Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
         January 25, 2010

Not Pro-Abortion?

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Some Catholics of the “leftist” or statist bent of naturalism who are attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of concilairism like to contend that the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is not “pro-abortion.” Gian Maria Vian, the editor of L'Osservatore Romano, expressed this view several times last year:

You were quoted as saying, “It is my clear conviction:  Obama is not a pro-abortion president.” On what basis do you hold this conviction?

Gian Maria Vian: I made that statement in an interview to an Italian journalist of “Il Riformista” who called me on the day the President was at Notre Dame for the controversial ceremony of the conferring of the law degree honoris causa. I was in Barcelona; I gave the interview over the phone and based my observation primarily on the speech President Obama gave on that occasion. A speech which demonstrated openness. In this sense, I said that he didn’t seem a pro-abortion. president.

What do you mean?

Vian: “He considered abortion, at least in his speech at Notre Dame, as something to prevent and above all, he said, we must proceed in the attempt to widen the consensus as much as possible because he realizes that it is a very delicate issue. Of course, Senator Obama made decisions that certainly cannot be defined as pro-life, to use the American term. He was rather pro-choice. Yet I believe that the Senator’s activity prior to his presidential election is one thing, and the political line he is following as President of the United States is another.

“We have noticed that his entire program prior to his election was more radical than it is revealing itself to be now that he is president. So this is what I meant when I said he didn’t sound like a pro-abortion president. Besides, he stated that the Freedom of Choice Act is no longer a top priority of the Administration.

“Naturally, it is also a sort of wishful thinking. Let’s hope that my conviction is confirmed by the politic”al actions of the administration. This is basically the same attitude of watching, waiting and hope of the Catholic bishops of the United States.” (Under the Roman Sun - Latest Newsflash - Inside the Vatican Magazine.)

Such a view is, of course, absolutely delusional, although it is a little histrionic to assert that Barack Hussein Obama is the most pro-abortion President in the history of this country as he ranks up with former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, whose administration advanced the “Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances” Act (F.A.C.E.) and authorized the testing and then the marketing of the human pesticide, RU-486, as pro-aborts were appointed at all levels of the Federal judiciary. There was nothing “moderate” about the pro-abortion policies of the administration of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and Albert Arnold Gore, Jr.

Mind you, noting the fact of the Clinton-Gore administration's absolute, unwavering commitment to baby-killing under cover of the civil law by chemical and surgical means takes nothing away from the fervent support given baby-killing by the administration of Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. The current administration's support for baby-killing was reaffirmed on Friday, January 22, 2009, the thirty-seventh anniversary of the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, as the White House issued the following statement of Barack Hussein Obama:

“Today we recognize the 37th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which affirms every woman’s fundamental constitutional right to choose whether to have an abortion, as well as each American’s right to privacy from government intrusion. I have, and continue to, support these constitutional rights. 

“I also remain committed to working with people of good will to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant women and families, and strengthen the adoption system. 

“Today and every day, we must strive to ensure that all women have limitless opportunities to fulfill their dreams.” (Statement by the President on the 37th Anniversary of Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade.)

Mister President, the direct, intentional killing of any innocent human being from the first moment of conception through all subsequent stages until natural death is prohibited by the binding precepts of the Fifth Commandment, which admits of no exceptions whatsoever.

Mister President, no human being has any moral right to “choose” to commit an act contrary to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.

Mister President, the civil law may never licitly sanction actions contrary to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law. Pope Leo XIII made this very clear in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890:

But, if the laws of the State are manifestly at variance with the divine law, containing enactments hurtful to the Church, or conveying injunctions adverse to the duties imposed by religion, or if they violate in the person of the supreme Pontiff the authority of Jesus Christ, then, truly, to resist becomes a positive duty, to obey, a crime; a crime, moreover, combined with misdemeanor against the State itself, inasmuch as every offense leveled against religion is also a sin against the State. Here anew it becomes evident how unjust is the reproach of sedition; for the obedience due to rulers and legislators is not refused, but there is a deviation from their will in those precepts only which they have no power to enjoin. Commands that are issued adversely to the honor due to God, and hence are beyond the scope of justice, must be looked upon as anything rather than laws. You are fully aware, venerable brothers, that this is the very contention of the Apostle St. Paul, who, in writing to Titus, after reminding Christians that they are ‘to be subject to princes and powers, and to obey at a word,’ at once adds: ‘And to be ready to every good work.’ Thereby he openly declares that, if laws of men contain injunctions contrary to the eternal law of God, it is right not to obey them. In like manner, the Prince of the Apostles gave this courageous and sublime answer to those who would have deprived him of the liberty of preaching the Gospel: ‘If it be just in the sight of God to hear you rather than God, judge ye, for we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard."

