Is Anyone familiar with the Third Secret of Fatima?

[Sure]

When Mary said Russia would be converted, you don’t think she meant converted to a heretical and schismatic Orthodox Church, do you?

The Orthodox are both heretical, as they deny Papal Infallibility and more, and also schismatic since they do not recognize the Primacy of the Pope, but only consider him “first among equals”. Since we know that all heretics and all schismatics will go to hell (infallible dogma), why would you possible think that the conversion Mary spoke of would be to a heretical and schismatic Church whose member will all (objectively speaking) go to hell?

Or do you deny that all heretics and all schismatics - every single oe with exception - will go to hell?

No, she meant converted from the pure unadulterated evil atheism that killed more people than anything else in the history of the world - Communism.

 

[latinmasslover]

Prove that one. Please, actually study up on the history before you make such claims. Here’s a link that show multiple sources on Pope Liberius. To compare St. Athanasius and Fr. Gruner is laughable. The martyr complexes are growing by the minute.

phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=9671

You might also want to go back and read Pastor Aeternus in its entirety.

And who is the arbiter on the matter? Did Peter ever tell Paul he was disobedient. And, BTW, this is another poor example. This wasn’t a case of Peter using Papal authority. This was a case of Peter making a PRIVATE error.

EWTN discusses the matter of Pope Liberius: his opposition to the Arian heresy is in question enough to keep the title “Saint” away from him, and St. Athanasius was exiled for not accepting the heresy.

What do you find incorrect about the papal definition?

Excommunications are not infallible. The pope can make mistakes, which many people here seem to think is impossible. To disagree with the pope is not a sin, especially in this matter of the consecration. Where and when did JOHN PAUL II refute Fr. Gruner’s claim regarding Russia?! Our current Pope, when Cardinal, said the whole secret hasn’t been released. Cardinals who have read the Secret say that it refers to the Apostasy in the Church and corruption in the upper hierarchy. We see the results of this in the lack pastoral care over the CATHOLIC Church…there’s more concern for bringing “them” in, even if it means compromise. The Faithful priests and bishops are the ones getting persecuted, not the liberals. Fatima warns of this.

 

[latinmasslover]

No, she meant converted from the pure unadulterated evil atheism that killed more people than anything else in the history of the world - Communism.

And you know that this is all She meant how…? When has the Virgin Mary appeared and NOT called people to her Son? Simply rejecting communism doesn’t mean comming to Jesus, just look at our govt.

 

[Sure]

Where and when did JOHN PAUL II refute Fr. Gruner’s claim regarding Russia?! Our current Pope, when Cardinal, said the whole secret hasn’t been released. Cardinals who have read the Secret say that it refers to the Apostasy in the Church and corruption in the upper hierarchy. We see the results of this in the lack pastoral care over the CATHOLIC Church…there’s more concern for bringing “them” in, even if it means compromise. The Faithful priests and bishops are the ones getting persecuted, not the liberals. Fatima warns of this.

First off, the Pope has no duty to refute the claims of a wacko priest who isn’t even decent enough to refrain from committing sacrilige on a daily basis by profaning the Holy Eucharist.

Secondly, the comment about Cardinal Ratzinger is ludicrous. Cardinal Ratzinger published an entire document analyzing and interpreting the third secret. You are either lying or mistaken about Card. Ratzinger. He stated quite clearly: “Thus we come finally to the third part of the “secret” of Fatima which for the first time is being published in its entirety.” So, no he never said that the secret was not released, that is completely incorrect.

 

[latinmasslover]

It is intellectually retarded for one to claim that he recognizes and loves the Church and then disobey the valid and lawful commands of the Pope regarding a disciplinary matter. A priest who is suspended ought to cease his public ministry until such time as he has been lawfully reinstated by the Church and his jurisdiction restored.

You can’t claim to “love” Christ and then disobey his Body.

SAINT Joan of Arc refused to submit to the opinion of the lawful Bishop regarding her PRIVATE revelations. SAINT Joan of Arc, who’s *excommunication *was overturned after her death. SAINT Joan of Arc, who loved the Church and knew that to go against the Church meant to go against God Himself, refused the order of the *lawful *bishop.

