On the Feast of Saint Henry the Emperor, July 15, 2025

The Providence of God unfolds itself constantly in our lives. Events that occurred years ago can be seen in light of the deepening of our understanding of the Holy Faith over the course of time. A decision, for example, to adopt a particular saint as one's patron for the reception of the Sacrament of Confirmation might contain within itself a significance that a young Catholic may only come to appreciate with the passage of time.

Well, such is the case with the saint who is honored today, Saint Henry the Emperor, whom I chose to be my patron for the reception of the Sacrament of Confirmation at the hands of the late Bishop Walter P. Kellenberg in Saint Aloysius Church in Great Neck, New York, on March 21, 1961, the Feast of Saint Benedict. 

To be honest, I was attracted at first more to the name than to the saint. My father's name was Albert Henry Martin Droleskey. Taking the name Henry would make my full name, Thomas Albert Henry Droleskey, a variation of his. I did read a little bit about the saint, learning that he was a just ruler and an exemplar of Christ the King. However, I did not know what it meant to be an exemplar of Christ the King in political life, thinking that Henry was a Catholic who simply lived a good life.

Saint Henry the Emperor, though, knew in the Providence of God that he had some work to do with a boy who was growing up in a household where his parents talked about politics almost all of the time and never (and I do mean never) talked about the lives of the saints. Saint Henry had to pray very hard that a boy growing up in a fairly secular home environment might come to see in him, Saint Henry, the very embodiment of the spirit of Christendom that was specifically rejected by the false, naturalistic, anti-Incarnational and semi-Pelagian spirit of Modernity, especially in the modern state, including the United States of America. Indeed. It took over twenty-six years after my Confirmation for me to begin the process of reassessing my uncritical acceptance of the founding principles of the United States as being perfectly compatible with the Faith--or at least not hostile to the practice of the Faith in the midst of a pluralistic society.

It was the writings of Pope Leo XIII that led me back to examine the great saints of Christendom who had served as civil rulers. I had already become familiarized with Saint Louis IX, King of France, as a result of having read  what is called the "Liturgy of the Hours" in my Novus Ordo days in the early 1980s. However, it was Pope Leo who led me through his encyclical letters to retrace the origins of Christendom, forcing me to realize that saints like Louis IX and today's saint, Henry, are the models for all civil rule for all time.

Henry, Louis, Casimir, Ferdinand of Leon and Castille, Edward the Confessor, and Canute of Denmark, among many others, understood that they had to rule in place of Christ the King, seeking to administer justice according to the Mind of the Divine Redeemer as He deposited It in Holy Mother Church and to foster those conditions that would make it more possible for their subjects to sanctify and to thus save their souls in the kingdoms they governed. They also knew that if they proposed to do things--or indeed had actually done things--contrary to the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law that the Church, either in the person of the Supreme Pontiff or the local bishop, could interpose herself as a last resort, following the exhausting of her Indirect Power of preaching and teaching and exhortation, to prevent an action contrary to the good of souls from being taken before the fact or to impose a penalty ex post facto.

Saint Henry, in particular, was a ruler who was concerned principally about the salvation of his own immortal soul, understanding that he could lose his soul for all eternity if he was in any way unjust to his subjects or forgetful about their temporal and their eternal welfare. He knew that he could never do evil so that good might come out of it. There was not a trace of Machiavellianism in this holy man, who desired at all times only to do the will of God. Saint Henry, for example, knew that that it was illicit and immoral for him to attempt to claim that he had the power as a civil ruler to abrogate the law of God in order to advance politically expedient ends. He knew that there was no compromise with evil, no such thing as "the lesser of two evils." Truth was truth. Right was right. The pursuit of personal holiness and a concomitant indifference towards personal sin were incompatible in any human being--and bound to result in conflict, chaos and disorder in a nation. Saint Henry knew that the just ruler was a man of prayer, penance, mortification and holy detachment from the things, people and places of this passing world. He was a true light of Christ the King during the fifty-two years (972-1024) of his exemplary, saintly life.

Saint Henry understood that he had the responsibility to help to foster those conditions within the jurisdictional boundaries of his civil rule (first Bavaria, then Germany, then the entirety of the Holy Roman Empire) that would make it more possible for his subjects to save their souls as Catholics. He knew that the best safeguard, although far from an infallible guarantor, of the common good domestically and of peace internationally was the right ordering of souls in cooperation with Sanctifying Grace. His support for ongoing missionary work of the Church in Central and Eastern Europe at the end of the First Millennium and the beginning of the Second Millennium and was personally responsible for the conversion of Saint Stephen of Hungary.

Father Francis X. Weninger, S.J., who was a native of Austria and was thus very familiar with the importance of Saint Henry the Emperor, wrote the following tribute to the son of the Duke of Bavaria who became the only canonized Holy Roman Emperor:

Among the Roman Emperors there is one whom the Catholic Church mentions, as well in the Martyrology as in holy Mass and the breviary, as a Saint; the Emperor Henry. He was the son of the Duke of Bavaria, and received instruction in the Christian religion, and also in the liberal arts, under St. Wolfgang. This holy teacher inculcated not only piety, but also holiness, as is proved by the Emperor's whole after-life. The early death of his holy tutor was a source of deep grief to the pious youth, and he spent many an hour at his grave, confiding all his cares to him with the confidence of a child. One day, while he was thus praying, sleep overtook him, during which he saw the holy bishop standing before him, telling him to turn his eyes to the wall. On doing so, he saw distinctly the two words "After Six." He awoke, and thinking he should die after six days, he prepared himself piously for his departure from this life. The six days, however, passed, and as he was still alive, he thought that perhaps six weeks had been intended by those words. But these also went by, and in like manner six months and six years, during all of which he lived so piously that he was constantly ready to die. When, however, at the expiration of six years, he was chosen Emperor, he comprehended the import of those two words.

