L
latinmasslover
Guest
Didn’t La Salette warn that Rome would lose the faith…and at Akita wasn’t it also said that there’s a lot of corruption in the upper hierarchy?
Kyrie eleison!
- Status
Kyrie eleison!
P
Pax_et_Caritas
Guest
Something else that is interesting is to read what those who read the third secret said about it before 2000 when, according to many learned and wise people, only a portion of it was released, along with an “explanation” that many see as very flawed.Didn’t La Salette warn that Rome would lose the faith…and at Akita wasn’t it also said that there’s a lot of corruption in the upper hierarchy?
If you read what thosee who read the third secret said about it, it does not fit with what Rome said in 2000. For example, Cardinal Ratzinger discussed the third secret in 1984 and what he said had nothing to do with the suicide atempt of John Paul II. This is what Cardinal Ratzinger said…
*Interviewer: “Cardinal Ratzinger, have you read what is called the Third Secret of Fatima: i.e., the one that Sister Lucia had sent to Pope John XXIII and which the latter did not wish to make known and consigned to the Vatican archives?”
Crd Ratzinger: “Yes, I have read it”.
Interviewer: “Why has it not been revealed?”
Ratzinger: “Because, according to the judgement of the Popes, it adds nothing (literally: ‘nothing different’) to what a Christian must know concerning what derives from Revelation: i.e., a radical call for conversion; the absolute importance of history; the dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian, and therefore of the world. And then the importance of the ‘novissimi’ (the last events at the end of time). If it is not made public - at least for the time being - it is in order to prevent religious prophecy from being mistaken for a quest for the sensational (literally: ‘for sensationalism’). But the things contained in this ‘Third Secret’ correspond to what has been announced in Scripture and has been said again and again in many other Marian apparitions, first of all that of Fatima in what is already known of what its message contains. Conversion and penitence are the essential conditions for ‘salvation’.” END *
Although Pope Pius XII did not read the third secret, this is what he said about the matter:
*Pope Pius XII "Suppose, dear friend, that Communism [one of “the errors of Russia” mentioned in the Message of Fatima] was only the most visible of the instruments of subversion to be used against the Church and the traditions of Divine Revelation … I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past.
"A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, “Where have they taken Him?”*
Father Joseph Schweigl (September 1952)
In 1952 Father Joseph Schweigl was entrusted by Pope Pius XII with a secret mission to interrogate Sister Lucy about the Third Secret. He later stated the following:
"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.’*
On March 17, 1990 Cardinal Oddi, who was a personal friend of Pope John XXIII and who had spoken to him regarding the Secret, gave the following testimony to Italian journalist Lucio Brunelli in the journal Il Sabato:
"It [the Third Secret] has nothing to do with Gorbachev. The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against apostasy in the Church.
I will end with a quote from Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi, who was the personal papal theologian to Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II. He confirmed what the above quotes say when hy said:
Cardinal Ciappi: “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
In these quotes we learn that the third secret has “two parts”: One dealing with the Pope (that is the part that was released); the other predicting that the “great apostasy” will begin at the top.
Our lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis.
B
bear06
Guest
I have a few problems with this. First, there is no citation, context, etc. for Bertone’s quotes. Next, there are no dates for these quotes. Next, even if it is accurate he says computer not typewriter. I believe you can even see a typewriter in her cell but maybe someone else has seen it recently and can verify this (of course, if there is one, it most certainly was put there to further the revelation of the real third secret
).Here’s the Holy Father’s take on Cardinal Bertone.
zenit.org/article-19686?l=english
What this comes down to is that there are some who are saying that the Vatican is lying when they say that the Third Secret has been revealed.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Since when did Jesus promise that those in the Vatican could never sin? Keep in mind that among the apostles chosen by Jesus, by God Himself, one *betrayed *Him, one *denied *Him, three times even after warned, **and only one remained faithful **by His side at His death. Why does everybody seem to think that in this age the words, the warnings, of Jesus Christ and His Holy Mother, will not come to pass? He warned of Judas, of Peter, of the Apostles abandoning Him before it even gets hard. Then He sends His Holy Mother to warn His people that it’s happening again, and everybody blows her off. What is so difficult to understand?
