Doing The Bidding of Antichrist

Felled by a case of the flu yesterday, Tuesday, November 25, 2014, the Feast of Saint Catherine of Alexandria, that lingers yet today, Wednesday, November 26, 2014, the Feast of Saint Sylvester the Abbot and the Commemoration of Saint Peter of Alexandria (and, in some places, the Commemoration of Saint Leonard of Port Maurice), there is time and strength only to comment in a brief way on Antichrist’s Antipope’s addresses to the European Council and the European Parliament yesterday.

Both of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s addresses yesterday were filled with one boilerplate Modernist platitude after another.

Occasional references to God generally, to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and to the “throwaway” society that dispenses with, among others, the unborn and the elderly, each were couched in the language of The Sillon, that is, of “human dignity” and “human rights.” Bergoglio thus continued the theme that has characterized the false pontificates of Giovanni Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick, Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI before him of stressing the needs of the “human person.”

To this, my few remaining readers, I remind one and all of how our true popes have spoken first of the rights of God, not of man:

The world has heard enough of the so-called "rights of man." Let it hear something of the rights of God. That the time is suitable is proved by the very general revival of religious feeling already referred to, and especially that devotion towards Our Saviour of which there are so many indications, and which, please God, we shall hand on to the New Century as a pledge of happier times to come. But as this consummation cannot be hoped for except by the aid of divine grace, let us strive in prayer, with united heart and voice, to incline Almighty God unto mercy, that He would not suffer those to perish whom He had redeemed by His Blood. May He look down in mercy upon this world, which has indeed sinned much, but which has also suffered much in expiation! And, embracing in His loving-kindness all races and classes of mankind, may He remember His own words: "I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to Myself" (John xii., 32).  (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s view of the world is anthropocentric, not Theocentric.  Yet it is that Pope Leo explained above why this utterly false and represents a diabolical inversion of the simple that Christ the King as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His true Church is to be the center of the lives of every and every nation:

From this it may clearly be seen what consequences are to be expected from that false pride which, rejecting our Saviour's Kingship, places man at the summit of all things and declares that human nature must rule supreme. And yet, this supreme rule can neither be attained nor even defined. The rule of Jesus Christ derives its form and its power from Divine Love: a holy and orderly charity is both its foundation and its crown. Its necessary consequences are the strict fulfilment of duty, respect of mutual rights, the estimation of the things of heaven above those of earth, the preference of the love of God to all things. But this supremacy of man, which openly rejects Christ, or at least ignores Him, is entirely founded upon selfishness, knowing neither charity nor selfdevotion. Man may indeed be king, through Jesus Christ: but only on condition that he first of all obey God, and diligently seek his rule of life in God's law. By the law of Christ we mean not only the natural precepts of morality and the Ancient Law, all of which Jesus Christ has perfected and crowned by His declaration, explanation and sanction; but also the rest of His doctrine and His own peculiar institutions. Of these the chief is His Church. Indeed whatsoever things Christ has instituted are most fully contained in His Church. Moreover, He willed to perpetuate the office assigned to Him by His Father by means of the ministry of the Church so gloriously founded by Himself. On the one hand He confided to her all the means of men's salvation, on the other He most solemnly commanded men to be subject to her and to obey her diligently, and to follow her even as Himself: "He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me" (Luke x, 16). Wherefore the law of Christ must be sought in the Church. Christ is man's "Way"; the Church also is his "Way"-Christ of Himself and by His very nature, the Church by His commission and the communication of His power. Hence all who would find salvation apart from the Church, are led astray and strive in vain.

As with individuals, so with nations. These, too, must necessarily tend to ruin if they go astray from "The Way." The Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, is King and Lord of the earth, and holds supreme dominion over men, both individually and collectively. "And He gave Him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve Him" (Daniel vii., 14). "I am appointed King by Him . . . I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession" (Psalm ii., 6, 8). Therefore the law of Christ ought to prevail in human society and be the guide and teacher of public as well as of private life. Since this is so by divine decree, and no man may with impunity contravene it, it is an evil thing for the common weal wherever Christianity does not hold the place that belongs to it. When Jesus Christ is absent, human reason fails, being bereft of its chief protection and light, and the very end is lost sight of, for which, under God's providence, human society has been built up. This end is the obtaining by the members of society of natural good through the aid of civil unity, though always in harmony with the perfect and eternal good which is above nature. But when men's minds are clouded, both rulers and ruled go astray, for they have no safe line to follow nor end to aim at. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)