Before he was crowned Emperor, he followed the wishes of his parents and married Cunegunda, daughter of the Palatine Siegfried, with whom, by mutual consent, he lived in perpetual chastity. Having attained the highest dignity that could be conferred upon him, he altered not in the least his pious manner of living. He united with his dignity, a most edifying humility, as he had accepted the imperial crown only with the intention of furthering the honor of God, of protecting and disseminating the true faith, and of laboring for the welfare of his subjects. During his reign of 22 years, he was often in the field, sometimes in one country, sometimes in another; at first against those who aspired to the throne, and then against the persecutors of the Church, or the rebels and enemies of the Empire. He was most miraculously assisted by God and obtained many glorious victories over his enemies. We will give one example as a proof of this.

Several barbarous nations of Sclavonia and other neighboring territories made inroads into some portions of the Empire, doing great damage to the inhabitants and sparing neither churches nor convents, but plundering and laying waste everything in their way. They ravaged the diocese of Merseburg, and the holy emperor, advised by the nobles of the land, marched against them. Girding around his loins the sword of the holy Martyr St. Adrian, he called on the Lord of Hosts to be with him, and then begged his holy patrons, especially the holy Archangel Michael, St. Gregory and St. Adrian to intercede for him. He further promised to St. Lawrence, the patron of the See of Merseburg, to renew the church that had been dedicated to him, and which had been destroyed by the idolatrous people, if he would obtain from God the grace to vanquish them. His whole army was prepared for the battle, by receiving the Holy Communion, and when the morning broke, the Emperor beheld the barbarians marching against him in immense masses. Having again called on God for aid, he encouraged his soldiers to fight bravely against the enemies of the country and religion. When the battle began, the holy Emperor perceived those Saints whose aid had been invoked, at the head of his army, strengthening his soldiers and causing such panic among the enemy, that most of them fled and others turned in wild rage against each other. Thus did the Almighty renew the miracle, which, in ancient times, He had wrought for the benefit of His people, and the holy Emperor won a complete victory for which he gave due thanks to heaven and fulfilled the promise made in honor of St. Lawrence.

Valiantly as the holy Emperor marched against the enemies of his land and the Holy Church, on this occasion, he was equally ready, at other times, to spare those who humbled themselves and requested peace. The inhabitants of Troja in Calabria had rebelled against the general of the Emperor, and the latter was obliged to punish them for it, in order to prevent others from following their expample. Hence he besieged Troja with his army. When the inhabitants saw that they could not oppose the imperial power, they sent all the children in a long procession to the Emperor, crying "Lord, have mercy." So touching a cry, accompanied by floods of tears, went to the Emperor's heart, and withdrawing his army, he announced to the people of the city his pardon, with the words, that it would be wrong for him, as a man, to disregard prayers and tears which oftentimes moved even God. Surely a beautiful example of Christian charity, far from all desire to seek revenge on those who gave offence. The same charity actuated the holy Emperor to assist the poor and needy, and to stretch forth his hand to help the oppressed. His love to the Almighty he manifested especially by his zeal to further His honor on all occasions. To this end he erected many magnificent churches and convents, on which he spent large sums of money. There can hardly be named a monarch, who renewed and erected so many churches, endowed so many dioceses, and founded so many convents as this holy Emperor.

He founded the diocese of Bamberg and endowed it most generously. In the city of Bamberg, he built, in honor of the holy Archangel Michael, a church on the site still called Mount-Michael, another dedicated to St. Stephen, and also the magnificent Cathedral. The last was consecrated by the Pope himself, with great solemnity. The same Pope, Benedict VIII., crowned Henry and Cunegunda at Rome, on which occasion he presented the Emperor with a golden ball--the imperial globe--surmounted by the cross. This precious gift, as also the crown placed on his head at Rome, the Emperor, on his return, bestowed on the Church of the monastery at Cluni, to which he paid a pious visit. Notwithstanding his being engaged in frequent wars, which devoured enormous sums of money, he bestowed great treasure on the churches to procure everything that was necessary to ornament them. He wished to see the churches and everything belonging to the divine service magnificent, and kept in proper order, and used to say: "The Lord, to whom these churches are consecrated, is so great, that we ought to do all in our power to worship and proclaim His greatness and majesty. Nothing is laid out uselessly that is given to this end, nay, we never can ornament our churches so much that there will be no room left to do still more." The holy Emperor desired in this respect to imitate the Emperor Constantine the Great, who was celebrated through the whole Christian world, not only for the many grand churches that he erected, but also for the splendid vessels, candelabra, paintings and vestments with which he furnished and ornamented them; for the same reason which actuated King Solomon to gather an almost inconceivable amount of gold and silver for the building of the Temple. "For,'" said he, "we do not erect a dwelling for man, but for God."

Besides these and other works, which the holy Emperor undertook for the welfare of the empire, and the honor of the Holy Church, he did not neglect those exercises of piety which he needed for his own salvation. He had certain hours both of the day and of the night, which he gave to prayer. He undertook nothing without first asking the assistance of the Almighty by prayer. During many bitter persecutions which he had to suffer, even from his own brother, his patience was most remarkable; a word of complaint was never heard to pass his lips. In like manner he bore the most cruel pains occasioned by sickness, until St. Benedict, who visibly appeared to him during his sleep, cured him. He mortified his body with rigorous fasts and other penances. He received frequently, and always with great devotion, the Holy Sacrament, and by this means preserved his chastity until the end of his life.

