D
Sr. Lucia says that the consecration of Russia was accepted. Why can’t these people accept what the seer says? Do they know more about her apparition than she does?
Their main argument, so far as I understand, is that Sister Lucia several times stated that the “Consecration” was invalid, and only later under pressure said it was.Sr. Lucia says that the consecration of Russia was accepted. Why can’t these people accept what the seer says? Do they know more about her apparition than she does?
There was more than one attempt to comply with the act of consecration. Only the last attempt was accepted. The times Sr. Lucia said the act was invalid are not the same as the time she said it was valid.Their main argument, so far as I understand, is that Sister Lucia several times stated that the “Consecration” was invalid, and only later under pressure said it was.
And there actually seems to be some truth to this. At least, I’ve never seen an orthodox Catholic reply to these accusations, and the documentation produced in support of them.
A Real Interview
. . . Then, in September of 1985, an account of an interview with her appeared in Sol de Fatima magazine, published by friends of the Spanish Blue Army. It quoted Sr. Lucia affirming once again that yet another consecration of the world, performed in 1984 in Rome, still did not satisfy Our Lady’s request. The text of the consecration made no mention of Russia, and none of the thousands of other bishops of the world were commanded to participate.
A Cousin Speaks
A year later, one of the few family members permitted to visit Sr. Lucia spoke out. Maria do Fetal, a cousin, publicly stated after a visit that Sr. Lucia had said the consecration still had not been done. Her statement gave a momentary voice to her cloistered cousin, who was still not permitted to speak for herself.
Quick Confirmation
In June of 1987, Sr. Lucia made a rare excursion outside her convent to vote in a general election. In a brief exchange with a journalist, Enrico Romero, Sr. Lucia confirmed once again that the consecration of Russia had not been done.
Instructions to Contradict
I don’t know what to make of all this. Blessed John XXIII was supposed to reveal the secret publicly in 1960, as per Our Lady’s orders. He refused to do so. Why is it so hard to believe that John Paul II is also disobeying Our Lady?Two years later, in the summer of 1989, Sr. Lucia received a surprising instruction from an anonymous official at the Vatican. The instruction directed that Sr. Lucia and her fellow religious at the convent must now say that the consecration performed in March of 1984 satisfied the request of Our Lady of Fatima. This extraordinary order to flatly contradict herself was revealed by Father Messias Coelho, a longtime friend and occasional visitor of Sr. Lucia. In evident obedience to the same instruction, Sr. Lucia’s cousin Maria do Fetal suddenly reversed herself, and quoted Sr. Lucia as saying the consecration had been done.
not true as has been refuted many times, but people who place their faith in private revelation and disdain the magesterial teaching authority of the Church refuse to accept it.It seems that even after the 1984 Consecration Sister Lucia denied that Our Lady’s request was ever fulfilled. I don’t know what to make of all this. Blessed John XXIII was supposed to reveal the secret publicly in 1960, as per Our Lady’s orders. He refused to do so. Why is it so hard to believe that John Paul II is also disobeying Our Lady?
Stephen.
She is a cloistered nun. They don’t do “public” anything. She wrote a book, under obedience. She has been given permission by her religious superiors to give a few interviews. That’s an awful lot of talking in public for a cloistered nun. At her age, I think she deserves to fulfill the rest of her mission on this Earth in peace.She is hardly ever allowed to talk to the public and it is so tough to interview her.
Fatima, as all apparitions, is a private revelation.Having received three sacraments in Our Lady of Fatima RCC, I wonder how much that speaks toward an endorsement or recognition of this Revelation, which technically, by definition is a General Revelation. Or maybe the Holy See. IHS Darylhttp://www.fatima.org/news/newsviews/Óimages/spacer.gifÓAt Fatima, on May 13, 2000, referring to Jacinta and Francisco, the seers of Fatima, Pope John Paul II said, ÒAccording to the Divine plan, Ôa woman clothed with the sunÕ (Rev. 12:1) came down from Heaven to this earth to visit the privileged children of the Father.Ó
I agree with David on this one, and always have. Private revelations, IMO, are meant to be just that ‘private’. (Just like the supposed number of Popes we are to have before Christ’s return). Satan can take many forms and even mimic holy images and quote Scripture. Satan is using ‘this particular revelation’ and pitting it against the Church and fueling the fire and support for the Protestants.Fatima, as all apparitions, is a private revelation.
I looked in the Catechism and there is nothing regarding “general” revelations.
Fatima is not part of the Deposit of Faith.
Just because we recognize the Blessed Virgin under the title of Our Lady of Fatima does not require any belief in the message/apparitions of Fatima.
I agree!! UMMMMM, may be some masons WITHIN the vatican?? In any event, i cannot wait to see the documentary.Their main argument, so far as I understand, is that Sister Lucia several times stated that the “Consecration” was invalid, and only later under pressure said it was.
And there actually seems to be some truth to this. At least, I’ve never seen an orthodox Catholic reply to these accusations, and the documentation produced in support of them.