Mister President, it is impossible for anyone to claim to pursue the common temporal good when he promotes policies contrary to the precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural and thus contrary to the good of souls:

The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

Mister President, no one can say that he is a disciple of the Redeemer of Man, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, while promoting the very thing, sin, that caused Him to suffer unspeakable horrors in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and that caused Seven Swords of Sorrow to be thrust through and through the Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother.

Mister President, no one can claim to be a friend of social order domestically or peace internationally if he promotes under cover of the civil law and throughout the quarters of popular culture that which caused the God-Man to suffer, that which wounds the souls He redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross. While it is one thing to sin and to be sorry as one seeks out the Mercy of God in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance, it is another to persist in personal sin unrepentantly, worse yet to promote it under cover of the civil law and in the midst of popular culture.

Mister President, contrary to what you contended on May 17, 2009, at the University of Notre Dame du Lac in Notre Dame Indiana, there is no “common ground” to be found between those who support baby-killing under cover of the civil law and those who are unalterably opposed to such killing:

“After I read the doctor's letter, I wrote back to him and thanked him. I didn't change my position, but I did tell my staff to change the words on my website. And I said a prayer that night that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me. Because when we do that - when we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think like we do or believe what we do - that's when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.

“That's when we begin to say, "Maybe we won't agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions.

“So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women.

“Understand - I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.”(Text of Obama Speech at the University of Notre Dame.)

There is no "common ground" between truth and error, between good and evil. The precepts of the Fifth Commandment make it clear that it is never permissible to directly intend to kill an innocent human being as the first end of a moral act.

An expectant mother has no "decision" to make when she discovers that she is carrying a child in her womb. She has a baby to nurture unto birth and then to bring to the Baptismal font to be made a spiritual child by adoption of the Most Blessed Trinity, Whose very inner life is flooded into that baby's soul as the Original Sin and that soul's captivity to the devil is flooded out of it. There is no "decision" to be made. There is no "choice" to be made. There is God's Holy Will to fulfill with love and with perfection, made possible by the supernatural helps won for us by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into human hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of all Graces.

Although I have written (and taught) this repeatedly throughout the course of my professional life as a college professor and speaker and writer, let me reiterate this simple truth once again: Every abortion in an attack mystically on the preborn Baby Jesus in the person of an innocent preborn baby in his mother's womb. No one--and I mean no one--can say that he "loves" Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and support as a matter of public law and/or participate in actively the act of dismembering  or burning or poisoning Him mystically in the persons of innocent preborn children by chemical or surgical means.

It is that simple. There is "common ground" to be found. There is only God's Law to be obeyed. Period.

The late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen explained that we must be intolerant of error and vice:

"America, it is said, is suffering from intolerance. It is not. It is suffering from tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos. Our country is not nearly so much overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded... In the face of this broadmindedness, what the world needs is intolerance." ("A Plea for Intolerance," 1931). 

Mister President, you won't be able to use hubris to escape from the reality of these words, written by Pope Pius XI in Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930, at the moment of your Particular Judgment if you do not repent of you crimes against God and men and convert to the true Faith before you die, choosing to Baptized, if necessary, which washes away Original Sin and Actual Sins (and all of the temporal punishment due to one's Actual Sins):

“Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven.” (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930.)

Anyone who contends that Barack Hussein Obama is not a dyed-in-the-wool pro-abort is either intellectually dishonest or willfully self-deluded. Barack Hussein Obama is an unreconstructed, unbent, unapologetic supporter of the wanton killing, both by chemical and surgical means, of innocent children in their mothers' wombs under cover of the civil law. While we pray for his conversion to the true Faith before he dies, we must recognize him as an enemy of authentic social order, which is premised upon a due subordination of all men, whether acting individually or collectively in the institutions of civil governance, to the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church.