After so virtuous a life he became sick at the Castle of Grone, not far from Halberstadt, while on a journey. After receiving the Viaticum, he called his holy consort, Cunegunda and her relations around his dying bed, and after once again asking her to forgive him, for having once suspected her of evil deeds, as is related in the life of this holy Empress, on the third day of March, he took her hand and said to her relations, in the presence of many persons: "She was entrusted to me by you, or rather by Christ our Lord, and I give her back to Christ and to you, a pure virgin." Soon after, he expired, in the year 1024, and the 52d of his age. It was the will of God that the holy Emperor should reveal, with his last words, the life of unviolated chastity which he and his consort had led; as until then it had been a secret. His relics were entombed at Bamberg, in the Cathedral erected by him, where they are greatly venerated at the present day. The many miracles, which have taken place at his tomb, induced Pope Eugenius III., to canonize him in the year 1152.

PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS.

The holy Emperor Henry expended large sums in ornamenting the churches and in providing them with splendid vessels and vestments to be used in the sacred service. He could truthfully say with the pious King David: "I have loved, O Lord, the beauty of thy house, and the place where thy glory dwelleth." (Psalm xxv.) Why he did this has been explained, and there can be no doubt, that in doing so, he acted in a holy and praiseworthy manner. What then shall be said of those who employ the abundance of their means, in immoderately adorning their own luxurious dwellings, in gaudy dresses, in maintaining useless animals, or in vain and even sinful amusements? What shall be said of those who, not only contribute nothing to the ornament of a church, but, like the heretics, speak against it, as though it were superfluous, unnecessary or unsuitable? Just as if God had been wrong when He ordained an infinitely more costly adornment for the Temple of Jerusalem, than can be found in our time in any Church of the Christian world! What of those who even try to prevent others from contributing to the decoration of a Church, or to the maintenance of devotion?

What of those who declare invalid all donations, bequests and endowments made to this end, and who say that it would be much better if the money were given to the poor, or used for hospitals? Do they not think and speak like Judas, who murmured against the costly spices with which Mary Magdelene anointed the Saviour? In his estimation this was extravagance, and the spices ought to be sold, and the money given to the poor. He, however, as the Gospel testifies, cared not for the poor, but would himself have had some of the money which the spices would have brought. The same is the case with those of whom I spoke. What is used to embellish the churches is wasted: it ought to be given to the poor: but what is used in gaming, debauchery, luxurious banquets and garments, is not wasted, and ought not to be given to the poor. If great bequests or donations are made to them, it is all valid, and the poor are not thought of; but if the Church is benefited in this manner, it is all wrong, and must be the result of exaggerated piety, or the work of a greedy, crafty priest; then great injustice is done to the heirs; the bequest or donation must be invalid, and the poor are forthwith remembered!

Oh! you hypocrites! Oh! you true followers of Judas! If you are so concerned about the poor, why do you not begin to assist them yourselves, as generously as you are able to do? It is in truth a pity that you did not live under the Old Testament, when the Lord commanded a magnificent Temple to be erected and decorated most sumptuously. I believe you would even then have remarked that it would be much wiser to bestow the money on the poor. And if you had been present when the poor widow put her two mites into the treasury, I believe you would have blamed her, saying, that she would have done much better, by using it for herself or for other poor. But Christ Himself praised the pious widow, as is seen in the Gospel (Mark xii.). Hence, who shall dare to blame her or others who act in a similar manner? There will come a day when it will be made manifest who derived the greatest comfort, joy and benefit from his temporal possessions, he who used them for the maintenance and embellishment of the Church, or he who squandered them frivolously, uselessly, or perhaps sinfully; or he who hoarded them as a miser. A true Christian, who is himself unable to contribute to the maintenance or decoration of the Church, does not prevent others from so doing: he does not speak against such pious gifts, but rejoices in the thought that God is thus honored.

The above does not intimate that the poor should be neglected. We have often in this work, exhorted our readers to be generous to them. We now refer to those only who make a pretext of the poor, to blame the maintenance and decoration of the Church. The instruction of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which He gave on one occasion, is all that is here needed: "These things you ought to have done, and not have left those undone." (Matth. xxiii.)

II. St. Henry prepared himself, first for six days, then six weeks, then six months, and finally, six years for death, as he looked upon the above mentioned words, "After six," as an announcement of his approaching end. He acted rightly; for, when death is concerned, no preparation can be too thorough, as our eternity depends upon it. Have you still to live six years, six months, six weeks, six days? You know not. You are not even assured of six hours; for, the same faith which teaches you that death is certain, teaches you also that the time, manner and place of it are unknown. Can you believe this, and yet defer to prepare yourself for your departure from this world? Of course you promise to yourself that you will live many years to come: but how can you promise yourself what is not at all in your power!

Has the Almighty, who alone is Lord over time, life and death, assured you on this point? Have there not been many deceived who, like yourself, flattered themselves with the hope of a long life? But even should you still live many years, do you suppose that you would regret having prepared yourself for death, by penance and a Christian life, though you were spared to live longer? St. Henry certainly did not regret it. How many thousands suffer in hell, and regret eternally, that deceived by the hope of a long life, they postponed preparing themselves for death. Taken away suddenly in their sins, they have gone to everlasting destruction. Whom, then, will you follow, these unhappy ones, or St. Henry? "Reform your lives, and prepare yourselves early for death, because the end of our days is unknown." This admonition comes to us from St. Augustine. (St. Henry, Emperor.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger also provided us with a wonderful narrative of my own Confirmation patron saint's life and work in behalf of Christ the King:

Henry of Germany, the second king, but the first emperor of that name, was the last crowned representative of that branch of the house of Saxony descended from Henry the Fowler, to which God, in the tenth century, entrusted the mission of restoring the work of Chandelling and Leo III. This noble stock was rendered more glorious in the fowlers of sanctity adorning its branches than in the deep and powerful roots it struck in the German soil by great and long-enduring institutions.

