Sorry Francis devotees: "Nemo dat quod non habet"

As The Wild Voice notes: "Pope Francis claimed that the miracle of Jesus multiplying the bread and fish was really a miracle of 'sharing,' not multiplying."

This rationalist interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures has been thoroughly refuted.  See Father John Echert's excellent explanation at EWTN's website here.

Today, many bishops, priests, religious and laity, puffed up with satanic pride, have become enamored with themselves and their "intellectual prowess." And like their master, the father of all lies (John 8: 44), these too are now rebelling against God and His Holy Church.

These sons of Hell spend much of their waking hours contradicting Sacred Scripture, denying dogma and popularizing immorality. These pseudo-intellectuals arrogantly divinize man's intellect while ridiculing the Word of God. Saint Paul spoke of these disciples of Lucifer in 2 Timothy 4: 1-4: "I charge you to preach the word, to stay with this task whether convenient or inconvenient - correcting, reproving, appealing - constantly teaching and never losing patience. For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine, but, following their own desires, will surround themselves with teachers who tickle their ears. They will stop listening to the truth and will wander off to fables."

In Romans 1, Saint Paul emphasizes the fact that there is a connection between a refusal to acknowledge and obey God and a subsequent degeneration of morality. And yet, with all the sex abuse scandals within the Church and all the sexual immorality and dissent, there has been very little discussion about this truth. False worship and pride in one's own intellect cause spiritual blindness and subject men to the destructive and degrading drives of fallen nature - most especially in the area of sex. Saint Paul tells us that people who fall into such spiritual blindness begin to encourage others to do so. And so infidelity spreads like a cancer.

There is an increasingly hostile attitude toward Sacred Scripture on the part of many who believe that they can "correct" God's Word. Still others, as you note, alter the scriptures because a particular verse convicts them.

Contrast this arrogance with the Church Fathers. When confronted with such an arrogant approach to God's Word, they responded in no uncertain terms:

"They have not feared to lay hands upon the sacred Scriptures, saying that they have corrected them. Nor is it likely that they themselves are ignorant of how very bold their offense is. For either they do not believe that the sacred Scriptures were spoken by the Holy Spirit, in which case they are unbelievers, or if they regard themselves as being wiser than the Holy Spirit, what else can they be but demoniacs." (St. Hippolytus of Rome, "Fragment" in Eusebius, History of the Church, 5, ch. 28).

Ask yourself, "Why would Francis deny Jesus' miracle of the feeding of the five thousand?

God is almighty.  This means that He can, by His Will alone, create all things, bring them into existence.  This is Church dogma.  This dogma contains two truths: God can create all things and, moreover, through a simple act of His Will.

Sacred Scripture states this explicitly: "For thou didst create all things, and by thy will they existed and were created" (Apoc. 4:11).

It requires infinite power to call out of nothing (ex nihilo) even a single grain of sand.  And yet we read in God's Holy Word that, "God said, 'Let there be light': and there was light...'Let the waters...be gathered into one place...' And it was so...'Let the earth being forth living creatures...' And it was so" (Gen 1).

And this same God cannot multiply loaves and fishes?

There are those who, having succumbed to spiritual blindness due to a lack of an authentic prayer life, hold up Francis as a "Shepherd."  Those if us who have remained in the Faith while committing ourselves to prayer, see him for what he is: the Destroyer foretold by Saint Francis.

There is an old Latin axiom:"Nemo dat quod non habet" - "You cannot give what you do not have."

Francis clearly does not possess the Catholic Faith.  How then can he transmit it to others?

Francis the Destroyer has absorbed the poison of Hell...

In a review some years ago of Michael S. Rose's book entitled, "Goodbye, Good Men," Rev. Robert J. Johansen noted that, "There is too much evidence of the abuse of authority in certain dioceses and seminaries to dismiss Rose’s claims as baseless. It is still the case, even in a seminary with a reputation for orthodoxy such as St. Charles, that seminarians would not openly admit to members of the formation committee that they attended a licit (under the Ecclesia Dei indult) Tridentine liturgy for fear of being branded a “reactionary” and hounded out. I know many priests and seminarians who were subjected to harassment similar to that which Rose describes. I personally was turned away by a Midwestern seminary in the mid-1980’s for being “rigid”, “doctrinaire”, and “lacking in pastoral sensitivity.” These terms are recognized “code words” for describing seminarians and candidates who are loyal to Church teaching and discipline, and are attached to traditional forms of piety and devotion.

The genius of using such terms is that they do have a legitimate use: There really is such a thing as being rigid or inflexible; there really are priests who lack sensitivity to people’s needs or situations. By co-opting and re-defining such words, those who wished to advance their own agenda were able to masquerade as agents of the Church. Rose is correct in identifying the existence of these people and their agenda and the damage they caused." See here.

"Rigid," "doctrinaire," "lacking in pastoral sensitivity," these are indeed code words used by liberals who are Catholic in name only and for whom the Church's precepts are merely "man-made rules."  Such as Francis the Destroyer.  See my last post.

And he's at it again.  Now the False Prophet, who is inspired not by Heaven but by the poison of Hell, is suggesting that behind orthodoxy, behind fidelity to Jesus Christ and His Revelation, is...wickedness*.  See here.

