facts

7 common myths and facts about the rosary
Read More

7 common myths and facts about the rosary

unitedyam

A woman prays the rosary at the Dominican Rosary Pilgrimage at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, DC, on Sept. 28, 2024. / Credit: Jeffrey Bruno

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 7, 2025 / 04:00 am (CNA).

October is designated by the Catholic Church as the Month of the Rosary, and Oct. 7 is the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary.

Here are seven common myths and facts about this devotion to Our Lady:

1. Only Catholics can pray the rosary. 

False. While rosaries are typically associated with Catholics, non-Catholics can certainly pray the rosary — and in fact, many credit it to their conversion. Even some Protestants recognize the rosary as a valid form of prayer.

2. Praying the rosary is idolatry. 

False. Some have objections to the rosary, claiming it idolizes Mary and is overly repetitive. 

Just like any practice, the rosary can be abused — just as someone might idolize a particular pastor or priest, a form of worship, or fasting. But the rosary itself is not a form of idolatry. 

The rosary is not a prayer to Mary — it is a meditation on the life of Christ revealed in five mysteries “with the purposes of drawing the person praying deeper into reflecting on Christ’s joys, sacrifices, sufferings, and the glorious miracles of his life.” 

When we pray the Hail Mary, we are not adoring Mary, we are asking for her intercession — just as we might ask a friend or family member to pray for us. 

Second, any prayer can lose its meaning if we do not intentionally meditate on it. Focusing on the mysteries with purpose and intention is key to the rosary’s transforming power. As one author encourages: “The rosary itself stays the same, but we do not.”

3. You can wear a rosary as a necklace.

It depends. It is typically considered disrespectful and irreverent to wear a rosary around one’s neck as jewelry, even though the Church does not have an explicit declaration against doing so. 

However, Canon 1171 of the Code of Canon Law says that “sacred objects, set aside for divine worship by dedication or blessing, are to be treated with reverence. They are not to be made over to secular or inappropriate use, even though they may belong to private persons.”

It is important to treat the rosary with respect and intention. If you intend to wear the rosary as a piece of jewelry, this would not be respectful and should be avoided. It goes without saying that wearing the rosary as a mockery or gang symbol would be a sin.

But if it is your intention to use the rosary and be mindful of prayer, then it could be permissible. It is not uncommon in some cultures, like in Honduras and El Salvador, to see the rosary respectfully worn around the neck as a sign of devotion.

Rosary rings or bracelets might be a better option if you want to keep your rosary close at hand as a reminder to pray, as they are kept more out of sight and would not be as easily misconstrued to be a piece of jewelry. 

4. The rosary is an extremist symbol.

False. A widely-shared 2022 Atlantic article went viral for accusing the rosary of being an “extremist symbol.” 

“Just as the AR-15 rifle has become a sacred object for Christian nationalists in general, the rosary has acquired a militaristic meaning for radical-traditional (or ‘rad trad’) Catholics,” the article read.

The author also cited the Church’s stance on traditional marriage and the sanctity of life as evidence of “extremism” and claimed that Catholics’ tendency to call the rosary a “weapon in the fight against evil” as dangerous.

As CNA reported in 2022, popes have urged Catholics to pray the rosary since 1571 — often referring to the rosary as a prayer “weapon” and most powerful spiritual tool.

5. The rosary is not biblical.

Untrue! Most of its words come directly from Scripture.

First, the Our Father is prayed. The words of the Our Father are those Christ taught his disciples to pray in Matthew 6:9–13.

The Hail Mary also comes straight from the Bible. The first part, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee,” comes from Luke 1:28, and the second, “Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb,” is found in Luke 1:42.

Finally, each of the decades prayed on the rosary symbolizes an event in the lives of Jesus and Mary. The decades are divided into four sets of mysteries: joyful, luminous, sorrowful, and glorious, the majority of which are found in Scripture. 

6. A rosary bead, or pea, can kill you.

Somewhat true. A rosary pea, or abrus seed, is a vine plant native to India and parts of Asia. The seeds of the vine, which are red with black spots, are often used to make beaded jewelry — including rosaries. Rosary pea seeds contain a toxic substance called “abrin,” which is a naturally-occurring poison that can be fatal if ingested. However, it’s unlikely for someone to get abrin poisoning just from holding a rosary made from abrus seeds, as one would have to swallow them.

Today, most rosaries are made from other nontoxic materials, such as olive wood or glass — eliminating this concern.

7. Carrying a rosary can protect you.

True. The rosary has proven to be a miraculous force for protecting those of faith and bestowing upon them extra graces, such as the victory of the Christian forces at the Battle of Lepanto after St. Pius V implored Western Christians to pray the rosary.

