The previous part of this series was published on Friday, January 24, 2014, the Feast of Saint Timothy, at No Space Between Ratzinger and Bergoglio, part six.
There is little that needs to be done in this final segment as there comes a point when redundancy is counterproductive. Those who are part of the “Resignationism Rising” movement and others in the fantasy-land that is the Motu world where well-meaning Catholics think that they are being “loyal” while having a beautiful liturgy staged mostly by men who are not truly ordained priests of the Catholic Church have shown a decided tendency to ignore actual facts by resorting constantly to shopworn slogans that prove only one thing: their willingness to overlook what they know to be grave offenses to the Catholic Faith that harm the souls for whom Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to Redeem.
Thus it is that a few points to emphasize and reiterate the work done in the previous six segments of this series will be made in the hope that a few disinterested readers who have yet to realize that the spotless, mystical bride of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ can never give us any ambiguity in her doctrine, no less to contradict or to deconstruct articles contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith.
First, Joseph Ratzinger has always rejected what Jorge Mario Bergoglio continues to reject: the belief that it is necessary to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of non-Catholics to the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.
This is what the then Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger wrote in the very misnamed book, Principles of Catholic Theology, that is really a compendium of his lectures rather than a text he wrote at one time from cover to cover:
“As regards Protestantism, the maximum demand of the Catholic Church would be that the Protestant ecclesiological ministers be regarded as totally invalid and that Protestants be converted to Catholicism; the maximum demand of Protestants, on the other hand, would be that the Catholic Church accept, along with the unconditional acknowledgement of all Protestant ministries, the Protestant concept of ministry and their understanding of the Church and thus, in practice, renounce the apostolic and sacramental structure of the Church, which would mean, in practice, the conversion of Catholics to Protestantism and their acceptance of a multiplicity of distinct community structures as the historical form of the Church. While the first three maximum demands are today rather unanimously rejected by Christian consciousness, the fourth exercises a kind of fascination for it – as it were, a certain conclusiveness that makes it appear to be the real solution to the problem. This is all the more true since there is joined to it the expectation that a Parliament of Churches, a “truly ecumenical council’, could then harmonize this pluralism and promote a Christian unity of action. That no real union would result from this, but that its very impossibility would become a single common dogma, should convince anyone who examines the suggestion closely that such a way would not bring Church unity but only a final renunciation of it. As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity.
“As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity. In any event, church unity is not a political problem that can be solved by means of compromise or the weighing of what is regarded as possible or acceptable. What is at stake here is unity of belief, that is, the question of truth, which cannot be the object of political maneuvering. As long as and to the extent that the maximum solution must be regarded as a requirement of truth itself, just so long and to just that extent there will be no other recourse than simply to strive to convert one’s partner in the debate. In other words, the claim of truth ought not to be raised where there is not a compelling and indisputable reason for doing so. We may not interpret as truth that which is, in reality, a historical development with a more or less close relationship to truth. Whenever, then, the weight of truth and its incontrovertibility are involved, they must be met by a corresponding sincerity that avoids laying claim to truth prematurely and is ready to search for the inner fullness of truth with the eyes of love.” (Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 197-198.)
“None of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity,” not even the immutable teaching of the Catholic Church that all non-Catholics, including Protestants, must convert unconditionally to the Catholic Faith in order to be save?
No, this is not “Pope” Benedict XVI’s “vision” of “unity,” something that he noted in 2010 in an address to the “Pontifical” Council for Promoting Christian Unity in terms that were almost identical to the apostasy he published twenty-eight years beforehand:
“Dear friends, despite the presence of new problematic situations or difficult points for the dialogue, the aim of the ecumenical path remains unchanged, as does the firm commitment in pursuing it. It is not, however, a commitment according to political categories, so to speak, in which the ability to negotiate or the greater capacity to find compromises come into play, from which could be expected, as good mediators, that, after a certain time, one will arrive at agreements acceptable to all. Ecumenical action has a twofold movement. On one hand there is the convinced, passionate and tenacious search to find full unity in truth, to excogitate models of unity, to illumine oppositions and dark points in order to reach unity. And this in the necessary theological dialogue, but above all in prayer and in penance, in that spiritual ecumenism which constitutes the throbbing heart of the whole path: The unity of Christians is and remains prayer, it resides in prayer. On the other hand, another operative movement, which arises from the firm awareness that we do not know the hour of the realization of the unity among all the disciples of Christ and we cannot know it, because unity is not “made by us,” God “makes” it: it comes from above, from the unity of the Father with the Son in the dialogue of love which is the Holy Spirit; it is a taking part in the divine unity. And this should not make our commitment diminish, rather, it should make us ever more attentive to receive the signs of the times of the Lord, knowing how to recognize with gratitude that which already unites us and working to consolidate it and make it grow. In the end, also in the ecumenical path, it is about leaving to God what is only his and of exploring, with seriousness, constancy and dedication, what is our task, being aware that to our commitment belongs the binomial of acting and suffering, of activity and patience, of effort and joy.