But, as yet another member of the hierarch has reminded us (this time a Cardinal, See here), the faithful are not bound to follow a Pope who betrays the Church.

What Saint Louis de Montfort has to say about enemies of the Rosary Confraternity applies here because the Most Holy Rosary is a contemplation of Divine Revelation, which contains moral norms described by Francis as mere "rules and regulations":

"It is easy to see that they have absorbed the poison of hell and that they are inspired by the devil - for nobody can condemn devotion to the Holy Rosary without condemning all that is most holy in the Catholic Faith, such as the Lord's Prayer, the Angelic Salutation and the mysteries of the life, death, and glory of Jesus Christ and of His Holy Mother."

The rough Beast even now slouches toward Bethlehem, waiting to be "born." In truth, he is already here, his message being prepared by his willing dupe, his ecclesiastical puppet, his Masonic disciple.  That message will be that man has come of age, that the Church's moral norms are now outdated, that traditional-minded Christians are rigid and even evil, something to be eradicated - like useless weeds interfering with the progress of a New Garden where men shall be like gods.

The Reign of the Beast is soon to begin. But his reign is short.  His history, and that of his whoring pseudo-prophet, a modern-day Judas, has already been written.  And its end is the eternal lake of fire.

*  John 16:2.

Francis to journalists: Belief in God isn't necessary, only honesty

Francis just told journalists:

"The question here isn't to believe in God or not.  The question is to be or not to be honest with oneself and with others. This is the journalist's job -we might say his mission too-: to get as close as possible to the truth and never to say or write anything that one knows, in his conscience, to be false.”

This isn't the teaching of Vatican II's Inter Mirifica:

3. The Catholic Church, since it was founded by Christ our Lord to bear salvation to all men and thus is obliged to preach the Gospel, considers it one of its duties to announce the Good News of salvation also with the help of the media of social communication and to instruct men in their proper use.

It is, therefore, an inherent right of the Church to have at its disposal and to employ any of these media insofar as they are necessary or useful for the instruction of Christians and all its efforts for the welfare of souls. It is the duty of Pastors to instruct and guide the faithful so that they, with the help of these same media, may further the salvation and perfection of themselves and of the entire human family. In addition, the laity especially must strive to instill a human and Christian spirit into these media, so that they may fully measure up to the great expectations of mankind and to God's design.

4. For the proper use of these media it is most necessary that all who employ them be acquainted with the norms of morality and conscientiously put them into practice in this area. They must look, then, to the nature of what is communicated, given the special character of each of these media. At the same time they must take into consideration the entire situation or circumstances, namely, the persons, place, time and other conditions under which communication takes place and which can affect or totally change its propriety. Among these circumstances to be considered is the precise manner in which a given medium achieves its effect. For its influence can be so great that men, especially if they are unprepared, can scarcely become aware of it, govern its impact, or, if necessary, reject it.

5. It is, however, especially necessary that all parties concerned should adopt for themselves a proper moral outlook on the use of these media, especially with respect to certain questions that have been vigorously aired in our day.

The first question has to do with "information," as it is called, or the search for and reporting of the news. Now clearly this has become most useful and very often necessary for the progress of contemporary society and for achieving closer links among men. The prompt publication of affairs and events provides every individual with a fuller, continuing acquaintance with them, and thus all can contribute more effectively to the common good and more readily promote and advance the welfare of the entire civil society. Therefore, in society men have a right to information, in accord with the circumstances in each case, about matters concerning individuals or the community. The proper exercise of this right demands, however, that the news itself that is communicated should always be true and complete, within the bounds of justice and charity. In addition, the manner in which the news is communicated should be proper and decent. This means that in both the search for news and in reporting it, there must be full respect for the laws of morality and for the legitimate rights and dignity of the individual. For not all knowledge is helpful, but "it is charity that edifies."(1)

6. The second question deals with the relationship between the rights, as they are called, of art and the norms of morality. Since the mounting controversies in this area frequently take their rise from false teachings about ethics and aesthetics, the Council proclaims that all must hold to the absolute primacy of the objective moral order, that is, this order by itself surpasses and fittingly coordinates all other spheres of human affairs-the arts not excepted-even though they be endowed with notable dignity. For man who is endowed by God with the gift of reason and summoned to pursue a lofty destiny, is alone affected by the moral order in his entire being. And likewise, if man resolutely and faithfully upholds this order, he will be brought to the attainment of complete perfection and happiness.


Pope John Paul II, speaking to journalists, echoed this teaching:

"You are very concerned about freedom of information and of expression: you are right. Think yourselves lucky to enjoy it! Use this freedom well to grasp the truth more closely and to admit your readers, your listeners or viewers into "whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious", to repeat the words of St Paul (Ph 4:8); into what helps them to live in justice and brotherhood, to discover the ultimate meaning of life, to open them up to the mystery of God, so near each of us."


It is critical that journalists remain open to the order created by God.  Yet Francis the Masonic Destroyer would have them believe that belief in God simply isn't relevant to their vocation.

Francis is preparing the Church and the world for an age without Christ, for the reign of Antichrist.

