Fatima's Third Secret and Vatican II

  • Thread starter Thread starter RoseofMary1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pope after Pope who have presided over perhaps the greatest mass apostasy and heresy in the 2000-year history of the Church.

Someone is doing something wrong. As they say: stuff rolls uphill.
 
That is misdirection and mis-characterization. He was not suspended for promoting an approved apparition (Fatima). He was accused of “insubordination.,” which was meant to discredit him because he was promoting our Lady of Fatima.

There was a letter used by the media, but it was by the Vatican’s Secretary of State and was never substantiated or confirmed by the church.

 
A little honesty would be good here, as those quoted words are those of Our Lady. Also, Fatima,or has no\ever broken with the pope. Saying you don’t believed it is not evidence. It is all there to be found (If pride is not in the way).
 
He appealed his suspension to the highest court in the Church - the Apostolic Signatura. They rejected his appeal, and that is all the confirmation the Church needs to make. Your comment concerning confirmation of a letter is called a red herring - the Church does not need to confirm a letter; the highest court confirmed the suspension.

The bit about the case being used to discredit him is just a bunch of blather as it has nothing to do with the reality of the case; his bishop ordered him to return to the diocese and he refused. that is a violation, the case was tried, appealed, and the Church, through its court, siad the case was a) legitimate and b) his suspension was correct and his appeal failed.
 
RoseofMary1 said:
A little honesty would be good here, as those quoted words are those of Our Lady. Also, Fatima,or has no\ever broken with the pope. Saying you don’t believed it is not evidence.
Click to expand...
Repeating the same thing over and over is not evidence. Can you show where the Church has said those words are Mary’s? I only found where it was claimed by those who are not to be trusted.
 
ChunkMonk said:
Pope after Pope who have presided over perhaps the greatest mass apostasy and heresy in the 2000-year history of the Church.
Click to expand...
Martin Luther expressed a similar sentiment. Do you have another 94 theses?
 
Last edited:
Literally impossible, as Russia’s errors are still being spread throughout the world.

Reality is that Russia was never and has never been consecrated according to the request of Our Lady. And it speaks to another very frightening reality that no Pope has done this, despite having plenty of opportunity. Even if they believed it was already done, why not do it “again” in thr correct form, if only to assuage all the doubts and remove the stumbling block?

But as I said, it is manifestly obvious that it has not been done. Which means there must be some reason why it is not being done. I couldn’t even begin to imagine what that reason is, but I have a feeling it concerns the real Third Secret.
 
ChunkMonk said:
why not do it “again” in thr correct form
Click to expand...
The correct form? As decided by you? By other dissident Catholics? This thread has had an explosion of schismatic ideas. Why would any faithful Catholic believe random anonymous posters over three popes?
 
Well, no, Martin Luther was the “cause” other mass apostasy event that might compete with our own. He wasn’t a Pope or even a bishop. And I’m pretty sure he wasn’t complaining that Our Lady’s words were not being heeded.

The Church is the Church. The pope is the pope. I have no interest in disobedience. I have no interest in deifying the Pope either though.
 
I mean the form laid out by Our Lady. A consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart in communion with the Bishops.

Schismatic? Dissident? Why all the buzz-words? No one here is preaching schism or disobedience. That kind of rhetoric only serves to dig people in even deeper into their ideas that something very bad is going on. When reasonabke requests and questions are treated like that it makes one wonder why it is such a festering sore spot. Would multiple consecration invalidate each other? Will Our Lady be angry if we exercise an abundance of caution and make sure we do it right?

As I said, it is manifestly obvious that the errors of Russia have been and are being spread throughout the world. Someone is doing something wrong!

Popes are like Kings. They seem to have little time explaining themselves to us peons. Which is fine, but does give rise to the questions.
 
Well if you don’t believe in Fatima anyway then of course you don’t think a consecration is necessary. I happen to believe in it and think the consecration is definitely necessary.

Or maybe I’m reading you wrong… What do you think Our Lady meant by “errors”? I don’t think she meant communism, per se. And the fall of the Soviet Union was more like the bursting of an infected appendix, the infection was stuck in one place, but once the organ bursts, it is spread throughout the body.
 
At the time of her statement, I believe it is obvious she was talking about: secularism, atheism, communism… And through them all their daughters including but not limited to: abortion, contraception, homosexuality, pornography, promiscuity, disobedience to authority, relativism, eugenics, scientism, paedophilia, Satanism, heresy, apostasy, euthanasia, effeminacy, modernism…

But you cleverly avoided my question: what do you think she meant by “errors”? That’s why I was (and still am to be honest) unsure whether you believed in it at all, because you seemed to be implying that Russia had no “errors” to spread or that no “errors” could be spread, or that perhaps she never even talked about “errors” at all. So what “errors” was she referring to?
 
Last edited:
ChunkMonk said:
Well if you don’t believe in Fatima anyway
Click to expand...
One may believe in Our Lady of Fatima, as did St. John Paul, without believing the conspiracies and accusations against the Church in the name of Fatima.
Popes are like Kings. They seem to have little time explaining themselves to us peons.
Click to expand...
The correct analogy is shepherds and sheep, not kings and peons.
 
Last edited:
Obviously, the consecration wasn’t done because if it had been, then all sorts of stuff would have happened, or not happened, whatever the case may be.
Is this like the “no true Scotsman” reasoning?
 
I thought the consecration wasn’t important one way or the other… So why is it an “accusation” to say it hasn’t been done? And as far as conspiracies go… Well there are always conspiracies in a large organization. Some benign, some not so benign.

Lot of wolves in this sheep-pen… They say we get the shepherds we deserve.
 
I continue to express my skepticism about Fatima. I have skimmed most of the Vatican document and what is obvious is that there is no “message of 1917” – rather, the third message morphed into a “secret” (why?) and past the middle of the Vatican document, Lucia says it is up to the pope to interpret it – wHAT? See? this is the silly part of Fatima – the secrets, the prolonged period of interpreting the third secret? In 2000, Lucia is saying that there isn’t a definitive interpretation of the third “secret” – what were the first two again?

So, Sr. Lucia knows how to manipulate people and create suspense for decades about the meaning of the secret. I’m trying to understand, I really am.
 
I;ve said it before – I don’t think the miracle of the sun was a miracle. What may have been a miracle is that some unusual atmospheric conditions occurred, that were witnessed up to 30 miles away. But, science was not advanced enough to describe what was happening then.
The thing I want to add here, is that people seem to WANT to believe in Fatima. They seem to believe that going to Fatima means something. What does it mean? Can’t anybody pray the rosary at home, in South America, for example. Every place I look, I see big money changing hands – tour buses, hotels, restaurants, etc. Ironically, Fatima is not religious enough for me. It doesn’t stack up to even the shortest book in the Bible in importance. Lucia didn’t write down the messages until she was in her twenties, and even much later. There was always “more” and “more” she wanted to say, until she passed away.
 
O.k. I will admit that “MK Ultra” immediately got filed in my brain under kooky conspiracy theory. :roll_eyes: However, there actually was an MK Ultra. Wow. 😮
 
Father Grunner died in good standing in the church. There was a vague charge of “insubordination” but that had nothing to do with his Fatima ministry. Our Lady herself said that “bishops will oppose bishops” all because of Our Lady and devotion to her and her messages. So, it is not surprising.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top