe themselves to be officials of the Catholic Church, the one and only true Church on the face of this earth, have urged members of one heretical and schismatic sect that does not have true sacraments to go to another heretical and schismatic sect that does have true sacraments in order to assure themselves of sacramental validity as they seek to administer invalid, heretical liturgical rites so that they can "maintain" their "Anglican" tradition within the context of the "Worldwide Anglican Communion." You got all that?

This is amazing. Rather than urge the members of the "Traditional Anglican Communion" to convert unconditionally to what they believe is the Catholic Church, officials of the conciliar Vatican have urged them for the past eighteen years to seek holy orders from a schismatic and heretical sect that rejects, among other things, Papal Primacy, Papal Infallibility, the Catholic doctrine on Original Sin, and which teaches that contraception is a matter of "personal conscience". There you have it , my friends. Officials in the conciliar Vatican have sanctioned one group of non-Catholics to seek true holy orders from another group of non-Catholics while no efforts are made to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of either set of non-Catholics to what is believed to be the Catholic Church.

If the conciliar Vatican has sanctioned the use of validly but illicitly consecrated bishops of the Polish National Catholic Church as a means of keeping alive the Anglican "tradition," which, as noted above, is founded in a rejection of Catholic Faith and Worship, who can object to those who desire to keep the immutable Faith and immemorial Worship of the Catholic Church alive by seeking episcopal consecration from those who are validly but, at least in the eyes of the conciliar Vatican, illicitly consecrated? Why is it important in the eyes of the conciliar Vatican to maintain Anglican "tradition," which, of course, is quite compatible with concilairism, while it is forbidden to seek to maintain Catholic tradition?

Secondly, contrary to the conflated report that appeared on that traditional web portal, the conciliar church is going to require the Anglo-Catholics to be "ordained" in the worthless conciliar rites on a de novo basis, not on a conditional basis. This is being done merely for the sake of appearance and to give "priests" in the "Traditional Anglican Communion" the "assurance" of being "validly" ordained. Leaving aside, ass just noted, the little fact the conciliar rites are just as invalid as the Anglican rites, Ratzinger/Benedict and his ecumaniacal crony, Walter "Cardinal" Kasper, have both acted as though Anglican orders are valid by the way in which they have treated members of the Anglican "clergy." The de novo "ordinations" are being done solely for the sake of appearance as Kasper has told us in the past that Pope Leo XIII's Apostolicae Curae can be "understood in our new ecumenical context in which our communion in faith and mission has considerably grown:"

As I see the problem and its possible solution, it is not a question of apostolic succession in the sense of an historical chain of laying on of hands running back through the centuries to one of the apostles; this would be a very mechanical and individualistic vision, which by the way historically could hardly be proved and ascertained. The Catholic view is different from such an individualistic and mechanical approach. Its starting point is the collegium of the apostles as a whole; together they received the promise that Jesus Christ will be with them till the end of the world (Matt 28, 20). So after the death of the historical apostles they had to co-opt others who took over some of their apostolic functions. In this sense the whole of the episcopate stands in succession to the whole of the collegium of the apostles.

To stand in the apostolic succession is not a matter of an individual historical chain but of collegial membership in a collegium, which as a whole goes back to the apostles by sharing the same apostolic faith and the same apostolic mission. The laying on of hands is under this aspect a sign of co-optation in a collegium.

This has far reaching consequences for the acknowledgement of the validity of the episcopal ordination of another Church. Such acknowledgement is not a question of an uninterrupted chain but of the uninterrupted sharing of faith and mission, and as such is a question of communion in the same faith and in the same mission.

It is beyond the scope of our present context to discuss what this means for a re-evaluation of Apostolicae Curae (1896) of Pope Leo XIII, who declared Anglican orders null and void, a decision which still stands between our Churches. Without doubt this decision, as Cardinal Willebrands had already affirmed, must be understood in our new ecumenical context in which our communion in faith and mission has considerably grown. A final solution can only be found in the larger context of full communion in faith, sacramental life, and shared apostolic mission. (A Vision of Christian Unity for the Next Generation.)