Who will be able to resist the Antichrist when he reveals himself? - which could be at any time now. As I mentioned in a previous post, Romano Guardini has provided us with the answer:

"One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence witout Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed. His arguments will be so impressive, supported by means of such tremendous power - violent and diplomatic, material and intellectual - that to reject them will result in almost insurmountable scandal, and everyone whose eyes are not opened by grace will be lost. Then it will be clear what the Christian essence really is: that which stems not from the world, but from the heart of God; victory of grace over the world; redemption of the world, for her true essence is not to be found in herself, but in God, from whom she has received it. When God becomes all in all, the world will finally burst into flower."

Those who believe in their own intellectual prowess will succumb to the lie. They will be seduced by the Antichrist. Already we see the spirit of Antichrist seducing so many as they scramble to find teachers who will tickle their ears and tell them what they want to hear. But their end is destruction.

Pope John Paul II to Contemplatives: Remain faithful to the cloistered life according to your particular charism; Francis: Forget Pope Saint John Paul II's teaching

Pope Benedict XVI, speaking on the value of contemplative life as taught by Saint Teresa of Avila, noted that, “Therefore time devoted to prayer is not time wasted, it is time in which the path of life unfolds, the path unfolds to learning from God an ardent love for him, for his Church, and practical charity for our brothers and sisters..." See here.

And, in a General Audience given on June 13, 2012, Pope Benedict XVI stressed that,

“Therefore, the more room we make for prayer the more we will see our life transformed and enlivened by the tangible power of God’s love. This is what happened, for example, to Bl. Mother Teresa of Calcutta who found in contemplation of Jesus and even also in long periods of aridity the ultimate reason and incredible strength to recognize him in the poor and abandoned, in spite of her fragility.

Contemplation of Christ in our life does not alienate us — as I have already said — from reality. Rather it enables us to share even more in human events, because the Lord, in attracting us to him through prayer, enables us to make ourselves present and close to every brother and sister in his love..."

Pope John Paul II, in Vita Consecrata, No. 59, taught authoritatively that,  "The monastic life of women and the cloister deserve special attention because of the great esteem in which the Christian community holds this type of life, which is a sign of the exclusive union of the Church as Bride with her Lord, whom she loves above all things. Indeed, the life of cloistered nuns, devoted in a special way to prayer, to asceticism and diligent progress in the spiritual life, "is nothing other than a journey to the heavenly Jerusalem and an anticipation of the eschatological Church immutable in its possession and contemplation of God"
… Choosing an enclosed space where they will live their lives, cloistered nuns share in Christ's emptying of himself by means of a radical poverty, expressed in their renunciation not only of things but also of "space", of contacts, of so many benefits of creation.”

…To these dear Sisters, therefore, I extend my gratitude and I encourage them to remain faithful to the cloistered life according to their particular charism. Thanks to their example, this way of life continues to draw many vocations, attracting people by the radical nature of a "spousal" existence dedicated totally to God in contemplation. As an expression of pure love which is worth more than any work, the contemplative life generates an extraordinary apostolic and missionary effectiveness."

But Francis the Destroyer is demanding that Consecrated Religious abandon their particular charisma to better accommodate the modern world.

Marian Horvat notes:

"Francis' latest Apostolic Constitution on Women's Contemplative Life is much more revolutionary than it might appear at first sight. Perhaps that is why it has not received the attention it deserves from the Catholic media, who typically try to avoid reporting the more destructive fruits of Vatican II.

Titled Vultum Dei Quaerere (VDQ), it calls for women religious living in contemplative orders around the world to re-regulate their lifestyles and re-write their constitutions to better conform to the Vatican II guidelines and the changing modern times. The Vatican press release plainly admits VDQ is a “call to implement changes” in 12 areas of the monastic tradition, from formation to cloister and asceticism. In the long term, it is a full re-structuring of contemplative religious orders.


The document is short, if we consider the prolixity of other Francis documents, only 21 pages. Despite much flummery and praise for the contemplative life, the tone of Vultum Dei Quaerere is clear: All Catholic religious in contemplative communities – and that means absolutely all: the cloistered, semi-cloistered, those devoted primarily to prayer, etc. – must officially “get with” the Vatican II program and actively engage in adaptation to the modern world. (VDQ art. 2: §1)

No more exceptions or excuses like “we are following the order’s special charisma.” The move toward centralization and modernization is mandated by the Supreme Pontiff himself and applies to every order under his jurisdiction, including the traditionalist female contemplative institutions – those linked to Fraternity St. Peter, the Institute of Christ the King, the Good Shepherd Institute and, shortly, to those dependent on the Society of St. Pius X, when it officializes its status with Rome.

Forbiddingly, Francis begins by dictating that VDQ abrogates and over-rules all past documents with norms governing the lives of religious contemplative women, including the 1983 Code of Canon Law. To make the command crystal clear, he specifically lists the more relevant documents starting with Pius XII's Apostolic Constitution Sponsa Christi (1950) to the Vatican Instruction Verbi Sponsa (1999) on the contemplative life and enclosure of nuns. (VDQ art. 1 )

Therefore, with a sweep of the hand, Francis mandates:
All contemplative women religious orders must review their aims and rewrite their constitutions to be in better accord with Vatican II;

All past norms and regulations governing contemplatives including Canon Law are voided;

The contemplative women religious orders must submit unquestioningly to VDQ and await another set of guidelines to come.
These new constitutions, once adapted to the new guidelines, still to be issued by the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, must be approved by the Holy See. (VDQ art. 14: §2)

It should be noted here that the one appointed to issue these norms is Brazilian Card. João Braz de Aviz. the head of the Vatican's Congregation for Religious Life. Card. Aviz makes no secret that he believes all religious orders should live their lives more “inserted” into the world.