Many great saints across history, including Pope John Paul II, Padre Pio, and Lucia of Fátima, have also recognized the rosary as the most powerful weapon in fighting the real spiritual battles we face in the world. 

We know that spiritual warfare is a real and present danger: “For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens” (Eph 6:11–12). 

“The rosary is a powerful weapon to put the demons to flight and to keep oneself from sin … If you desire peace in your hearts, in your homes, and in your country, assemble each evening to recite the rosary. Let not even one day pass without saying it, no matter how burdened you may be with many cares and labors,” Pope Pius XI said. 

This story was first published on Oct. 1, 2022, and has been updated.

Read More
Religious Liberty Commission hears from teachers, coaches, school leaders
Read More

Religious Liberty Commission hears from teachers, coaches, school leaders

unitedyam

President Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission meets on Sept. 29, 2025, in Washington, D.C. / Credit: Tessa Gervasini/CNA

Washington, D.C., Sep 29, 2025 / 19:13 pm (CNA).

Teachers, coaches, and other public and private school leaders said their religious liberty was threatened in American schools at a hearing conducted by President Donald Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission on Sept. 29.

Speakers said there must be a fight for schools to bring back the “truth” to protect students and religious liberty. Joe Kennedy, a high school football coach; Monica Gill, a high school teacher; Marisol Arroyo-Castro, a seventh grade teacher; and Keisha Russell, a lawyer for First Liberty Institute, addressed the commission led by Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.

“There has to be a call to action,” commission member Dr. Phil McGraw said. “The most common way to lose power is to think you don’t have it to begin with. We do have power, and we need to rally with that power.”

Teachers and coaches describe experiences

Kennedy said he was suspended — and later fired — from his position as a football coach at Bremerton High School in Washington for praying a brief and quiet prayer after football games.

“After the game, I took a knee to say thanks,” Kennedy explained. “That’s all. If that could be turned into a national controversy, it says more about the confusion in our country than the conduct of the person performing it.”

Kennedy told the commission the law is “cloudy and muddy” and they “have the power to clarify it.” Kennedy also said some lawyers “need to be held accountable” for actions taken in religious liberty cases.

Kennedy said: “I don’t know a lot about law and liberty, but I know that you’re supposed to advise people on the truth and the facts, and they’re not. They have an agenda, and their agenda is well set and in place and is working very well, keeping prayer out of the public square. They’re still doing it. That needs to be exposed.”

“Being a teacher has been one of the greatest blessings of my life,” Gill said to the committee. “God really gave my heart a mission … to show all of my students every day that they are loved. No matter what they’re going through, no matter what their grades are, no matter what their status is with their peers, I love them.”

“But in the summer of 2021 … Loudoun County Public Schools adopted a policy that forced teachers to deny the foundational truth of what it means to be human, created as male and female,” Gill said.

“This policy forced teachers to affirm all transgender students,” Gill said. “My employer gave teachers a choice: deny truth or risk everything … I knew that I could not stand in front of my Father in heaven one day and say: ‘My pension plan was more important than your truth.’ I also knew that if I say that I love my students, the only right choice would be to stand in love and truth for them.”

To combat the policy, Gill joined a lawsuit by Alliance Defending Freedom after a fellow Virginia teacher was fired for speaking out against the same policy. The lawsuit “resulted in victory for all teachers to freely speak truth and love when Loudoun County finally agreed not to require teachers to use pronouns in accordance with the student’s sex,” Gill said.

Arroyo-Castro testified that she was punished for displaying a cross in her private workspace in her seventh grade classroom in a New Britain School District school in Connecticut. 

“I share this with you to help you understand why the crucifix is so significant to me and why I will never hide it from anyone’s view,” Arroyo-Castro said. “The vice principal told me that the crucifix was of a religious nature, so against the Constitution of the United States, and that it had to be taken down by the end of the day.”

If she did not take it down it would be considered “insubordination and could lead to termination,” Arroyo-Castro said. She asked if she could have time to pray on it, and was told she could, but “it wouldn’t change anything.” 

“I was later called to a meeting with the district chief of staff, the principal, the vice principal, [and a] union representative. The chief of staff suggested that I put the crucifix in a drawer. I knew I couldn’t do that since my grandmother has instilled in me the meaning of the crucifix and how it should be treated with respect. But the chief of staff said that the Constitution says that I had to take it down,” Arroyo-Castro said.

