Question Concerning Fatima

[WhateverIsTrue122]

So. The second secret states that during the Pontificate of Pope Pius XI, a mysterious light would appear in the sky (which turned out to be Aurora Borealis), and that this light would signal the beginning of a second world war. These events would have occurred in 1938. However, Lucia did not write about these prophesies at all until 1941, a point at which this account could be more easily considered a history than a prophesy. So not to be overly skeptical, but why would Mary give Lucia a prophesy like this if she wasn’t going to do anything with it until after the foreseen events occurred? Because I constantly see people citing the accurate predictions of Fatima as proof of its validity; but honestly, having past events dated as prophecy only makes me feel slightly embarrassed in defending it. If I were looking at the event from a skeptical point of view, I would see this and the incredibly vague nature of the third mystery (the only mystery that really concerns the future at the time of writing) as stumbling blocks to believing the message.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

You don’t need to “defend” Fatima because it’s private revelation, and it is not required or necessary for a Catholic, let alone anyone else, to believe private revelation.

The Vatican has already decided that Fatima is worthy of belief, and thus approved it at the highest level. So it’s pointless for anyone to express or argue skepticism over it, given that the Vatican has made up its mind. The choice you and other people have is to either believe in it or not believe in it. There’s no need to go around being an apologist for it.

People who have chosen to believe in it likely do not care that you or anyone else thinks some part of it is “vague” or that you are “embarrassed in defending it”. People who don’t believe in it are entitled to their unbelief, so there’s no need for you to be trying to convince them to believe when it sounds like you yourself don’t fully believe in it.

As for “why would Mary do this and that”, Mary does what she does because God wills that she do it. She always follows God’s will. I am sure when Mary gave Lucia the prophecies, God already knew (and may have let Mary know as well) when Lucia would be writing it down.

 

[commenter]

You don’t need to “defend” Fatima because it’s private revelation, and it is not required or necessary for a Catholic, let alone anyone else, to believe private revelation.

The Vatican has already decided that Fatima is worthy of belief, and thus approved it at the highest level.

“Approved at the highest level” for a private revelation, that is.

In other words, everything in public revelation is approved at a higher level than Fatima. Public Revelation is what we are called to defense and evangelism. Fatima might, for some, be an optional means to facilitate that end, but never an end in itself.

 

[StudentMI]

I’ve heard some cite the late dating of the writing down of the secrets as evidence against Fatima. It is a little worrying.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’ve heard some cite the late dating of the writing down of the secrets as evidence against Fatima. It is a little worrying.

Why is it “worrying” when you’re not required to believe it?

It seems like people just like to pick at Fatima and argue about Fatima instead of following what Our Lady said we should do, which is all in public revelation as well, and is stuff we should be doing.

I will never understand the obsession with the prophecies. People constantly miss the true message of Fatima becaues they’d rather concern themselves with eschatological stuff. It would be good if bishops and priests would tell people to get their minds on what’s truly important, which is prayer and penance.

 

[StudentMI]

Why is it “worrying” when you’re not required to believe it?

Well I find it worrying because of the reliability of the whole thing. It’s irrelevant really because public revelation is what we’re required to believe in, but it still leaves me with questions.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Do you do all the important things that Our Lady told us to do?

 

[StudentMI]

I try to.

10 characters.

 

[Justin_Mary]

So not to be overly skeptical, but why would Mary give Lucia a prophesy like this if she wasn’t going to do anything with it until after the foreseen events occurred?

That’s a good question.

On the one hand, we’ve got Mary telling these things to children. Children who will not see this bright light & have very little experience of the war itself. On the other hand, we have the Miracle of the Sun.

On a practical level, there was no internet or google, so there’s practically no way for Lucia to even know about the bright lights regardless of when she wrote down the secrets.

Regardless, it is a good question. Worthy of meditation.

 

[StudentMI]

I suppose it’s like that quote from St Ignatius. I will believe red is black if the hierarchical Church declares it so.

 

[PennyinCanada]

So not to be overly skeptical, but why would Mary give Lucia a prophesy like this if she wasn’t going to do anything with it until after the foreseen events occurred?

Lucia likely had a confessor who guided her and she was obedient.

Jesus had a similar problem. ‘Why is he eating with sinners?’ and ‘Why is he breaking the Sabaoth?’ (He wasn’t breaking the Sabaoth by healing people as he explained that doing acts of mercy on the Sabaoth honored God) Meanwhile the lame could walk, the blind could see, the dead were raised. Jesus said that his works were a testimony that he was speaking the truth.

The appearances of Our Lady at Fatima, the incredible event on Oct 13 1917, at a predicted time and location, has been investigated, and found worthy of belief by the church. A person can receive this with joy at the intervention of God right before terrible human suffering of that century began and be comforted that God is with us. If a person is skeptical in the face of this event, what would it take for someone to say like Thomas ‘My Lord and my God!’