Addressing the religious formation directors at a Rome congress in 2015, he spoke harsh words against those religious who try to avoid the changes in the Church brought about by Vatican II.

“In fact, those that are distancing themselves from the Council to make another path are killing themselves – sooner or later, they will die,” Braz de Aviz said. “They will make no sense. They will be outside the Church. We need to build, using the Gospel and the Council as a departure point.” (National Catholic Reporter, “ Cardinal to religious: Those who abandon Vatican II are killing themselves,” April 9, 2015)

This is the Cardinal chosen by Francis to issue and regulate the coming specific norms that will direct the contemplative women religious in their task of adaptation to the modern world. I believe it can be fairly said that this does not bode well for the more traditional and conservative orders that have been growing in the past few decades.

While Francis heaps praise on “the life of special consecration,” he is also insisting that these women religious become “women of our time.” (VDQ n. 2) For this, “special attention needs to be given to two great documents of Vatican Council II: Lumen gentium and Perfectae caritatis.”

The first of these in effect sets a new definition of Church as “the People of God,” promotes the protestant notion of the priesthood of the faithful and makes a theoretical call to holiness, but in practice exalting the life of service above all others.

How does this translate into transforming the lives of contemplatives? More participation in the liturgy as ”the people of God,” of course, and a prayer aimed toward improving humanity vs. praise of God.

VDQ effectively asks all contemplative women to embrace the social agenda of the post-conciliar Popes, which eschews prayer for conversion to the Catholic Faith and the primary goal of contemplative life in the past: becoming victim souls to appease the just anger of Our Lord for the sins of individuals and nations. 

A new signpost is erected: to offer “intercessory prayer for prisoners, migrants, refugees and victims of persecution.” These intercessory prayers must also extend to the unemployed, the poor, sick, drug addicts, AIDS victims and others in such “urgent” situations. That is to say, the contemplative sisters are to change their focus from prayer for conversion and salvation of souls to prayer for the social well-being and health of bodies. (n. 16)

Francis the Destroyer is on fire to build this world while attempting to destroy the last vestiges of true contemplation and to sanitize the Catholic Church of her supernatural life.

Preparation for the Beast who will soon reveal himself openly.

Pope Francis: The Destroyer prophesied by Saint Francis? What do you think?

Irish Central reports:
                                                   
"Pope Francis continues to amaze. He married 20 couples on Sunday in Rome several of them “living in sin” having had children outside marriage.

'The people getting married on Sunday are couples like many others,' the diocese of Rome said in a statement. 'Some already live together, some already have children.'

 

The Pope said marriage was 'real life, not some TV show.'

In marrying them he he kicked away one of the bulwark beliefs of the sex-obsessed hierarchy in the old church, the belief that sex outside marriage was a heinous and immoral act.

All of us Irish Catholics grew up with that unfortunate characterization of those who did not conform to the absolute orthodoxy of only having sex and children within marriage.

All others were fallen sinners. This led to some mighty hypocrisy on all sides as fallen men and women were considered far below the virtuous few – most of whom on closer scrutiny were not such virtuous souls.

The scandal around the unfortunate Bishop Eamon Casey, when it was revealed he had a child, was subsequently utterly dwarfed by the pedophile crisis that hit the church in Ireland like a hurricane.
It seems likely that contraception could be next. Francis is nothing but a realist, and over 90 percent of Catholic couples use contraception.

Francis is trying to make the church more inclusive, to absorb those who have been driven away by right wing ideology bordering on the dictatorial.

Old line conservatives like Cardinal Raymond Burke from St,Louis, once a powerful figure in the Vatican who Francis replaced in the Congregation for Bishops, had held fast to the old teachings. .
Their day is done under this new pope.The words of his 2013 September interview make that clear.
It is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time,” Francis said. “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods.

“The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines."

In that same interview Francis cast himself as first and foremost a sinner. It was a remarkable statement, but his papacy is infused with it. We are all sinners, weak, sometimes immoral he says, but we can find our way back to God if we seek to do so. 'Judge not, lest you be judged.'

One can only imagine the privileged conservative old guard choking on their fine Italian wine as they hear this latest pronouncement." (See here).

I've got news for you Francis: The teaching of the Church on cohabitation is also real life and not some TV show.  Here's what the Bishops of Pennsylvania had to say about cohabitation not so long ago:


Living Together: Questions and Answers Regarding Cohabitation and the Church's Moral Teaching

Dear Engaged Couple:


We congratulate you on your engagement and want to offer a word of encouragement to you during this special period of preparation for marriage.

While there are many issues which you will discuss over the course of your preparation period, one important area in which many priests and couples have shared their concerns with us is that of engaged couples living together before marriage. While many in our society may see no problem with this arrangement, living together and having sexual relations before marriage can never be reconciled with what God expects of us.