After she refused to remove it, Arroyo-Castro was released from school with an unpaid suspension. She was offered legal defense by lawyers at First Liberty, which sued the school for violating the Constitution. While the lawsuit is ongoing she works in the administrative building “far from the students.”

Arroyo-Castro said: “Every day, I wonder how they’re doing.”

“Please do what you can to educate the districts in American schools about the true meaning of the establishment clause and the free exercise clause,” Arroyo-Castro advised the commission members. “How can we do our jobs well when many education leaders today don’t understand the Constitution themselves? We must understand as Americans that freedom of religion is a right that benefits all Americans.”

Suggestions from faith leaders

Leaders at Jewish, Catholic, and Christian schools also recounted religious freedom issues facing faith-based schools across the nation and what the country can do.

The leaders highlighted the need to protect the financial aid faith-based institutions receive and stop any threats of losing money if certain values are not enforced. Todd J. Williams, provost at Cairn University, said: “Schools will begin to cave because they’re worried about the millions of dollars that will go out the door.”

Father Robert Sirico, a priest at Sacred Heart Catholic School in Grand Rapids, Michigan, said he was recently affected by a decision by the Michigan Supreme Court that redefined sex to include sexual orientation and gender identity. 

“While presented as a matter of fairness, this reinterpretation proposes grave dangers, grave risks for all religious institutions, even those like Sacred Heart that receive absolutely no public support,” he said.

Sacred Heart has filed a lawsuit to combat the issue, but Sirico said what needs to be done “exceeds the competency of [the] commission and the competency of this administration.” 

“We have to think of this in existential terms, and we have to come at this project with the understanding that this is going to take years to transform. This is why religious people can transform the world: We believe in something that’s greater than our politics. We can reenvision.”

Read More
Lila Rose delivers strong pro-life message in Yale debate with Frances Kissling
Read More

Lila Rose delivers strong pro-life message in Yale debate with Frances Kissling

unitedyam

Lila Rose (left) debates Frances Kissling on Sept. 16, 2025, at Yale University. / Credit: Live Action via YouTube screenshot

National Catholic Register, Sep 19, 2025 / 10:40 am (CNA).

The news that pro-life activist Lila Rose was declared the winner by students attending a debate earlier this week with an abortion activist at Yale University — a campus not particularly known for its pro-life sentiment — lit up the pro-life corners of the internet.

Rose, the founder and president of Live Action, posted on X following Tuesday night’s debate, which was hosted by the Yale Political Union. She said the event’s organizer was “shocked” after those in attendance voted in favor of the pro-life argument by a margin of 60-31.

For defenders of the lives of unborn babies, it was heartening to see apparent evidence that arguments against abortion are making headway, even at one of the country’s most elite educational institutions. 

Rose’s opponent, Frances Kissling, the former head of Catholics for Choice and founding president of the National Abortion Federation, laid bare the diabolical essence of the “pro-choice” argument. An unborn baby may be human, according to Kissling, but a woman should be able to decide whether the child lives or dies.

“We need to begin to think about abortion as a conflict of values. I tend to favor more or think more about the value of women’s lives,” Kissling said.

“I’m not talking about whether they’re going to die or not,” she said. “I’m talking about the fact that they have decisions to make about how they are going to live that life,” Kissling clarified.

Kissling, who is Catholic and had spent two years as a religious sister in a convent, went on to say that abortion should be condoned by what she said is an ever-evolving Catholic Church.

“The idea that Catholicism never changes is not true, even in very serious decisions,” she said. “I was thinking about this. Whatever happened to limbo?”

“I’m in the group of Catholics who look at the idea that even the Catholic Church can change. We learn new things,” she said. 

Rose countered by describing what allowing “choice” to trump life really looks like, citing the recent case of a 21-year-old college student whose newborn baby was found dead, wrapped in a towel and stuffed in a closet.

“A child hidden in a closet, his humanity denied. If this does not grieve us, then what will? This is what choice over life looks like when the choice of adults is made supreme,” Rose said.

“What about the child’s choice? That has not been represented here yet tonight. And so let me ask the question here plainly: Should murder be legal? Of course not. Then why do we excuse abortion? Abortion is the direct and intentional killing of an innocent human being,” she said.

Rose called for more federal funding for pregnancy-resource centers, for government-funded cash credits for parents, and for making childbirth free.

“Instead of turning to violence against the most vulnerable as a solution to problems that we face, instead, we should be a society that uplifts, that makes life better for the vulnerable, that focuses our energy and our efforts and our organizations and our resources on supporting women and young families and children,” Rose said.

At the conclusion of the debate, Kissling revealed that at the heart of her position is a concession that an unborn child is, in fact, a human being. 