“We confidently invoke the Holy Spirit, so that he will guide our way and that each one will feel with renewed vigor the appeal to work for the ecumenical cause. I encourage all of you to continue your work; it is a help that you render to the Bishop of Rome in fulfilling his mission at the service of unity. As a sign of affection and gratitude, I impart to you my heartfelt apostolic blessing.” (Antipapal Words to Members of Christian Unity Council.)
“Excogitate models of unity”? This is the talk of an insane man. This is craziness. This is absurdity.
Yet it is that the supposedly more revolutionary Jorge Mario Bergoglio has taught the exact same thing in the past ten months, including just last evening at the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls as he participated in an “ecumenical” vespers service along with a Greek Orthodox bishop and an Anglican non-bishop, David Moxon. The parallels between Bergoglio’s heresy and that of Ratzinger’s are striking in their similarity, proving yet again to those who have the honesty to see and to accept the truth that there is no space between these two heretics on matters of theological substance:
““’Has Christ been divided?’ (1 Cor 1:13). The urgent appeal which Saint Paul makes at the beginning of his First Letter to the Corinthians, and which has been proclaimed at this evening’s liturgy, was chosen by a group of our fellow Christians in Canada as the theme for our meditation during this year’s Week of Prayer.
“The Apostle was grieved to learn that the Christians of Corinth had split into different factions. Some claimed: “I belong to Paul”; while others claimed: “I belong to Apollos” or “I belong to Cephas”, and others yet claimed: “I belong to Christ” (cf. v. 12). Paul could not even praise those who claimed to belong to Christ, since they were using the name of the one Saviour to set themselves apart from their other brothers and sisters within the community. In other words, the particular experience of each individual, or an attachment to certain significant persons in the community, had become a yardstick for judging the faith of others.
“Amid this divisiveness, Paul appeals to the Christians of Corinth “by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” to be in agreement, so that divisions will not reign among them, but rather a perfect union of mind and purpose (cf. v. 10). The communion for which the Apostle pleads, however, cannot be the fruit of human strategies. Perfect union among brothers and sisters can only come from looking to the mind and heart of Christ Jesus (cf. Phil 2:5). This evening, as we gather here in prayer, may we realize that Christ, who cannot be divided, wants to draw us to himself, to the sentiments of his heart, to his complete and confident surrender into the hands of the Father, to his radical self-emptying for love of humanity. Christ alone can be the principle, the cause and the driving force behind our unity.
“As we find ourselves in his presence, we realize all the more that we may not regard divisions in the Church as something natural, inevitable in any form of human association. Our divisions wound Christ’s body, they impair the witness which we are called to give to him before the world. The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism, appealing to the text of Saint Paul which we have reflected on, significantly states: “Christ the Lord founded one Church and one Church only. However, many Christian communities present themselves to people as the true inheritance of Jesus Christ; all indeed profess to be followers of the Lord but they differ in outlook and go their different ways, as if Christ were divided”. And the Council continues: “Such division openly contradicts the will of Christ, scandalizes the world, and damages the sacred cause of preaching the Gospel to every creature” (Unitatis Redintegratio, 1).
“Christ, dear friends, cannot be divided! This conviction must sustain and encourage us to persevere with humility and trust on the way to the restoration of full visible unity among all believers in Christ. Tonight I think of the work of two great Popes: Blessed John XXIII and Blessed John Paul II. In the course of their own lives, both came to realize the urgency of the cause of unity and, once elected to the See of Peter, they guided the entire Catholic flock decisively on the paths of ecumenism. Pope John blazed new trails which earlier would have been almost unthinkable. Pope John Paul held up ecumenical dialogue as an ordinary and indispensable aspect of the life of each Particular Church. With them, I think too of Pope Paul VI, another great promoter of dialogue; in these very days we are commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of his historic embrace with the Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople.
