"The sanctity of human life" by Rep. Mike Pence, Part 2...

"For that one reason among many, the United States will suffer unless there is placed into your government a group that fears the Lord if they cannot love the Lord. They will fear Him and find measures to stop the slaughter of the unborn." - Our Lady of the Roses, April 14, 1984

Rep. Mike Pence presented this address on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives on October 8, 2003:

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise again now for the second time in this chamber to address an issue that, while we passed significant legislation concerning partial-birth abortion recently, truthfully the Congress does very little to speak to what I believe is the defining issue of our time: namely, the questions and debates surrounding the sanctity of human life. So, Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago I initiated on the floor of this Congress what I hope will become a series during my tenure here, a series of conversations between myself and other members of Congress who care deeply about this debate and where we might explore the historical and intellectual and moral foundations of the right to life.

It seems altogether fitting that we do it here, in this Congress and in this place. Because this is not only the House of the people, but it is the place throughout the history of this nation where not only have we come together to debate the urgent needs of the country but also we have come to this place and in this building for over 200 years to discuss those things which are, while not urgent to some, they are important to the fabric of the Nation. In my humble opinion, Mr. Speaker, restoring a fundamental understanding about the sanctity of human life and its central position in the development of notions of justice in Western civilization is without a doubt the most significant issue of our day.

I was inspired by none other than a former member of this body, John Quincy Adams, who, prior to being a 20-year member of Congress was, of course, President of the United States of America. But as he served in the chamber just adjacent to this one, where the Congress met for much of the 19th century, John Quincy Adams was known to be a man about one cause, and that was abolition. In fact, former President and then Congressman John Quincy Adams was a man who came to be known by his detractors as the hell hound of abolition, because congressman and former President John Quincy Adams would come into this place, history records, and week after week through his 20-year career in Congress he made the case against slavery.

As someone who believes in my heart that the decision that the United States Supreme Court rendered in 1973, a decision which has resulted in the legal abortion of nearly a million and a half children every year since, requires that we employ the same device of debate and discussion that John Quincy Adams employed, it is my hope, Mr. Speaker, to do as he did, to prick the conscience of the nation, or even our own colleagues, to think deeply in their hearts and in their minds about this notion of the sanctity of life.

To do that, I have called upon a variety of sources, some of which I will cite tonight. I begin tonight, as I hope to reflect on that historical debate that John Quincy Adams so notably brought to this floor, with a quote from Martin Luther King Jr., in his letter from the Birmingham jail.

Some may think, well, why is a lawmaker, why is the Chamber where laws are made, worried about something that is a moral issue? In fact, I received just a few days ago a letter from a constituent who voiced that often-repeated phrase that they did not want me to impose my moral views on them, believing that they were referring to my views on the right to life. Well, on that very issue the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, "A just law is man-made code that squares with the moral law of God. Unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law of God."

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Lutheran pastor who was martyred for resisting Adolf Hitler, gave what may be the clearest expression of this principle when he said, "If government persistently and arbitrarily violates its assigned task, then the divine mandate lapses."

In fact, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Lutheran pastor who was martyred for resisting Adolf Hitler, gave what may be the clearest expression of this principle when he said, "If government persistently and arbitrarily violates its assigned task, then the divine mandate lapses." In the case of Pastor Bonhoeffer and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. the principle is the same: It is the notion that there is a law higher than what we can conceive of here; and, dare I say it, Mr. Speaker, there is even a law higher than the contemporary decisions of the United States Supreme Court, that there is a law that rises unerringly out of history, and it is that moral law of which the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., wrote from that Birmingham jail.

A rabbi said famously in my presence once, "No one ever breaks God's law, they just break themselves against it." And what is true of individuals can undoubtedly be true of nations. Nations that set themselves against the moral law and moral truth fail to break that law so much as they break themselves.

Certainly that was the case in 19th century America, was it not, Mr. Speaker? For in 19th century America, while the congressman and former President John Quincy Adams came to this floor week after week and argued the moral approbation of slavery, argued for the abolition of slavery, America slept, believing that it could break that moral law and still survive. And as we learned, following the elections of 1860 and the secession of southern states and 600,000 battle deaths later, the truth is, Mr. Speaker, America did not succeed in breaking the moral law, but America broke itself against that simple notion of human dignity, that one man ought not to be able, in a just society, to enslave another man, and to put him, as Abraham Lincoln would say in his second inaugural address, under the pain of the whip.