Kissling then presented the argument put forward by adherents of utilitarian moral theory that an action can be justified if it leads to the “happiness” of the greatest number of people.

The abortion activist suggested considering a “thought experiment” involving a situation in which there is a fire in a building, and one is faced with deciding whether to rescue a poor family of six or a doctor who was about to come up with a cure for cancer. 

“I’m asking you to think for yourself about how much you really believe and how much you act and how all our governments act within the principle of ‘every single life [has equal value],’” she said.

“The greatest good for the greatest number of people. Good principle. Do you save the family of six or do you save the doctor? That’s it,” she said.

Following the debate, Sabrina Soriano, a junior and art history major at Yale, said she thought Rose was the clear winner.

“I think Lila definitely just swept the floor and took the trophy prize because she came in with a sense of humility, and also with a deep sense of wanting to do justice to the Church in general, and also to the unborn.”

“I think regardless of if you were pro-choice, you understood that the argument [Kissling made] was weak, and it was based on more of a crowd-surfing or sentimentality rather than the facts,” said Soriano, who is Catholic and a member of the campus pro-life group, as were many students in attendance.

Kylyn Smith, a 19-year-old senior and double major in physics and economics, told the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, that while there was a strong contingent of pro-life advocates in the audience, Rose bested Kissling in the debate fair and square. 

“Lila Rose valiantly defended the pro-life position with a secular, logical argument centered on the humanity of the unborn child. It was incredible watching her speak just as incisively and coherently live and in person as on her videos,” Smith said. 

“Passion from attendees of all opinions quite literally rang throughout the auditorium, from hissing in disagreement to stomping in support. Ms. Rose’s cogent reasoning stood in stark contrast to the often-contradictory statements of the other guest, solidifying Lila’s win.”

This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.

Read More
Study: Mental health-related hospitalizations rates doubled for women who had abortions
Read More

Study: Mental health-related hospitalizations rates doubled for women who had abortions

unitedyam

null / Credit: GBALLGIGGSPHOTO/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Sep 1, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA).

A recent study found that the rate of mental-health-related hospitalizations doubled for women who had abortions compared with women who gave birth. 

The study, published this summer in the Journal of Psychiatric Research, compared abortions with other pregnancies in hospitals in Quebec, Canada, between 2006 and 2022, tracking data on women for up to 17 years.

The study, which compared more than 1.2 million women who gave birth in Quebec hospitals with more than 28,000 women who had abortions, found that “rates of mental-health-related hospitalization were higher following induced abortions than other pregnancies.” 

Abortion was associated with a number of mental-health-related difficulties including hospitalization for psychiatric disorders, substance use disorders, and suicide attempts, the study found.

This association was especially high for women who were younger than 25 years at the time of their abortions, as well as for patients who already had an existing mental illness.

The risk of mental health hospitalization was highest within five years of the abortion. The risk decreased gradually after the five-year point, but only after 17 years did the risk begin “to resemble” pregnancies carried to term, according to the study.

Tessa Cox, senior research associate at the think tank Charlotte Lozier Institute, said the study was “particularly powerful.” 

“This recent study out of Canada, which has more comprehensive health care data than the U.S., adds to a mounting body of research suggesting that abortion can harm women’s mental health,” Cox said.

“The abortion industry downplays the evidence, so the fact that this new study included more than a million women and took prior mental health and other related factors into account makes it particularly powerful,” she told CNA.

“Women deserve to have all the facts — and women and men who have been harmed by abortion need to know that forgiveness and healing are possible,” Cox said.

Another scholar called the study “robust,” noting that it followed the data over an extended period of time and had constants that enabled the information to be more accurate.

Michael New, senior associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute and assistant professor of practice at The Catholic University of America, noted that the study “provides strong statistical evidence that abortion increases the risk of a range of mental health problems.”

New said the study had many strengths, including its large sample size, the way it tracked women over an extended period of time, and how the authors analyzed data from an extended period of time.

This method was rare, according to the study, which noted that “large population-based studies with long-term follow-up are rare yet necessary to understand the mental health needs of women post abortion.”

New called this study’s results “robust,” noting that this study stands firm against criticism that similar studies have faced.

The study is one of several that have investigated correlation between mental health challenges and abortion.

“While other research has found that women who obtain abortions are likely to suffer from mental health disorders, critics of these studies have argued that women with mental health problems are more likely to obtain abortions in the first place,” New said.

“Most importantly it holds constant whether or not the women in the study had been hospitalized with mental health problems in the past,” he said of the Canadian study.

Read More