The Holy Spirit, who Charlemagne gave His gifts according as He will, was then calling to the loftiest destinies that land which, more than any other, had witnessed the energy of His divine action in the transformation of nations. Won to Christ by St. Boniface and the continuators of his work, the vast country which extends beyond the Rhine and the Danube had become the bulwark of the West, and for many years had been the scene of devastation and ruin. Far from attempting to subjugate her own rule to the formidable tribes that inhabited it, pagan Rome, at the very zenith of her power, had had no higher ambition than to raise a wall separation between them and the Empire: Christian Rome, more truly mistress of the world, set up in their very midst the seat of the Holy Roman Empire re-established by her Pontiffs. The new Empire was to defend the rights of the common Mother, to protect Christendom from new inroads of barbarians, to win over to the Gospel or else to crush the successive hordes that would come down her frontiers--Hungarians, Slavs, Mongols, Tartars, and Ottomans. Happy had it been for Germany if she had always understood her true glory, if the fidelity of her princes to the Vicar of the Man-God had been equal to her people's faith.

God, on His part, had not closed His hand. To-day's feast shows us the crowning-point of the period of fruitful labour, when the Holy Ghost, having created Germany anew in the waters of the sacred font, would lead her up to the full development of a people's perfect age. The historian, who would know what Providence requires of nations, must study them at such a period of truly creative formation. Indeed, when God creates, whether in the order of nature or of the supernatural vocation of men and societies. He first deposits in His work the principle of that grade of life for which it is destined: it is a precious germ, the development of which, unless thwarted, must lead that being to attain its end; and the knowledge of which, could we observe it before any alteration has taken place, would clearly indicate the divine intention with regard to that being. Now, many times already, since the coming of the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier, we have shown that the principle of life for Christian nations is the holiness of their beginnings: a holiness as manifold as is the Wisdom of God, whose instrument these nations are to be, and as peculiar to each as are their several destinies. This holiness, beginning as it does for the most part from the throne, possesses a social character. The crimes also of princes will but too often bear this same mark, from the very fact of the princes being the representatives of their people before God. Then, too, we have seen how in the name of Mary, who through her divine Maternity is the channel of life to the whole world, a mission has been intrusted to women: the mission of bringing forth to God the families of nations (familiae gentium), which are to the objects of His tenderest love. Whereas the princes, the apparent founders of empires, stand with their mighty deeds in the foreground of history, it is she that, by her secret tears and prayers, give fruitfulness, a loftier aim, and stability to their undertakings.

The Holy Ghost leads many souls to imitate the Mother of God; like Clotilde, Radegond, and Bathildis, who gave the Franks to the Church in troublous times--three chosen souls—Matilda, Adelaide, and Cunigund--and added the aureole of sanctity to the imperial diadem of Germany. Over the chaos of the tenth century, whence Germany was to spring, they shone out like three bright stars, shedding their peaceful light over the Church and the world in that dark night and thus doing more to suppress anarchy than could even the swords of Otho. The eleventh century opened: Hildebrand had not yet arisen, and the angels of the sanctuary were weeping over many a desecrated altar, when the royal succession was brought to a beautiful close by a virginal union, as though, weary of producing heroes for the world, it would now bear fruit for heaven alone. Was such a step against the interests of Germany? No; it drew down the mercy of God upon the country, which, in the midst of universal corruption, could offer Him the perfume of such a holocaust.

Let earth and heaven this day unite in celebrating the man who carried out to the full the designs of Eternal Wisdom at this period of history. In his single person he discovered all the heroism and sanctity of the illustrious race, whose chief glory it is to have been for a century a worthy preparation for so great a man. Great before men, who knew not whether to admire more this bravery or energetic activity which made him seem to be everywhere at once throughout his vast empire, he was ever successful, putting down internal revolts, chastising the insolence of the Greeks in southern Italy, assisting Hungary to rise from barbarism to Christianity, concluding with Robert the Pious a lasting peace between the Empire and the eldest daughter of the Church [France]. But the virgin spouse of the virgin Cunigund was greater still before God who never had a more faithful lieutenant upon earth. God in His Christ was in Henry's eyes the only King; the interest of Christ and the Church, the only principle of his administration; the most perfect service of the Man-God, his highest ambition. He understood how the truest nobility was hidden in the cloister, where chosen souls, fleeing from the universal degradation, were averting the ruin and obtaining the salvation of the world. It was this thought that led him on the morrow of his imperial coronation, to confide to the famous Abbey of Cluny the golden globe representing the world, which he, as a soldier of the vicar of Christ, was commissioned to defend. It was with this desire of imitating those noble souls that he threw himself at the feet of the Abbot of St. Vannes at Verdun, begging admission into his community, and then, constrained by obedience, returned with a heavy heart to resume the burden of government. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Volume XIII, Time After Pentecost: Book IV, pp. 103-106.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B.'s The Liturgical Year provided the account of Saint Henry's life as found in the Roman Breviary:

Henry, surnamed the Pious, Duke of Bavaria, became successively King of Germany and Emperor of the Romans: but not satisfied with a mere temporal principality, he strove to gain an immortal crown, by paying zealous service to the eternal King. As emperor, he devoted himself earnestly to spreading religion, and rebuilt with great magnificence the churches which had been destroyed by the infidels, endowing them generously both with money and lands. He built monasteries and other pious establishments, and increased the income of others; the bishopric of Bamberg, which he had founded out of his family possessions, he made tributary to St. Peter and the Roman Pontiff. When Benedict VIII, who had crowned him emperor, was obliged to seek safety in flight, Henry received him and restored him to his see.