It was in that second inaugural address that he spoke of the Civil War. He spoke of the Civil War as a time when we were paying the debt that justice demanded of a nation. It is altogether fitting, I think, that tonight in this part of the case for life that we reflect on some of the similarities, eerie similarities between that debate over the personhood of men and women of African descent enslaved as they were in the nation and the contemporary debate over abortion today because there are, as the author Gary Henry wrote in Focus magazine in June 1997, "There are, most assuredly, parallels between the debate over abortion today and the intellectual and moral debate and arguments made against slavery." It is almost eerie at times how the parallels between the arguments of those 150 years ago advocating slavery rights match with the arguments of personal choice that support abortion today.

Most notably, of course, we had a Supreme Court case out of step with the truth. It was a case decided in 1857 known as the Dred Scott decision. In that case the Supreme Court ruled, and many will forget, that slaves, even freed slaves, and all their descendants had no rights protected by the Constitution and that states had no right to abolish slavery. The reasoning in Dred Scott is historically and intellectually almost identical to the reasoning that would be employed in 1973 in a decision known as Roe v. Wade.

It was a reasoning that was centered on the definition of a person. In the Dred Scott case, the Court stripped away all rights from a class of human beings and reduced them to nothing more than the property of others. We can compare the arguments that the Court used to justify slavery and abortion very clearly. In the Court's eyes, the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade and its predecessor cases and progeny, unborn children are now the same as, quote, "the beings of inferior order" that the justices wrote of in the Dred Scott decision in 1857.

There are other similarities. An African American was considered a nonperson under the Constitution as the case of an unborn child was considered a nonperson. In fact, an African American in slavery and any of their progeny were considered the property of the owner, and in Roe v. Wade the unborn child is simply considered the property of the mother in a legal sense.

"It is almost eerie at times how the parallels between the arguments of those 150 years ago advocating slavery rights match with the arguments of personal choice that support abortion today"

It is truly astonishing even to recall that the Dred Scott case was decided by a 7-2 decision in the Supreme Court, the exact same number of justices that voted for and against the right to an abortion in Roe v. Wade.

It is extraordinary to think that the words "citizens" or "persons" used in the Constitution, according to the Dred Scott decision, were never intended to include African Americans; and according to Roe v. Wade, the term "citizens" and "persons" as used in the Constitution were never intended to include unborn children.

Listen to these cryptic words from the Dred Scott case of 1857. The Supreme Court wrote: "A Negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, were not intended to be included under the word `citizen´ in the Constitution, and can, therefore, claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States."

Here are the words now from the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. The Supreme Court wrote: "The word `person,´ as used in the 14th amendment, does not include the unborn. The unborn have never been recognized in the law," Justice Blackmun wrote for the majority, "as persons in the whole sense."

So while there may be some looking in on our debate tonight who may think I cannot believe that conservative from Indiana is stretching to somehow connect the debate over slavery in 1857 before the Supreme Court in Dred Scott and the debate over a woman's right to choose an abortion which took place before the Supreme Court in 1973, the person might surmise there is no connection, but the truth is: I learned in my very first class in law school on this topic, not only are they analogous, they are almost one to one parallels. Listen to those words again. In the Dred Scott in 1857 the Supreme Court said: "A Negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, were not intended to be included under the word `citizen´ in the Constitution, and can, therefore, claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States."

And in Roe v. Wade, they wrote the word "person" does not include the unborn. The unborn have never been recognized in the law; it is "persons" in the whole sense.

There are other parallels between Roe v.Wade and the decision in the Dred Scott case. The Dred Scott case of 1857 essentially said a slave is the property of the master and the Constitution has provided "the protection of private property against the encroachments of government." Literally the Supreme Court in 1857 brought out the idea of private property rights. In a very real sense the idea of privacy and the right to privacy that ostensibly emerges, as Justice Blackmun would write, the Bill of Rights was the very foundation of the Dred Scott decision. In the Roe v. Wade case in 1973, the Supreme Court said of that right: "The right of privacy is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."

