Memorandum to Donald John Trump: There is Nothing “In Between” About Protecting All Innocent Human Life Without Exception

Having told a reporter for the National Broadcasting Company on Thursday, August 29, 2024, the Feast of the Decollation of Saint John the Baptist and the Commemoration of Saint Sabina, that he was going to vote for an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Florida that would overturn the state’s “heartbeat bill” to prohibit baby-butchery after a baby’s heartbeat is detectable (which, as I have noted, is immoral even without the “life of the mother” exception that is contained therein, because innocent human life is inviolable from the time of conception) before telling a reporter for the London Daily Mail a few hours later that he had not yet made up what passes for his mind about how he was going to vote on the amendment, former President Donald John Trump  stated that he was going to against for the pro-baby-slaughtering amendment because it was radical

Former President Trump called Florida's proposed amendment to allow for unfettered abortion access across all nine months as "radical" in an exclusive interview with Fox News on Friday.

Amendment 4, up for vote in the Sunshine State, would end Florida's 6-week abortion ban by enshrining abortion in the state's constitution.

"No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient's health, as determined by the patient's healthcare provider," reads the ballot initiative.

"You need more time than six weeks. I've disagreed with that right from the early primaries. When I heard about it, I disagreed with it. At the same time, the Democrats are radical because the nine months is just a ridiculous situation," said Trump.

"That way you can do an abortion in the ninth month. And, you know, some of the states, like Minnesota and other states have it where you can actually execute the baby after birth and all of that stuff is unacceptable. So I'll be voting no for that reason," the former president asserted.

Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law in 2023 the Heartbeat Protection Act, which makes abortion after six weeks illegal in Florida.

"…Doing an abortion in the ninth month is unacceptable to anybody. And I think that, we're going to have to do something about that. There's some there's something in between, but the six is too short. It's just too short a period. And the nine months is unacceptable," Trump said today before a campaign rally in Pennsylvania.

Trump previously caused confusion over where he stood on the proposed amendment, as his pro-life stance on the campaign trail has not been absolute.

"I will say this: You have to win elections," Trump shared in a Fox News town hall earlier this year. "Otherwise, you’re going to be back where you were, and you can’t let that ever happen again. You’ve got to win elections." (Donald Trump opposes Florida's amendment 4, which offers unfettered abortion access.)

As the old saying goes, Donald John Trump has seen the light because he probably got a great of heat from various pro-life leaders about the conflicting statements he made yesterday. Some probably even told him that he ran the risk of losing support from at least pro-life voters if he did come out in support of the amendment as he strongly suggested two days ago.

That having been noted, however, the former president still supports so-called "exceptions" to the binding precepts of the Fifth Commandment while stating that those who oppose such "exceptions" are "extremists," a Federal mandate to require insurers to provide coverage for the baby-killing practice of in vitro fertilization that is a violation of the both the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage and of the Natural Law. He also fully supports expanded access to contraceptive pills and devices, most of which are abortifacients, and he has stated that he would not enforce the Comstock Act to prohibit the mailing of abortion pills through the United States Postal Service. That’s pro-life leadership for you—NOT!

There is nothing “moderate” or “reasonable” support one single, solitary killing of an innocent human being after conception no matter the age of the person targeted for execution. The direct, intentional killing of a baby in his first trimester of prenatal life is just as immoral as the killing of baby who is about to be born in his ninth month of prenatal life. The crime is the same no matter the age of the child being killing. No one has any authority from the true God of Divine Revelation to dispense with any innocent human life for any reason at any time, and the victim’s age has nothing at all to do with the immorality of such an act.

A human being is a human being from conception onward. He does not "human" status at viability. He is a human being made in the image and likeness of God at the moment of conception. Why is this so difficult for Donald John Trump to undersand or accept?

The inviolability of innocent human life is non-negotiable.

What more is there left to say?

No, we do not need self-serving lectures from those, such as the forty-fifth president of the United States of America, who do not understand the nature of truth and who believe anything other than their own “insights” are negotiable.

While it is certainly true that leftists are unyielding in their support for the chemical and surgical assassination of innocent babies, it is false to claim that those who oppose all abortions without exceptions are “extremists” as to obey the true God of Divine Revelation and His Laws is no act of “extremism” except to those who do not believe that truth resonates and can change minds.