Once when he was suffering from a severe illness in the monastery of Monte Cassino, St. Benedict cured him by a wonderful miracle. He endowed the Roman Church with a most copious grant, undertook in her defence a war against the Greeks, and gained possession of Apulia, which they had held for some time. It was his custom to undertake nothing without prayer, and at times he saw the angel of the Lord, or the holy martyrs, his patrons, fighting for him at the head of his army. Aided thus by the divine protection, he overcame barbarous nations more by prayer than by arms. Hungary was still pagan; but Henry having given his sister in marriage to its King Stephen, the latter was baptized, and thus the whole nation was brought to the faith of Christ. He set the rare example of preserving virginity in the married state, and at his death restored his wife, St. Cunigund, a virgin to her family.

He arranged everything relating to the glory or advantage of the empire with the greatest prudence, and left scattered throughout Gaul, Italy, and Germany, traces of his munificence towards religion. The sweet odour of his heroic virtue spread far and wide, till he was more celebrated for his holiness than for his imperial dignity. At length, his life's work was accomplished, and he was called by our Lord to the rewards of the heavenly kingdom, in the year of salvation 1024. His body was buried in the church of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul at Bamberg. God wished to glorify His servant, and many miracles were worked at his tomb. These being afterwards proved and certified, Eugenius III inscribed his name upon the catalogue of the saints. (The Roman Breviary as quoted in Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Volume XIII, Time After Pentecost: Book IV, pp. 106-108.)

Dom Prosper's prayer for Saint Henry’s feast day, July 15, speaks to us as clearly in the Twenty-first Century as it did when written in the Nineteenth Century:

From thy throne in heaven, cast down a look of pity on the extensive domain of the Holy Empire, which owed so much to thee, and which heresy has for ever dismembered. Put to confusion those principles, unknown to Germany in happier days, which would reconstruct, for the benefit of earthly prosperity, the grandeurs of the past without the cement of the ancient faith. Return, O emperor of glorious days! return and fight for the Church; gather together the remains of Christendom upon the traditional ground of the interests common to all Catholic nations: then will the alliance, which thy able policy concluded, give to the world a security, a peace, a prosperity, which it can never enjoy so long as it remains on such a slippery footing, and exposed to the violence of every hostile agency. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Volume XIII, Time After Pentecost: Book IV, p. 109.)

Saint Henry has much to teach Catholics who participate in civil governance today about their responsibilities, particularly about their obligation to pursue personal holiness and thus to be ready to suffer everything, including electoral defeat, in order to plant seeds for the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King. Saint Henry's exemplary conduct in the service of Christ the King is not something meant only for the history books. His saintly and prudent conduct as a Catholic and as a civil leader is meant to inspire us today. For the graces made available to him in the sacraments during his life a thousand years ago are no less powerful today than they were then. Why do we consider it "unrealistic," therefore, to act and to speak as Catholics without regard to the exigencies of short-term goals in the realm of civil governance and public policy?

Saint Henry has must to teach those Catholics who publish articles about civil governance without ever once referencing the definitive Social Teaching of the Catholic Church, acting as though they were Protestants by relying upon their private interpretations of Sacred Scripture. Some have gone so far as to develop an entire thesis about the Church and State as though Our Lord Himself had not spoken loudly and clearly through the examples of His great exemplars, such as Saint Edward the Confessor and Saint Stephen of Hungary and Saint Louis IX and Saint Henry, to name only a few, and as though He had not spoken infallibly through His true Vicars on the matter.

Thus, the occasion of the Feast of Saint Henry, which occurs this year on the Seventh Sunday after Pentecost, is a good occasion to remind those Catholics who sneer and jeer at those of us who believe it is important to give people access to the infallible papal teaching on the necessity of the civil state's confessionally recognizing the Catholic Church as its official religion that Our Lord indeed has spoken very clearly about the relationship between Church and State, admitting, of course, that each has separate spheres of competency and that Holy Mother Church can reconcile herself to any legitimate form of civil governance as long as she is recognized as the true Church and as that civil government keeps in mind the eternal good of souls as its first priority. We do not have to "reinvent the wheel" concerning the proper relationship of Church and State  We have the examples of the great saints. We have the teaching of the Catholic Church.