In addition, countless studies have shown that couples who live together before marriage have higher rates of divorce and a poorer quality of marital relationship than those who do not.

Your engagement is meant to be a time of grace and growth in preparing for your marriage. In the months ahead, we urge all engaged couples who are living together to separate. All Catholics should seek to be reconciled with God and the Church by going to confession and by going to Mass and Holy Communion regularly.

Living chastely during your remaining months of engagement will teach you many things about one another. It will help you to grow in the virtues of generous love, sacrificial giving, self-restraint and good communication - virtues which are essential for a good and lasting marriage.

We pray that as you seek God and his way more deeply, you will be rewarded with an abundance of his grace. May your love for each other always be strong and life-giving.

With every prayerful best wish, we remain,
Sincerely yours in Christ,
The Bishops of Pennsylvania

1. What is cohabitation?
"Cohabitation" is commonly referred to as "living together." It describes the relationship of a man and woman who are sexually active and share a household, though they are not married.

2. Why is cohabitation such a concern for the Church?
As you work with your priest during this time of preparation for marriage, you will speak with him about many issues. But the Church is particularly concerned about cohabitation because the practice is so common today and because, in the long run, it is causing great unhappiness for families in the Church. This is true, above all, because - even though society may approve of the practice - cohabitation simply cannot be squared with God's plan for marriage. This may be why most couples who live together before marriage find married life difficult to sustain for very long.
The Church does not invent laws. It passes on and interprets what God has revealed through the ages. No one in the Church has the right to change what Jesus has taught. To do so would be to deprive people of saving truths that were meant for all time. Our Christian faith teaches that a sexual relationship belongs only in marriage. Sex outside of marriage shows disrespect for the sacrament of marriage, the sacredness of sex, and human dignity.

3. We have good reasons for living together before our wedding. Why can't the Church just accept that?

The Church cares for you as a parent cares for a beloved son or daughter. Knowing that cohabitation increases a couples' chance of marital failure, the Church wants to protect you and preserve your happiness. Besides, most couples don't really evaluate the reasons they give to justify their decision. Think about it:

Reason 1: "It's more convenient for us."

"Convenience" is a good thing, but it's not the basis for making a decision that will affect your entire life. Married life is sometimes inconvenient and even demanding. Cohabitation for convenience is poor preparation for that kind of commitment. Research bears this out. Studies show that those who live together before marriage tend to prefer "change," "experimentation" and open-ended lifestyles - all of which could lead to instability in marriage. One study, conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago and the University of Michigan, concluded that couples who cohabit tend to experience superficial communication and uncommitted decision-making once they are married. Cohabitation for convenience does not allow for the careful thought and adequate "space" necessary for making wise life decisions.

Reason 2: "We're trying to save money for the wedding, so living together is more economical."
Sure, you might save the price of monthly rent, but you're sacrificing something more valuable. Engagement is more than just time to plan the party. It is a time for deeper discussion and more thorough reflection, which are best carried out in a detached way. Couples who are living together do not have the luxury of such detachment. So whatever expenses you save, you'll likely pay more in the end. Dr. Joyce Brothers said it well in an article on cohabitation: "short-term savings are less important than investing in a lifetime relationship."

Reason 3: "Because of the high divorce rate, we want to see if things work out first."
Studies consistently show that couples who live together score significantly lower in both marital communications and overall satisfaction. On the surface, a trial run at marriage may seem to make sense, allowing one to screen out less compatible mates. But it doesn't work out that way. Couples who live together before marriage actually have a 50% greater chance of divorce than those who don't. And about 60% of couples who cohabit break up without marrying. Living together before marriage is different from living together in marriage, because there is no binding commitment to support the relationship.

Reason 4: "We need to get to know one another first. Later we'll start having kids."
Cohabitation is actually the worst way to get to know another person, because it shortcuts the true development of lasting friendship. Those who live together before marriage often report an over-reliance on sexual expression and less emphasis on conversation and other ways of communication - ways that ultimately lead to a more fulfilling sexual union after marriage. Traditionally, the process of dating or "courtship" has led couples to a deeper appreciation of one another through conversation, shared ideals and dreams, and a mutual understanding of one another's values.
Reason 5: "The Church is just outdated and out of touch with its thinking in this matter. Birth control made those old rules obsolete."

That's just not true. In the early days of the Church, living together outside of marriage was common among the non-Christians in the Roman Empire - as was the use of artificial contraception. But these practices were devastating for individuals, families, and society. Women were treated as disposable objects, mere toys for sexual pleasure, to be discarded when passions waned. The Christian vision of marriage and family led to happiness and fulfillment for individuals and families - and a great renewal of culture and society. Far from being outmoded, then as now, the Church's teaching is revolutionary - and it works!