 

[Justin_Mary]

These events would have occurred in 1938. However, Lucia did not write about these prophesies at all until 1941, a point at which this account could be more easily considered a history than a prophesy.

Ok, after a brief refresher on Fatima, I’ve come to conclude that we put too much emphasis on the dates things were written down. She was telling people about her experience way before 1938. & there are letters to various people in reference to them. The document you’re talking about in 1941 should not be considered the source, or the beginning. More like the end.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

I try to.

That’s a good thing, continue to do so. There was nothing unique in her instructions from Fatima. She may have revealed certain things that were new, but her instructions were the same as always. Pray, fast, and make reparations.

As for writing it down, don’t get so hung up on that. I remember things from my youth, and I could write them down right now . That doesn’t mean they didn’t happen back then, it just means that I hadn’t bothered to write it down. She was under no obligation to do so until her superior ordered her to, so she didn’t.

I will believe red is black if the hierarchical Church declares it so.

This is not an instance of being asked to believe something that is demonstrably untrue. This is simply a case of someone no doing what you personally would expect them to do having received a revelation from God. Just because she didn’t write it down when you think she ought to have doesn’t somehow make it false.

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

Just going out on a limb here, but why is the writing down the significant marker of the prophecy’s veracity? Wouldn’t (and didn’t) the prophecies have been shared verbally long before they were written?

 

[WhateverIsTrue122]

Well, that’s the problem. While the message of Fatima was certainly shared before this point, I can’t find a reference to the prophecy itself being told anywhere prior to 1941. I was hoping that in posting this someone would come up with a reference.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

WhateverIsTrue122:

These events would have occurred in 1938. However, Lucia did not write about these prophesies at all until 1941, a point at which this account could be more easily considered a history than a prophesy.

Ok, after a brief refresher on Fatima, I’ve come to conclude that we put too much emphasis on the dates things were written down. She was telling people about her experience way before 1938. & there are letters to various people in reference to them. The document you’re talking about in 1941 should not be considered the source, or the beginning. More like the end.

I am glad to know this. Does this mean that she told people about the “unknown light” before it happened, and what the particulars were (during the reign of Pius XI, a sign of further punishment for sin with another war), before they actually happened? Before there even was a Pius XI?

I really hate to say it, but if this isn’t the case, I don’t mean that I disbelieve the prophecy, but it would be next to impossible to convince a skeptic that it wasn’t made up after the fact. And for those who would say we shouldn’t be trying to convince people of Fatima, I disagree. If it happened — and I believe it did — then everyone needs to know about it, everyone needs to believe it, and any objections they might have, should be answered.

I have heard it said (I believe it was Fr Stanley Jaki) that even if the miracle of the sun could be explained by natural phenomena (“sun dogs”, rapid temperature inversion generating blasts of hot air), being able to p(name removed by moderator)oint in advance the exact moment it would happen, is proof enough of a supernatural explanation for Fatima. My only caveat would be “but does this region of Portugal experience ‘sun dogs’ and temperature inversions all the time?”. I’m not well-versed enough in Portuguese regional meteorology to be able to answer that. Anyone?

 

[Dan_Defender]

a mysterious light would appear in the sky (which turned out to be Aurora Borealis), and that this light would signal the beginning of a second world war.

I think you are missing the point that this 'Aurora" was caused by a geomagnetic solar storm which is very rare, in the sense that a normal aurora is only seen in very northern latitudes, yet this one in January 1938 was seen across Europe, including Portugal, and it was widely reported as the event of the century. The last time such an event occurred was 1709. Regardless of when the secret was published (though I’m sure Lucia had discussed it with her priest before then), it doesn’t take away from the event’s significance.

 

[Justin_Mary]

I really hate to say it, but if this isn’t the case, I don’t mean that I disbelieve the prophecy, but it would be next to impossible to convince a skeptic that it wasn’t made up after the fact. And for those who would say we shouldn’t be trying to convince people of Fatima, I disagree. If it happened — and I believe it did — then everyone needs to know about it, everyone needs to believe it, and any objections they might have, should be answered.

I hear what you are saying & agree. However, I’m on the opposite end of the spectrum & don’t require a lot of proof. The message of Fatima conforms to my understanding of the Gospels, my understanding of the Old Testament… I’m good.

At the same time, consider that Luke was not at Christ’s baptism. Luke was not there when Jesus was taken up from us. He wrote his gospel in retrospect. He, like all the Gospel writers framed their account based on what their audience knew.

But you & I believe.

 

[tommy37]

My cousin got his Doctorate in “Portuguese Regional Meteorology”!

 

[HomeschoolDad]

My cousin got his Doctorate in “Portuguese Regional Meteorology”!

Assuming you’re not just pulling our leg here, might you ask him?