First, as is noted in Conversion in Reverse, each civil state has the obligation to accord the Catholic Church the favor and the protection of the laws. Numerous popes have pointed this out, including Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

As a consequence, the State, constituted as it is, is clearly bound to act up to the manifold and weighty duties linking it to God, by the public profession of religion. Nature and reason, which command every individual devoutly to worship God in holiness, because we belong to Him and must return to Him, since from Him we came, bind also the civil community by a like law. For, men living together in society are under the power of God no less than individuals are, and society, no less than individuals, owes gratitude to God who gave it being and maintains it and whose everbounteous goodness enriches it with countless blessings. Since, then, no one is allowed to be remiss in the service due to God, and since the chief duty of all men is to cling to religion in both its teaching and practice-not such religion as they may have a preference for, but the religion which God enjoins, and which certain and most clear marks show to be the only one true religion -- it is a public crime to act as though there were no God. So, too, is it a sin for the State not to have care for religion as a something beyond its scope, or as of no practical benefit; or out of many forms of religion to adopt that one which chimes in with the fancy; for we are bound absolutely to worship God in that way which He has shown to be His will. All who rule, therefore, would hold in honor the holy name of God, and one of their chief duties must be to favor religion, to protect it, to shield it under the credit and sanction of the laws, and neither to organize nor enact any measure that may compromise its safety. This is the bounden duty of rulers to the people over whom they rule. For one and all are we destined by our birth and adoption to enjoy, when this frail and fleeting life is ended, a supreme and final good in heaven, and to the attainment of this every endeavor should be directed. Since, then, upon this depends the full and perfect happiness of mankind, the securing of this end should be of all imaginable interests the most urgent. Hence, civil society, established for the common welfare, should not only safeguard the wellbeing of the community, but have also at heart the interests of its individual members, in such mode as not in any way to hinder, but in every manner to render as easy as may be, the possession of that highest and unchangeable good for which all should seek. Wherefore, for this purpose, care must especially be taken to preserve unharmed and unimpeded the religion whereof the practice is the link connecting man with God. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)

Now, it cannot be difficult to find out which is the true religion, if only it be sought with an earnest and unbiased mind; for proofs are abundant and striking. We have, for example, the fulfillment of prophecies, miracles in great numbers, the rapid spread of the faith in the midst of enemies and in face of overwhelming obstacles, the witness of the martyrs, and the like. From all these it is evident that the only true religion is the one established by Jesus Christ Himself, and which He committed to His Church to protect and to propagate. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.) 

Pope Saint Pius X summarized the entirety of the Social Teaching of the Catholic Church on the civil state so succinctly in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906. I want to take each major passage from the much quoted third paragraph and to explain, if ever so briefly, what they mean:

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error  (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehemeter Nos, February 11, 1906.)

The Protestant and Judeo-Masonic notion that the civil state must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. This is a simple declarative statement. It is either true or it is false. Emanating from the pen of a true pope, who was merely reiterating the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church, we know it to be true. No one--not even someone who thinks, falsely, that he is a "pope" or those who write for prestigious journals--is free to dissent from this teaching. Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II exalted the separation of Church and State. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI dd so repeatedly in his false pontificate. Jorge Mario Bergolgio/Francis has done this on an almost daily basis in the past two years, four months, although it seems as though it has been much longer than that!

Those who embrace any concept of the separation of Church and State show themselves to have defected from the Catholic Faith as they reject the Church's constant teaching that is part of her Ordinary Magisterium and thus protected by the charism of infallibility. It may not be possible to realize the happy union of Church and State at any moment in history. It is still nevertheless important to hold fast to this teaching regardless as to whether it can be realized in the civil realm.

Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him  (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehemeter Nos, February 11, 1906.) 

Man, whether acting individually or together with others in society, has the obligation to worship God. Indeed, the public worship of God is the chief duty of man. Every society in recorded history had some form of pietas, that is, of public, state-sponsored worship, prior to the Constitution of the United States of America and the French Revolution. Even pagan peoples and barbaric tribes had some form of social acts of "worship" that bound them together and was expressed publicly.

As Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has been made Incarnate in Our Lady's Virginal and Immaculate by the power of the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, and has effected His Redemptive Act on the wood of the Holy Cross and instituted the Church that was formed out of the Blood and Water that flowed from His Wounded Side, each man and each state has the obligation to worship Him as He has revealed Himself exclusively through His true Church. God preserves the lives of individual men. He preserves the lives of nations. Both must acknowledge this publicly and worship Him through His one and only true Church. Generic references to "God" and "Faith" are forms of naturalism, be they Masonic or nationalistic (see Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937). The conciliar "popes," including, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, have taught that that some kind of "inter-denominationalism" is good enough in the public sector. They have defected from the CatholicFaith. wrong. Pope Saint Pius X points this out in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.  (Pope Saint Pius, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

Yes, it could be argued the Constitution of the United States of America is its own demigod, having idolaters who venerate its framers and judge the entirety of civil governance solely in accordance with their "wisdom" and "philosophy." A Jewish man said at an educational conference in Maryland in 1987 that he had just been to an "all-night vigil" to "adore" a parchment containing the first seven articles of the Constitution. "Original intent" has replaced the Ten Commandments, as entrusted to and taught by the Catholic Church, and Social Teaching of the Catholic Church as the means of establishing and maintaining social order. Alas, this is delusional. Men need to submit themselves to the Deposit of Faith that Our Lord has given only to the Catholic Church to know order in their own lives and in that of their nations. They need to have belief in, access to and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace in order to scale the heights of sanctity in their own individual lives and thus to contribute to the common temporal good, pursued in light of their own eternal good.

Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)

The separation of Church and State is a negation of the supernatural order in that it convinces people that there are areas of human existence that are not touched by Catholic teaching, that men are free to pursue the common temporal good without regarding First and Last Things, that it is not necessary for men to be confessionally Catholic at all times and in all places. The Catholic Church, however, teaches that the first obligation of the civil state is not the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only. This is, as Pope Saint Pius X explains, only the proximate object of political societies, not that Holy Mother Church is unconcerned about the common temporal good, which she seeks to encourage as best as she can. The first obligation of the civil state is to help to foster those conditions wherein its citizens can best sanctify and thus save their souls as members of the Catholic Church. Upon this rests the entire foundation of the civil state and its ability to advance the common temporal good in light of man's Last End.