T
thechrismyster
Guest
hot off the presses…
telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/11/wapocalypse111.xml
Catholic Church isn’t hiding apocalypse secret’
By Malcolm Moore, Rome Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:25am BST 12/09/2007
The only surviving witness to a decades-long conspiracy theory has firmly denied the Catholic Church is hiding details about a predicted apocalypse.
The third secret of Fatima, revealed in 2000, referred to the 1981 assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II
Archbishop Loris Capovilla, 91, said there was no truth in the rumour that the Vatican was suppressing a vision of the end of the world.
telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/11/wapocalypse111.xml
Catholic Church isn’t hiding apocalypse secret’
By Malcolm Moore, Rome Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:25am BST 12/09/2007
The only surviving witness to a decades-long conspiracy theory has firmly denied the Catholic Church is hiding details about a predicted apocalypse.
The third secret of Fatima, revealed in 2000, referred to the 1981 assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II
Archbishop Loris Capovilla, 91, said there was no truth in the rumour that the Vatican was suppressing a vision of the end of the world.
I
iceman
Guest
I appreciate your calm and respectful persistence in inviting viewers here to seriously consider Fr. Gruner’s humble and longstanding initiative to push the Church hierarchy to consecrate Russia to Our Blessed Mother’s Immaculate Heart. Fr. Gruner has been anything but arrogant in his effort, although the same cannot be said about a number of others higher in the Church. The present Apostasy in the Church should be readily apparent to anyone seriously committed to the Catholic faith and to sugguest that Russia is now enjoying the benefit promised by our Blessed Mother is at best ludicrous. Critical thinking and reasoning are not sins in the Catholic faith, but necessary for it. Alternately, blind obedience to the whims and statements of some of the hierarchy (as distinct from to orthodox belief) is a fool’s pasttime.Didn’t La Salette warn that Rome would lose the faith…and at Akita wasn’t it also said that there’s a lot of corruption in the upper hierarchy?
The story of the Third Secret has yet to be revealed in its entirety. We all should continue to pray that this changes soon
P
Pax_et_Caritas
Guest
Great post. I wanted to throw out one more fact about John Paul II’s “consecrations of Russia”.
At Fatima, the blessed mother requested that the Pope, in union with all of hte Bishops, consecrate Russia to her imaculate heart, promising thereby the conversion of that country and bring peace to the world.
On March 25, 1984, John Paul II consecrated the world (without mention of Russia) to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Immediately after he twice addressed words to Our Lady of Fatima, words which contained a clear admission that the consecration She requested still remained to be done. His words were published in L’Osservatore Romano. He said, “Enlighten especially the peoples of which You, Yourself, are awaiting our consecration and confiding.”
Several hours later the Holy Father again addressed Our Lady of Fatima in St. Peter’s Basilica with these words, “We wish to choose this Sunday for the Act of Entrusting and Consecration of the world, of all peoples, especially those who have a very great need of this consecration and entrusting, of those people for whom You, Yourself, are awaiting our act of consecration.”
In an interview which appeared in the September 1985 issue of Sol de Fatima, Sister Lucy was asked if the Pope had fulfilled the request made by Our Lady at Tuy when he consecrated the world in 1984. Sister Lucy answered, “There has been no participation of all the bishops, and there was no mention of Russia.” The interviewer then asked, “So the consecration was not done as requested by Our Lady?” Sister Lucy answered, “No, many bishops attached no importance to this act.”
Yet, even though the Pope did not consecrated Russia in union with the Bishops of the world, as requested, nevertheless, many claim that this was the long awaited consecration. But if this non-consecration-of-Russia fulfilled our Lady’s request, as many today maintain, why did not the consecration of Pope Pius XII fuflill that request?
On July 7,1952 Pope Pius XII, in response to the petitions of the Russian Catholics, consecrated Russia (by name) and her people to the Immaculate Heart. Unfortunately, he did not perform the consecration in union with the Bishops of the world.
So, why would John Paul II’s consecration of the world suffice for the consecration of Russia, whereas Puis XII’s consecration of Russia, by name, not suffice?
It makes no sense. And all one has to do in order to verify that John Paul II’s non-consecration of Russia did not suffice is to look at the fruits.