Moreover, former President Trump's efforts to please "moderate" pro-aborts with the push he has made in the last fourteen months for a more "moderate" position about the surgical execution of babies have failed miserably while his base of support with the pro-life community is now more skeptical of his true positions, if he has any, because of his endless scolding of pro-life "extremists" while stating that mothers need "more time" than six weeks to "decide" whether to kill their unborn child, something that he still believes and professes despite his now stated intention to vote against Florida Proposition Four that would overturn his adopted state's heartbeat bill.

So what if the country is not with us?

So what?

Big deal.

Live by popular sovereignty, die by popular sovereignty.

If the “people” want to protect baby-killing by punishing supposedly pro-life politicians who are not so “pro-life” after all, then they will suffer the consequences of the continuing scourge of violent lawlessness that have made many American cities unlivable. No one is safe when the least among us can be killed with impunity in the sanctuary of his mother’s womb.

Donald John Trump does not read this website, of course.

However, he would do well to consider these words of Pope Pius XII that have been quoted on this site several times before:

Pope Pius XII explained the dangers of the adversary’s plan to make women tools of his revolutionary agenda against the family in an allocution he delivered on April 18, 1952, as His Holiness pointed out the dangers of “situation ethics,” which was, after all, the entire foundation of the dissenting opinion in the case of Thomas E. Dobbs, Mississippi State Health Officer v. Jackson Women’s Organization, June 24, 2022:

The new ethic (adapted to circumstances), say its authors, is eminently “individual.” In this determination of conscience, each individual finds himself in direct relationship with God and decides before Him, without the slightest trace of intervention by any law, any authority, any community, any cult or religion. Here there is simply the “I” of man and the “I” of the personal God, not the God of the law, but of God the Father, with whom man must unite himself in filial love. Viewed thus, the decision of conscience is a personal “risk,” according to one’s own knowledge and evaluation, in all sincerity before God. These two things, right intention and sincere response, are what God considers! He is not concerned with the action. Hence the answer may be to exchange that Catholic faith for other principles, to seek divorce, to interrupt gestation, to refuse obedience to competent authority in the family, the Church, the State, and so forth.

All this would be perfectly fitting for man’s status as one who has come “of age” and, in the Christian order, it would be in harmony with the relation of sonship which, according to the teaching of Christ, makes us pray to God as “Our Father.”

This personal view of things spares man the necessity of having to ask himself, at every instant, whether the decision to be taken corresponds with the paragraphs of the law or to the canons of abstract standards and rules. It preserves man from the hypocrisy of pharisaical fidelity to laws; it preserves him both from pathological scruples as well at from the flippancy or lack of conscience, because it puts the responsibility before God on the Christian personally. Thus speak those who preach the “new morality.”

It is Alien to the Faith and Catholic Principles

8. Stated thus expressly, the new ethic is so foreign to the faith and to Catholic principles that even a child, if he knows his catechism, will be aware of it and will feel it. It is not difficult to recognize how this new moral system derives from existentialism which either prescinds from God or simply denies Him, and, in any case, leaves man to himself. It is possible that present-day conditions may have led men to attempt to transplant this “new morality” into Catholic soil, in order to make the hardships of Christian life more bearable for the faithful. In fact, millions of them are being called upon today, and in an extraordinary degree, to practice firmness, patience, constancy, and the spirit of sacrifice, if they wish to preserve their faith intact. For they suffer the blows of fate, or are placed in surroundings which put within their reach everything which their passionate heart yearns for or desires. Such an attempt can never succeed.

The Fundamental Obligations of the Moral Law

9. It will be asked, how the moral law, which is universal, can be sufficient, and even have binding force, in an individual case, which, in the concrete, is always unique and “happens only once.” It can be sufficient and binding, and it actually is because precisely by reason of its universality, the moral law includes necessarily and “intentionally” all particular cases in which its meaning is verified. In very many cases it does so with such convincing logic that even the conscience of the simple faithful sees immediately, and with full certitude, the decision to be taken.

10. This is especially true of the negative obligations of the moral law, namely those which oblige us not to do something, or to set something else aside. Yet it is not true only of these obligations. The fundamental obligations of the moral law are based on the essence and the nature of man, and on his essential relationships, and thus they have force wherever we find man. The fundamental obligations of the Christian law, in the degree in which they are superior to those of the natural law, are based on the essence of the supernatural order established by the Divine Redeemer. From the essential relationships between man and God, between man and man, between husband and wife, between parents and children; from the essential community relationships found in the family, in the Church, and in the State, it follows, among other things, that hatred of God, blasphemy, idolatry, abandoning the true faith, denial of the faith, perjury, murder, bearing false witness, calumny, adultery and fornication, the abuse of marriage, the solitary sin, stealing and robbery, taking away the necessities of life, depriving workers of their just wage (James 5:4), monopolizing vital foodstuffs and unjustifiably increasing prices, fraudulent bankruptcy, unjust maneuvering in speculation—all this is gravely forbidden by the divine Lawmaker. No examination is necessary. No matter what the situation of the individual may be, there is no other course open to him but to obey.

11. For the rest, against “situation ethics,” We set up three considerations, or maxims. The first: We grant that God wants, first and always, a right intention. But this is not enough. He also wants the good work. A second principle is that it is not permitted to do evil in order that good may result (Rom 3:8). Now this new ethic, perhaps without being aware of it, acts according to the principle that the end justifies the means. A Christian cannot be unaware of the fact that he must sacrifice everything, even his life, in order to save his soul. Of this we are reminded by all the martyrs. Martyrs are very numerous, even in our time. The mother of the Maccabees, along with her sons; Saints Perpetua and Felicitas, notwithstanding their newborn children; Maria Goretti, and thousands of others, men and women, whom the Church venerates—did they, in the face of the “situation” in which they found themselves, uselessly or even mistakenly incur a bloody death? No, certainly not, and in their blood they are the most explicit witnesses to the truth against the “new morality.” (Pope Pius XII, Address “Soyez Les Bienvenues” (1952) – Novus Ordo Watch.)

If there is another danger that threatens the family, not since yesterday, but long ago, which, however, at present, is growing visibly, it can become fatal [to societies], that is, the attack and the disruption of the fruit of conjugal morality.

We have, in recent years, taken every opportunity to expose the one or the other essential point of the moral law, and more recently to indicate it as a whole, not only by refuting the errors that corrupt it, but also showing in a positive sense, the office the importance, the value for the happiness of the spouses, children and all family, for stability and the greater social good from their homes up to the State and the Church itself.

At the heart of this doctrine is that marriage is an institution at the service of life. In close connection with this principle, we, according to the constant teaching of the Church, have illustrated a argument that it is not only one of the essential foundations of conjugal morality, but also of social morality in general: namely, that the direct attack innocent human life, as a means to an end - in this case the order to save another life - is illegal.

Innocent human life, whatever its condition, is always inviolate from the first instance of its existence and it can never be attacked voluntarily. This is a fundamental right of human beings. A fundamental value is the Christian conception of life must be respected as valid for the life still hidden in the womb against direct abortion and against all innocent human life thereafter. There can be no direct murders of a child before, during and after childbirth. As established may be the legal distinction between these different stages of development life born or unborn, according to the moral law, all direct attacks on inviolable human life are serious and illegal.

This principle applies to the child's life, like that of mother's. Never, under any circumstances, has the Church has taught that the life of child must be preferred to that of the mother. It would be wrong to set the issue with this alternative: either the child's life or that of mother. No, nor the mother's life, nor that of her child, can be subjected to an act of direct suppression. For the one side and the other the need can be only one: to make every effort to save the life of both, mother and child (see Pious XI Encycl. Casti Connubii, 31 dec. 1930, Acta Ap. Sedis vol. 22, p.. 562-563).

It is one of the most beautiful and noble aspirations of medicine trying ever new ways to ensure both their lives. What if, despite all the advances of science, still remain, and will remain in the future, a doctor says that the mother is going to die unless here child is killed in violation of God's commandment: Thou shalt not kill!  We must strive until the last moment to help save the child and the mother without attacking either as we bow before the laws of nature and the dispositions of Divine Providence.

But - one may object - the mother's life, especially of a mother of a numerous family, is incomparably greater than a value that of an unborn child. The application of the theory of balance of values to the matter which now occupies us has already found acceptance in legal discussions. The answer to this nagging objection is not difficult. The inviolability of the life of an innocent person does not depend by its greater or lesser value. For over ten years, the Church has formally condemned the killing of the estimated life as "worthless', and who knows the antecedents that provoked such a sad condemnation, those who can ponder the dire consequences that would be reached, if you want to measure the inviolability of innocent life at its value, you must well appreciate the reasons that led to this arrangement.

Besides, who can judge with certainty which of the two lives is actually more valuable? Who knows which path will follow that child and at what heights it can achieve and arrive at during his life? We compare Here are two sizes, one of whom nothing is known. We would like to cite an example in this regard, which may already known to some of you, but that does not lose some of its evocative value.

It dates back to 1905. There lived a young woman of noble family and even more noble senses, but slender and delicate health. As a teenager, she had been sick with a small apical pleurisy, which appeared healed; when, however, after contracting a happy marriage, she felt a new life blossoming within her, she felt ill and soon there was a special physical pain that dismayed that the two skilled health professionals, who watched  her with loving care. That old scar of the pleurisy had been awakened and, in the view of the doctors, there was no time to lose to save this gentle lady from death. The concluded that it was necessary to proceed without delay to an abortion.

Even the groom agreed. The seriousness of the case was very painful. But when the obstetrician attending to the mother announced their resolution to proceed with an abortion, the mother, with firm emphasis, "Thank you for your pitiful tips, but I can not truncate the life of my child! I can not, I can not! I feel already throbbing in my breast, it has the right to live, it comes from God must know God and to love and enjoy it." The husband asked, begged, pleaded, and she remained inflexible, and calmly awaited the event.

The child was born regularly, but immediately after the health of the mother went downhill. The outbreak spread to the lungs and the decay became progressive. Two months later she went to extremes, and she saw her little girl growing very well one who had grown very healthy. The mother looked at her robust baby and saw his sweet smile, and then she quietly died.

Several years later there was in a religious institute a very young sister, totally dedicated to the care and education of children abandoned, and with eyes bent on charges with a tender motherly love. She loved the tiny sick children and as if she had given them life. She was the daughter of the sacrifice, which now with her big heart has spread much love among the children of the destitute. The heroism of the intrepid mother was not in vain! (See Andrea Majocchi. " Between burning scissors," 1940, p.. 21 et seq.). But we ask: Is Perhaps the Christian sense, indeed even purely human, vanished in this point of no longer being able to understand the sublime sacrifice of the mother and the visible action of divine Providence, which made quell'olocausto born such a great result? (Pope Pius XII, Address to Association of Large Families, November 26, 1951; I used Google Translate to translate this address from the Italian as it is found at AAS Documents, p. 855; you will have to scroll down to page 855, which takes some time, to find the address.)

The story of the mother who gave up her life one hundred eighteen years ago now rather than to kill the innocent child in her womb stands as a stark contrast to the utilitarianism displayed by the likes of Donald John Trump, who believes that pro-life citizens must “negotiate” a consensus, Nonsense.

The prayers of the mother who sacrificed her life rather than to authorize the killing of her child made possible her daughter's entry into the religious life. Trump has no capacity to think of such realities. Sadly, neither do many "pro-life" Catholics no matter where they fall across the vast expanse of the ecclesiastical divide in this time of apostasy and betrayal.

Alas, even those Catholics who are pro-life, no matter where they fall across the ecclesiastical divide, do not understand or accept these facts. They are willing to accept "crumbs" from phony pro-life politicians in the false belief that we will "get somewhere" by means of the political process. We will not. Many of these truly good people, a lot of whom have worked their entire lives to defend the inviolability of preborn human life by volunteering at crisis pregnancy centers and by praying Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary in front of abortuaries and by speaking out against this crime that cries out to Heaven for vengeance, are looking for naturalistic solutions to the abortion genocide precisely because they have never been taught by the scions of the counterfeit church of conciliarism that the proximate cause for social problems in our world today is the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King and that we must try to plant the seeds for the restoration of this Social Kingship, starting with the enthronement of our homes to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Pope Pius XI explained the terrible judgement that awaits those in public life who enable the killing of innocent babies in the sanctuaries of their mothers’ wombs:

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.)