Speaking in perfect continuity with his conciliar predecessors, each of whom had the same contempt for the immutable teaching of Social Reign of Christ the King as he possesses. Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that the Catholic Church is to serve “humanity” and can “learn” from the “world,” which can help to “purify” her from “ideological extremes”: 

The second challenge which I would like to mention is transversality. Here I would begin with my own experience: in my meetings with political leaders from various European countries, I have observed that the younger politicians view reality differently than their older colleagues. They may appear to be saying the same things, but their approach is different. The lyrics are the same but the music is different. This is evident in younger politicians from various parties. This empirical fact points to a reality of present-day Europe which cannot be overlooked in efforts to unite the continent and to guide its future: we need to take into account this transversality encountered in every sector. To do so requires engaging in dialogue, including intergenerational dialogue. Were we to define the continent today, we should speak of a Europe in dialogue, one which puts a transversality of opinions and reflections at the service of a harmonious union of peoples.

To embark upon this path of transversal communication requires not only generational empathy, but also an historic methodology of growth. In Europe’s present political situation, merely internal dialogue between the organizations (whether political, religious or cultural) to which one belongs, ends up being unproductive. Our times demand the ability to break out of the structures which “contain” our identity and to encounter others, for the sake of making that identity more solid and fruitful in the fraternal exchange of transversality. A Europe which can only dialogue with limited groups stops halfway; it needs that youthful spirit which can rise to the challenge of transversality.

In light of all this, I am gratified by the desire of the Council of Europe to invest in intercultural dialogue, including its religious dimension, through the Exchange on the Religious Dimension of Intercultural Dialogue. Here is a valuable opportunity for open, respectful and enriching exchange between persons and groups of different origins and ethnic, linguistic and religious traditions, in a spirit of understanding and mutual respect.

These meetings appear particularly important in the current multicultural and multipolar context, for finding a distinctive physiognomy capable of skilfully linking the European identity forged over the course of centuries to the expectations and aspirations of other peoples who are now making their appearance on the continent.

This way of thinking also casts light on the contribution which Christianity can offer to the cultural and social development of Europe today within the context of a correct relationship between religion and society. In the Christian vision, faith and reason, religion and society, are called to enlighten and support one another, and, whenever necessary, to purify one another from ideological extremes. European society as a whole cannot fail to benefit from a renewed interplay between these two sectors, whether to confront a form of religious fundamentalism which is above all inimical to God, or to remedy a reductive rationality which does no honour to man.   (Antipope’s Address to Eurosocialist Plutocrats, known as the Council of Europe

The heretics of Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism do as much violence to language as they have done to doctrine, worship, moral and pastoral praxis. A false religion that emanates from a counterfeit church with a false liturgy has had to give rise to a revolutionary vocabulary to speak to the “modern world,” which is itself the product of the diabolical lies of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry. I mean, what in the world is “transversality”? “Inter-generational dialogue”?

Moreover, to believe that the Catholic Church can be “purified” from “ideological extremes” by the world is to assert that she can be misled into various errors, which is yet another denial of her Divine Constitution on the part of the Argentine Apostate.

Jorge even returned to his “widowed church” heresy on Monday morning, November 24, 2014, the Feast of Saint John of the Cross and the Commemoration of Saint Chrysoganus, to explain once again that what he thinks is the Catholic Church is capable of showing forth anything other than the light of her Divine Founder, Invisible Head and Mystical Spouse, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:

"I like to see the Church in this figure, the Church which is, in a sense, a widow, because she waiting for her Bridegroom who will return ... But she has her Bridegroom in the Eucharist, in the Word of God, in the poor, yes: but she is still waiting for his return. This is the attitude of the Church... This widow was not important, the widow’s name did not appear in the newspapers. No one knew her. She had no university degrees... nothing. Nothing. She did not shine of her own light. This is what makes me see the Church in the figure of this woman. The Church must not shine on her own light, but the light that comes from her Bridegroom. That comes right from her Bridegroom. And over the centuries, when the Church wanted to have her own light, she was wrong.”

"It's true," continued Pope Francis, "that sometimes the Lord can ask His Church to have, to shine some its own light" but this means that if the Church's mission is to illuminate humanity, the light that she gifts must be the one she has received from Christ in an attitude of humility.”  