“The work of these, my predecessors, enabled ecumenical dialogue to become an essential dimension of the ministry of the Bishop of Rome, so that today the Petrine ministry cannot be fully understood without this openness to dialogue with all believers in Christ. We can say also that the journey of ecumenism has allowed us to come to a deeper understanding of the ministry of the Successor of Peter, and we must be confident that it will continue to do so in the future. As we look with gratitude to the progress which the Lord has enabled us to make, and without ignoring the difficulties which ecumenical dialogue is presently experiencing, let us all pray that we may put on the mind of Christ and thus progress towards the unity which he wills.
“In this climate of prayer for the gift of unity, I address a cordial and fraternal greeting to His Eminence Metropolitan Gennadios, the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch, and to His Grace David Moxon, the personal representative in Rome of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to all the representatives of the various Churches and Ecclesial Communities gathered here this evening.
“Dear brothers and sisters, let us ask the Lord Jesus, who has made us living members of his body, to keep us deeply united to him, to help us overcome our conflicts, our divisions and our self-seeking, and to be united to one another by one force, by the power of love which the Holy Spirit pours into our hearts (cf. Rom 5:5).”
Yes, what Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII started would have been unthinkable in the Catholic Church as she has consistently condemned any fellowship with false religions, each of which is hated by God and is an agent of the devil.
It is useful once again to make reference to what the Catholic Church has taught concerning false ecumenism of the sort preached and practiced by the likes of Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis:
“It is for this reason that so many who do not share ‘the communion and the truth of the Catholic Church’ must make use of the occasion of the Council, by the means of the Catholic Church, which received in Her bosom their ancestors, proposes [further] demonstration of profound unity and of firm vital force; hear the requirements [demands] of her heart, they must engage themselves to leave this state that does not guarantee for them the security of salvation. She does not hesitate to raise to the Lord of mercy most fervent prayers to tear down of the walls of division, to dissipate the haze of errors, and lead them back within holy Mother Church, where their Ancestors found salutary pastures of life; where, in an exclusive way, is conserved and transmitted whole the doctrine of Jesus Christ and wherein is dispensed the mysteries of heavenly grace.
“It is therefore by force of the right of Our supreme Apostolic ministry, entrusted to us by the same Christ the Lord, which, having to carry out with [supreme] participation all the duties of the good Shepherd and to follow and embrace with paternal love all the men of the world, we send this Letter of Ours to all the Christians from whom We are separated, with which we exhort them warmly and beseech them with insistence to hasten to return to the one fold of Christ; we desire in fact from the depths of the heart their salvation in Christ Jesus, and we fear having to render an account one day to Him, Our Judge, if, through some possibility, we have not pointed out and prepared the way for them to attain eternal salvation. In all Our prayers and supplications, with thankfulness, day and night we never omit to ask for them, with humble insistence, from the eternal Shepherd of souls the abundance of goods and heavenly graces. And since, if also, we fulfill in the earth the office of vicar, with all our heart we await with open arms the return of the wayward sons to the Catholic Church, in order to receive them with infinite fondness into the house of the Heavenly Father and to enrich them with its inexhaustible treasures. By our greatest wish for the return to the truth and the communion with the Catholic Church, upon which depends not only the salvation of all of them, but above all also of the whole Christian society: the entire world in fact cannot enjoy true peace if it is not of one fold and one shepherd. (Pope Pius IX, Iam Vos Omnes, September 13, 1868.)
“So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: ‘The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling, she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly.’ The same holy Martyr with good reason marveled exceedingly that anyone could believe that ‘this unity in the Church which arises from a divine foundation, and which is knit together by heavenly sacraments, could be rent and torn asunder by the force of contrary wills.’ For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.” (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
It was on August 19, 2005, that Joseph Ratzinger proved, as “Pope Benedict XVI,” his absolute “papal” rejection of this consistent teaching of the Catholic Church, which dates back to the command that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ gave to the Eleven before He Ascended to His Co-Equal and Co-Eternal God the Father’s right hand in Heaven on Ascension Thursday, that began with Saint Peter’s first Urbi et Orbi address on Pentecost Sunday that resulted in the conversion of over three thousand Jews from all over the Mediterranean (an address that Ratzinger/Benedict does not believe that Saint Peter delivered–see Coloring Everything He Says and Does, part two):
“We all know there are numerous models of unity and you know that the Catholic Church also has as her goal the full visible unity of the disciples of Christ, as defined by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council in its various Documents (cf. Lumen Gentium, nn. 8, 13; Unitatis Redintegratio, nn. 2, 4, etc.). This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (cf. Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 4); the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world.