M
MMLJ
Guest
Greetings. I have read this article concerning Bertone vs Socci. It is an analysis/report of the quotes/statements by Bertone from Bertone’s book (The Last Visionary of Fatima) in response to a book by Socci (The Fourth Secret of Fatima): (for citations consult either these books or consult the Remnant Newspaper online and contact the author)
** Bertone vs. Socci **
Christopher A. Ferrara
REMNANT COLUMNIST, New Jersey
Cardinal Bertone attempts an answer to Antonio Socci’s explosive book accusing the Vatican of covering up the Third Secret of Fatima, but the Cardinal only succeeds in embarrassing himself and confirming the suspicions of the faithful.
. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State, has published a small book, The Last Visionary of Fatima, which attacks the Italian intellectual Antonio Socci for having concluded in his own book, The Fourth Secret of Fatima, that the Vatican is concealing a text of the Third Secret. Socci’s conclusion brings to a rolling boil the long-simmering conviction among the faithful that, as Mother Angelica put it on her national television show in 2001, “we didn’t get the whole thing.”
Socci is a highly respected mainstream Catholic commentator who has conducted press conferences for both Bertone and the former Cardinal Ratzinger. Bertone had no choice but to attempt an answer…
But, as Socci shows in his response to Bertone’s book in the Italian newspaper Libero, Bertone’s effort is a major embarrassment to him and to the Vatican—a disaster, in fact, because it leaves untouched the entire case in support of the thesis that the Vatican is hiding part of the Secret, while* raising still more doubts about Bertone’s credibility.* At the same time, Bertone demeans his high office by recklessly hurling invective at Socci, pronouncing his contentions “ravings,” calling him a deliberate liar (“mendace”), and even accusing him of the tactics of Freemasonry, which has to be one of the most ironic remarks of the post-conciliar epoch. * Bertone acts like a desperate, wounded man instead of the Vatican Secretary of State…*
…As Socci observes in his reply, Bertone’s book not only fails to answer any of the points he raised in The Fourth Secret of Fatima, but also “poses further problems. I was even embarrassed to read a thing so bungled and self-wounding.” For example, in order to bolster the Vatican party line that the Message of Fatima (and thus the Third Secret) belongs to the past because Russia has already “converted,” Bertone “credits the rumor that Gorbachev, in the historic visit to Pope Wojtyla of December 1, 1989, ‘made a mea culpa’ before the Pope”—a myth that was “officially denied by the Vatican Press Office on March 2, 1998.”……
IMPORTANT: Actually these words were taken from Cardinal Bertone’s OWN book, The Last Visionary of Fatima as can be viewed from this excerpt of the article below:Next, there are no dates for these quotes. Next, even if it is accurate he says computer not typewriter. I believe you can even see a typewriter in her cell but maybe someone else has seen it recently and can verify this (of course, if there is one, it most certainly was put there to further the revelation of the real third secret
Another self-inflicted wound is Bertone’s statement that “Sister Lucy never worked with a computer.” Here Bertone forgets that, when it was expedient for him to do so, he asserted precisely the opposite: that Sister Lucy “even used a computer” in 1989—a claim that, as Socci notes, “served to accredit certain letters that Sister Lucy had not written in her own hand and which contradicted everything she had said before on the consecration of Russia.” Bertone has thus undermined all claims that Sister Lucy was the author of those letters.
Special Note: Bertone has not denied making the quotes in his own book (obvious?) nor his quotes in Socci’s book (
)Note: For clarification and cited references consult the following books/article:
*The Last Visionary of Fatima *by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State, and The Fourth Secret of Fatima by the renowned Italian intellectual Antonio Socci. (also the author of this article Christopher A. Ferrara Remnant Columnist)
I hope this helps with your confusion, GOD bless.
S
stmaria
Guest
I have never read that she say convert “Russia to God”
If the Consecration of Russia has been done then why haven’t the promises of Our Lady been fulfilled? Russia is still a godless nation and it is still a threat to the world. There has not been peace since 1984.
One in seven Polish bishops was police informer, says Catholic Church commission By Jonathan Luxmoore
7/5/2007 Catholic News Service (www.catholicnews.com)
catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=24608
WARSAW, Poland (CNS) – One in seven of Poland’s 132 Catholic bishops was registered as a secret police informer under communist rule, but the scope of the issue has not been fully established, said a Polish church commission.
