S
StevieD
Guest
This UFO analogy does not fit, three children did not predict the exact date of the appearance of UFO’s over Phoenix as proof of earlier messages. This makes Fatima totally different.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Its not an analogy that I buy into but it is one that people can and have made.This UFO analogy does not fit, three children did not predict the exact date of the appearance of UFO’s over Phoenix as proof of earlier messages. This makes Fatima totally different.
T
Timothysis
Guest
Oh, good grief. Then it would seem that we are all doomed. The past recent popes have all been involved in an effort to undermine the Church by calling an “evil council,” participating in the “evil council,” enacting reforms of the “evil council,” and in accordance with the “evil council” publishing a new missal in order to celebrate the liturgy of the Mass. Obviously, the popes are evil, the cardinals who elected them are evil and the bishops who adhere to them are evil (I guess we’re lucky that so many bishops ignore the wishes of the pope, huh?). Fatima was supposed to be about repentance and reparation for sin but thrown in at the last minute is a little bit that the Church would apostatize itself. Oh well, you win some, you lose some.Actually, more and more is beginning to leak out.\
Before the Vatican published the Vision of the Third Secret, there had been reports that the secret contained two parts: One dealt with the Pope and the other part dealt with the apostasy.
In 1952 Fr. Joseph Schweigl, S.J., was sent by Pope Pius XII to speak with Sister Lucy regarding the Third Secret. This is what he said publicly upon his return:
“I cannot reveal anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the third secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one concerns the Pope. The other, logically–although I must say nothing–would have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.”
Most of the quotes that dealt with the Third Secret, prior to the release of the vision in 2000 dealt with the apostacy. The famous quote from Cardinal Ratzinger from 1984, for example, mentioned the crisis of faith and nothing about a Pope being killed. Most of the other quotes from those who read the secret also mentioned the apostasy.
What is beginning to leak out is what is contained in the not-yet-release portion, which begins with “In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved…”.
What does this not-yet-released part of the Secret say? Here’s a quote from a recent interview.
“…Question: Do you see a connection between the Third Secret of Fatima and the introduction of the New Mass?”
“[Fr. Kramer] Sister Lucy of Fatima, said that there would take place a diabolical disorientation in the Church. And there is nothing that could do more to bring that about than a liturgical revolution that would enshrine alien principles into a seemingly Catholic liturgy.
As a matter of fact, there is more substance to the question of a diabolical disorientation. I am referring to the part of the Third Secret of Fatima that has not yet been revealed. I know this to be a fact because **I have personally spoken with a German theologian and a seminary Rector who is a longtime close fiend of Pope Benedict. **
When Pope Benedict was still Cardinal Ratzinger, around 1990 he revealed to his friend that in the Third Secret of Fatima Our Lady warns not to change the liturgy: literally, not to mix extraneous foreign elements into the Catholic liturgy. Now, of course, with the new Mass of Pope Paul VI, that is exactly what was done. Elements of Protestantism, both in symbolism and in the wording of the liturgy, were brought into and mixed into a Catholic framework to the extent that the makers of the new Rite flatly stated that this is no longer the Roman Rite, it is a new creation.”
**“…Our Lady also warned that there would be an evil Council in the Church that would cause great scandal. **And of course, it was the documents of Vatican II-the Constitution on the Liturgy-which gave the impetus for Pope Paul VI to reform the liturgy in such a disastrous manner that caused such a loss of faith and confusion in the Church.”
“…Now after this took place, the German theologian who I am referring to went back to the country in South America where he was Rector of a seminary and he explained to a young priest what Cardinal Ratzinger had related to him. And precisely when he related that Our Lady warned against changing the Mass and there would be an evil Council in the Church, the both of them saw a plume of smoke coming up from the floor. Now it was a marble floor. This could not be anything of a natural phenomenon. Both the young priest and the old German Rector were so impressed they drew up a dossier and sent it to Cardinal Ratzinger.”
“…The elderly German priest, Ratzinger’s long-time personal friend, took note of the fact that when this vision of the Third Secret was published it did not contain those things, those elements of the Third Secret that Cardinal Ratzinger had revealed to him nearly ten years earlier. The German priest -Father Dollinger- told me that this question was burning in his mind on the day he concelebrated with Cardinal Ratzinger. Father Dollinger said to me, “I confronted Cardinal Ratzinger to his face” And of course he asked Cardinal Ratzinger, “how can this be the entire Third Secret? Remember what you told me before?”