Barack Hussein Obama commemorated the thirty-seventh anniversary of the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton by expressing his support for these decisions. He did not even acknowledge the thousands of Americans who had made many sacrifices to travel to Washington, District of Columbia, to mourn over those decisions of the Supreme Court, in effect aborting those people as though they do not exist and that their voices have no right to be heard. As much as it is my personal belief that those who speak at the rally prior to the March for Life are clueless about First and Last Things and are willfully ignorant of the truth that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order, repeating over and over again the same naturalistic and/or conciliarist doublespeak that they have been mouthing for decades, it is nevertheless an appalling lack of honesty to refuse to acknowledge the presence of over 200,000 Americans at the March for Life.

Caesar Obamus was not the only one who refused to acknowledge the presence of so many Americans at the March for Life three days ago. The secular media once again ignored, at least for the most part, the March for Life, refusing to carry any stories about the event. Those few stories that were published made it appear as though supporters and opponents of baby-killing were in the nation's capital in equal numbers on Friday, January 22, 2010. Then again, as I noted in a column in 2002 (four years before I became a sedevacantist), this is nothing new:

"Without any censorship in the West, fashionable trends of thought are fastidiously separated from those that are not fashionable, and the latter, without ever being forbidden, have little chance of finding their way into periodicals or books or being heard in colleges. Your scholars are free in the legal sense, but they are hemmed in by the idols of the prevailing fad. There is no open violence as in the East; however, a selection dictated by fashion and the need to accommodate mass standards frequently prevents the most independent-minded persons from contributing to public life and gives rise to dangerous herd instincts that block successful development. In America, I have received letters from highly intelligent persons -- maybe a teacher in a faraway small college who could do much for the renewal and salvation of his country, but the country cannot hear him because the media will not provide him with a forum. This gives birth to strong mass prejudices, to a blindness which is perilous in our dynamic era."

These words were spoken by Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn in a commencement address delivered at Harvard University on June 8, 1978. Long before the term "politically correct" had been coined, Solzhenitsyn had noted that Western society is hardly as "free" as it claims to be, that the controlling intellectual and cultural elite censor quite carefully the flow of information to the average citizen, to say nothing of controlling what the average person is supposed to think about the frequently doctored information that is fed to him in newspapers and on television and radio newscasts.

The situation is far more blatant now than it was twenty-four years ago when Solzhenitsyn was scorned by America's intellectual elite for daring to assert that Western civilization suffered from the same basic disease which afflicted Russia in her captivity to the Bolsheviks.

Those who control this nation's news outlets have a vested interest in managing the news in an ideological manner so as to prevent anyone or any event which might reflect unfavorably on the prevailing cultural orthodoxy from being made known to the general public.

Case-in-point: the twenty-ninth annual March for Life, which was held on January 22, 2002, in Washington, D.C. March for Life Education and Defense Fund organizers indicated to the press that more than 100,000 people gathered on the Ellipse before marching up to Capitol Hill to demonstrate their commitment to the restoration of legal protection for the innocent unborn, as well as to ensure the protection of all innocent human life from the first moment of fertilization to the time of natural death. Hundreds of buses carrying thousands of people make their way down to our nation's capital city from points north, south, east, and west of the Potomac River.

Others make their way by air or in their own cars. Scores of elected officials address the crowd gathered on the Ellipse. The president of the United States even addressed the crowd by a telephone hookup with March for Life President Nellie Gray.

This is a major news story, right? No, not in the eyes of the fascists who control the American media. More than has been the case in recent years (which has seen the amount of coverage given to the March for Life shrivel to next-to-nothing), the March for Life was ignored by virtually every major media outlet in the United States. My wife and I searched in vain while driving between lecturing engagements in northern California to find even one reference to the March on CBS.

Radio national news on the hour. Not one. I searched the websites of THE NEW YORK TIMES, the NEW YORK POST, Associated Press, and Fox News Channel to find out some news of what was happening at an event I myself participated in annually until my schedule called for me to be on the West Coast in the month of January. As I do not have access to a television (and could not watch same even if I did have such access because of my travel schedule), I do not know what coverage was given to the March for Life on the broadcast and cable news programs. However, there was evidently very little coverage from what I have been able to discover.