 

David Hepworth cites Ratzinger/Benedict himself as an "authority" to come to the conclusion that "There is no denial of the fact that God acted through our ministry to confer sacramental grace." Here is a newsflash for you "Bishop" Hepworth: God hates Anglicanism as he hates all false religions. Anglicanism is a false religion. It has no right or mission from God to exist. Unlike Orthodoxy, which lays claim legitimately to apostolic traditions and valid sacramental rites, Anglicanism has been from its outside an open rebellion against God as He has revealed Himself through His true Church. God does not confer "sacramental grace" through invalid liturgical rites. Such rites are invalid and devoid of grace no matter whether they are simulated by validly ordained priests or by mere laymen.

For Ratzinger/Benedict and Walter Kasper to contend that there is sacramental grace flowing through the false, heretical, condemned rites of Anglicanism is indeed to turn Apostolicae Curae upside down, at least on a de facto basis by placing into question Pope Leo XIII's solemn declaration:

Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the decrees of the pontiffs, our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by our authority, of our own initiative and certain knowledge, we pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void. . . .

We decree that these letters and all things contained therein shall not be liable at any time to be impugned or objected to by reason of fault or any other defect whatsoever of subreption or obreption of our intention, but are and shall be always valid and in force and shall be inviolably observed both juridically and otherwise, by all of whatsoever degree and preeminence, declaring null and void anything which, in these matters, may happen to be contrariwise attempted, whether wittingly or unwittingly, by any person whatsoever, by whatsoever authority or pretext, all things to the contrary notwithstanding. (Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, September 18, 1896.)

 

Even in this, of course, there is the typical contradiction and paradox found in almost all things conciliar. Vatican officials have, on the one hand, treated the "archbishops" of Canterbury as valid "bishops" while referring "traditional" Anglicans to Polish National Catholic bishops in order for them to have certainty about the validity of their holy orders. Which is it? How can "sacramental grace" flow from false, heretical, condemned liturgical rites simulated, at least for the most part, by ordinary laymen who are members of a false church? The intellectual gymnastics that those who desire to be in "full communion" with the counterfeit church of conciliarism are certainly beyond my ability to grasp. What's so difficult about telling the current crop of Anglicans that they have do what others have done in the past, convert unconditionally to the Catholic Church?

Actually, of course, the "Anglo-Catholics" will fit in just fine with the rest of the conciliar crew, which sports the various Motu communities and the likes of the "Catholic" Charismatic Renewal, Cursillo, Focolare, the Sant'Egidio Community, the Shalom Catholic Community, the Chemin Neuf Community, the International Community of Faith and Light, Regnum Christi, Communion and Liberation, the Emmanuel Community, the Seguimi Lay Group of Human-Christian Promotion, and. among many, many others, including the Neocatechumenal Way.

"Bishop" Hepworth will learn from his confreres in the Motu communities and the "lay movements" that this is how one reacts as a member of the counterfeit church of conciliarism when the "pope" esteems symbols of false religions, calls mosques as "sacred places" and as "jewels" that "stand out across the face of the earth," assumes a Mohammedan prayer position and takes off his shoes while in a mosque so as to signify being in a "holy" place, says that Christians and Jews "pray to the Lord" and that Christians must have a profound "respect" for a Jewish interpretation of the Bible, and as he defines "peace" as the "coexistence" of religions: silence, denial, justification.

Oh, yes, "Bishop" Hepworth and his "Anglo-Catholics" will fit in quite well with those who want nice ceremonies devoid of an absolute, unconditional adherence to everything contained in the Deposit of Faith and devoid of absolutely any understanding of the obligation to defend the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity as they are come under attack from conciliar "pontiff."

In the midst of the incredible apostasies taking place before our very eyes, we must, as always, have recourse to Our Lady as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit and as we keep her company in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and in our time in fervent prayer before her Divine Son's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament. She will help us to cleave only to true bishops and to true priests who make absolutely no concessions to the abominable apostasies and blasphemies and sacrileges of conciliarism or to the nonexistent legitimacy of its "popes" and "bishops" who offend God so boldly, so openly and so brazenly--and with the full support and admiring approval of most of the world's baptized Catholics.

While each person must come to recognize this for himself (it took me long enough to do so; I defended the indefensible for far too long!), we must nevertheless embrace the truth once we do come to recognize and accept it without caring for one moment what anyone else may think about us as we make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

As I noted three months ago now, we can never grow accustomed to defaming our martyrs. We can never grow accustomed to offenses given to God by the conciliar "popes" and their conciliar "bishops." We must cleave to the Catholic Church, not to the counterfeit church of conciliarism, as we attempt to plant the seeds for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

What are we waiting for?

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.

 

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

 

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint 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.

Saint Blase, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints