New Book on Third Secret!!!

[peary]

He did read the secret. It is a historical fact that he was the secreatary of Cardinal Bea. Look it Up!

On December 26, 1957 Father Augustin Fuentes, who was preparing to become the postulator of the causes for beatification of Francisco and Jacinta Marto, met with Sister Lucy at her convent in Coimbra, Portugal. Here, he was able to converse with the Fatima seer at great length. Upon his return to his native Mexico, he gave a conference on the meeting, in which he reported Sister Lucy’s words. Father Alonso, the official Fatima archivist for 16 years, stressed that the account of this conference was published “with every guarantee of authenticity and with due episcopal approval, including that of the Bishop of Fatima.”

"Father, how much time is there before 1960 arrives? It will be very sad for everyone, not one person will rejoice at all if beforehand the world does not pray and do penance. I am not able to give any other details, because it is still a Secret. According to the will of the Most Holy Virgin, only the Holy Father and the Bishop of Fatima are permitted to know the Secret, but they have chosen to not know it so that they would not be influenced. This is the third part of the Message of Our Lady, which will remain secret until 1960."
-Sr. Lucia

I stand by my posting. Go contact Fr. Fox if you need more information.Sr. Lusiasaid that the secret was meant for the pope,
and that particular interview, of which I am aware, does not contradict anything the Vatican released in 2000 with regard to the so-called "Third Secret."

 

[Volodymyr_988]

What in the world does Sedevacantism have to with this discussion?

Sedevacantists believe there has been no Pope since Puis.
No one here has said anything about there being no valid Popes.

Just because the Pope and hierarcrhy are negligent, disobey God, does not mean they loose their offices or there is no hierarchy.

When anyone starts talking about apostasy or disobedient clerics, people throw out the Sede card even though no one believes it.
Spreading the lie about believing in sedevacantism when someone criticizes the clergy is pretty disingenuous.

No one is advocating Sedevacantism.

Looks like Harmony1988 already answered this.

If the Pope has taught error (VII, being a Mason, etc…) then you have to logically leave the Church and go to one of those Churches/groups.

 

[Harmony1988]

Just because Fr. Martin did exorcisms or believed in the demon doesn’t mean much, muslims do so too (not trying to be derogatory at all, just trying to indicate other religions).

Sedevacantists believe in demons and exorcism and so do the ultra catholics and etc. etc. Hardly proof of anything.

 

[stmaria]

=beckycmarie;3620641]But why are some insisting part of the secret hasn’t been revealed?

I think I know the answer to that one. It’s because the third secret was a huge disappointment for some. They were expecting some earth shattering news, and when they didn’t get it, they decided the Church must be holding back the earth shattering part.

You are right. There was nothing earth shattering in the third secret that was released a few years ago. Yet that **contradicts **what Pope John Paul said about the third secret.

Ewtn-
ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/ENDNEAR.TXT

According to a report from more than 15 years ago, John Paul spoke
about the “Third Secret” to a group in Fulda, Germany, on a visit
there on November 17,1980. His words were tape-recorded.

What emerges is a picture rather more disturbing than the one
painted by Ratzinger last month.

In that private gathering, the Pope spoke of a "troubling"
message, of predictions of "oceans flooding entire continents,
people annihilated suddenly, by the millions, from one instant to
the next."
“We must be well prepared,” the Pope said, “for great trials in
the near future, which can even require the sacrifice of our
lives.”** And he explained why he had not made the message public: **"If a message announces that millions of people are going to die, one doesn’t really wish to have it made public. Many want to know it only out of curiosity, but they forget that knowledge brings responsibility."
You can’t see the contradition??

 

[saint_rafael]

Trust me rafael, what you are implying here is strongly reminiscent of sedevacantism. You are accusing John XXIII of leading the church into error. Why won’t you now calm down, go read something else. The church is in trouble yes, like it always has been, something alway plagues the church, it always has throughout time, first the trouble with rome in days of Peter, etc etc.

However, what you are implying here is that your knowledge of reading material on the internet is enough to qualify you as some kind of definite historian or a knowledgeable person on these matters. Picking up vague things here and there on the internet doesn’t help your position. You know just as much as any ordinary tom that has read these matters on the internet.

The fact that you use a schismatic priest as your guide I think gives a very strong indication that he has hoodwinked you into beliving there is something more, there is no great big dirty secret hidden and still to come.

You must be extremely ignorant of Church teaching and Church history.

Pope can teach error and fall into Heresy. Popes are protected from teaching error when they speak Ex-Catedra. Popes are only infallible when they speak Ex-catedra.

Pope Honorius was declared a heretic by the Third Council of Constantinople and by Pope Leo II.
**
A Pope is a man and can fall into error. A Pope can use his own free will to obey God or do evil.