4. Why does the Church interfere in the sex lives of couples? It's really just a private matter between us.

Sex is intensely private and personal, but it also has deep moral and social dimensions. Sex works as a primary bonding agent in families and the family is the building block of society. Sexual rights and wrongs influence the health and happiness of individuals, families and neighborhoods. That's why sexual behavior has always been the subject of many civil laws. The Church, of course, wishes to safeguard the family and society. But, more than that, the Church wishes to safeguard your relationship with your future spouse and with God. Sex is the act that seals and renews the couple's marriage covenant before God. Sexual sins, then, are not just between a man and a woman, but between the couple and God. And that's the Church's responsibility. Sex is not simply a private matter. If it's between you and God, it's between you and the Church. You need to ask yourself: "When do I stop being a Christian? When I close the bedroom door? When does my relationship with God cease to matter?"

5. But, really, how does what we do with our own bodies affect our relationship with each other and our spiritual relationship with God?

The gift of your body in sexual intercourse is a profound symbol of the giving of your whole self. In making love, the husband and wife are saying to one another in "body language" what they said to each other at the altar on their wedding day: "I am yours, for life!" God created sex to be physically pleasurable and emotionally fulfilling. But it is even greater than all that. It is, above all, the deepest sign of the complete gift of self that a husband and wife pledge to each other. This mutual gift empowers the couple to become co-creators with God in giving life to a new person, a baby. According to God's design, the gift of sexual union has two primary purposes: strengthening married love and sharing that love with children. The only "place" where this total self-giving between a man and a woman is to take place is in marriage. It is the only "place" where children can be raised with the secure, committed love of a mother and a father. So sexual intimacy belongs only in marriage. Outside of marriage, sex is a lie. The action says: "I give you my whole self" - but the man and woman are really holding back their commitment, their fertility, and their relationship with God.
Before giving your body to another person, you need to give your whole life, and you need to receive your spouse's whole life in return - and that can only happen in marriage.

6. Why can't I just follow my conscience if I believe living together is okay?

People can be wrong in matters of conscience, and people often are. Where our self-interest is concerned, our capacity for self-deception is huge. Here, as in everything we do, we need an objective standard to tell us if our conscience is properly formed and able to make right judgments. Morality is not a matter of opinion or "gut feeling." Conscience is God's voice, speaking the truth deep within your heart. It's unlikely - if not impossible - that God would contradict His own commandments just for your convenience or desires. You are acting in good conscience when you choose to do what God intends. The choice to live together outside a marriage is always wrong and sinful.

7. Why does the Church claim that living together is a scandal to others?

Many of our family and friends are doing the same thing. Just because everyone does something doesn't make it right or any less serious. A couple's choice to live together is not simply made in isolation. It affects everyone in relationship with these two people - parents, brothers, sisters, friends, and even other members of the parish. A cohabiting couple implicitly communicates that there is nothing wrong breaking God's law. This can be especially misleading to young children - nieces, nephews, and children of
friends - who are impressionable and whose moral reasoning is immature.

8. What is the best way to prepare ourselves spiritually for our upcoming marriage?

"A wedding is for a day, but a marriage is for a lifetime." That can be a long and happy time, but only with good preparation. The best way to get ready for marriage is to practice your faith. Catholics do this by faithful attendance at weekly Sunday Mass, by going to the Sacrament of Penance (confession), by prayer, and by practicing works of charity. If you haven't been attending Mass regularly, your parish priest will want to see you back. If it's been a long time since your last confession, your priest will help you. Confession is a necessary step if you have already been cohabiting. During the days of preparation, you are strongly encouraged to pray together as a couple, read Scripture, and lead a virtuous life. For guidance, look to other couples with strong Christian values.

9. Why should we need to separate now? It's just an arbitrary rule of the Church.
The Church's teaching on cohabitation is not an "arbitrary" rule. Living together before marriage is a sin because it violates God's commandments and the law of the Church. St. Paul lists this sin - technically called "fornication" among the sins (whether within or outside cohabitation) that can keep a person from reaching heaven (see 1 Corinthians 6:9) Cohabitation works against the heart's deepest desires and greatly increases the chances of a failed marriage. If you are honest with yourself, every practical consideration will tell you that separating before marriage is the right thing to do. It is a decision to turn away from sin and to follow Christ and His teaching. That is always the right decision. But it's a good decision for other important reasons, too:-it will strengthen your marriage -it will deepen your friendship -it will foster deeper intimacy and communion -it will build up your problem-solving and communications skills -it will give your marriage a greater chance for success. You may think you are unique and that your passion for each other will never wane. But that's what most couples think. No one goes into marriage planning for a breakup; yet a majority of couples today do break up. You want to be one of the exceptional couples who not only succeed in marriage, but also live together in happiness and fulfillment. Some couples who are living together think that separation before marriage is artificial or meaningless. Some fear that halting sexual activity will be harmful to the relationship. But this is rarely the case. Sometimes in marriage, too, a sexual relationship will have to be suspended for a time due to illness, military service, business travel, or the good of a spouse. Relationships not only survive this , but actually grow stronger. God rewards such sacrifices with graces for a good relationship. Abstaining from sex will also enable you to rely on other means of communication, which ultimately will empower you to get to know each other in a deeper, lasting way.

10. What good will following the Church's teachings do for us anyway?

Catholic teaching in this matter brings rich blessings to those couples who willingly accept it. The Good News of Jesus frees you to enjoy intimacy even more:
-by appreciating your spouse as a person, not an object
-by living in a stable, secure, permanent, and faithful relationship
-by expressing true, committed love rather than simply satisfying a physical urge
Married life has a special place in God's plan. Like everything good, it require sacrifices. But they're small compared to the rewards. Seek first the Kingdom of God; everything else you desire will be given to you - and more!