Cardinal Ratzinger was cornered. He didn’t know what to say so he blurted out to his friend in German, “Wirklich gebt das der etwas” which means “really there is something more there,” meaning there is something more in the Third Secret. The Cardinal stated this quite plainly.”
I know of another person who was told the exact same thing by another priest years ago, who also received the information from Cardinal Ratzinger. It seems clear why the promoters of Vatican II would want to bury the Third Secret.
J
juliamajor
Guest
Holy Moley- I have been hearing variations on the same theme since I’m a little kid -that about 50 yrs ago.So no- I don’t feel comfortable with private revelation-because it can cause conspiracy theories, gossip, discontent and other mischiefs when people start to speculate on that which would be impossible to know.Actually, more and more is beginning to leak out.\
Before the Vatican published the Vision of the Third Secret, there had been reports that the secret contained two parts: One dealt with the Pope and the other part dealt with the apostasy.
In 1952 Fr. Joseph Schweigl, S.J., was sent by Pope Pius XII to speak with Sister Lucy regarding the Third Secret. This is what he said publicly upon his return:
“I cannot reveal anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the third secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one concerns the Pope. The other, logically–although I must say nothing–would have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.”
Most of the quotes that dealt with the Third Secret, prior to the release of the vision in 2000 dealt with the apostacy. The famous quote from Cardinal Ratzinger from 1984, for example, mentioned the crisis of faith and nothing about a Pope being killed. Most of the other quotes from those who read the secret also mentioned the apostasy.
What is beginning to leak out is what is contained in the not-yet-release portion, which begins with “In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved…”.
What does this not-yet-released part of the Secret say? Here’s a quote from a recent interview.
“…Question: Do you see a connection between the Third Secret of Fatima and the introduction of the New Mass?”
“[Fr. Kramer] Sister Lucy of Fatima, said that there would take place a diabolical disorientation in the Church. And there is nothing that could do more to bring that about than a liturgical revolution that would enshrine alien principles into a seemingly Catholic liturgy.
As a matter of fact, there is more substance to the question of a diabolical disorientation. I am referring to the part of the Third Secret of Fatima that has not yet been revealed. I know this to be a fact because **I have personally spoken with a German theologian and a seminary Rector who is a longtime close fiend of Pope Benedict. **
When Pope Benedict was still Cardinal Ratzinger, around 1990 he revealed to his friend that in the Third Secret of Fatima Our Lady warns not to change the liturgy: literally, not to mix extraneous foreign elements into the Catholic liturgy. Now, of course, with the new Mass of Pope Paul VI, that is exactly what was done. Elements of Protestantism, both in symbolism and in the wording of the liturgy, were brought into and mixed into a Catholic framework to the extent that the makers of the new Rite flatly stated that this is no longer the Roman Rite, it is a new creation.”
**“…Our Lady also warned that there would be an evil Council in the Church that would cause great scandal. **And of course, it was the documents of Vatican II-the Constitution on the Liturgy-which gave the impetus for Pope Paul VI to reform the liturgy in such a disastrous manner that caused such a loss of faith and confusion in the Church.”
“…Now after this took place, the German theologian who I am referring to went back to the country in South America where he was Rector of a seminary and he explained to a young priest what Cardinal Ratzinger had related to him. And precisely when he related that Our Lady warned against changing the Mass and there would be an evil Council in the Church, the both of them saw a plume of smoke coming up from the floor. Now it was a marble floor. This could not be anything of a natural phenomenon. Both the young priest and the old German Rector were so impressed they drew up a dossier and sent it to Cardinal Ratzinger.”
“…The elderly German priest, Ratzinger’s long-time personal friend, took note of the fact that when this vision of the Third Secret was published it did not contain those things, those elements of the Third Secret that Cardinal Ratzinger had revealed to him nearly ten years earlier. The German priest -Father Dollinger- told me that this question was burning in his mind on the day he concelebrated with Cardinal Ratzinger. Father Dollinger said to me, “I confronted Cardinal Ratzinger to his face” And of course he asked Cardinal Ratzinger, “how can this be the entire Third Secret? Remember what you told me before?”
Cardinal Ratzinger was cornered. He didn’t know what to say so he blurted out to his friend in German, “Wirklich gebt das der etwas” which means “really there is something more there,” meaning there is something more in the Third Secret. The Cardinal stated this quite plainly.”
I know of another person who was told the exact same thing by another priest years ago, who also received the information from Cardinal Ratzinger. It seems clear why the promoters of Vatican II would want to bury the Third Secret.
If you want True Revelation stick to the Scripture and the Church and the Holy Spirit which guides it.We have the Trinity- No other proposed vehicle of revelation need apply.
S
StevieD
Guest
Definitely ‘Yeah’. Something this big was bound to attract many strange conspiracy theorists. Believe Sr Lucia, the current and previous Pope and the Church. Do not put your faith in others who are on the fringes (and possibly beyond the pale) of the Church of God. It is a mistake and a big mistake which is spiritually dangerous.Oh, yeah?
(From “The Devil’s Final Battle”, by Fr. Paul Kramer):
September 1985 - In an interview in Sol de Fatima magazine (a publication of friends of the Spanish Blue Army), Sister Lucy affirms that the Consecration of Russia still has not been done because, yet again, Russia was not the clear object of the 1984 consecration and the world’s episcopate did not participate.
1985 - Cardinal Gagnon, in an interview with Father Caillon, acknowledges the Consecration of Russia has still not been done.
1986 - Maria do Fetal publicly quotes Sister Lucy (her cousin) as saying that the Consecration of Russia still has not been done. Maria do Fetal will consistently maintain that Sister Lucy told her this until July 1989
July 20, 1987 - Interviewed quickly outside her convent while voting, Sister Lucy confirms to journalist Enrico Romero that the Consecration of Russia has not been done.
October 25, 1987 - In an audience with a dozen Catholic leaders, Cardinal Mayer publicly acknowledges that the Consecration has not been done according to Our Lady’s specific request.
November 26, 1987 - In a private meeting, Cardinal Stickler confirms that the Consecration has not been done because the Pope lacks the support of the bishops. “They do not obey him,” says Cardinal Stickler.
1988 - Cardinal Gagnon attacks Father Gruner for publishing the Caillon report of his 1985 statement that the Consecration has not yet been done. Cardinal Gagnon admits speaking to Father Caillon, and does not deny the truth of his report, but says it was not meant for publication.
1989 - More than 350 Roman Catholic bishops respond to a letter from Father Gruner, confirming their willingness to consecrate Russia with the Pope as requested by Our Lady at Fatima.
July 1989 - In the presence of three witnesses at the Hotel Solar da Marta in Fatima, Father Messias Coelho reveals that Sister Lucy has just received an anonymous “instruction” from unidentified persons in the Vatican bureaucracy. The “instruction” states that Sister Lucy and her fellow religious must now say that the Consecration of Russia was accomplished in the ceremony of March 25, 1984, even though Russia was never mentioned and the world’s bishops did not participate.
Code:After this development, various witnesses — including, it is claimed, Sister Lucy herself — begin to repudiate their own prior statements that the Consecration has not been done. These witnesses previously clearly stated that Russia could not possibly have been consecrated as requested in the Fatima Message because of the failure to mention Russia and the failure to obtain the participation of the world's bishops. Thus begins a process of “revising” Our Lady's request from the Consecration of Russia to the Consecration of the world. At the same time, powerful forces from within the Vatican apparatus begin to target Father Gruner and his apostolate for suppression.
C
CassiusLonginus
Guest
Everybody, just accept the fact that Russia has been consecrated. I mean, look at the proof. Her conversion is like…voila! What a miracle!
H
hawkeye
Guest
I believe in Fatima, signs were promised and signs were given, war was prophesied, it happened, the miracle of the sun, it happened, witnessed by more than 70’000 people.
And I believe Fatima was for an era, but the things requested aren’t being lived, and the world is headed towards a period of darkness, be it war pestilence or otherwise.
And I believe Fatima was for an era, but the things requested aren’t being lived, and the world is headed towards a period of darkness, be it war pestilence or otherwise.
R
RosaryCrusader
Guest
Well, Brother, whether you believe or not one thing we can both agree on is that if us wayward children had been living the Gospel like we’re suppose to then our good Mother would not have to come down to warn us in the first place. It’s really tragic that Our Lady has to come down from heaven to tell us the fundamentals of Catholicism ie. the existence of Hell, the necessity of prayer and penance, the value of intercessory prayer, Christian modesty etc…No need to get profane.
You may believe as you wish, I have been told that I should believe in Fatima solely because of the Miracle of the Sun. There are other reasons to believe inteh miracles of Christ besides my being told that they happened.