The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.) 

God has instituted His own Divine Plan to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church. The civil state must, therefore, be in a harmonious agreement with the Catholic Church on all that pertains to souls. While a decision, for example, to build a particular highway or a bridge is left to the free decision of the civil state and is one in which the Church has no right to interfere, a Catholic is going to recognize that a decision to build a highway or a bridge must reflect an actual need and that it must be designed to be as beautiful as possible, reflecting the beauty of God and of the world He has created, and be as durable as possible, its building completed for the honor and glory of the Blessed Trinity. The things of God pertain even in Caesar's realm insofar as every decision we make must redounded to His greater honor and glory and be in accord with His Holy Truths.

Additionally, there are indeed many areas where the two powers have joint jurisdiction, if you will. The Catholic Church teaches what is contained in the Deposit of Faith. She alone is sole repository of the Divine Positive :aw and the authentic explicator of the Natural Law. She, therefore, has the obligation to remonstrate with civil officials to subordinate civil law and public policy in accord with the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.

To wit, the Catholic Church has the obligation to remind civil officials that they have no right to permit grave evils (such as any assault upon innocent human life, including abortion, whether by chemical or surgical means) to go unpunished. Indeed, the civil state has the obligation to seek to eradicate those conditions that breed sins, particularly blasphemies and heresies, and to impose a fitting punishment upon malefactors convicted after due process, leaving it to the prudence of the civil authorities to determine the punishment that fits the crime and that is, reasonably speaking, in accord with the nature and the circumstances of the act.

A civil legislature (or any other institution of civil governance), for example, has no authority to permit or to be "indifferent" about abortion, whether by surgical or chemical means. The only authority an institution of civil governance has over the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and the Natural Law is to determine what sort of penalties will be imposed upon those who violate them. No institution of civil governance has any authority to consider grave violations of God's laws to be a "civil right" or to passively "permit" them by refusing to apprehend and punish those commit them. The removal of the agreement between Church and State will result in seeds of dispute in which it will become more difficult to see whether the truth lies, engendering great confusion, which is exactly what has happened during the anti-Incarnational, Judeo-Masonic era known as Modernity, of which Modernism as served in recent decades as most important and useful enabler and legitimizer.

Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)  

This is correct. The true Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and to condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Truth is unchanging. It is immutable. One of the proofs of the apostasies of the conciliar "pontiffs," who have put Our Lord through a mystical Crucifixion and Burial, is their rejection of the Catholic Church's condemnation of the separation of Church and State and their embrace of this Protestant and Judeo-Masonic heresy that has wrought so much evil in the world.

The rest of paragraph three in Vehementer Nos contains passages from Pope Leo XIII's Immortale Dei that are quoted frequently in this site, especially Pope Leo's reminder that:

As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)  

This is the immutable teaching of the Catholic Church, exemplified so perfectly by Saint Henry, who lived in a Josephite manner with his wife, Saint Cunigund (also styled as "Cunigund").

Indeed, those seeking to "reinvent the wheel" by ignoring the Social Teaching of the Catholic Church on the civil state as though it did not exist or as though it did not bind one's conscience had better consider these words of Pope Pius XI, contained in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922:

Many believe in or claim that they believe in and hold fast to Catholic doctrine on such questions as social authority, the right of owning private property, on the relations between capital and labor, on the rights of the laboring man, on the relations between Church and State, religion and country, on the relations between the different social classes, on international relations, on the rights of the Holy See and the prerogatives of the Roman Pontiff and the Episcopate, on the social rights of Jesus Christ, Who is the Creator, Redeemer, and Lord not only of individuals but of nations. In spite of these protestations, they speak, write, and, what is more, act as if it were not necessary any longer to follow, or that they did not remain still in full force, the teachings and solemn pronouncements which may be found in so many documents of the Holy See, and particularly in those written by Leo XIII, Pius X, and Benedict XV.

There is a species of moral, legal, and social modernism which We condemn, no less decidedly than We condemn theological modernism. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)  

Additionally, no one can claim that encyclical letters do not bind one's consciences. They do. Pope Pius XII noted this most firmly in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, which condemned the "new theology" that is so near and dear to the heart of the late Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI: 

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

This applies to each of the conciliar "popes" aand to those apologists of the religiously indifferentist state in allegedly "traditional" Catholic circles who are nothing other than Modernists, Americanists, naturalists who embrace of conciliarism's enabling pernicious error of the separation of Church and State that has devastated so many souls and the nations in which they live. No amount of worldly success and respect and reaffirmation by like-minded dissenters from Catholic Social Teaching exempts from adhering to the necessity of working for this goal, enunciated by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique and lived by Saint Henry and Saint Cunigund, among so many others in the Middle Ages:

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo.  (Pope Saint Pius, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.) 

The restoration of the Catholic City is not on the agenda of Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, placing him in complete opposition to the patrimony of the Catholic Church, as expressed so eloquently by Pope Leo XIII in Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892:

Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God  (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)  

You are not going to see that quote in too many "prestigious journals" or in the allocutions of Jorge Mario Beroglgio.  It is, however, the teaching of the Catholic Church that we must follow, not the apostasies of the counterfeit church or conciliarism or the non-existent "wisdom" of the philosophes of the Enlightenment and their contemporary enablers in allegedly Catholic circles.