"Everything we do in the Church is to help us in this, to help us receive that light. Service without this light is no good: it makes the Church rich, or powerful, or makes the Church seek power, or take the wrong road, as has happened many times in history, as happens in our lives, when we want to have another light, which is not exactly that of the Lord: a light of our own. When the Church "is faithful to hope and to her Bridegroom," repeated Papa Francis, "it is a joy to receive the light from Him, to be in this sense 'widow' ', waiting, like the moon, for the “sun that will return". (The Church Must Not Shine Forth Her Own Light.)

In other words, the “triumphalistic” church of the past was not led by the light of Christ, which means that she was led by spirit of the devil himself. All of the glory given to God in the Immemorial Mass of Tradition was wrong was it came from “the church” and not from God, Who desires “simplicity” and “humility.” All of the architecture, art and music of Christendom was “self-centered” and “closed-in-on-itself.”

Jorge Mario Bergoglio thus looks at the glories of Christendom, including the temporal power of the Catholic Church, as erroneous, showing himself to have the spirit of Protestantism, especially that of Calvinism, and Jansenism, which was condemned by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794:

The Suitable Order to Be Observed in Worship

31. The proposition of the synod enunciating that it is fitting, in accordance with the order of divine services and ancient custom, that there be only one altar in each temple, and therefore, that it is pleased to restore that custom,—rash, injurious to the very ancient pious custom flourishing and approved for these many centuries in the Church, especially in the Latin Church.

32. Likewise, the prescription forbidding cases of sacred relics or flowers being placed on the altar,— rash, injurious to the pious and approved custom of the Church.

33. The proposition of the synod by which it shows itself eager to remove the cause through which, in part, there has been induced a forgetfulness of the principles relating to the order of the liturgy, "by recalling it (the liturgy) to a greater simplicity of rites, by expressing it in the vernacular language, by uttering it in a loud voice"; as if the present order of the liturgy, received and approved by the Church, had emanated in some part from the forgetfulness of the principles by which it should be regulated,—rash, offensive to pious ears, insulting to the Church, favorable to the charges of heretics against it. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)

Moreover, Pope Pius VI also condemned prophetically Jorge Mario Bergoglio's rejection of saying a prescribed number of prayers that the conciliar "pontiff" has mocked as "Pelagianism" when it is pure and simple Catholicism:

The doctrine which notes as universally superstitious "any efficacy which is placed in a fixed number of prayers and of pious salutations"; as if one should consider as superstitious the efficacy which is derived not from the number viewed in itself, but from the prescript of the Church appointing a certain number of prayers or of external acts for obtaining indulgences, for fulfilling penances and, in general, for the performance of sacred and religious worship in the correct order and due form,—false, rash, scandalous, dangerous, injurious to the piety of the faithful, derogatory to the authority of the Church, erroneous. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1894.)  

The whole Conciliar Enterprise, if a term can be coined that borrows a bit from the language of an anti-sedevacantist writer, has been condemned from beginning to end, and not one little bit of it can come from the Catholic Church, she who is the virginal, immaculate mystical spouse of her Divine Founder and Invisible Head, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Alas, there is really not much more that is left for the lords of conciliarism to "undress" as they have destroyed, whether by means of outright denial or by the methods outlined by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei or by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, and The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910, or by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, Catholic doctrine, Catholic worship and Catholic pastoral praxis to such an extent that most Catholics have absolutely no authentic sensus Catholicus left by which they can recognize and reject the errors of the day as coming from figures of Antichrist himself.

Yet it is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio told the pro-abortion, pro-perversity stronghold of statism and one world governance, the European Parliament, which is a different parliamentary body than the Council of Euorpe, that, contrary to all truth, the Catholic Church has committed errors, which he believes have been “purified” by the world, whose “secularity” is not threatened by the Catholic Church:

Taking as a starting point this opening to the transcendent, I would like to reaffirm the centrality of the human person, which otherwise is at the mercy of the whims and the powers of the moment. I consider to be fundamental not only the legacy that Christianity has offered in the past to the social and cultural formation of the continent, but above all the contribution which it desires to offer today, and in the future, to Europe’s growth. This contribution does not represent a threat to the secularity of states or to the independence of the institutions of the European Union, but rather an enrichment. This is clear from the ideals which shaped Europe from the beginning, such as peace, subsidiarity and reciprocal solidarity, and a humanism centred on respect for the dignity of the human person. (Address to the European Union.)