It is truly astonishing to think of the parallels, and it seems to me to be altogether fitting that we would amplify those. As we think about coming upon the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision, I am someone who believes in my heart that the steady advance of civil rights in this country to every American is the glory of this nation, that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the single greatest legislative accomplishment of the 20th century, and we as Americans ought to take enormous pride in the fact that our forebears were willing to confront and reject the ethos of their time of some Americans, and even a 7-2 decision by the Supreme Court, that certified that Negroes were never to be counted among the citizens protected in the Constitution. It is because of their courage, their willingness to confront both the awesome power of the Supreme Court and their own countrymen, that we arrive in a nation today of increasing justice for all.

In fact, one cannot help but wonder, as I have since the first days I studied American history at a small college on the Ohio River Valley, one cannot help but wonder if the 600,000 lives that were lost in the Civil War, the families that were sundered in the Civil War, the wounds that in some respects 150 years later we find ourselves as a nation still recovering from, might have been altogether avoided if America had done as England had done some 25 years earlier and recognized that a practice in their midst certified by the highest courts in the land, and through traditions of decades, was simply and flatly morally wrong. But we did not.

Different than the United Kingdom that not only denounced slavery because of the leadership and 40-year campaign of a member of Parliament named William Wilberforce, not only did England denounce slavery and make it illegal, but they also declared war on slavery on the seven seas. And the holocaust of the Civil War that struck our country never came to England. And anyone that has ever visited or spent time in England knows that the division between the races is fundamentally better and less defined than in this nation because England, before they were forced into the cataclysm that we met as a nation in 1861 in the Civil War, shuffled off that conflict between their law and what was legal and the moral law and moral truth.

In fact, it was John Quincy Adams who I opened with tonight who would go to the floor of Congress and argue the fundamental immorality of slavery, literally using his last breath, collapsing on the floor of Congress to argue against slavery in America. He was carried out and expired in the year 1848. He died in this very building. Some might look at John Quincy Adams, as some looking in tonight might look at me, and say speaking empty words, not making any change. John Quincy Adams died almost a decade before the Dred Scott decision. Some of his contemporaries might have said, what did he think he accomplished. But I submit very humbly that John Quincy Adams, on Earth and in heaven, accomplished a great deal because history does record that in 1848, the last year of his life, was the first year of a freshman congressman from Illinois, a gangly and, by his own definition, a homely man, named Abe Lincoln. Born in Kentucky, moved at the age of 2 to the state of Indiana where he grew up until he was 19 on a little farm on which I have walked in southwestern Indiana.

He came to the United States Congress in 1848, and history would record that Abraham Lincoln, sitting in the back row as a freshman member of Congress, listening to the great man John Quincy Adams speak, would be deeply moved by one who was then known as the "hell hound of abolition." One can only imagine the sallow cheeks of a young and beardless Abe Lincoln sitting in the back row wondering, what is the grand old man making all the fuss about, slavery being so deeply ensconced in the industrial and legal tradition of America at the time.

But he listened and he heard, and it would be just 10 years later after leaving Congress that same Abe Lincoln, who our children in grade school know as President Abraham Lincoln, would run again for public office; but this time he was in a very real sense a changed man. He would enter a race in Illinois against Stephen Douglas for the Senate, a race that he would lose, but it would capture the imagination of America because of a series of debates known as the Lincoln-Douglas debates. And in those debates, more than any other political exercise of the age, Abraham Lincoln defined the moral dimensions of the wrong of slavery in America.

The irony is among those who say you have to soften our position on abortion in contemporary debate because you could lose elections. Well, that same advice could have been given to Abraham Lincoln because he certainly lost that campaign for the Senate, being as focused as he was on that issue. But it was precisely his courage and his unapologetic moral case for the wrong and the injustice of denying personhood, denying the fundamental constitutional rights to an entire class of human beings that would propel him to his party's nomination for President of the United States.

And he would be elected, and upon his election the nation would divide and be torn by war.