Indeed, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, which is owned and operated by the cult called the Unification Church of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon, even refused to accept a pro-life advertisement sponsored by the American Life League. And although the paper did have an article on the March, it ran one photograph which attempted to depict pro-lifers as "angry" people. It turns out that THE WASHINGTON POST ran a much more complete story than the supposedly more conservative TIMES, as was pointed out to me by several people following the initial draft of this article. However, the nation's newspaper of record, THE NEW YORK TIMES, itself ran only a photograph in its national edition, complete with a caption making it appear as though an equal number of people on "both sides" of the abortion debate had gathered to mark the 29th anniversary of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Roe v. Wade. That was it. A lone photograph with a misleading caption designed to misrepresent and underreport the facts of this year's March for Life. Although my own search of news stories was admittedly cursory, given the exigencies of my schedule, the only newspaper I could find which contained an actual news story about the March was in the SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS.

It is important to frame this news blackout in its proper context. Imagine this scenario: more than 100,000 American citizens journeyed to Washington to protest the treatment of Taliban and al-Qaeda detainees being held at the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba. Busloads of people made their way to Washington for the demonstration.

Senate Majority Leader Thomas Daschle, concerned about this country's human rights image abroad, addressed the crowd by telephone hookup from his office in the Capitol, as did Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The thousands of people who gathered on the Ellipse then marched to Capitol Hill to demand "humane" treatment for the detainees, caught red-handed in their efforts to support terrorism and to kill members of the American armed forces. Does anyone believe that the national news media would not be covering such a story? The cable networks would be providing continuous live coverage of the event. Even the broadcast networks would devote considerable time to the story, perhaps even assigning reporters to travel with the busloads of people as they journeyed to Washington, thus documenting the "sacrifices" made by these concerned citizens. There would be endless coverage on television and radio, to say nothing of column space devoted to it in newspapers.

Not so, obviously, for the March for Life. Ah, some sanctimonious apologists of the fascism of the American Left will say that the March is not news, that the same people gather every year to say the same thing. I guarantee you that a gathering of homosexual and lesbian activists which took place every year would receive complete news coverage. Indeed, the very fact that people make sacrifices to travel to Washington to participate in the March for Life is itself newsworthy, as it demonstrates a degree of commitment to persevere in a cause no matter the political and cultural and legal obstacles which make such dedication all the more noteworthy. Scores of stories could be written about the people who bus in from Kansas and Illinois and Wisconsin and Texas and Missouri, to say nothing of those who must leave around 3:00 a.m. from Massachusetts and Rhode Island and New Hampshire to make it to Washington in time for the March. Other stories could be written and broadcast about the [Novus Ordo service] held at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception the night before the March and about the hundreds of people who spend all night praying before [what I considered to be at the time] the Blessed Sacrament, exposed solemnly in the Crypt Church of the National Shrine. Even the demography of the March, which includes thousands of young people, is a source for dozens of print and television and radio stories.

When all is said and done, however, the national news media in this nation support abortion. They must spin for the abortionists and the feminist organizations and the politicians of both major political parties who support the destruction of innocent children in their mothers wombs. Thus, no effort is going to be made to cover completely and objectively a prayerful, peaceful gathering of American citizens who take a politically incorrect and culturally proscribed position on an issue considered closed by those who constitute Americas secular magisterium. The very people who deny even the possibility of infallibly revealed truths safeguarded by the Church Jesus Christ created upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope, believe they are infallible and that any dissent from their received teaching is not only unnewsworthy, it is demonstrative of bigotry and ignorance and intolerance.

There is a word for this hypocrisy: fascism. Those who fear the truth do not want to report things as they are. They do not want to give anyone an opportunity to make the case against what is considered to be our prevailing cultural orthodoxy. Our news is managed in this country just as much as it is in out-and-out dictatorships, except that the news is managed to the left here quite voluntarily by people who are on a mission to marginalize and demonize anyone and anything which does not conform in lockstep with dogmatic leftist orthodoxy.