So yes, you can oppose lawful authority when that authority is abused. We need good, holy priests, and just because a priest isn’t in good standing with Rome doesn’t mean that he’s not pleasing to God. Being in good standing with Rome these days, a lot of the time, doesn’t mean adherence to the Catholic Faith. Again, this was warned about at Fatima. Cardinals are opposing Cardinals: the Secret refers to the Apostasy and corruption in the upper hierarchy…no, it doesn’t…yes it does…no it doesn’t…Who is telling the truth, and who is lying (not necessarily on purpose)? Obviously some are not being totally honest. To say a Cardinal or Pope can’t sin goes against the definition of papal infallibility made at Vatican I, not to mention, naive, foolish, and show ignorance of the Catholic Faith.

 

[Sure]

And you know that this is all She meant how…? When has the Virgin Mary appeared and NOT called people to her Son? Simply rejecting communism doesn’t mean comming to Jesus, just look at our govt.

You should go back and read what she said and try to remember this in the context of WWII, Communism, and Nazism. They were evils far beyond the imagination of ANYONE in 1917. The world was being shredded by WWI, with millions being killed and Mary told them it could get even worse and it did. How do you knwo she didn’t mean it this way? I am not saying she is not calling people to her Son.

Also, it seems that Mary called for the consecration of Russia in order to prevent World War II. Clearly, that didn’t happen and WWII occurred in accordance with her prediction. So, why all the discussion? What’s done is done.

 

[latinmasslover]

First off, the Pope has no duty to refute the claims of a wacko priest who isn’t even decent enough to refrain from committing sacrilige on a daily basis by profaning the Holy Eucharist.

Secondly, the comment about Cardinal Ratzinger is ludicrous. Cardinal Ratzinger published an entire document analyzing and interpreting the third secret. You are either lying or mistaken about Card. Ratzinger. He stated quite clearly: “Thus we come finally to the third part of the “secret” of Fatima which for the first time is being published in its entirety.” So, no he never said that the secret was not released, that is completely incorrect.

It’s not the Pope’s duty? I suppose it’s his duty to go around kissing Korans and praying for the “coming of the messiah” with the Jews, and being present at Masses that are profaned with dancing simply because the culture dances? You’re saying that this issue, which is major for a lot of peope, is not his responsibily to clarify? Well, amibiguity is a thing endorsed by many supporters of the Second Vatican Council, why not this too?

How is the Holy Eucharist being profaned by Fr. Gruner? Referring to him as a “wacko priest” isn’t really a comment in line with the spirit of Vatican II. If you want to talk about profaning the Holy Eucharist, talk to the bishops and priests who allow reception of Holy Communion in the hand, which John Paul II did not approve of.

Care to cite (date especially) the quote of Cardinal Ratzinger?

 

[latinmasslover]

You should go back and read what she said and try to remember this in the context of WWII, Communism, and Nazism. They were evils far beyond the imagination of ANYONE in 1917. The world was being shredded by WWI, with millions being killed and Mary told them it could get even worse and it did. How do you knwo she didn’t mean it this way? I am not saying she is not calling people to her Son.

Also, it seems that Mary called for the consecration of Russia in order to prevent World War II. Clearly, that didn’t happen and WWII occurred in accordance with her prediction. So, why all the discussion? What’s done is done.

As long as you’re ready for WWIII.

 

[Sure]

SAINT Joan of Arc refused to submit to the opinion of the lawful Bishop regarding her PRIVATE revelations. SAINT Joan of Arc, who’s *excommunication *was overturned after her death. SAINT Joan of Arc, who loved the Church and knew that to go against the Church meant to go against God Himself, refused the order of the *lawful *bishop.

So yes, you can oppose lawful authority when that authority is abused. We need good, holy priests, and just because a priest isn’t in good standing with Rome doesn’t mean that he’s not pleasing to God. Being in good standing with Rome these days, a lot of the time, doesn’t mean adherence to the Catholic Faith. Again, this was warned about at Fatima. Cardinals are opposing Cardinals: the Secret refers to the Apostasy and corruption in the upper hierarchy…no, it doesn’t…yes it does…no it doesn’t…Who is telling the truth, and who is lying (not necessarily on purpose)? Obviously some are not being totally honest. To say a Cardinal or Pope can’t sin goes against the definition of papal infallibility made at Vatican I, not to mention, naive, foolish, and show ignorance of the Catholic Faith.