"The latest statistics from the Alan Guttmacher Institute estimate 43,358,592 total abortions since 1973"

As we look at those Lincoln and Douglas debates, the arguments that candidate Abraham Lincoln made are extraordinary. He makes the case about the fundamental immorality of slavery; and for all the world, and I intend to do it during the course of these conversations about life, Mr. Speaker, we can take entire tracks of Abraham Lincoln's remarks in the Lincoln and Douglas debates and we can pull out the word "slavery" and put in the word "abortion," and the sentence makes perfect sense as he speaks about the denial of the fundamental right to life and liberty to a class of human beings in America. He spoke about it not in the context of established law, but as we know from history, as did the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in his letter from the Birmingham jail, he spoke about it in the context of the moral law of God.

I close this installment, Mr. Speaker, of the case for life as I began it with those extraordinary reflections of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But I close it with recognition that it is not just high principle and history that call us in this place to an account to restore the fundamental notion that life is sacred. But rather there are lives, I offer humbly, not gratuitously, by the millions that cry out from someplace that they are and that we someday will be, and they call upon us as a nation to right what has gone so wrong.

The latest statistics from the Alan Guttmacher Institute estimate 43,358,592 total abortions since 1973. King David, when he lost his son, experiencing the justice of God, washed his face after a period of grief and said that his mourning was over. When his friends and colleagues asked him how he could move on, he said of his son, "I will go to him but he will not again come to me."

I believe in all my heart that those 43-plus million souls have gone to a place where by God's grace I hope someday to go, but I believe that they cry out to America and to their own generation, not a word of condemnation because I expect that when we are done here, when we know ourselves even as we are known, our natural tendency to judge others will fade significantly.

I rise today, Mr. Speaker, in that same spirit, that it is my fondest hope that, as I have the privilege of serving in this body, I from time to time come to this floor even with other colleagues and make the case for life in a way that is truly brokenhearted, in a way that is brokenhearted not just about the 43 million who are not here but about the 43 million who were led into making that choice and the broken hearts in their lives that they feel, because I truly do believe, Mr. Speaker, that whether it is individuals or nations that we do not break God's law, we break ourselves against it.

As the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said in the letter from the Birmingham jail, and we should heed this as we consider someday the ideal of restoring the sanctity of human life, "A just law is man-made code that squares with the moral law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law."

Martin Luther King was right. Abortion is wrong, and it is my deepest and fondest hope that through peaceful means, as Dr. King led America through debate, through engagement, through compassion, that we will lead our nation back to where the man-made code will again square with the moral law of God, and we will someday restore the sanctity of human life.

 

"How can a great country like the United States fall, you say, My child? You ask Me in your heart. I read your heart. I will tell you why. Because they have given themselves over to satan. When a country has lost its morality and seeks the pleasures of the flesh, giving over, themselves over, to all manner of abominations, like homosexuality, and condoning this up the highest courts of the land, then that country shall fall." - Our Lady of the Roses, November 1, 1985
 

The awesome Bayside Prophecies...  http://www.tldm.org/Bayside/default.htm  
These prophecies came from Jesus, Mary, and the saints to Veronica Lueken at Bayside, NY, from 1968 to 1995:

SIN OF OMISSION
"The sin of omission shall condemn many to hell, be they layman or Hierarchy.  I repeat:  not the sin of commission, but the sin of omission will commit many to hell.  Among them there will be also mitres." - Our Lady, October 6, 1980

THE UNITED STATES SHALL BE FIRST STRUCK
"One of the reasons the Eternal Father chose your city and your state for My appearance was because of abortion, the murder of the holy innocents. Your nation, without repentance, shall be the first struck." - Our Lady, March 15, 1978

THE UNITED STATES SHALL FALL
"How can a great country like the United States fall, you say, My child?  You ask Me in your heart.  I read your heart.  I will tell you why.  Because they have given themselves over to satan.  When a country has lost its morality and seeks the pleasures of the flesh, giving over, themselves over, to all manner of abominations, like homosexuality, and condoning this up the highest courts of the land, then that country shall fall." - Our Lady of the Roses, November 1, 1985