The quotes I have used come from the Churchmen who have read the Third Secret.
These man who personally have read the text have from their own mouths spoken about the secret and apostasy.**
**
Both Pope Paul VI and Cardinal Cooke allowed Fr. Martin to be a priest in good standing. These men never branded him a schismatic. That is your own disingenuous statement.**

 

[saint_rafael]

Looks like Harmony1988 already answered this.

If the Pope has taught error (VII, being a Mason, etc…) then you have to logically leave the Church and go to one of those Churches/groups.

I think you need to read a Catechism or some Church history.

Popes can teach error and many have throughout the centuries. A Pope in only infallible when he speaks ex-Cathedra.

A Pope is a man and can fall into error. A Pope can use his own free will to obey God or do evil.

Pope Honorius was declared a heretic by a Church council (Constantinople III) and Pope Leo II.

Popes can teach error and even fall into heresy.

Just because Popes make mistakes, that does not mean Catholics leave the one true Church. Catholics must resist bad Popes. St. Thomas Aquinas had this position.

Papal Mistakes, heresies, or errors do not mean they lose their office.

 

[beckycmarie]

Fr. Martin was an excorcist. I guess you can call believing in the devil, demons, or demonic possesion “wacky theology” or “divisive beliefs.” I call it Catholic Faith.

That is quite a presumption on your part.

He has some wacky beliefs when it comes to demonology, such as his invention of the concept of perfect possession from which there is no return, and his beliefs that when possessed, demons control the will. Demons control the body, but they never force the will. God Himself doesn’t do that, so why would he allow demons to?

The divisive belief I referred to is the assertion that the Church is withholding information about the third secret.

 

[beckycmarie]

You are right. There was nothing earth shattering in the third secret that was released a few years ago. Yet that **contradicts **what Pope John Paul said about the third secret.

Ewtn-
ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/ENDNEAR.TXT

According to a report from more than 15 years ago, John Paul spoke
about the “Third Secret” to a group in Fulda, Germany, on a visit
there on November 17,1980. His words were tape-recorded.

What emerges is a picture rather more disturbing than the one
painted by Ratzinger last month.

In that private gathering, the Pope spoke of a "troubling"
message, of predictions of "oceans flooding entire continents,
people annihilated suddenly, by the millions, from one instant to
the next."
“We must be well prepared,” the Pope said, “for great trials in
the near future, which can even require the sacrifice of our
lives.”** And he explained why he had not made the message public: **"If a message announces that millions of people are going to die, one doesn’t really wish to have it made public. Many want to know it only out of curiosity, but they forget that knowledge brings responsibility."
You can’t see the contradition??

A key phrase in what you just posted is, “according to a report.”

What report? Who’s reporting it? I could report anything I want, that doesn’t necessarily make it true.

Where is the recording?

The problem here is people get an idea that has no evidence to back it up stuck in their heads, and then stop thinking. Then they find some text that says someone who knows someone who worked for the Pope overheard him say (insert rumor here) and use rumors to back up their position.

All of this is hearsay. I’d like to see the actual PROOF that any of this took place.

 

[Shoshana]

That is quite a presumption on your part.

He has some wacky beliefs when it comes to demonology, such as his invention of the concept of perfect possession from which there is no return, and his beliefs that when possessed, demons control the will. Demons control the body, but they never force the will. God Himself doesn’t do that, so why would he allow demons to?

The divisive belief I referred to is the assertion that the Church is withholding information about the third secret.

The perfectly possessed can for sure give away their will for the glory of Satan…God doesn’t force the will for sure but it is up to us to allow our will to be subject to His. Same thing with perfect possession and one’s will being subject to satan’s.

 

[Shoshana]

A key phrase in what you just posted is, “according to a report.”

What report? Who’s reporting it? I could report anything I want, that doesn’t necessarily make it true.

Where is the recording?

The problem here is people get an idea that has no evidence to back it up stuck in their heads, and then stop thinking. Then they find some text that says someone who knows someone who worked for the Pope overheard him say (insert rumor here) and use rumors to back up their position.

All of this is hearsay. I’d like to see the actual PROOF that any of this took place.

We must not lack charity in posting. The above article came from:

This article was taken from the November 1996 issue of “Inside the
Vatican.” Subscriptions: Inside the Vatican, Martin de Porres Lay
Dominican Community, 3050 Gap Knob Road, New Hope, KY 40052, 1-
800-789-9494, Fax: 502-325-3091.
ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/ENDNEAR.TXT

If you would have read the whole article, you would have known that.