Questions for Reflection and Prayer:

1. As an engaged couple, why did you choose to cohabit before marriage?
2. What have the two of you learned from your experience of living together? What have you learned about yourselves as a couple and as individuals?
3. What is the driving force behind your decision to marry at this time? What has changed in the relationship and made you wish to marry and have your marriage blessed in this Church?
4. Was there a previous reluctance or hesitation to marry? If so, why? Have those issues been completely resolved?
5. Why are you seeking marriage in the Catholic Church?
6. What does marriage as a sacrament mean to the two of you?
7. How do you see your faith and love for each other as an intimate part of your marriage?
8. How do you want your marriage to be open to life?
"At the beginning, the Creator made them male and female and declared for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife. And the two shall become as one. Thus, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore, let no man separate what God has joined."
- Matthew 19:4-6
"The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws . . . God himself is the author of marriage."
- The Church in the Modern World, Vatican II, 48
"The conjugal covenant of marriage opens the spouses to a lasting communion of love and life, and it is brought to completion in a full and specific way with the procreation of children. The communion of spouses gives rise to the community of the family." - Letter to Families, Pope John Paul II, 7
"Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses . . . is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death . . .That total physical self-giving would be a lie if it were not the sign and fruit of a total personal self-giving."
- Familiaris Consortio, Pope John Paul II, 11
"The spouses' union achieves the twofold end of marriage: the good of the spouses themselves and the transmission of life. These two meanings or values of marriage cannot be separated without altering the couple's spiritual life and compromising the goods of marriage and the future of the family. The conjugal love of man and woman thus stands under the twofold obligation of fidelity and fecundity."
- Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2363
"The very preparation for Christian marriage is itself a journey of faith. It is a special opportunity for the engaged to rediscover and deepen the faith received in Baptism and nourished by their Christian upbringing. In this way they come to recognize and freely accept their vocation to follow Christ and to serve the Kingdom of God in the married state."
- Pope John Paul II, The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World


Father Malachi Martin, a Jesuit scholar who served as a member of the Vatican Advisory Council as well as personal secretary to Cardinal Augustin Bea, was known to be in possession of detailed information pertaining to the Third Secret of Fatima, which he said addressed a plan to install the False Prophet during a "Final Conclave."

Is it just a coincidence that the current Pontiff took the name Francis - after Saint Francis of Assisi - when the same saint was given a prophecy which enabled him to prophesy that, "...a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error and death.....some preachers will keep silence about the truth, an others will trample it under foot and deny it....for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer."
This prophecy of an anti-pope seizing papal authority and the faithful remnant of the Church being subjected to persecution like never before in history has been spoken of by many seers.  Blessed Joachim prophesied that, "Toward the end of the world, Antichrist will overthrow the pope and usurp his See."  Malvenda says that, "...Rome itself in the last times of the world will return to its ancient idolatry, power and imperial greatness.  It will cast out its Pontiff, altogether apostasize from the Christian faith, terribly persecute the Church, shed the blood of martyrs more cruelly than ever, and will recover its former state of abundant wealth, or even greater than it had under its first rulers."

The priest-mystic Father Herman Bernard Kramer, in his classic work "The Book of Destiny," interprets the twelfth chapter of the Book of Revelation thusly: "The 'sign' in heaven is that of a woman with child crying out in travail and anguish of delivery.  In that travail, she gives birth to some definite 'person' who is to rule the Church with a rod of iron (verse 5).  It then points to a conflict-waged within the Church to elect one who was to 'rule all nations' in the manner clearly stated.  In accord with the text this is unmistakably a papal election, for only Christ and His Vicar have the divine right to rule all nations.....But at this time the great powers may take a menacing attitude to hinder the election of  the logical and expected candidate...."

What else does this describe but a revolution in the Church?  See here for what's going on in Pope Francis' Argentina.

Frederick William Faber (died 1863): Antichrist…Many believe in a demonical incarnation—this will not be so—but he will be utterly possessed…His doctrine as apparent contradiction of no religion, yet a new religion…He has an attending pontiff, so separating regal and prophetic office (Edward. Prophecy for Today. Imprimatur + A.J. Willinger, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno; Reprint: Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford (IL), 1984, p. 87).

Anna-Katarina Emmerick(19th century): The Church is in great danger…The Protestant doctrine and that of the schismatic Greeks are to spread everywhere. I now see that in this place (Rome) the (Catholic) Church is being so cleverly undermined, that there hardly remain a hundred or so priests who have not been deceived. They all work for the destruction, even the clergy. A great destruction is now at hand…I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. They were building a great, strange, and extravagant Church. Everyone was admitted in it in order to be united and to have equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description. Such was to be the new Church…I saw again a new and odd-looking Church which they were trying to build. There was nothing holy about it… (Dupont Y. Catholic Prophecy: The Coming Chastisement. TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1973, pp. 66, 71, 116)

Yves Dupont {writer interpreting A. Emmerick}: They wanted to make a new Church, a Church of human manufacture, but God had other designs…An anti-pope shall be set up in Rome (Dupont, p. 116).