“On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not!
“It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in discipline. Unity in multiplicity, and multiplicity in unity: in my Homily for the Solemnity of Sts Peter and Paul on 29 June last, I insisted that full unity and true catholicity in the original sense of the word go together. As a necessary condition for the achievement of this coexistence, the commitment to unity must be constantly purified and renewed; it must constantly grow and mature.” (Ecumenical meeting at the Archbishopric of Cologne English.)
Why is this wrong? Permit a man who has been exasperated by three straight days of dealing with the devils within Adobe Contribute and must now adjust to Word Press ona permanent basis a moment to sigh. Oh, I’m back. Here is why:
“To characterize the relation between Catholics and Protestants as ‘unity-in-diversity’ is misleading, inasmuch as it implies that essentially Catholics are one with heretics, and that their diversities are only accidental. Actually, the very opposite is the true situation. For, however near an heretical sect may seem to be to the Catholic Church in its particular beliefs, a wide gulf separates them, insofar as the divinely established means whereby the message of God is to be communicated to souls–the infallible Magisterium of the Church–is rejected by every heretical sect. By telling Protestants that they are one with us in certain beliefs, in such wise as to give the impression that we regard this unity as the predominant feature of our relation with them, we are actually misleading them regarding the true attitude of the Catholic Church toward those who do not acknowledge Her teaching authority.” (Father Francis Connell, Father Connell Answers Moral Questions, published in 1959 by Catholic University of America Press, p. 11; quoted in Fathers Dominic and Francisco Radecki, CMRI, TUMULTUOUS TIMES, p. 348.)
There is no space on the matter of false ecumenism between Ratzinger and Bergoglio. I defy anyone in the the “Resignationism Rising” movement to report accurately on their “pope’s” rejection of the Divine Constitution of the Catholic Church, including the teaching found in one of the very dogmatic statements cited in the letter to Ratzinger that was quoted in part six of this series three days ago (three days that seem like an eternity to me!), Cantate Domino, February 4, 1442, which was issued by Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence.
Indeed, as noted in part one of this series, Ratzinger and Bergoglio are as one in their false teaching about the supposedly perpetually binding nature of the Mosaic Covenant and in their rejection of these words of Saint John Chrystostom, whose feast we celebrate this very day, Monday, January 27, 2014:
“Let that be your judgment about the synagogue, too. For they brought the books of Moses and the prophets along with them into the synagogue, not to honor them but to outrage them with dishonor. When they say that Moses and the prophets knew not Christ and said nothing about his coming, what greater outrage could they do to those holy men than to accuse them of failing to recognize their Master, than to say that those saintly prophets are partners of their impiety? And so it is that we must hate both them and their synagogue all the more because of their offensive treatment of those holy men.” (Saint John Chrysostom, Fourth Century, A.D., Saint John Chrysostom: Eight Homilies Against the Jews.)
“Many, I know, respect the Jews and think that their present way of life is a venerable one. This is why I hasten to uproot and tear out this deadly opinion. I said that the synagogue is no better than a theater and I bring forward a prophet as my witness. Surely the Jews are not more deserving of belief than their prophets. ‘You had a harlot’s brow; you became shameless before all’. Where a harlot has set herself up, that place is a brothel. But the synagogue is not only a brothel and a theater; it also is a den of robbers and a lodging for wild beasts. Jeremiah said: ‘Your house has become for me the den of a hyena’. He does not simply say ‘of wild beast’, but ‘of a filthy wild beast’, and again: ‘I have abandoned my house, I have cast off my inheritance’. But when God forsakes a people, what hope of salvation is left? When God forsakes a place, that place becomes the dwelling of demons.
“(2) But at any rate the Jews say that they, too, adore God. God forbid that I say that. No Jew adores God! Who says so? The Son of God says so. For he said: ‘If you were to know my Father, you would also know me. But you neither know me nor do you know my Father’. Could I produce a witness more trustworthy than the Son of God?
“(3) If, then, the Jews fail to know the Father, if they crucified the Son, if they thrust off the help of the Spirit, who should not make bold to declare plainly that the synagogue is a dwelling of demons? God is not worshipped there. Heaven forbid! From now on it remains a place of idolatry. But still some people pay it honor as a holy place.”(Saint John Chrysostom: Eight Homilies Against the Jews)
Neither Joseph Alois Ratzinger or Jorge Mario Bergoglio believe that this is so. Each has shown himself ready, willing and able to enter into synagogues and to give the appearance of validating the false religion of Talmudism while participating, whether passively by listening or actively while praying aloud, in prayers that deny the Sacred Divinity of the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity made Man in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary by the power of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, at the Annunciation.