“Up to 20 were registered by communist Poland’s security organs as secret collaborators, operational contacts or information sources, and one as an intelligence agent, while several were registered as potential recruits,” the commission said in a June 27 statement.
© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27345
“Catholic priests in Russia are ‘persona non grata,’” and Russia’s domestic intelligence service, the FSB, has compiled a list of priests termed “undesirable,” according to an internationally respected news source.
“An authentic anti-Catholic campaign is being conducted not only by the Russian Orthodox Church and nationalist forces, but also by State agencies…organized campaign is being waged against the Catholic Church in Russia,” according to the independent Zenit news agency. The Russian Orthodox Church condemned the action as part of a plan to convert Orthodox Christians to the Catholic Church. …Referring to the present state of religious expression in Russia, Kondrusiewicz asked, “What is in store for Catholics of our country. … Are the times of persecution of the faith returning?”
Christopher Ruddy
Wednesday, Dec. 17, 2003
archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/12/16/232628.shtml
“The major news this month may not be that Saddam Hussein was captured, but that a silent coup has taken place in Russia – all but confirming a new dictatorship there I believe that Russia today remains America’s No. 1 danger. Why?
For two reasons.
First, the old communist KGB elite have confirmed their ongoing coup in parliamentary elections this month.
Second, Russia remains the only country in the world that can destroy the United States in 30 minutes…However one describes this monster that has developed in Russia, it remains a danger. …Russia would re-examine the defensive nature of its nuclear strategy and spoke ominously about taking pre-emptive nuclear strikes against unspecified international targets…Clearly the madmen who made up the Old Soviet Union are back in the driver’s seat. They also control the world’s greatest nuclear arsenal.”
Sunday August 19, 2007
The Observer observer.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,2151813,00.html
“The diplomatic atmosphere between Britain and Russia has been getting sharply chillier since Moscow refused to extradite the man Scotland Yard accuses of the murder of ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko. There were tit-for-tat embassy expulsions. Now the BBC World Service has had its licence to broadcast in Moscow revoked.
But this is a sideshow in a broader story of Russia’s growing suspicion of the West and a tendency towards neo-Soviet grandstanding. President Vladimir Putin last week said that, in response to ‘strategic threats by other military powers’, Russian long-range bombers would resume their Cold War routine of flights around the world. Russian jets have also started testing Nato defences, ‘buzzing’ targets near US and UK bases.
Russia is particularly peeved about US plans to deploy an anti-missile defence shield, supported by facilities in former Eastern Bloc countries. Moscow does not believe Washington’s claim that the shield is meant to ward off future Iranian or North Korean attacks… The Soviet Union did not suffer a military defeat in 1991 and the West did not impose punitive reparations. But it is striking how much Mr Putin’s international sabre-rattling is matched by authoritarian tendencies at home. Political dissent has been crushed and state media promote a cult of the President”
S
Sure
Guest
Ummm…the fall of Communism in the Soviet state was a HUGE deal. To pretend otherwise is insane. The fact that Russia is not perfect does not mean it was not converted. In Russia, there is now a place for God. It’s government is not a totalitarian atheist state that persecutes Christians. Does it have social and moral problems? Certainly. But then again so does the rest of the world.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
The “Fall of Communism” proves nothing, especially when exCommunists fess up to the fact that the “fall” is an act, to lower our guard regarding Russia, and that when we least expect it they’ll attack. I’ll have the exact quote and reference on Friday, which I’ll post if nobody else does.
It’s like when I left the Church as a teen; I attended Mass, Adoration, Confession, but had no belief whatsoever. In fact, I had a great hate for the Church then, but unless you really knew me, you wouldn’t have guessed.
Aside from this alleged “fall of communism,” what are the fruits of the “consecration?”
Another thing, does anybody have a quote from Pope John Paul II that denounces Fr. Gruner’s Apostolate or states that he has in fact consecrated Russia, correctly?
S
Sure
Guest
So, the fall of communism was all a “ruse”. No offense, but that’s absolutely crazy and irrational. It’s all a secret plan???