Miracles are not the only reason to believe in something.
No need for me to read books. You seem to assume that I do not believe in Fatima, I have not said this. I have not said where my beliefs are on this matter, as I said, it is a private matter that I chose not to reveal here.
I chose to believe Pope John Paul II, Sr Lucia, and the other Church officials (the current pope is one of them) who says that we do have the whole Third Secret. I chose to believe them because they have seen it and those claiming we do not have it have not seen it. I think Mother Angelica, if she did say that, is wrong.
Any ways, it does not matter if we have it or not as it is a matter of private revelation and has no bearing on our salvation.
Yes, Fatima (and many other apparitions) has been deemed “worthy of belief” but not required. A faithful Catholic may believe that nothing supernatural has occurred at Fatima or any of the other approved apparitions and still be a faithful Catholic.
Tragic…
T
TNKnight
Guest
Amen to that RosaryCrusader!Well, Brother, whether you believe or not one thing we can both agree on is that if us wayward children had been living the Gospel like we’re suppose to then our good Mother would not have to come down to warn us in the first place. It’s really tragic that Our Lady has to come down from heaven to tell us the fundamentals of Catholicism ie. the existence of Hell, the necessity of prayer and penance, the value of intercessory prayer, Christian modesty etc…
Tragic…
V
VitaminC
Guest
Oh, so you want to believe the current Pope? So, do you believe him when he said in 2000 that the Secret has nothing to do with the apocalypse, or do you believe him in 1984 when he said the Secret DOES involve the importance of the Apocalypse? Which one??Definitely ‘Yeah’. Something this big was bound to attract many strange conspiracy theorists. Believe Sr Lucia, the current and previous Pope and the Church. Do not put your faith in others who are on the fringes (and possibly beyond the pale) of the Church of God. It is a mistake and a big mistake which is spiritually dangerous.
How about Pope JPII on May 13, 2000 when he said the Secret was alerting us to the Apocalypse, citing Apocalypse 12:3-4? --content available on vatican website.
How about Cardinal Ciappi saying that it deals with the great apostasy, and that it starts at the top? Cardinal Oddi and Malachi Martin as well?
Sorry, but this type of “trust the Church and Pope” argument won’t work.
M
Matariel
Guest
But Russia is mostly non-practicing Orthodox or agnostic… and the people that do go to church are Russian Orthodox, not Catholic. So you can hardly say it’s converted…Everybody, just accept the fact that Russia has been consecrated. I mean, look at the proof. Her conversion is like…voila! What a miracle!
S
StevieD
Guest
It works for me and should do so for any Catholic. Just listen to Our Lady’s message, forget the conspiracy theories.Oh, so you want to believe the current Pope? So, do you believe him when he said in 2000 that the Secret has nothing to do with the apocalypse, or do you believe him in 1984 when he said the Secret DOES involve the importance of the Apocalypse? Which one??
How about Pope JPII on May 13, 2000 when he said the Secret was alerting us to the Apocalypse, citing Apocalypse 12:3-4? --content available on vatican website.
How about Cardinal Ciappi saying that it deals with the great apostasy, and that it starts at the top? Cardinal Oddi and Malachi Martin as well?
Sorry, but this type of “trust the Church and Pope” argument won’t work.
S
StevieD
Guest
Who is saying that Russia IS converted? The ditching of Communism was an absolutely necessary first step for Russia to convert to Christ and occurred with incredible swiftness following the consecration. Now - well we wait and see, we have no dates from Our Lady, she did not say “and immediately after the consecration…” We were promised a period of peace (as opposed to a war which has not occurred). If the conversion is to Orthodoxy well that is an authentic conversion. Never forget that the promises were conditional on the fulfilment of her “REQUESTS” - plural - that includes presumably a sufficient number of Catholics saying the Rosary and carrying out the devotions of the first Five Saturdays. Don’t blame Our Lady, don’t blame the Church, don’t blame the Popes - we should all look closer to home (myself included).But Russia is mostly non-practicing Orthodox or agnostic… and the people that do go to church are Russian Orthodox, not Catholic. So you can hardly say it’s converted…
C
CassiusLonginus
Guest
I was just being sarcastic. If the consecration had been fulfilled NOBODY could miss it.But Russia is mostly non-practicing Orthodox or agnostic… and the people that do go to church are Russian Orthodox, not Catholic. So you can hardly say it’s converted…
C
CassiusLonginus
Guest
I like your non-answer to what VitaminC said. “It works for me and should do so for any Catholic” doesn’t fly because the pope has contradicted himself. Furthermore, VitaminC didn’t mention any conspiracy theories; he simply reiterated other people’s words and showed how they contradicted themselves. Way to go.It works for me and should do so for any Catholic. Just listen to Our Lady’s message, forget the conspiracy theories.