This is off topic, but what you are saying is that anytime a priest “feels” he is justified in disobeying the Church’s Laws he can still be in good staning? I thought that was protestantism.

By the way, I never said Popes cannot err. But even when they make mistakes their canonical decisions are still binding. You are not going to go to hell for following canon law. There is no such guarantee when violating canon law.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

When Mary said Russia would be converted, you don’t think she meant converted to a heretical and schismatic Orthodox Church, do you?

The Orthodox are both heretical, as they deny Papal Infallibility and more, and also schismatic since they do not recognize the Primacy of the Pope, but only consider him “first among equals”. Since we know that all heretics and all schismatics will go to hell (infallible dogma), why would you possible think that the conversion Mary spoke of would be to a heretical and schismatic Church whose member will all (objectively speaking) go to hell?

Or do you deny that all heretics and all schismatics - every single oe with exception - will go to hell?

I will just say this, according to the Catechism, the Orthodox are not schismatics.

818 “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

The only ones who can truly be charged with schism are those Catholics who leave the Catholic Church for the Orthodox Church.

I also do not believe that the Catholic Church charges the Orthodox with heresy.

 

[Sure]

As long as you’re ready for WWIII.

Ummm…ok, but she never said anything about avoiding World War III by consecrating Russia. She spoke of World War II and other wars and destruction. Last I checked the 20th century was kind of bad, or have you forgotten?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

SAINT Joan of Arc refused to submit to the opinion of the lawful Bishop regarding her PRIVATE revelations. SAINT Joan of Arc, who’s *excommunication *was overturned after her death. SAINT Joan of Arc, who loved the Church and knew that to go against the Church meant to go against God Himself, refused the order of the *lawful *bishop.

While the bishop that St Joan of Arc refused to be obedient to was lawful I do not believe that he had jurisdiction over her to demand her obedience.

So this comparison does not really work.

She refused a bishop, yes, but he did not have jurisdiction over her to command her. He was an English bishop and her rightful bishop was French and I do not believe that he was a party to what was done to her. So she did not disobey the Church but a bishop who had no right to command her.

 

[pprimeau1976]

If I can put my :twocents: in on the debate with Gruner:

Gruner is in my opinion a hypocrite. He is so concerned that we do things according to the wishes of Mary - i.e. consecrate ONLY Russia in union with all the bishops of the world. However, Gruner puts his own spin on things. He insists that it be done in union with all the Catholic bishops of the world. If Gruner cared so much about Our Lady’s instructions, he would be insisting that the consecration be done in union with the Orthodox patriarchs as well since they are by definition, bishops. He doesn’t care to follow those instructions to the letter when it comes to that detail.

Gruner is also a self-promoter. What kind of priest refers to himself as the “Fatima Priest” or the “Fatima Crusader” and boasts about going to mass and saying the Rosary everyday?:bowdown2:

BTW…one more thing. There is no third “secret” of Fatima anymore. It has been revealed.

 

[Sure]

If I can put my :twocents: in on the debate with Gruner:

Gruner is in my opinion a hypocrite. He is so concerned that we do things according to the wishes of Mary - i.e. consecrate ONLY Russia in union with all the bishops of the world. However, Gruner puts his own spin on things. He insists that it be done in union with all the Catholic bishops of the world. If Gruner cared so much about Our Lady’s instructions, he would be insisting that the consecration be done in union with the Orthodox patriarchs as well since they are by definition, bishops. He doesn’t care to follow those instructions to the letter when it comes to that detail.

Gruner is also a self-promoter. What kind of priest refers to himself as the “Fatima Priest” or the “Fatima Crusader” and boasts about going to mass and saying the Rosary everyday?:bowdown2:

Not to mention that IF he admits that the third secret has been revealed, then he is out of a job.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.