Additionally, there is no space between Ratzinger and Bergoglio when it comes to esteeming the symbols, rites and blasphemous teachings of Mohammedanism found in the Koran.
Here are several visual reminders of Ratzinger/Benedict’s gestures of esteem shown to Mohammedanism:
November 30, 2006: Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI entered into the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey, taking off his shoes so as to symbolize that he was in a “holy place” and then turned in the direction of Mecca at the behest of his Mohammedan “host,” who instructed him to assume the Mohammedan prayer position as they “prayed” together. God is offended by honor being given to such a false religion as the souls of His faithful Catholics are scandalized and bewildered and confused as a consequence.
Ratzinger at the Blue Mosque
Ratzinger/Benedict receiving a copy of the Koran, “John Paul II Cultural Center,” Washington, District of Columbia, Thursday, April 17, 2008. Would Our Lord receive a copy of this blasphemous document, no less with a smile on his face? See the video of this exercise in apostasy, (See for yourself, April 17, 2008 – 6:15 p.m. – Interreligious Gathering.) It was a few weeks later that Ratzinger/Benedict received yet another copy of the Koran in the Vatican, referring to it as “this dear, precious book.” A book of blasphemy is “dear” and “precious”? Yes, to an apostate, absolutely.
May 9, 2008: Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI visited Amman, Jordan, making the following incredible statement while there:
“Places of worship, like this splendid Al-Hussein Bin Talal mosque named after the revered late King, stand out like jewels across the earth’s surface. From the ancient to the modern, the magnificent to the humble, they all point to the divine, to the Transcendent One, to the Almighty. And through the centuries these sanctuaries have drawn men and women into their sacred space to pause, to pray, to acknowledge the presence of the Almighty, and to recognize that we are all his creatures.” (Speech to Muslim religious leaders, members of the Diplomatic Corps and Rectors of universities in Jordan in front of the mosque al-Hussein bin Talal in Amman)
Ratzinger/Benedict at the Mosque Al-Hussein bin Talal, Amman, Jordan, Saturday, May 9, 2009.
Three days later, that is, on May 12, 2009, Ratzinger/Benedict, yet again called another Mohammedan mosque, the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, “sacred,” proving himself to bereft of any understanding of the precepts contained in the First and Second Commandments:
“I cordially thank the Grand Mufti, Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, together with the Director of the Jerusalem Islamic Waqf, Sheikh Mohammed Azzam al-Khatib al-Tamimi, and the Head of the Awquaf Council, Sheikh Abdel Azim Salhab, for the welcome they have extended to me on your behalf. I am deeply grateful for the invitation to visit this sacred place, and I willingly pay my respects to you and the leaders of the Islamic community in Jerusalem.” (Courtesy visit to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the Mount of the Temple, since when is a place of false worship “sacred” to the true God of Divine Revelation?)
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI entering the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, Wednesday, May 12, 2009. Note that the false “pontiff” took off his shoes once again.
Saints gave up their lives rather than to give even the appearance of such apostasy.
There was hardly a word of protest in 2006, 2008 and 2009 from those who now constitute the “Resignationism Rising” movement and/or those in the Disneyland of the World of Motumania concerning these grave offenses given by the supposed “restorer of tradition” to the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity. Most of these individuals kept their mouths shut in an exercise of the prudence of the flesh in order to seek and then to preserve their beloved Summorum Pontificum, July 5, 2007, that was issued precisely to keep their mouths shut and their spirits “pacified” in the wake of apostasies such as the ones depicted and documented above.
How is it, therefore, that anyone in the “Resignationism Rising” movement and or those in the Disneyland of the World of Motumania be upset by the following words of Jorge Mario Bergoglio that reaffirmed Mohammedans in the “value” of Koran that has been called “dear” and “precious” by a “pope” who has taken off his shoes, turned in the direction of Mecca, assumed the Mohammedan prayer position and called mosques, which are dens of the devil himself, as “sacred”?
“Sharing our experience in carrying that cross, to expel the illness within our hearts, which embitters our life: it is important that you do this in your meetings. Those that are Christian, with the Bible, and those that are Muslim, with the Quran. The faith that your parents instilled in you will always help you move on.” (Antipope Francis, Address to Refugees at Sacred Heart Basilica, Rome, Jan. 19, 2014. As found at The “Gospel” according to Bergoglio at Novus Ordo Watch Wire Blog.)