While we pray for the conversion of all those who solicit, perform, cooperate in, or support the chemical and/or surgical execution of the innocent preborn, we also have a duty to remind those in public life who enable these executions of the very direct words written by Pope Pius XI about their fate when they stand before the Avenger of innocent blood when they die, and it is indeed apropos to call to mind what Pope Pius IX said on the occasion of the eighteen hundredth anniversary of Nero’s persecutions in 67 A.D.;

The great centennial celebration proceeded. Who would have dared to say, whilst Nero reigned at Rome and Christians were as pariahs, tolerated only in order to afford the spectacle of their tortures to a heathen multitude, that eighteen hundred years from Nero's time, Christianity would flourish and celebrate in that city, which was the scene of its greatest trials, as well as all over the world, its victory and the glorious martyrdom of its apostilic founders! The month of June, 1867, will ever be memorable in the annals of the church. Never had so many bishops assembled in the holy city. Nor were there ever there, at one time, so many priests and pilgrims of all ranks and classes. The duties of the time were commenced early in the month. On the 11th and 12th of June, consistories were held in presence of the bishops, in order to make preparation for the canonization of two hundred and five Japanese Christians -- priests, catechist, laymen, women and children -- put to death in hatred of the Chrisitan faith from 1617 to 1632. On the 26th of February, 1867, the decree of canonization had already been solemnly read in presence of Pius IX, who, on the occasion, went in state to the Roman College. On the 22nd February of the same year, the Holy Father signed decrees bearing on the beautifications of several holy persons, among whom was Clement Maria Hofbauer, a Redemptorist. In an age of unbelief, it was only to be expected that the enquiry should be made why the Pope made so many saints?

In February, 1867, his Holiness replied, on occasion of a visit to the Convent of the Capuchin Friars: "I have been shown," said he, "a pamphlet, entitled 'Why so many Saints?' Had we ever so much need of intercessors in heaven and patterns in this world?" A little later he also said, alluding to the festival at Paris; "Man has not been placed on the earth solely in order to amass  wealth; still less in order to lead a life of pleasure. The world is ignorant of this. It forgets mind, and devotes itself to matter. Neither you nor I are of this world of which I speak. You are come here in good disposition to seek the edification of your souls. I hope therefore, that you will bear away with you a salutary impression. Never forget, my children, that you have a soul, a soul created in the image of God, and which God will judge. Bestow on it more thought and care than on industrial speculations, railways, and all those lesser objects which constitute the good things of this world. I forbid you not to interest yourself in such transient matters. Do so reasonably and moderately. But let me once more beg of you to remember that you have a soul."  (The Rev. Æneas MacDonell Dawson, Pius IX. And His Time, London: Thos. Coffey, Catholic Record Printing House. 1880, pp. 283-284.)

Someone ought to explain to Donald John Trump that he is not infallible and that he has a soul which he will lose for all eternity if he does not convert to the Catholic Faith and then become a defender of her teaching from which no one can dissent legitimately.

On the Feast of Saint Raymond Nonnatus

Today, Saturdy, August 31, 2024, is the Feast  of Saint Raymond Nonnatus, who had his lips pierced and sealed by a fire-branded lock that was put there by the very diabolical ancestors of those who “Father” Farragher had invited to pray to their devils, the Mohammedans, so that he could no longer preach so effectively with Our Lady’s helps to ransom Catholics from their slavery to these bloodthirsty monsters and to effect the conversion of Mohammedans themselves.

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s account of Saint Raymond’s life is a very good way to demonstrate the invioabliity of the seal of the confessional even if a priest has to undergo capture, torture, and even execution:

August closes as it began, with a feast of deliverance; as though that were the divine seal set by Eternal Wisdom upon this month—the month when holy Church makes the works and ways of Divine Wisdom the special object of her contemplation.

Upon the fall of our first parents and their expulsion from Paradise, the Word and Wisdom of God, that is, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, began the great work of our deliverance—that magnificent work of human Redemption which, by an all-gracious, eternal degree of the three Divine Persons, was to be wrought out by the Son of God in our flesh. And as that blessed Savior, in his infinite wisdom, made spontaneous choice of sorrows, of sufferings, and of death on a cross as the best means of our redemption, so has he always allotted to his best loved friends the kind of life which he had deliberately chosen for himself, that is, the way of the Cross. And the nearest and dearest to him were those who were predestined, like his Blessed Mother, the Mater Dolorosa, to have the honor of being most like himself—the Man of Sorrows. Hence the toils and trials of the greatest Saints; hence the great deliverances wrought by them, and their heroic victories over the world and over the spirits of wickedness in the high places.

On the feasts of St. Raymund of Pegnafort and St. Peter Nolasco, we saw something of the origin of the illustrious Order, of which Raymund Nonnatus added such glory. Soon the august foundress herself, Our Lady of Mercy, will come in person to receive the expression of the world’s gratitude for so many benefits. The following Legend recounts the peculiar merits of our Saint of today.