We need to remind the scions of Modernity in the world and Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism that rulers such as Saint Henry forged the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ with all of their might. They did not speak in the empty and Masonic phrases ("civilization of love," "human solidarity," "the development of peoples") that pass through the lips of antipopes and their curial cardinals and false bishops and are emblazoned in the print media as well. Saint Henry teaches the leaders of the regime of novelty that there can be no true development for men and their nations in this vale of tears unless each man and each nation turns to the true Faith, establishing it as the confessional foundation of both personal and national life, rendering public honor and glory to Christ the King and to Mary our Immaculate Queen.

I have come to realize that I owe Saint Henry a great deal. He might have wondered how long it would take an Americanist to see everything in the world through the eyes of the true Faith and to re-direct his work in the advancement of the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King in the world and the restoration of Tradition within the Church. However, I realize now that Saint Henry took quite seriously a little boy's choice of his name, pulling that boy along despite his many, many sins and refusal to see that the only antidote to the evils of secularism is Catholicism, that there are no political solutions to our problems, that we must be agents of Christ the King and be tenderly devoted to our loving Queen, Our Most Blessed Mother.

One of the concrete ways we can promote the Social Reign of Christ the King right in our own homes is to promote the enthronement of each home, starting with our own, to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Pope Benedict XV (as in "the fifteenth," not the deceased false papal claimant named Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, thank you) approved home enthronement to the Sacred Heart of Jesus (the Immaculate Heart of Mary component of the enthronement developed after Our Lady's Fatima apparitions) in a letter to the founder of this movement, Father Mateo Crawley-Boevey, dated April 27, 1915:

We have read your letter with interest; also the documents that accompanied it. They give proof of the zealous and untiring labors with which you have devoted yourself, for many years, to the work of consecrating families to the Sacred Heart of Jesus in this particular manner: by placing an image or painting of the Sacred Heart in the most prominent place in the home, as on a throne, as a sign that Our Lord reigns visibly in these families.

Already Our Predecessor, Leo XIII, of blessed memory, consecrated the whole human race to the Divine Heart of Jesus, and his encyclical Annum Sacrum upon this subject is well known. Nevertheless, it seems that even after this general consecration, the devotion extending to individual families is not without benefit; on the contrary it is in perfect accordance with the former, and can only contribute greatly to the realization of the pious intentions of that Pontiff of blessed memory.

What concerns every single individual affects Us more deeply, indeed, than what is of general interest. Therefore, We rejoice that your efforts in this regard have brought such abundant fruit. We exhort you to continue zealously in the apostolate you have so successfully begun. At present nothing Is more timely. 

The malicious efforts of the wicked are specially directed against the home, the family circle. Since the family contains the root, the elements of civil society, the enemies realize well that the hoped-for transformation or rather the hoped-for destruction of all human society cannot take place before the ruin of the family is accomplished. Every effort is being made to weaken the firmness and indissolubility of the marriage bond and to prevent our youth from coming under religious influence. Wickedness goes so far as to endanger the very propagation of the human race, and to defile the sanctity of matrimonial life by praising shameful practices for the gratification of lust which frustrate the rights of the laws of nature. 

You do well, therefore, beloved son, to take in hand the welfare of society to awaken and spread above all things a Christian spirit in the home that the love of Jesus Christ may permeate the families, and His love reign there like a queen. By so doing you obey Jesus Christ Himself Who promised to pour out His blessings on those homes where a picture of His Sacred Heart is exposed and venerated.

It is a holy and salutary work to show our most loving Savior this honor and homage; yet, all is not accomplished thereby. Of equal importance it is to know Christ, to take to heart His doctrine. His life, His Passion, His glorification. To follow Him does not consist in being guided by passing religious sentiments which easily touch tender hearts and move to tears but leave vices unchecked. To follow Christ means to grasp Him with a lively and constant faith which at the same time influences heart and mind, and regulates our morals. Indeed, the very reason why Jesus is forgotten by so many, and so little loved by others, is that to some He is almost unknown and by others not known sufficiently.

Continue, then, beloved son, your labors and your apostolate, in order to enkindle the flames of love for the Sacred Heart of Jesus in Catholic families. Above all, let your efforts and labors tend to this ---- it is Our will ---- that to every home where you apply, this love may come as a result of the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and of the truths and laws which He has given us.

In 1913, Our Predecessor, Pius X, of blessed memory, granted special privileges at the request of the bishops of Chile to the families of that country who had consecrated themselves to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. To encourage this universal pious work, We desire all these privileges to be extended to the families of the whole Catholic world who perform this consecration.

As a pledge of Divine favors, and as a mark of Our paternal good will, We impart to you affectionately, beloved son, the Apostolic Blessing. Given at St. Peter's, Rome, April 27, 1915---- Benedict XV, Pope.   

To know the authentic Social Teaching of the Catholic Church and to promote home enthronement to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart are ways to defeat the devil's tools of naturalism (and its Americanist offshoot in the United States of America) in our own homes. We can replicate the spirit of Saint Henry in our homes if not our nations!

Thank you, Saint Henry. Please continue to guide all those who have taken you for their patron so that they may follow your example of holiness and your zeal for converting men and nations to the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. May we honor you by honoring Our Lady in her Most Holy Rosary, which was given to Saint Dominic about one hundred eighty-four years after your death to help fight the forces that seek yet to stamp out all vestiges of the glories of Christendom in the mind of men, no less to make sure that it never sees the light of day again. May we honor you and your saintly wife by making reparation for our sins to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, helping to plant the seeds for the day when your saintly like will be the norm in all governments of the world once again.

Vivat Christus Rex!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now

Our Lady of Mount Carmel, 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 Henry the Emperor, pray for us.

Saint Cunegunda, pray for us.