Those who participate in the March for Life do not do so for public consumption. The lion's share of those who participate in it are Catholics, men and women who offer up their sacrifices and their nearly invisible and unreported witness to the Father through the Son in Spirit and in Truth. Those who are consecrated to the Mother of God, in whose virginal and immaculate womb the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity deigned to be conceived as a helpless embryo by the Holy Ghost at the Annunciation, give the merit they earn as a result of their witness to her to be used as she sees fit for the honor and glory of God and for the conversion of souls.

Nevertheless, it is so sad to see such courageous witnesses ignored with complete impunity by a news media intent on distorting reality in order to advance its own perverted ends. (The Fascism of the Left.)

It is no different now than it was eight years ago. No different at all, save for the fact that the partly pro-abortion, partly anti-abortion George Walker Bush, who was assiduously out of the nation's capital every January 22 between 2002 and 2007, not even speaking to Nellie Gray via telephone hookup in 2001 and then, finally, addressing two hundred key pro-life organizers at the White House in 2008, has been replaced by the unconditionally pro-abortion Barack Hussein Obama, who was out of town himself until late in the evening on January 22, 2010.

As I noted three days ago in “Thirty-Seven Years of Indifference,” the situation facing us in the world is the result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and institutionalized by the naturalistic forces of Judeo-Masonry. Although it is indeed a scandal that the sacrifices made by the participants in the March for Life are ignored by Caesar Obamus and by the “mainstream secular media,” it is nevertheless true that most of those who gathered in Washington, District of Columbia, three days ago are oblivious to the truth that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Conciliarism is simply an ecclesiastical expression of the anti-Incarnationalism of Modernity, which is why most of the speeches and earnest entreaties made by pro-life individuals three days ago are, when all is said ad done, bereft of real content as they fail to acknowledge and to promote these simple words of Pope Pius XI that were contained in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925:

We firmly hope, however, that the feast of the Kingship of Christ, which in future will be yearly observed, may hasten the return of society to our loving Savior. It would be the duty of Catholics to do all they can to bring about this happy result. Many of these, however, have neither the station in society nor the authority which should belong to those who bear the torch of truth. This state of things may perhaps be attributed to a certain slowness and timidity in good people, who are reluctant to engage in conflict or oppose but a weak resistance; thus the enemies of the Church become bolder in their attacks. But if the faithful were generally to understand that it behooves them ever to fight courageously under the banner of Christ their King, then, fired with apostolic zeal, they would strive to win over to their Lord those hearts that are bitter and estranged from him, and would valiantly defend his rights.

Moreover, the annual and universal celebration of the feast of the Kingship of Christ will draw attention to the evils which anticlericalism has brought upon society in drawing men away from Christ, and will also do much to remedy them. While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights.


Men and their nations need to be converted to to the Catholic Faith. Some would say that this is “impossible.” Those who believe this, however, deny the efficacy of the graces won for us on Calvary by the shedding of Our Lord's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces. Nothing is impossible with God, not even the conversion of the United States of America and everyone in it.

Today, January 25, 2010, is the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle. Saul of Tarsus had persecuted the infant Church with great zeal, believing that he was doing God's Holy Will in doing so. It was after he had presided over the stoning of the Catholic protomartyr, Saint Stephen, that Saul of Tarsus was confronted by the voice of the very One Who he had been persecuting:

“And Saul, as yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, And asked of him letters to Damascus, to the synagogues: that if he found any men and women of this way, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. And as he went on his journey, it came to pass that he drew nigh to Damascus; and suddenly a light from heaven shined round about him. And falling on the ground, he heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? Who said: Who art thou, Lord? And he: I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. It is hard for thee to kick against the goad.” (Acts 9: 1-5.)

We should not doubt the simple Catholic truth that God can effect the conversion of anyone and of any nation miraculously. Remember, the apparition of Our Lady to Juan Diego on Tepeyac Hill in 1531 effected the conversion of over nine million indigenous Americans. We know that miraculous conversions will take place once a true pope consecrates Russia to Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart with all of the world's bishops in fulfillment of Our Lady's Fatima Message. Every Rosary we pray helps to plant seeds for what most people, including most Catholics, believe is either unnecessary or “impossible,” the conversion of all men and all nations to the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there is no true social order.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

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

See also: A Litany of Saints

© Copyright 2010, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.