Behold Jorge Mario Bergoglio in his capacity as an historical revisionist.

Most of Europe was in a state of barbarism “at the beginning” while other parts served as homes to paganism of one sort or another. It was Catholicism that transformed Europe, which has returned to its barbaric, pagan ways precisely because its countries have abandoned the Catholic Faith, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.

Pope Pius XII made this point very clear in his first encyclical letter, Summi Pontificatus, October 10, 1939:

The denial of the fundamentals of morality had its origin, in Europe, in the abandonment of that Christian teaching of which the Chair of Peter is the depository and exponent. That teaching had once given spiritual cohesion to a Europe which, educated, ennobled and civilized by the Cross, had reached such a degree of civil progress as to become the teacher of other peoples, of other continents. But, cut off from the infallible teaching authority of the Church, not a few separated brethren have gone so far as to overthrow the central dogma of Christianity, the Divinity of the Savior, and have hastened thereby the progress of spiritual decay.

The Holy Gospel narrates that when Jesus was crucified "there was darkness over the whole earth" (Matthew xxvii. 45); a terrifying symbol of what happened and what still happens spiritually wherever incredulity, blind and proud of itself, has succeeded in excluding Christ from modern life, especially from public life, and has undermined faith in God as well as faith in Christ. The consequence is that the moral values by which in other times public and private conduct was gauged have fallen into disuse; and the much vaunted civilization of society, which has made ever more rapid progress, withdrawing man, the family and the State from the beneficent and regenerating effects of the idea of God and the teaching of the Church, has caused to reappear, in regions in which for many centuries shone the splendors of Christian civilization, in a manner ever clearer, ever more distinct, ever more distressing, the signs of a corrupt and corrupting paganism: "There was darkness when they crucified Jesus" (Roman Breviary, Good Friday, Response Five).

Many perhaps, while abandoning the teaching of Christ, were not fully conscious of being led astray by a mirage of glittering phrases, which proclaimed such estrangement as an escape from the slavery in which they were before held; nor did they then foresee the bitter consequences of bartering the truth that sets free, for error which enslaves. They did not realize that, in renouncing the infinitely wise and paternal laws of God, and the unifying and elevating doctrines of Christ's love, they were resigning themselves to the whim of a poor, fickle human wisdom; they spoke of progress, when they were going back; of being raised, when they groveled; of arriving at man's estate, when they stooped to servility. They did not perceive the inability of all human effort to replace the law of Christ by anything equal to it; "they became vain in their thoughts" (Romans i. 21).

With the weakening of faith in God and in Jesus Christ, and the darkening in men's minds of the light of moral principles, there disappeared the indispensable foundation of the stability and quiet of that internal and external, private and public order, which alone can support and safeguard the prosperity of States.

It is true that even when Europe had a cohesion of brotherhood through identical ideals gathered from Christian preaching, she was not free from divisions, convulsions and wars which laid her waste; but perhaps they never felt the intense pessimism of today as to the possibility of settling them, for they had then an effective moral sense of the just and of the unjust, of the lawful and of the unlawful, which, by restraining outbreaks of passion, left the way open to an honorable settlement. In Our days, on the contrary, dissensions come not only from the surge of rebellious passion, but also from a deep spiritual crisis which has overthrown the sound principles of private and public morality. (Pope Pius XII, Summi Pontificatus, October 10, 1939.)

Yes, as has been stated on this site so many times, Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Nothing else.

Each of conciliar “popes” have preached the “dignity of man, “not the glory of God” or the fact that there is only one true means for men to be united: the Catholic Faith. What Jorge Mario Bergoglio said yesterday in Strasbourg, France, it should be noted, was simply yet another manifestation of the conciliar commitment to the principles of The Sillon that were condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:

Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

It was as the Patriarch of Venice in 1896 that Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto, the future Pope Saint Pius X, condemned the Modernist view of the civil state and its penchant for providing cradle-to-grave entitlements, which he termed “welfarism,” that Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes are nothing other than fundamental “human rights”:

In August 1896 in Padua, the second Congress of the Catholic Union for Social Studies took place. We have already seen that this organization had been created seven years before by Professor Giuseppe Toniolo, in the presence of the Bishop of Mantua [Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto]. This time, eight bishops were present and several directors of the Opera del Congressi took part. All the eminent representatives of the Italian Catholic Movement were present (Medolago Pagnuzzi, Alessi and others). Cardinal Sarto's address attracted considerable notice. Faced with "ardent enemies" (unbelief and revolution) "...menacing and trying to destroy the social fabric," the Patriarch of Venice invited the participants to make Jesus Christ the foundation of their work: "the only peace treaty is the Gospel." He warned them against what is now called the "welfare state," the state which provides everything and provides all socialization: "substituting public almsgiving for private almsgiving involves the complete destruction of Christianity and it is a terrible attack on the principle of ownership. Christianity cannot exist without charity, and the difference between charity and justice is that justice may have recourse to laws and even to force, depending on the circumstances, whereas charity can only be imposed by the tribunal of God and of conscience." If public assistance and the redistribution of wealth are institutionalized, "poverty becomes a function, a way of life, a public trade..." (Yves Chiron, Saint Pius X: Restorer of the Church. Translated by Graham Harrison. Angelus Press, 2002, p. 100.)

This is all one really needs to know about Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s view of the world, which he does the bidding of Antichrist in repeating one boilerplate conciliar cliché after another as the world applauds him for his supposed “wisdom.”

Insofar as Jorge’s belief that the Catholic Church has committed errors and has been and continues to be in need of “purification” by the world, suffice to remind readers of this site of the following irrefutable statements of Catholic truth:

As for the rest, We greatly deplore the fact that, where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the advice of the apostle. There you will find someone who is overconfident in seeking the truth outside the Catholic Church, in which it can be found without even a light tarnish of error. Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation of truth. You correctly understand, venerable brothers, that We speak here also of that erroneous philosophical system which was recently brought in and is clearly to be condemned. This system, which comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does not seek truth where it stands in the received and holy apostolic inheritance. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain doctrines not approved by the Church, are adopted. Only the most conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can sustain and support that truth. (Pope Gregory XVI, Singulari Nos, May 25, 1834.)

In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which  It has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

Let, therefore, the separated children draw nigh to the Apostolic See, set up in the City which Peter and Paul, the Princes of the Apostles, consecrated by their blood; to that See, We repeat, which is 'the root and womb whence the Church of God springs,' not with the intention and the hope that 'the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth' will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their errors, but, on the contrary, that they themselves submit to its teaching and government. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

Saint Peter of Alexandria, whose feast is commemorated today, the Feast of Saint Sylvester the Abbot, suffer much from the civil authorities during of Roman Empire.Emperor Diocletian. He suffered more at the hands of the Arians because of his absolute refusal to receive anyone associated with Arius into communion with the Catholic Church:

This Peter succeeded that eminent Saint, Theonas, as Pope of Alexandria, (in the year of our Lord 300,) and the glory of his holiness and teaching hath enlightened not Egypt only, but the whole Church of God. The wondrous patience wherewith he bore the roughness of the times in the persecution under Maximian Galerius caused many greatly to increase in Christian graces. He was the first who cut off Arius, then a Deacon of Alexandria, from the Communion of the faithful, on account of his leaning to the Meletian schism. He was condemned to death by Maximian, and was in prison when there came to him the two Priests Achilles and Alexander to plead for Arius, but Peter told them that Jesus had appeared to him in the night clad in a rent garment, and when he asked what was thereby signified, had said unto him Arius hath torn My vesture, which is the Church. Also, he foretold to them that they should be Popes of Alexandria after him, and strictly commanded them never to receive Arius into Communion, because he knew him to be dead in the sight of God. That this was a true prophecy the event did shortly prove. At length, in the twelfth year of his Popedom, upon the 26th day of November, in the year of salvation 311, his head was cut off, and he went hence to receive the crown of his testimony. (Matins, the Divine Office, November 26.)

Men such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio are as dead in the sight of God as was Arius as he, Bergoglio, does the bidding of Antichrist just as much as Arius.

May we beg Our Lady to protect us from the contagion of conciliarism, keeping ever close to her through her Most Holy Rosary and making sure at all times to wear, if not openly display, her Miraculous Medal as a sign of our complete confidence in her as our sure protection against the maladies of the body and, more importantly, of the soul.

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 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 Sylvester the Abbot, pray for us.

Saint Peter of Alexandria, pray for us.

Saint Catherine Laboure, pray for us.