M
Matariel
Guest
I agree. I totally believe Mother Mary appeared at Fátima.Who is saying that Russia IS converted? The ditching of Communism was an absolutely necessary first step for Russia to convert to Christ and occurred with incredible swiftness following the consecration.
It’s a step in the right direction, but the schismatic Eastern churches are still separated from the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. Although much closer to the Church than the Protestants or Anglicans, they still are nevertheless not in communion with the holy Catholic Church. For their to be a true conversion, it must be to the holy Catholic Faith, not one of the separated Eastern churches.If the conversion is to Orthodoxy well that is an authentic conversion.
I agree. I’ve never done the First Five Saturdays, but I should. I also want to do the First Fridays for the Sacred Heart, too.Never forget that the promises were conditional on the fulfilment of her “REQUESTS” - plural - that includes presumably a sufficient number of Catholics saying the Rosary and carrying out the devotions of the first Five Saturdays. Don’t blame Our Lady, don’t blame the Church, don’t blame the Popes - we should all look closer to home (myself included).
M
Matariel
Guest
He didn’t contradict himself, he merely changed his mind.I like your non-answer to what VitaminC said. “It works for me and should do so for any Catholic” doesn’t fly because the pope has contradicted himself.
C
CassiusLonginus
Guest
Russia ceasing to spread its error and its conversion will have to be miraculous and sudden. It will have to be because heaven can accomplish this whereas men cannot. But if we wait 20 or 50 years or more until russia converts and stops spreading her error who will notice this? Who will see this and say “wow, this is a sign”? Nobody.The ditching of Communism was an absolutely necessary first step for Russia to convert to Christ and occurred with incredible swiftness following the consecration. Now - well we wait and see, we have no dates from Our Lady, she did not say “and immediately after the consecration…”
How is this authentic? Is the orthodox church really an authentic church if its still in schism? They still need to come back and submit to the Roman pontiff, the vicar of Christ.We were promised a period of peace (as opposed to a war which has not occurred). If the conversion is to Orthodoxy well that is an authentic conversion.
This is a very good point, but also we can lay blame with the popes as well. Russia was never mentioned in the consecrations. I’ve said it elsewhere and I’ll say it again, if the BVM appeared in my house and told me to pray for the conversion of my sister, I’d follow orders and pray for the conversion of my sister…I would NOT simply pray for the conversion of all women, or all people, because that’s not what was asked of me.Never forget that the promises were conditional on the fulfilment of her “REQUESTS” - plural - that includes presumably a sufficient number of Catholics saying the Rosary and carrying out the devotions of the first Five Saturdays. Don’t blame Our Lady, don’t blame the Church, don’t blame the Popes - we should all look closer to home (myself included).
The consecration has yet to take place. Also, given the SSPX’s current rosary crusade, you don’t think that the pope or one of his men would be quick to point out to the SSPX that it’s already taken place?
Ultimately, did we fulfill the BVM’s wishes? No, we didn’t, we simply disobeyed under the auspices of “doing even better!”. Perhaps we should just be obedient children and do what we’re told.
M
malachi3
Guest
I think I believe in Fatima. Not sure of a lot these days.The title pretty much says it all.
After reading The Last Secret of Fatima by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, I’ve come to believe that the events in Fatima are more than just “worthy of belief”. I’m interested, though, in what others think, so that is the subject of this thread. What do you believe happened, or did not happen, in Fatima, Portugal in the year 1917?
Btw, I’m sick of reading page after page of snappish, agitated posts. If you post on this thread, please do so with respect and dignity so that we can have a true theological/historical discussion here. This is not to be a playground for bickering. I won’t hesitate to report any blatant disrespect; just be aware of that.
(BYW, I think the bickersons and snappers probably aren’t Catholics looking for serious discussion, but are just looking to agitate Catholics. Ya never know.)
C
CassiusLonginus
Guest
If that’s not LOL I don’t know what is.He didn’t contradict himself, he merely changed his mind.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.