Oba Prophecy: It will come when the Church authorities issue directives to support a new cult, when priests are forbidden to celebrate in any other, when the highest positions in the Church are given to perjurers and hypocrites, when only the renegades are admitted to occupy those positions. (Dupont, p. 115)

Ted and Maureen Flynn (20th century): Catholic prophecy warns us of severe problems facing the papacy in these end times…chaos will be within our midst. An Antipope will seize papal authority…It will be those who hold fast to the truths of the faith who will be labeled as the perpetrators of this horrible schism, according to some visionaries. (Flynn Ted and Maureen. The Thunder of Justice. MaxKol Communications, Inc. Sterling (VA), 1993, p. 255)

Jeanne le Royer (d. 1798): I see that when the Second Coming of Christ approaches a bad priest will do much harm to the Church (Culligan E. The Last World War and the End of Time. The book was blessed by Pope Paul VI, 1966. TAN Books, Rockford (IL), p. 128).

Bl. Anna-Maria Taigi (19th century): At the end, he will have the gift of miracles (Birch DA. Trial, Tribulation & Triumph: Before During and After Antichrist. Queenship Publishing Company, Goleta (CA), 1996, pp. 362-363).

Saint Zenobius (died 285): Antichrist will work a thousand prodigies on earth. (Connor, p. 73)

Priest O’Connor (20th century?): This final false prophet will be a bishop of the church and will lead all religions into becoming one. (The False Prophet. Living in the Final Generation. http://www.geocities.com/rebornempowered/ApparitionsofMary.htm 10/12/07)

Priest Paul Kramer (21st century): The errors of Orthodoxy and of Protestantism will be embraced by that false church, it will be an ecumenical church because the Anti-Pope will be recognized by the world—not by the faithful, but by the world—by the secular world and the secular governments. (Kramer P. The Imminent Chastisement for Not Fulfilling Our Lady’s Request. An edited transcript of a speech given at the Ambassadors of Jesus and Mary Seminar in Glendale, California.

Blessed Joachim (died 1202): Towards the end of the world Antichrist will overthrow the Pope and usurp his See (Connor, p. 76).

St. Francis of Assisi (d. 1226): There will be an uncanonically elected pope who will cause a great Schism, there will be divers thoughts preached which will cause many, even those in the different orders, to doubt, yea even agree with those heretics which will cause My order to divide, then will there be such universal dissentions and persecutions that if these days were not shortened even the elect would be lost (Culleton, p. 130).

Gregory the Great, Pope (d. 604): In those days, near the end…an army of priests and two-thirds of the Christians will join the Schism. (Culleton, R. Gerald. The Reign of Antichrist, p. 122)

Yves Dupont {reader and collector of Catholic prophecies}: “prophecies are quite explicit about the election of an anti-pope…Many prophecies predict an anti-pope and a schism” (Dupont, pp. 34,60-61)

G. Rossi (1873): We must observe that St. Malachy does not mention the last Pope as a distinct person from the preceding one, whom he styles Glory of the Olive. He merely says, “During the last persecution of the Church, Peter II, a Roman, shall reign. He shall feed the flock in many tribulations, at the end of which the City of the Seven Hills (Rome) will be destroyed, and the awful Judge shall judge his people.” According to St. Malachy, then, only ten, or at most eleven, popes remain to be in future more or less legitimately elected. We say more or less legitimately elected, because out of those future popes it is to be feared that one or two will be unlawfully elected as anti-popes. (Rossi, p. 139)

Priest E. Sylvester Berry (20th century) As indicated by the resemblance to a lamb, the prophet will probably set himself up in Rome as a sort of antipope during the vacancy of the papal throne . . .(Berry E.S. The Apocalypse of St. John. First published 1921. http://journals.aol.com/langosh5/Father_E_Sylvester_Berry/ 10/12/07)

Priest Herman Kramer (20th century): In accord with the text this is unmistakably a PAPAL ELECTION . . . But at this time the great powers may take a menacing attitude to hinder the election of the logical and expected candidate by threats of a general apostasy, assassination or imprisonment of this candidate if elected. This would suppose an extremely hostile mind in the governments of Europe towards the Church, because an extended interregnum in the papacy is always disastrous and more so in a time of universal persecution. If Satan would contrive to hinder a papal election, the Church would suffer great travail … one…destined for the papacy at the time will institute the needed reforms. A general council may decree the reforms…The lax clergy at the time will extol the conditions then existing…The dragon is a symbolic term for the evil world powers…They will try to make the Church a “state church” everywhere. This is only possible if they can subject the pope to their wills and compel him to teach and rule as they direct. That would be literally devouring the papacy. (Kramer H.B. L. The Book of Destiny, pp. 278,285).

Bishop Malachy (12th century): During the persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit upon the throne, Peter the Roman…the City of Seven Hills (Rome) will be utterly destroyed (Culleton, R. Gerald. The Prophets and Our Times. Nihil Obstat: L. Arvin. Imprimatur: Philip G. Scher, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno, November 15, 1941. Reprint 1974, TAN Books, Rockford (IL), p. 138).

As the Apostasy continues to spread, hatred for the Ten Commandments will intensify.  See here and here.