DOCTORS
"Doctors now are profaning their profession, those who have given themselves over to destroying human life in abortions." - Jesus, June 6, 1987

FOULEST OF DEEDS
"Our hearts are torn because of the wanton murder of the young by evil man. Abortion, My children, is murder, the most foulest of deeds, that is punishable by death! And what is worse than death of the soul?
     "I say unto you, as your Mother, that any man or woman who performs or takes part of this abomination of the murder of the unborn shall be given a heavy penance upon earth, or if this penance is not given upon earth, that person found guilty in the eyes of his God shall suffer eternal damnation in the fires of hell." - Our Lady, December 28, 1976 

DESTROYED
"All who become part of or condone abortion, the murder of the young, shall be destroyed!" - Jesus, June 2, 1979

HUMAN LIFE IS SACRED
"The Eternal Father command that you stop these murders at once! You will not destroy the lives of the unborn. Human life is sacred in the eyes of your God. No man has the right to destroy a life. The Father, He sends this life to you, and only He will decide when it will return back to the Kingdom.
     "Do not, My children, be deceived by the words of the evil ones about you who cry to you of no space left for man. There is space, for My Father has a plan for every life He sends." - Our Lady, August 5, 1971

WILL NEVER BE CONDONED
"You will remember, My children and My child, to guard the young. Your clergy have fallen into darkness. Abortion will never be condoned. But We must have others who fervently will go forward and bring out to the minds of those who have actually seduced the country and the children--bring them the knowledge of Heaven, hell and purgatory. Then they will not have free license to sin." - Our Lady, May 28, 1983

GOVERNMENT
"For that one reason among many, the United States will suffer unless there is placed into your government a group that fears the Lord if they cannot love the Lord. They will fear Him and find measures to stop the slaughter of the unborn." - Our Lady, April 14, 1984

NUNS
"That is what makes My heart ache, My child. That is one of the reasons Theresa is crying constantly when she looks into the convents and sees what is going on. Many now believe in abortion, the murders of the children; and many have committed this act upon themselves." - Jesus, October 1, 1988

SIXTY MILLION
"I say this for this reason: the Eternal Father is much disturbed at the numbers of abortions being committed throughout your country and the world. These numbers go upwards to fifty to sixty million in one year throughout the world." - Our Lady, June 18, 1986

TREATED AS GARBAGE
"O My child, My tears fall upon you all when I see all of the innocent little babies being slaughtered . . . cast into garbage pails like nothing but dirt and scum. They are living human beings! And all murderers shall get their just recompense." - Our Lady, March 18, 1983

BOMBS IN THE UNITED STATES
"These interlopers upon the serenity of the United States have dark skins.... With their plans there will be bombs placed in strategic places and many shall die at the hands of these ruffians....
     "One big reason for permitting this disaster in New York would be the abortion mills throughout the city and the country." - Jesus, October 1, 1988

HOLY SPIRIT
"At the time of conception, the Holy Spirit makes the child, and the breath of the Almighty gives it life." - Our Lady, June 18, 1991

LIMBO
"And what, My children, are We going to do with all the aborted babies? O My child, I know you feel as I do, for I can see the great distress on your face. What are We going to do, My child? Do you understand when they come to Us, they must go to Limbo? They are in Heaven, a happy place, but they cannot see God." - Our Lady, October 2, 1987

SORROWFULLY
"Sorrowfully, the penance that is to come upon the world for the murders of the unborn shall be a chastisement far greater in severity than man has ever witnessed in the past nor ever shall pass through again. Your world is plunging into a deep chasm of suffering and destruction." - Our Lady, May 20, 1978

OATH
"Your once loyal to the oath of a doctor, your once loyal doctors are now butchers! For money they kill the young!" - Our Lady, February 10, 1978

WOE TO THE WOMAN
"Know, My child, this simple lesson, that in these days of the latter times, women will seek to cast off their role as mother and a woman. Women will cast it off under the direction of satan, and murder her children. Woe to the woman who does not repent of this vile abomination! She has walked the road to eternal damnation and hell. Repent, O woman, or forever be lost!" - Our Lady, March 18, 1975  

Directives from Heaven...