 

[peary]

Perhaps this website will help put things in proper perspective about the 3rd ‘secret’ of Fatima:

ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/ENDNEAR.TXT

 

[beckycmarie]

We must not lack charity in posting. The above article came from:

This article was taken from the November 1996 issue of “Inside the
Vatican.” Subscriptions: Inside the Vatican, Martin de Porres Lay
Dominican Community, 3050 Gap Knob Road, New Hope, KY 40052, 1-
800-789-9494, Fax: 502-325-3091.

If you would have read the whole article, you would have known that.

I saw where the article came from, the problem is the article didn’t name the source of the report about JPII’s mentioning floods and annihilation.

The article itself is not the source. Once again, that comment is hearsay.

 

[Shoshana]

We do not need to believe in any private revelation at all, and one is still in good standing. But it just might not be wise to do so.

Divine Mercy (my favourite) was a ‘private revelation’ and made a public devotion within the universal church by our beloved John Paul 2. It has brought many, many sinners back to the fold. Is mercy of God a new thing…of course not! That being said, it would wise to read it as it is also explained in there that a pope from Poland would prepare the world for the end times. Who is that?

Then Cardinal Ratzinger has said a few words about the 3rd secret. He compared the 3rd secret to other Marian apparitions…which we will cite Our Lady of Akita, which is approved by the church and worthy of belief. On October 13, 1973 (the very anniversary of the Miracle fo the Sun…now what a coincidence!

My dear daughter, listen well to what I have to say to you. You will inform your superior."
After a short silence:
“As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests.”
"The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres…churches and altars sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.
“The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them”

 

[Shoshana]

I saw where the article came from, the problem is the article didn’t name the source of the report about JPII’s mentioning floods and annihilation.

The article itself is not the source. Once again, that comment is hearsay.

Then I guess you second guess EWTN’s wisdom in providing an article that is hearsay?

 

[Volodymyr_988]

I think you need to read a Catechism or some Church history.

Popes can teach error and many have throughout the centuries. A Pope in only infallible when he speaks ex-Cathedra.

A Pope is a man and can fall into error. A Pope can use his own free will to obey God or do evil.

Pope Honorius was declared a heretic by a Church council (Constantinople III) and Pope Leo II.

Popes can teach error and even fall into heresy.

Just because Popes make mistakes, that does not mean Catholics leave the one true Church. Catholics must resist bad Popes. St. Thomas Aquinas had this position.

Papal Mistakes, heresies, or errors do not mean they lose their office.

I believe the beloved Doctor of the Church San Roberto Bellarmino has written:

" But contrary to this it must be observed in the first place that, from the fact that the Pope deposes bishops, it is deduced that the Pope is above all the bishops, though the Pope on deposing a bishop does not destroy the episcopal jurisdiction, but only separates it from that person. In the second place, to depose anyone from the pontificate against the will of the deposed, is without doubt punishing him; however, to punish is proper to a superior or to a judge. In the third place, given that according to Cajetan and the other Thomists, in reality the whole and the parts taken as a whole are the same thing, he who has authority over the parts taken as a whole, being able to separate them one from another, has also authority over the whole itself which is constituted by those parts.
…
“Therefore, the true opinion is the fifth, according to which the Pope who is manifestly a heretic ceases by himself to be Pope and head, in the same way as he ceases to be a Christian and a member of the body of the Church; and for this reason he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the opinion of all the ancient Fathers, who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction, and outstandingly that of St. Cyprian (lib. 4, epist. 2) who speaks as follows of Novatian, who was Pope [antipope] in the schism which occurred during the pontificate of St. Cornelius: ‘He would not be able to retain the episcopate, and, if he was made bishop before, he separated himself from the body of those who were, like him, bishops, and from the unity of the Church.’”

 

[beckycmarie]

Then I guess you second guess EWTN’s wisdom in providing an article that is hearsay?

Oh the irony.

What’s worse, questioning EWTN, or questioning the Pope himself when he says the secret has been revealed in full?

It is a fact that the report that someone heard the Pope say those words would be hearsay in a US court and would be inadmissible as evidence.

The article does not cite the source of that report. This is a basic of good journalism. Without a source, that report is just a rumor.

 

[stmaria]

Oh the irony.

What’s worse, questioning EWTN, or questioning **the Pope himself **when he says the secret has been revealed in full?

.

Cardinal Sodano has said the Third Secret has been revealed in full. Can you find me a direct quote from Pope John Paul or Pope Benedict? Other wise you are basing you beliefs on “rumors”

 

[Volodymyr_988]

I think you need to read a Catechism or some Church history.

Pope Honorius was declared a heretic by a Church council (Constantinople III) and Pope Leo II.

Yes, not by some armchair theologian. Not by some kook. (This does not imply that you are either.)

I am well versed in Church History and the Faith thankyouverymuch.