Pope John Paul II didn’t need to answer to Fr. Gruner’s disobedience. As has been demonstrated earlier in this thread, Fr. Gruner is suspended and needs to reconcile with Rome. The fact that he continues to act as a priest is grieviously sinful.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
No offense, but to say that the Fall *can’t *be a ruse is naive, just as it’s naive to say that we’re not going through the Apostasy, the Apostasy that Jesus Christ (GOD) warned about, that the Virgin Mary warned about (even before Fatima) and that Cardinal Ratzinger confirmed. The “great Apostasy” that was forewarned refers to a large number of people being deceived, not a small group.
So John Paul II never said anything against Fr. Gruner?
Also, what has Fr. Gruner said that is incorrect regarding Faith or Morals?
S
Sure
Guest
We’re just going to have to disagree on the “conspiracy” theories.
Pope John Paul II didn’t make a statement, but the appropriate office of the Holy See did. Their statement is authoritative and can be found here:
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CCLGRNER.HTM
I have no idea what Fr. Gruner has said against faith and morals nor do I care. I know he is suspended and I tend to avoid following the teaching of priests who are not in union with Rome.
M
MMLJ
Guest
When you quote the word converted, what is it that you think she meant? Yes converted, but converted to what? Could you site your references please? Thank you.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Accusing the Pope of not making a consecration when he allegedly did is pretty serious, and the fact that he never said anything about that says a lot about it’s validity.
Fr. Gruner never said anything against Faith or Morals which is very important considering the fact that many priests and bishops do with no consequences.
**SAINT **Joan of Arc was excommunicated, **SAINT **Athanasius was excommunicated multiple times for **not being in “union with Rome.” **Pope Honorious was excommunicated by a later pope for simply not speaking out against heresy. Popes make mistakes, cardinals make mistakes, priests make mistakes…their every word is not Gospel.
When did Pope John Paul II refute the claims of Fr. Gruner?
Those who have read the Secret say that it has not all been released, and that it refers to the Apostasy in the Church. You wouldn’t expect certain Vatican officials to repeat that since it would make them look very…not worthy of trust, just like the Pharisees in days of Jesus.
P
Pax_et_Caritas
Guest
Gorbachev: “Gentlemen, comrades, do not be concerned about all you hear about glasnost and perestroika and democracy in the coming years. These are primarily for outward consumption. There will be no significant change within the Soviet Union, other than for cosmetic purposes. Our aim is to disarm the Americans and let them fall asleep.”
S
Sure
Guest
Yeah…still probably not a good idea to follow dissident priests who disregard the Pope’s lawful authority.
M
MMLJ
Guest
Nice.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
That is very true, I couldn’t agree more; however, what are we to do when he’s wrong, or makes a decision that isn’t entirely good? For example, as with St. Athanasius. The Pope accepted the Arian heresy with about 80% of the bishops, St. Athanasius opposed the heresy, and therefore was in opposition to Rome. Who do we follow? *Trust *might be the better word. We owe obedience to the Holy Father, but we still do not obey every single thing he says or does. He is infallible when defining Faith and Morals and that is all (see Vatican Council I) and that is where we can be “blindly obedient,” simply because in that situation he is guaranteed to be free from error. So who do we follow? We follow the Truth, Jesus, and His words. He gave us warnings so that when these things come to pass we will not lose faith. Is Fr. Gruner truly a disobedient priest? St. Paul opposed St. Peter, our first Pope, publicly to his face, as he himself said. Sometimes it is necessary, as St. Thomas Aquinas makes very clear.
If you read what Fr. Gruner writes you will see the love he has for the Church and Her preservation. Jesus said the gates of hell wouldn’t prevail, and they won’t. But, as Jesus told St. John, not St. Peter, who the betrayer was, so He is doing today…not telling the Pope, for whatever reason, but telling His other priests. When you see the love Fr. Gruner has for the Church, as well as other “schismatic” priests, you will understand how hard it is, how painful to live in “schism” simply for being faithful to the teachings of the Church. It’s a hard road, and our prayer needs to be that the Pope and the rest of the Cardinals start recognizing the problems in the Church, that they result not from the “traditionalists” but the liberals who undermine everything the Church stands for.
St. Athanasius says that those who remain faithful to the traditions of the Church are the true Church, even if they’re cast out. Keep the Faith!
- Status