D23 - Abortion PDF
D28 - Hell  PDF
D158 - America the Beautiful PDF
D167 - The Family - Part 1 PDF
D168 - The Family - Part 2 PDF
D179 - Women's Liberation   PDF
D224 - Restore America to One Nation Under God   PDF

Articles…

"The sanctity of human life" by Rep. Mike Pence, Part 1
http://www.tldm.org/news7/Pence1.htm

"The sanctity of human life" by Rep. Mike Pence, Part 3
http://www.tldm.org/news7/Pence3.htm

The parallels of slavery and abortion issues, Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade decisions
http://www.tldm.org/News7/ParallelsSlaveryAbortion.htm

Abortion and the conscience of the Nation, by President Ronald Reagan
http://www.tldm.org/News7/AbortionReagan.htm

Mother Teresa's letter to the Supreme Court on abortion
http://www.tldm.org/News7/AbortionMotherTeresa.htm

Pope says abortion to lead to downfall of democracies
http://www.tldm.org/news4/abortion.htm

Abortion: the ultimate exploitation of women
http://www.tldm.org/News6/exploitation.htm

Archbishop Chaput says abortion is "central social issue of this moment" in U.S. history
http://www.tldm.org/news6/Chaput3.htm

Spanish Bishop calls abortion "the greatest crime ever committed in history"
http://www.tldm.org/News7/AbortionGreatestCrime.htm

Virginia Bishop calls abortion "greatest moral evil of our age"
http://www.tldm.org/News7/Schmitt.htm

Archbishop Chaput says those who support abortion "rights" cannot be Catholic
http://www.tldm.org/News7/Chaput.htm

Mexican cardinals says that those who promote abortion cannot be Catholic
http://www.tldm.org/news7/MexicanCardinal.htm

Even elimination of poverty cannot justify one abortion, says Bishop Sheridan
http://www.tldm.org/News7/Sheridan3.htm

You wouldn't even ask
http://www.tldm.org/news7/Pavone1.htm

Archbishop Chaput says Catholics refusing to defend morality "demonstrating cowardice"
http://www.tldm.org/news7/Chaput3.htm

Abortion and the contraceptive mentality
http://www.tldm.org/news4/contraception_abortion.htm

Outside Links…

Abortion:

The beginning of the end of abortion, WorldNetDaily, November 13, 2004
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41431

Sin to vote for pro-abortion politicians? Fr. Matthew Habiger
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/SINTOVOT.HTM

2002 Canonical Petition to Excommunicate Culture of Death "Catholics"
http://www.cathfam.org/cfexcom/Excom.html

“Whoever is not with Me, is against Me,” Archbishop William Levada
http://www.ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/LEVADA.HTM

Declaration on procured abortion (CDF, November 18, 1974)
http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFABORT.HTM

The Gospel of Life, Pope John Paul II, March 25, 1995
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/JP2EVANG.HTM

Contraception:

Faithfulness to the Divine Plan in the Transmission of Life Pope John Paul II's General Audience (8 August 1984)

Humanae Vitae Pope Paul VI - Encyclical - On the Regulation of Births (25 July 1968)

Contraception Versus Abortion: A Comparison and Some Implications, By Msgr. Vincent Foy, PhD.

Contraception and Catholic Teaching, Donald DeMarco, Ph.D.

God and the Pill, Terence J. Hughes

Abortifacients, Charles M. Mangan

Contraception: Fatal to the Faith and to Eternal Life,  John A. Hardon, S.J.

Is Contraception Gravely Sinful Matter? by Fr Lino Ciccone CM (from L'Osservatore Romano, 4 December 1996)

| Home | Introduction | Prophecies | Directives | Order Form | Testimonies | Veronica | News | Photos | Bible | Magazine | Newsletters | Radio Show |

The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.    
Quotations are permissible as long as this web site is acknowledged through hyperlink to: http://www.tldm.org
Copyright © These Last Days Ministries, Inc. 1996 - 2005   All rights reserved.
P.O. Box 40                   616-698-6448
Lowell, MI 49331-0040
Revised: November 19, 2004

We encourage everyone to print or email copies of this web page to all the Bishops and all the clergy.  Also, send this page to as many people as possible.