Raymund, surnamed Nonnatus, on account of his having been brought into the world in an unusual manner after the death of his mother, was of a pious and noble family of Portelli in Catalonia. From his very infancy he showed signs of his future holiness; for, despising childish amusements and the attractions of the world, he applied himself to the practice of piety so that all wondered at his virtues, which far surpassed his age. As he grew older he began his studies; but after a short time he returned at his father’s command to live in the country. He frequently visited the chapel of St. Nicholas, built near Portelli, in order to venerate in it a holy image of the Mother of God, which is still more honored by the faithful. There he would pour out his prayers, begging God’s holy Mother to adopt him for her son and to deign to teach him the way of salvation and the science of the saints.

The most benign Virgin heard his prayer, and gave him to understand that it would greatly please her if he entered the Religious Order lately founded by her inspiration, under the name of the Order of “Ransom, or of Mercy for the redemption of captives.” Upon this Raymund at once set out for Barcelona, there to embrace that institute so full of brotherly charity. Thus enrolled in the army of holy religion, he persevered in perpetual virginity, which he had already consecrated to the Blessed Virgin. He excelled also in every other virtue most especially in charity towards those Christians who were living in misery, as slaves of the pagans. He was sent to Africa to redeem them, and freed many from slavery. But when he had exhausted his money, rather than abandon others who were in danger of losing their faith, he gave himself up to the barbarians as a pledge for their ransom. Burning with a most ardent desire for the salvation of souls, he converted several Mahometans to Christ by his preaching. On this account he was thrown into a close prison and after many tortures his lips were pierced through and fastened together with an iron padlock, which cruel martyrdom he endured for a long time.

This and his other noble deeds spread the fame of his sanctity far and near, so that Gregory IX determined to enroll him in the august college of the cardinals of the Holy Roman Church. When raised to that dignity the man of God shrank from all pomp and clung always to religious humility. On his way to Rome, as soon as he reached Cardona, he was attacked by his last illness, and earnestly begged to be strengthened by the Sacraments of the Church. As his illness grew worse and the priest delayed to come, Angels appeared, clothed in the religious habit of his Order, and refreshed him with the saving Viaticum. Having received It he gave thanks to God, and passed to our Lord on the last Sunday of August in the year 1240. Contentions arose concerning the place where he should be buried; his coffin was therefore placed upon a blind mule and by the will of God it was taken to the chapel of St. Nicholas, that it might be buried in that place where he had first begun a more perfect life. A convent of his Order was built in the spot, and there famous for many signs and miracles he is honored by the concourse of all the faithful of Catalonia, who come there to fulfill their vows.

To what a length, O illustrious Saint, didst thou follow the counsel of the Wise man! The bands of Wisdom, says he, are a healthful binding. And, not satisfied with putting thy feet into her fetters and thy neck into her chains, in the joy of thy love thou didst offer thy lips to the dreadful padlock, not mentioned by the son of Sirach. But what a reward is thine, now that this Wisdom of the Father, whose twofold precept of charity thou didst so fully carry out, inebriates thee with the torrent of eternal delights, adorning thy brow with the glory and grace which radiate from her own beauty! We would fain be forever with thee near that throne of light; teach us, then, how to walk in this world by the beautiful ways and peaceable paths of Wisdom. Deliver our souls, if they be still captive in sin; break the chains of our self-love, and give us instead those blessed bands of Wisdom which are humility, abnegation, self-forgetfulness, love of our brethren for God’s sake, love of God for his own sake. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year.)

Imitating the example of Saint Raymond Nonnatus, therefore, may we beg—yes, as in beg!—Our Lady through her Most Holy Rosary as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through her own Immaculate Heart to which this month of August has been dedicated to remain steadfast in defense of the truths of the Holy Faith at all times and following the example of the Bedingfelds in having nothing to do with any false religion, including conciliarism, and thus never to place oneself “una cum” the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of conciliar robber barons. We must also pray to Saint Raymon Nonnatus to beg of Our Lady of Ransom for us so we can be converted from our own sins and tepidity and thus scale the heights of sanctity by relying tenderly upon her maternal patronage at all times.

Vivat Christus Rex.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for now, and at the hour of our death.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us. 

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

Saint Raymond Nonnatus, pray for us.