Pietro Parolin's Andorra Box

As I have been focused on other matters lately and, as a general rule, I do not view other sedevacantist websites in order to maintain my own independence of thought.

However, I decided to access Mr. Mario Derksen’s Novus Ordo Watch two day ago and found a post entitled Andorra Working with Vatican to Decriminalize Abortion, which contained a link to the InfoVaticana website that first reported the story. I thereupon went to the InfoVaticana site to find the report as linked at Novus Ordo Watch:

The Government of Andorra will bring a reform of the Criminal Code to the Consell General in September to decriminalize abortion. And it will do so, according to all indications, with the knowledge—and without public opposition—of the Vatican Secretariat of State. After years of discreet negotiations led by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Rome is preparing to silently witness the fall of one of the last legal systems in Europe that criminally protected the life of the unborn.

The project, according to the reconstruction published by La Veu Lliure, is the result of conversations that began in 2019 between the Andorran Executive and the Holy See. The institutional particularity of the Principality—one of its two heads of State is the Bishop of Urgell, currently Monsignor Josep-Lluís Serrano Pentinat—turned any reform into a directly Vatican matter. Precisely for this reason, what happens in September cannot be presented as an event unrelated to the Church: if the reform goes ahead without the episcopal co-prince or Rome blocking it, the reading will be inevitable.

“Decriminalize is not legalize”: the same old semantic trap

The head of Government, Xavier Espot, insists on distinguishing between decriminalize and legalize: abortion will still not be allowed on Andorran territory and the CASS—the Principality’s Social Security—will not fund abortions abroad. The reform would be limited, they say, to removing criminal consequences for the woman who aborts.

It is exactly the same argumentative scheme with which the liberalization of abortion began in practically all the countries around us. First, it is decriminalized “only for the woman”; then “certain cases” are decriminalized; then it becomes a healthcare service; and finally a protected “right.” Anyone familiar with the legislative history of Spain, France, or Italy knows that the boundary the Andorran Government presents today as impassable is, in reality, the first square on a board whose end is known. The fact that criminal law ceases to protect the unborn is not a technical nuance: it is the State’s renunciation of recognizing that there is a victim.

In fact, during 2025 the Executive itself considered a much more ambitious approach: referral of women to abortion clinics in France or Spain, medical accompaniment from Andorra, and public funding for those found “in situations of vulnerability.” The fact that this design is now shelved does not mean it has disappeared. It means it has been decided to process it in phases.

Parolin, the negotiator

The Andorran interlocutor throughout this process has been Cardinal Pietro Parolin. The Secretary of State received Espot and Minister Ladislau Baró on July 29 at the Vatican, in the latest of a series of meetings dating back years. After that meeting, the Andorran Government confirmed that the reform will reach Parliament in September and thanked the Holy See for “the climate of trust and discretion” maintained.

It is worth pausing on that phrase. A Government preparing to decriminalize abortion publicly thanks the discretion of the Secretariat of State. Parolin’s diplomacy, true to its style, has once again opted for silent compromise rather than testimony: in 2023, during a visit to the Principality, the cardinal recalled that the defense of life is “an inalienable principle” for the Church. Three years later, that inalienable principle appears to have become negotiable, provided the operation is managed without noise.

La Veu Lliure concludes that the Vatican would have accepted, or at least decided not to block, a limited decriminalization. Rome has not denied that interpretation. And in these matters, the silence of the Secretariat of State is rarely accidental.

The silence of the co-prince

Nor has Monsignor Serrano Pentinat, who succeeded Monsignor Joan-Enric Vives at the head of the Diocese of Urgell in May 2025, commented on the terms of the reform. The episcopal co-prince has spoken of “dialogue” and of “accompanying women in difficult situations,” formulas that are as pastorally agreeable as they are legally innocuous. But the Bishop of Urgell is not an observer: he is a head of State. His signature, his silence, or his abstention will have direct consequences on the law. And on his conscience.

The question that no one in Rome seems willing to answer is elementary: can a Catholic bishop, co-prince of a State, allow the promulgation of a law that removes criminal protection for the life of the unborn? The Catechism and the constant magisterium of the Church—from Evangelium vitae onward—leave little room for diplomatic creativity.

Macron presses, Rome yields

While the Holy See negotiated discreetly, the other co-prince pushed without disguise. Emmanuel Macron—the same one who inscribed abortion in the French Constitution—raised the issue again during his visit to Andorra last April, addressing it both with Espot and with Serrano Pentinat. The result is clear: the French president’s pressure advances and Roman resistance retreats.

It is true that, according to La Veu Lliure, the arrival of Leo XIV complicated the conversations and helped reduce the scope of the project compared to the 2025 plans. The Pope has reiterated the defense of human life since the beginning of his pontificate. But consistency will be measured in September: if the project reaches the Consell General and prospers without the Holy See saying a word, the defense of life will once again have remained in the realm of generic statements while diplomacy did the opposite work behind closed doors.

What is at stake

Andorra was, along with Malta and very few other territories, one of the last European strongholds where the legal system fully protected the life of the conceived. That exception was not an anachronism: it was a testimony. If it falls in September, it will not have fallen by defeat, but by a negotiation in which the Church sat at the table to agree on the terms of its own withdrawal.

The final text that reaches the Consell General remains to be seen. But the precedent is already set: when the life of the unborn enters the Vatican diplomatic agenda, the inalienable ends up having a price. And discretion, it seems, is part of the payment. (Andorra prepares for September the decriminalization of abortion after years of talks with the Vatican – INFOVATICANA.)

This is a very well written report that makes all the proper distinctions, including how political entities go from “decriminalization” to “women’s healthcare” to a legal right.”

The importance of this report, however, is that it lays bare once again that there is no aspect of Catholic Faith, Worship, and Morals that is beyond the ability of the conciliar revolutionaries to “finesse” into a de facto acceptance of almost everything that is opposed to Divine Revelation and the Natural Law and thus of the true good of men and their nations as well as, most importantly, the eternal salvation of souls.

As Pope Saint Pius X reminded us in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:

It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to be reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in practice. They ask that the clergy should return to their primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they should admit the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, gladly listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters, would desire the suppression of the celibacy of the clergy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their principles?  (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, No. 38.)

This describes the reality of the counterfeit church of conciliarism perfectly, and the Vatican’s Secretariat of State under conciliar control has taken a wrecking ball to Catholic truth from the time of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII Metz Agreement that permitted Russian Orthodox “observers” to attend the “Second” Vatican Council in exchange for silence about Communism to Jean Villot’s implementation of Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria/Paul VI’s Ostpolitik  by Jean Marie Villot and to the long sellout of  faithful Catholics in Red China that  began under Agostino Casaroli and continued with Angelo Sodan, Tarcisio Bertone, and Pietro Parolin, who has always been willing to put the interests of the “world” above those of Catholic Faith and Morals. See, for example, Bergoglio the Red Surrenders Faithful Catholics to Their Persecutors, Neville Bergoglio's Appeasement of the Chicom Monsters, Doubly Betrayed by Jorge and His False Church, Red China’s Burgeoning Hegemony Over the West and the Conciliar Vatican, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio Would Have Urged Catholics to "Dialogue" with Diocletian.

Pietro Parolin’s long track record of selling out the Holy Faith to the prince of this world is nothing new and it was his fellow revolutionary Vincenzo Paglia’s talk of “understanding” the reasons why Italy was considering enacting an “assisted suicide” bill prompted me to write There Will Come A Day When Vincenzo Paglia Will Argue in Favor of "Accompanying" Women Right into the Hands of Baby Butchers on April 28, 2023.

Here are some excepts from There Will Come A Day When Vincenzo Paglia Will Argue in Favor of "Accompanying" Women Right into the Hands of Baby Butchers:

VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — The president of the regularly scandalous Pontifical Academy for Life has spoken in favor of assisted suicide as possibly being the “greatest common good concretely possible,” contrary to the Catholic Church’s teaching strenuously condemning the practice.

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia’s remarks were made during a recent television panel as part of the Perugia journalism festival, for a debate on the end of life entitled “The last trip (towards the end of life).”

While he expressed his personal opposition to practicing assisted suicide, Paglia defended it in principle, citing Pope Francis’ assault on Catholic Tradition in doing so. “Personally, I would not practice suicide assistance,” he said “but I understand that legal mediation may be the greatest common good concretely possible under the conditions we find ourselves in.” (Abp. Paglia defends assisted suicide as 'greatest common good possible' for dying people.)

Interjection Number One:

No civil law that permits a direct attack on innocent human life has any credibility in the eyes  of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, as to annihilate oneself, whether by oneself or with the “assistance” of others, is a Mortal Sin in the objective order of things against the Fifth Commandment and an open invitation to do away with human beings who are either ignorant about the theology of redemptive suffering and/or unwilling to embrace whatever crosses Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ sends to them until they die. For a supposed “archbishop” to suggest that laws permitting “assisted suicide” are advancing the common good is to make a mockery of the following words written by Pope Leo XIII in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890, that were quoted on this site just three days ago in "To Resist is a Duty, To Obey a Crime":

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." (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

But in this same matter, touching Christian faith, there are other duties whose exact and religious observance, necessary at all times in the interests of eternal salvation, become more especially so in these our days. Amid such reckless and widespread folly of opinion, it is, as We have said, the office of the Church to undertake the defense of truth and uproot errors from the mind, and this charge has to be at all times sacredly observed by her, seeing that the honor of God and the salvation of men are confided to her keeping. But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: "Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.'' To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: "Have confidence; I have overcome the world." Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.

The chief elements of this duty consist in professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally received, inherent power to drive away error. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

There is no need for a “debate” about “end of life” moral issues and/or legislation as the Fifth Commandment is very clear: “Thou shalt not kill.” Period.

Nothing that we suffer in this passing, mortal vale of tears is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Lord to suffer in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and that caused Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart to be thrust through with the Fourth through Seventh Swords of Sorrow. We must bear the cross until we die, recognizing that death is a punishment for Original Sin and that whatever pain Our Lord sends us to in our last agony is meant to purify us for the soul’s separation from the body and to minimize, if not entirely, eliminate any need for the departing soul to suffering in Purgatory after death.

Back to the first article dealing with Vincenzo Paglia’s apostasy:

From the very outset of his presentation, Paglia undermined the authority of the Catholic Church to pronounce of matters of truth and morals, stating: “First of all, I would like to clarify that the Catholic Church is not that it has a ready-made, prepackaged package of truths, as if it were a dispenser of truth pills.” (Abp. Paglia defends assisted suicide as 'greatest common good possible' for dying people.)

Interjection Number Two:

Yes, the Catholic Church is the sole repository and infallible explicator of Divine Revelation and she infallible and authoritative interpreter and teaching of the Natural Law. No one may dissent from what Holy Mother Church commands, and it is impossible her to command her children to adhere to error:

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

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

For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

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

Supernatural truth belongs entirely to the Catholic Church. The Natural Law belongs wholly to her as its authoritative interpreter and infallible explicator.

Vincenzo Paglia is a heretic, but to his embrace one of condemned error after another we must return:

Theological thought evolves in history,” he said, “in dialogue with the Magisterium and the experience of the people of God (sensus fidei fidelium), in a dynamic of mutual enrichment.”

The Christian “contribution” to public debates, said Paglia, is “made within the different cultures, neither above – as if they possessed an a priori given truth – nor below, as if believers were the bearers of a respectable opinion, but disengaged from history, ‘dogmatic’ indeed, therefore unacceptable.” 

“Between believers and non-believers there is a relationship of mutual learning,” he added. (Abp. Paglia defends assisted suicide as 'greatest common good possible' for dying people.)

Interjection Number Three:

Abject apostasy.

The concept of theological/dogmatic evolutionism is both philosophically absurd and stands as dogmatically condemned. The contention that theological “thought evolves in history” “in dialogue with the Magisterium and the experience of the people of God” is heretical, and was condemned as such by Pope Pius IX and the Council Fathers at the [First] Vatican Council, by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907, Praestantia Scripturae, November 18, 1907, and The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910, as well as by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950. Although I know that longtime readers of this site might not need another reiteration of these documents, I am always cognizant of the fact that there might be some person who is either new to the site or who needs a “refresher” on these quotations below that prove Vincenzo Paglia a consummately bold heretic and a direct tool of the adversary:

For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence, but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.

Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.

The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .

3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.

And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.

But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870.)

Hence it is quite impossible to maintain that they absolutely contain the truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sense in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his relation to the religious sense. But the object of the religious sense, as something contained in the absolute, possesses an infinite variety of aspects, of which now one, now another, may present itself. In like manner he who believes can avail himself of varying conditions. Consequently, the formulas which we call dogma must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. Here we have an immense structure of sophisms which ruin and wreck all religion.

Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and clearly flows from their principles. For among the chief points of their teaching is the following, which they deduce from the principle of vital immanence, namely, that religious formulas if they are to be really religious and not merely intellectual speculations, ought to be living and to live the life of the religious sense. This is not to be understood to mean that these formulas, especially if merely imaginative, were to be invented for the religious sense. Their origin matters nothing, any more than their number or quality. What is necessary is that the religious sense -- with some modification when needful -- should vitally assimilate them. In other words, it is necessary that the primitive formula be accepted and sanctioned by the heart; and similarly the subsequent work from which are brought forth the secondary formulas must proceed under the guidance of the heart.

Hence it comes that these formulas, in order to be living, should be, and should remain, adapted to the faith and to him who believes. Wherefore, if for any reason this adaptation should cease to exist, they lose their first meaning and accordingly need to be changed. In view of the fact that the character and lot of dogmatic formulas are so unstable, it is no wonder that Modernists should regard them so lightly and in such open disrespect, and have no consideration or praise for anything but the religious sense and for the religious life. In this way, with consummate audacity, they criticize the Church, as having strayed from the true path by failing to distinguish between the religious and moral sense of formulas and their surface meaning, and by clinging vainly and tenaciously to meaningless formulas, while religion itself is allowed to go to ruin. "Blind'- they are, and "leaders of the blind" puffed up with the proud name of science, they have reached that pitch of folly at which they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true meaning of religion; in introducing a new system in which "they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other and vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, unapproved by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can base and maintain truth itself." (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Domici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

After mature examination and the most diligent deliberations the Pontifical Biblical Commission has happily given certain decisions of a very useful kind for the proper promotion and direction on safe lines of Biblical studies. But we observe that some persons, unduly prone to opinions and methods tainted by pernicious novelties and excessively devoted to the principle of false liberty, which is really immoderate license and in sacred studies proves itself to be a most insidious and a fruitful source of the worst evils against the purity of the faith, have not received and do not receive these decisions with the proper obedience.

Wherefore we find it necessary to declare and to expressly prescribe, and by this our act we do declare and decree that all are bound in conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Commission relating to doctrine, which have been given in the past and which shall be given in the future, in the same way as to the decrees of the Roman congregations approved by the Pontiff; nor can all those escape the note of disobedience or temerity, and consequently of grave sin, who in speech or writing contradict such decisions, and this besides the scandal they give and the other reasons for which they may be responsible before God for other temerities and errors which generally go with such contradictions.

Moreover, in order to check the daily increasing audacity of many modernists who are endeavoring by all kinds of sophistry and devices to detract from the force and efficacy not only of the decree "Lamentabili sane exitu" (the so-called Syllabus), issued by our order by the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition on July 3 of the present year, but also of our encyclical letters "Pascendi dominici gregis" given on September 8 of this same year, we do by our apostolic authority repeat and confirm both that decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and those encyclical letters of ours, adding the penalty of excommunication against their contradictors, and this we declare and decree that should anybody, which may God forbid, be so rash as to defend any one of the propositions, opinions or teachings condemned in these documents he falls, ipso facto, under the censure contained under the chapter "Docentes" of the constitution "Apostolicae Sedis," which is the first among the excommunications latae sententiae, simply reserved to the Roman Pontiff. This excommunication is to be understood as salvis poenis, which may be incurred by those who have violated in any way the said documents, as propagators and defenders of heresies, when their propositions, opinions and teachings are heretical, as has happened more than once in the case of the adversaries of both these documents, especially when they advocate the errors of the modernists that is, the synthesis of all heresies.

Wherefore we again and most earnestly exhort the ordinaries of the dioceses and the heads of religious congregations to use the utmost vigilance over teachers, and first of all in the seminaries; and should they find any of them imbued with the errors of the modernists and eager for what is new and noxious, or lacking in docility to the prescriptions of the Apostolic See, in whatsoever way published, let them absolutely forbid the teaching office to such; so, too, let them exclude from sacred orders those young men who give the very faintest reason for doubt that they favor condemned doctrines and pernicious novelties. We exhort them also to take diligent care to put an end to those books and other writings, now growing exceedingly numerous, which contain opinions or tendencies of the kind condemned in the encyclical letters and decree above mentioned; let them see to it that these publications are removed from Catholic publishing houses, and especially from the hands of students and the clergy. By doing this they will at the same time be promoting real and solid education, which should always be a subject of the greatest solicitude for those who exercise sacred authority.

All these things we will and order to be sanctioned and established by our apostolic authority, aught to the contrary notwithstanding. (Pope Saint Pius X, Praestantia Scripturae, November 18, 1907.)

I hold with certainty and I sincerely confess that faith is not a blind inclination of religion welling up from the depth of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the inclination of a morally conditioned will, but is the genuine assent of the intellect to a truth that is received from outside by hearing. In this assent, given on the authority of the all-truthful God, we hold to be true what has been said, attested to, and revealed, by the personal God, our creator and Lord.” (Pope Saint Pius X, The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.)

“Some hold that the mysteries of faith are never expressed by truly adequate concepts but only by approximate and ever changeable notions, in which the truth is to some extent expressed, but is necessarily distorted. Wherefore they do not consider it absurd, but altogether necessary, that theology should substitute new concepts in place of the old ones in keeping with the various philosophies which in the course of time it uses as its instruments, so that it should give human expression to divine truths in various ways which are even somewhat opposed, but still equivalent, as they say. […] It is evident from what We have already said, that such efforts not only lead to what they call dogmatic relativism, but that they actually contain it.” (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)

Vincenzo Paglia, it is clear that you have no shame, that you consider yourself above that “no church” that held truth infallibly and declared it with absolute certainty.

It gets worse as Vincenzo Paglia used the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s false teaching on the death penalty as an example of theological evolutionism:

Paglia cited Pope Francis’ well documented attack on the Catholic Church’s teaching on the death penalty as an example of apparent change in the Church’s practice:

Think, for example, of what happened on the issue of the death penalty: because of the change in cultural and social conditions, because of the maturation of reflection on rights, the Pope modified the catechism. Whereas before we did not exclude that there were circumstances for which it could be legitimized, today we no longer consider it permissible, under any circumstances. (Abp. Paglia defends assisted suicide as 'greatest common good possible' for dying people.)

Interjection Number Four:

The right of the civil state to impose the death penalty upon those adjudged guilty of the commission of heinous crimes following the discharge of the due process of law (arrest, indictment, arraignment, trial by a jury of one’s peers, conviction, sentencing, appeals) is simply part of the Natural Law and can no sooner be changed than can the law of gravity. Although the imposition of the death penalty in a particular case can be debate, the fact of its inherent moral liceity is beyond debate. Yet it is that Vincenzo Paglia said that the conciliar sect’s opposition to death penalty can be used as a basis for reexamining legal approaches to euthanasia:

This rationale, said Paglia, should be used when looking at the issue of euthanasia: 

As believers, therefore, we ask the same questions that affect everyone, knowing that we are in a pluralistic democratic society. In this case, about the end of (earthly) life, we find ourselves as everyone before a common question: how is it possible to reach (together) the best way to articulate the good (ethical plane) and the just (legal plane), for each person and for society? (Abp. Paglia defends assisted suicide as 'greatest common good possible' for dying people.)

Interjection Number Five:

The existence of a pluralistic democracy society does not negate the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law or the Natural Law. Quite indeed, Holy Mother Church has a positive obligation to speak out in opposition to all that is repugnant to Faith and Morals and to be absolutely unyielding in her refusal to act in any way other than the line traced out by Silvio Cardinal Antoniano in the latter part of the Sixteenth Century in a perfect expression of Holy Mother Church’s consistent teaching on the illicit nature of that which is repugnant to the peace and happiness of eternity:

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.) 

You see, the problem with Paglia is this: he does not believe that assisted suicide is opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. He believes that civil legislation permitting it is an actual “good” as it can be used to “regulate” the practice of self-annihilation, overlooking the fact that that human beings, whether acting individually or together with others in the institutions of civil governance to contravene the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.

Paglia even went so far as to say that “human freedom” is always relative to others” even though we are only morally free to act in accordance with God’s eternal laws, which are never relative to anything whatsoever;

‘Accompaniment’ could require assisted suicide

Highlighting “human freedom” in decision making as being “always relative (to others),” Paglia stated that “regarding decisions about dying, this does not mean returning to the old medical paternalism, but rather emphasizing an interpretation of relational and responsible autonomy.”

He warned that countries which have allowed assisted suicide demonstrate how the “pool of people” legally allowed to kill themselves “tends to expand.” “Cases of involuntary euthanasia and deep palliative sedation without consent have thus grown,” said Paglia.

However, despite acknowledging the documented results of euthanasia laws, Paglia defended the permissibility of such laws, by appealing to Pope Francis’ theme of “accompaniment.”

In the time when death is approaching, I believe that the main response is that of accompaniment. And the first step to accompaniment is to listen to the questions, often very uncomfortable, that arise at this most delicate stage. 

The question of assisted suicide “is a question with many implications, in which several factors play regarding guilt, shame, pain, control, helplessness,” said the Vatican archbishop. “The interplay of projections between the sick person and the caregiver is very intricate: distinguishing between ‘he suffers too much’ and ‘I suffer too much to see him like this’ is not at all easy, just as it is very demanding to take seriously the demand for a relationship that helps to live with the radical loneliness of dying.” 

As a result of this “accompaniment,” Paglia stated that legal euthanasia could be an option, in order to support people in the “limitation, separation and passage of death.” (Abp. Paglia defends assisted suicide as 'greatest common good possible' for dying people.)

Interjection Number Six:

A Catholic priest is supposed to help souls bear their suffering with courage, gratitude, and love for the honor and glory of the Most Holy Trinity and to make reparation for their own sins. Although it is certainly true that a patient may ask for and receive analgesics to alleviate excruciating pain, it is morally impermissible for a Catholic priest to give any kind of consent to that which robs a person of his consciousness and then his death by the of a series of drugs designed to expedite or, in the case of “assisted suicide,” kills the patient as its directly intended end. The morality of act is determined by its nature and its end and is never morally permissible to undertake any action that directly intends to end an innocent human life. No amount of sentimental pleas from a patient, his family nor any amount of pressure from physicians, nurses or anyone else can make that which is in se impermissible permissible, and, perhaps most importantly, no amount of public support can make that which is evil a matter of the “public good” to be enshrined as part of the civil law.

 Our Lady stands with us in every moment of our lives, and she will stand with us at the end of our lives if we beg for her intercession now as well as to ask her to send us the graces to accept death as a punishment for Original Sin and our particular deaths as the means to expiate the debt that we owe for our forgiven Mortal Sins, our unforgiven Venial Sins, and our attachment to sin and to the things of this world. We need to have Our Lady accompany us now, and at the hour of our death, not subject ourselves to the conciliarists’ falsehood of “accompaniment which is nothing other than being accomplices in moral crimes against the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, and it also vital to remember that Saint Joseph is the Patron of the Dying. His own peaceful surrender to death in the company of His Most Chase Spouse, Our Lady, and His Foster Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, should give comfort to us all and inspire us always to invoke the intercession and patronage of Saint Joseph for a good, happy, and sacramentally provided for death.

Vincenzo Paglia intends to “accompany” human beings in the act of their self-annihilation and thus self as an accessory to the moral crimes of others. Or perhaps it is the case that Vincenzo Paglia believes that the nine ways by which one can an accessory to the sins of others have “evolved” themselves out of existence?

In other words, Vincenzo Paglia believes that Italy’s “assisted suicide” can help to “regulate” an entirely illicit practice so as to prevent “abuses” even though the practice itself is offensive to God, injurious to a just social order, and deadly to the persons involved. This is sort of like saying that there needs to be a law permitted “assisted theft” so that people cannot steal as much as they would want to do if theft was not properly regulated.

The whole “reasoning” is absurd as it is based on a concession that that which is illicit can be licit to pursue given the subjective circumstances in which people find themselves, and the attempt by the “Pontifical” Academy for Life to ”clarify” Paglia’s remarks did nothing but to leave the impression that the Italian law permitting assisted suicide is a legal “mediation” when it is nothing other than another assault on the inviolability of all innocent human life from conception thereafter. (See Appendices B and C, below, for a reminder of how Vincenzo Paglia found "nuance" in the tragic case of Charlie Gard six years ago and a reminder of how, in 2019, he justified the administration of vaccines derived from the stem cells of butchered babies. Paglia is an enemy of moral truth and thus of the souls redeemed by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood.)

Whatever conciliarism is, it is not Catholicism as it is based on a rejection of Holy Mother Church’s authentic magisterial teaching in favor of an “experiential-based” subjectivism that insists upon listening to the “community” rather than insisting upon obedience to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who has spoken to us through the infallible voice of His Holy Church, she who can more contradict herself than He can, God is immutable.

Pietro Parolin is simply following the conciliar blueprint of making “necessary” concessions to pro-abortion civil officials. That the direct, intentional taking of the lives of preborn babies in their mothers’ wombs has become a subject for “negotiation” demonstrates once again that, despite all their rhetoric to the contrary, the conciliar revolutionaries care more for their commitment to “pluralism” and “globalism” than they do the cause of protecting innocent human life from the moment of conception until the moment of death. These wretched men are facilitating to the killing of innocent human beings in the desire to appear “reasonable” to those who committed to the promotion of all manner of sins, including those that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, than it is to demand that the civil state conform its laws to the binding precepts of the Divine and Natural Laws in all that pertain to the good of souls.

Indeed, as we know, the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his lieutenants have waved the white flag of surrender on matters pertaining to unnatural vice and, as a consequence, have fought laws calling for the criminalization of sodomy and have been in the vanguard of "accompanying" and "welcoming" harded sinners who have no intention of reforming their lives. Perhaps even more to the point is that many "bishops" and even a few "cardinals" within the concilair sect believe sodomy is actually morally good and that there is no only no need of exhorting sodomites to reform and convert but that it is a moral necessity to affirm them and to celebrate their "lifestyle choices" with blasphemous and sacrilegious liturgies. 

Pietro Parolin’s “Andorra Box” thus will become the template for further Vatican concessions about abortion and contraception that will wind up reaffirming women who have already killed their children and emboldening others to do with moral impunity. To treat the killing of innocent babies as a subject for negotiation is to make it very difficult for ordinary Catholics who are still attached to the conciliar structures in the mistaken belief that they are “fighting within” the Catholic Church that is, in reality, Holy Mother Church’s counterfeit ape, to try to persuade elected officials to defend innocent preborn children and to restore a legal protection to them that the conciliar Vatican itself is helping to eclipse, if not erase entirely.

We must stand firm on behalf of our Catholic Faith at all times and in all situations as we recall the following words from Pope Pius XII’s Christmas Message to the world’s Catholics on December 24, 1943:

The path of humanity in the present confusion of ideas has been a path without God, indeed against God; without Christ, indeed against Christ. With this we do not want or intend to offend the wanderers; they are and remain our brothers.

However, it is appropriate that Christianity also considers that part of the responsibility, which falls to her in today's trials. Or haven't many Christians also made concessions to those false ideas and directions of life, so often disapproved by the magisterium of the Church?

Every lukewarmness and every rash bargaining with human respect in the profession of faith and its maxims; every pusillanimity and vacillation between good and evil in the practice of the Christian life, in the education of children and in governing the family; any hidden or manifest sin; all of this, and what more could be added, was and is a mournful contribution to the disaster which today is ravaging the world. And who would ever have the right to consider himself innocent of any fault? Reflection on yourselves and your works and the humble acknowledgment of this moral responsibility will make you perceive and feel in the depths of your soul how dutiful and holy a prayer and an action that appeases and implores the mercy of God and help to save the brothers; giving that honor back to God. (Pope Pius XII, Christmas Radio Message to the Peoples of the Whole World, December 24, 1943.)

We must make reparation for our own sins, which have worsened the state of the world-at-large and that of the Church Militant on earth far, far more than we might be willing to understand or to accept, which is why it is necessary for us to offer up all our works, prayers, and sufferings to the Throne of the Most Blessed Trinity by surrendering ourselves freely as the consecrated slaves of the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity made Man, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

We may not live long enough to see a happy resolution to the problems that afflict the world because of the sins of men who are either contemptuous of the laws of God or reject them outright. However, it is our duty to pray ceaselessly for the conversion of all men to the true Faith and to exhort them according to time and circumstances of our dealings with others to develop a profound love for Our Lady, the Queen of the Most Holy Rosary, and a total consecration to her Divine Son through her Immaculate Heart.

Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary is the key to getting us out of the mess that the world is in now, something that Pope Pius XII noted in Ingruentiam Mallorum, September 15, 1951:

We do not hesitate to affirm again publicly that We put great confidence in the Holy Rosary for the healing of evils which afflict our times. Not with force, not with arms, not with human power, but with Divine help obtained through the means of this prayer, strong like David with his sling, the Church undaunted shall be able to confront the infernal enemy, repeating to him the words of the young shepherd: “Thou comest to me with a sword, and a spear, and with a shield; but I come to thee in the name of the Lord of Hosts, the God of armies . . . and all this assembly shall know that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear, for this is his battle, and he will deliver you into our hands” (I Kings 17, 45-47)

16. For this reason, We earnestly desire, Venerable Brethren, that all the faithful, following your example and your exhortation should respond solicitously to Our paternal exhortation, uniting their hearts and their voices with the same ardor of charity. If the evils and the assaults of the wicked increase, so likewise must the piety of all good people increase and become ever more vigorous. Let them strive to obtain from our most loving Mother, especially through this form of prayer, that better times may quickly return for the Church and society.

17. May the very powerful Mother of God, moved by the prayers of so many of her sons, obtain from her only Son — let us all beseech her — that those who have miserably wandered from the path of truth and virtue may, with new fervor, find it again; that hatred and rivalry, which are the sources of discord and every kind of mishap, may be put aside, and that a true, just, and genuine peace may shine again upon individuals, families, peoples, and nations. And, finally, may she obtain that, after the rights of the Church have been secured in accord with justice, its beneficent influence may penetrate without obstacle the hearts of men, the social classes, and the avenues of public life so as to join people among themselves in brotherhood and lead them to that prosperity which regulates, preserves, and coordinates the rights and duties of all without harming anyone and which daily makes for greater and greater mutual friendship and collaboration. (Pope Pius XII noted in Ingruentiam Mallorum, September 15, 1951.)

We must trust in Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary and pray that our fidelity will bear good fruit for ourselves and for the whole world as we await the day when the Triumph of her Immaculate Heart will made manifest and as her Divine Son, Christ the King, takes His rightful place among men and their nations once again after a true pope has taken his place on the Throne of Saint Peter.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

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 John Eudes, pray for us.

Appendix

On the Feast of Saint John Eudes

Today, Wednesday, August 19, 2026, is the one hundred ninth anniversary of Our Lady's fourth apparition to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and their cousin Lucia dos Santos. This particular apparition was delayed for six days because the children were being held by the Mayor of Ourem, Portugal, who tried to intimidate them into recanting their testimony about what they had seen and heard on the thirteenth of each of the preceding three months.

As is well known, Jacinta and Francisco Marto and their cousin Lucia dos Santos were spirited away by the atheistic Mayor of Ourem, Portugal Artur de Oliveira Santos, the founding president of the local Masonic lodge, on August 13, 1917, in order to intimidate them into denouncing the apparitions of the "beautiful Lady"in the Cova da Iria in Fatima. The three children were thrown into jail, where they prayed Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary at around noontime on August 13, the time that Our Lady was scheduled to appear to them in the Cova da Iria. The Mayor of Ourem then took the children to his own home, where he threatened to boil them alive in oil. His threats were to no avail. He had to give up when the children preferred to face death rather than to renounce their beautiful Lady, who had shown them a vision of Hell a month before and had asked them to promote devotion to Her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

Artur de Oliveira Santos had the sense to give up when he knew that he could not get anywhere with Jacinta, Francisco and Lucia, whose own parents had their doubts about the Heavenly visions they claimed to have seen in the Cova da Iria. Although Artur Santos released the three children on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15, 1918, he refused to believe in Our Lady of Fatima even after the Miracle of the Sun, working to thwart a procession to the Cova da Iria on May 13, 1920, and involved in the plot that resulted in the roof of the chapel in the Cova being blown off on March 6, 1921 (the date of my own late mother's birth in Kansas City, Missouri), as two bombs near the holm oak tree atop which stood Our Lady during her visits failed to explode.(See The 1921 Bombing of the Shrine of Fatima by the Freemasons.) The Mayor of Ourem, a bitter atheist, hated the Mother of God and wanted to do everything in his power to stop belief in the Fatima Message.

It is no accident, therefore, that Our Lady chose to appear to the three shepherd children on August 19, 1917, after they had been freed as each of the dates she appeared had a connection with the liturgical feast of the day. Specifically, August 19 was the feast of Blessed John Eudes, who would be canonized by Pope Pius XI on May 31, 1925, a date that Pope Pius XII would designate in 1954 for the Feast of the Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Our Lady's delayed apparition to Jacinta, Francisco and Lucia on the feast of Blessed John Eudes, therefore, is highly significant as he helped to propagate devotion to Our Lady's Most Pure Heart, which he taught was inseparable from the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. 

Saint John Eudes, whose feast is celebrated today, Saturday, August 19, 2023, helped to establish formal devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus some thirty years before the revelations that Our Lord gave to Sister Margaret Mary Alacoque. He also promoted devotion to the Holy Heart of Mary. His own priestly heart was such that he stressed the importance of priests to have the very Hearts of Jesus and Mary in the confessional, exhorting sinners to amend their lives, to be sure, but doing so with an understanding of the frailties of fallen human nature and the manner in which Our Lord wants His Mercy to be extended to the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross. Saint John Eudes will help us to trust in the tender Mercies of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary during these times of apostasy and betrayal, especially as we pray the Holy Rosary to which he was so personally devoted.

The readings for Matins in yesterday's Divine Office taught us about the remarkable life of this great apostle of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Most Pure Heart of Mary:

John was born in the year 1601, of pious and respectable parents, at a village commonly known as Ri, in the diocese of Seez. While still a boy, when he was fed with the bread of Angels, he cheerfully made a vow of perpetual chastity. Having been received at the College of Caen, directed by the Fathers of the Society of Jesus, he was conspicuous for a remarkable piety; and, committing himself to the protection of the Virgin Mary, when still a youth he signed with his own blood, the special covenant he had entered into with her. Having completed his courses of letters and of philosophy with great distinction, and having spurned opportunities of marriage which had been arranged for him, he enrolled himself with the Congregation of the Oratory de Bérulle, and was ordained priest at Paris. He was on fire with a marvellous love towards his neighbour: for he took the most constant pains in caring for both the souls and bodies of those smitten with the Asiatic plague, in many different places. He was made Rector of the Oratorian house at Caen, but since he had been thinking for a long time of educating suitable young men for the ministry of the Church, earnestly asking for the divine assistance, with a brave spirit he most regretfully departed from the associates with whom he had lived for twenty years.

Accordingly, associating five priests with himself, in the year 1643, on the feastday of the Annunciation of the blessed Virgin Mary, he founded a Congregation of Priests, to whom he gave the most holy names of Jesus and Mary, and opened the first seminary at Caen; and a great many others followed immediately in Normandy and Brittany, also founded by him. For the recalling of sinful women to a Christian life, he founded the Order of Our Lady of Charity; of which most noble tree, the Congregation of the Good Shepherd of Angers is a branch. Furthermore, he founded the Society of the Admirable Heart of the Mother of God, and other charitable institutions. He was the author of many excellent treatises, and laboured as an Apostolic Missionary to the very end of his life, preaching the Gospel in very many villages, towns, and cities, and even in the royal court.

His matchless zeal was very conspicuous in promoting the salutary devotion towards the most sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, whose liturgical worship he was the first of all to devise, although not without some divine inspiration. He is therefore held to be the father, the teacher, and the apostle of that worship. Courageously withstanding the doctrines of the Jansenists, he preserved unalterable obedience towards the Chair of Peter, and he constantly prayed to God, both for his enemies as well as for his brethren. Broken by so many labours, rather than by years, desiring to be freed and to be with Christ, on the 19th day of August, 1680, frequently repeating the sweet names of Jesus and Mary, he died in peace. As he became illustrious by many miracles, Pope Pius X added him to the list of the Blessed, and as he still shone forth with new signs and wonders, Pope Pius XI, in the holy year and on the day of Pentecost, placed him among the Saints, and extended his Office and Mass to the universal Church. (Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint John Eudes.)

Perhaps we can, in honor of Saint John Eudes and his deep connection to Our Lady, recite this salutation of his to Our Lady, who is meant to reign as the Queen of all men and all nations here on earth:

Hail Mary! Daughter of God the Father.

Hail Mary! Mother of God the Son.

Hail Mary! Spouse of God the Holy Ghost.

Hail Mary! Temple of the Most Blessed Trinity.

Hail Mary! Pure Lily of the Effulgent Trinity. God.

Hail Mary!! Celestial Rose of the ineffable Love of God.

Hail Mary! Virgin pure and humble, of whom the King of Heaven willed to be born and with thy milk to be nourished.

Hail Mary! Virgin of Virgins.

Hail Mary! Queen of Martyrs, whose soul a sword transfixed.

Hail Mary! Lady most blessed: Unto whom all power in Heaven and earth is given.

Hail Mary! My Queen and my Mother! My Life, my sweetness and my Hope.

Hail Mary! Mother most Amiable.

Hail Mary! Mother most Admirable.

Hail Mary! Mother of Divine Love.

Hail Mary! IMMACULATE! Conceived without sin!

Hail Mary Full of Grace. The Lord is with Thee! Blessed art Thou amongst Women and Blessed is the Fruit of Thy Womb, Jesus!

Blessed be thy Spouse, St. Joseph.

Blessed be thy Father, St. Joachim.

Blessed be thy Mother, St. Anne.

Blessed be thy Guardian, St. John.

Blessed be thy Holy Angel, St. Gabriel.

Glory be to God the Father, who chose thee.

Glory be to God the Son, who loved thee.

Glory be to God the Holy Ghost, who espoused thee.

O Glorious Virgin Mary, may all men love and praise thee.

Holy Mary, Mother of God! Pray for us and bless us, now, and at death in the Name of Jesus, thy Divine Son.