Any “faith” will do for conciliar revolutionaries such as Joseph Alois Ratzinger and Jorge Mario Bergoglio, which is why they should not “do” as anything other than apostates who have expelled themselves from the bosom of the Holy Mother Church long ago by virtue of believing, adhering to and promoting publicly words and actions that have been condemned by her solemnly throughout the course of her nearly two millennia of existence.
We need to have recourse as never before to Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary, offering up to the sufferings of this present moment as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.
Consider the following meditation of Saint Louis de Montfort on the power of the Most Holy Rosary, contained in the Twenty-sixth Rose of The Secret of the Rosary:
“Whatever you do, do not be like a certain pious but self-willed lady in Rome, so often referred to by speakers on the Rosary. She was so devout and fervent that she put to shame by her holy life even the strictest religious in the church.
“Having decided to ask St. Dominic’s advice about her spiritual life, she made her confession to him. For penance he gave her one Rosary to say and advised her to say it every day. She excused herself, saying that she had her regular exercises, that she made the Stations of Rome every day, that she wore sackcloth as well as a hair-shirt, that she gave herself the discipline several times a week, that she often fasted and did other penances. Saint Dominic urged her over and over again to take his advice and say the Rosary, but she would not hear of it. She left the confessional, horrified at the methods of this new spiritual director who had tried so hard to persuade her to take up a devotion for which she had no taste.
“Later on, when she was at prayer she fell into ecstasy and had a vision of her soul appearing before the Supreme Judge. Saint Michael put all her penances and to her prayers on one side of the scale and all her sins and imperfections on the other. The tray of her good works were greatly outweighed by that of her sins and imperfections.
“Filled with alarm, she cried out for mercy, imploring the help of the Blessed Virgin, her gracious advocate, who took the one and only Rosary she had said for her penance and dropped it on the tray of her good works. This one Rosary was so heavy that it weighed more than all her sins as well as her good works. Our Lady then reproved her for having refused to follow the counsel of her servant Dominic and for not saying the Rosary every day.
“As soon as she came to herself she rushed and threw herself at the feet of Saint Dominic and told him all that had happened, begged his forgiveness and promised to say the Rosary faithfully every day. By this means she rose to Christian perfection and finally to the glory of everlasting life.
“You who are people of prayer, learn from this the power, the value and importance of this devotion of the holy Rosary when it is said with meditation on the mysteries.
“Few saints have reached the same heights of prayer as Saint Mary Magdalen, who was lifted up to heaven by angels each day, and who had the privilege of learning at the feet of Jesus and his holy Mother. Yet one day, when she asked God to show her a sure way of advancing in his love and arriving at the heights of perfect, he sent the archangel St. Michael to tell her, on his behalf, that there was no other way to reach perfection than to meditate on our Lord’s passion. So he placed a cross in the front of her cave and told her to pray before it, contemplating the sorrowful mysteries which she had seen take place with her own eyes.
“The example of Saint Francis de Sales, the great spiritual director of his time, should spur you on to join the holy confraternity of the Rosary, since, great saint though he was, he bound himself by vow to say the whole Rosary every day as long as he lived.
“Saint Charles Borromeo also said it every day and strongly recommended this devotion to his priests and clerics in seminaries and to all his people.
“Blessed Pius V, one of the greatest popes who have ever ruled the Church, used to say the Rosary every day. Saint Thomas of Villanova, Archbishop of Valencia, Saint Ignatius, Saint Francis Xavier, Saint Francis Borgia, Saint Teresa, and Saint Philip Neri, as well as many other great men whom I do not mention, were greatly devoted to the Rosary.
“Follow their example; your spiritual directors will be very pleased, and if they are aware of the benefits which you can derive from this devotion, they will be the first to urge you to adopt it.” (The Secret of the Rosary.)
Let us continue to trust in the power of Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary as we await in confidence the Triumph of her Immaculate Heart when a true pope fulfills her Fatima Message.
These days of chastisement will come to an end. We just need to bear the difficulties of the moment with joy and gratitude as we seek to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves of Christ the King through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
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 Andrew the Apostle, 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 John Chrysostom, pray for us.
Isn’t it time to pray a Rosary now?
Haven’t heard from a lot of you lately. Although our situation has improved a bit, we still need assistance from those who support the work of this site, especially those who have not given in the past and able to do so now. Thank you.