Russia will be converted?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pythagoras
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pythagoras

Guest
The prophecy of Fatima said that Russia will be converted. What does it mean by the word “converted” here. Does it mean the Russians will become Catholics just like what happened with Our Lady of Guadalupe and the conversion of Latin Americas which became true?
 
Hello,
Prior to the Communism, Russia was Catholic.
I believe it means that Russia will have a conversion from Atheism to Christianity.

Russia will be “Consecrated to my Imaculate Heart” ,Our Lady of Fatima.

Scott
 
40.png
super64:
Hello,
Prior to the Communism, Russia was Catholic.
I believe it means that Russia will have a conversion from Atheism to Christianity.

Russia will be “Consecrated to my Imaculate Heart” ,Our Lady of Fatima.

Scott
Click to expand...
Russia was Russian Orthodox, not Catholic
 
Was Russia atheistic already in 1916? If not, then the conversion had to be from Orthodox to Catholic.
 
40.png
forthright:
Was Russia atheistic already in 1916? If not, then the conversion had to be from Orthodox to Catholic.
Click to expand...
Russia has never really been atheist. Russia was very strongly Orthodox from 988 C.E. until the Communists offically discouraged religion in 1917-1918. Even during the Communist era the Church was a factor in the lives of many people. In 1987 between 40% and 50% of Russian babies were baptized in the Othodox Church and in 1988 60% of deceased Russians had Othodox funeral services.
 
40.png
BillP:
Russia has never really been atheist. Russia was very strongly Orthodox from 988 C.E. until the Communists offically discouraged religion in 1917-1918. Even during the Communist era the Church was a factor in the lives of many people. In 1987 between 40% and 50% of Russian babies were baptized in the Othodox Church and in 1988 60% of deceased Russians had Othodox funeral services.
Click to expand...
True, the Orthodox faith survived while being persecuted, unfortunately Eastern Catholicism was suppressed brutally.

As an aside, I’m sorry, but I can’t stand that designation C.E. We’re Catholics here, you can use Anno Domini!
 
40.png
forthright:
Was Russia atheistic already in 1916? If not, then the conversion had to be from Orthodox to Catholic.
Click to expand...
It was prophesying the future, so whether Russia was under athiest control or not at that present time is irrelevent. The prophesy was interpereted by the Vatican to mean the end of Athiest Communism in Russia. As for the interperetation that it might have in addition meant the conversion of the Orthodox, it is a possibility, however it does not seem to imply that, in fact the message of Fatima was broad in that. But, I believe in the Vatican’s interperetation of it. If the Russian Orthodox convert to catholicism, then I’ll believe in that additional interperetation. But, currently it appears that’s not happening.
 
Is the Russian Orthodox church in communion with Rome? Or am I thinking of Eastern Catholicism.
 
40.png
malcolm_davies:
no the orthodox (including russian orthodox) are not in communion with rome.
Click to expand...
It is true that there are two Churches, the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox. However:
“Important in this connection is the Balamand Document’s rejection of the premise that only one of our churches is the unique possessor of the means of grace in such a way that conversion to that church from the other is necessary for salvation. The Document asserts that “on each side it is recognized that what Christ has entrusted to his Church . . . cannot be considered the exclusive property of one of our churches.” (13) To be sure, there may be cases in which conscience leads an Orthodox or a Catholic Christian to enter the other church (cf. 14). This, however, does not mean that our churches should set out to “win converts” by cultivating inappropriate fears and anxieties.”
according to:
A Response of the Orthodox/Roman Catholic Consultation
in the United States to the Joint International Commission
for Theological Dialogue Between the Orthodox Church
and the Roman Catholic Church Regarding the Balamand Document
(Dated June 23, 1993
 
40.png
Like:
Are you saying Sister Lucia, JP2 & B16 have lied to us?
Seen this?
Or This?
Click to expand...
Regardless of this or this or that, consecrating the world is not consecrating Russia. I don’t care what JPII may have mutterd under his breath. I just cannot accept things that are that clear. Obviously JPII did not do it right the first time, so why are we so sure he did the second? I hate to have to say that about JPII, but he is not the first, nor only pope who could not seem to do it. It was attempted 5 times, and obviously done wrong at least four times, and in my personal opinion (and many others) actually five. Don’t be so shocked.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
40.png
stanley123:
It is true that there are two Churches, the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, just trying to clarify here:

Did you mean to say “there are two Churches, the Catholic-- which includes both the Eastern and Roman Rites-- and the Orthodox.” :confused:

I’m a revert just trying to figure all this out! 🙂

Thanks! 🙂
 
40.png
Photini:
Excuse me, just trying to clarify here:

Did you mean to say “there are two Churches, the Catholic-- which includes both the Eastern and Roman Rites-- and the Orthodox.” :confused:

I’m a revert just trying to figure all this out! 🙂

Thanks! 🙂
Click to expand...
Dear Photini,

There are Eastern Catholics who are part of the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church (i.e. the Church in communion with the See of Peter, the Pope) and there is the schismatic Orthodox Church which is not.

God bless,
 
40.png
Photini:
Excuse me, just trying to clarify here:

Did you mean to say “there are two Churches, the Catholic-- which includes both the Eastern and Roman Rites-- and the Orthodox.” :confused:
Click to expand...
This is OK. Thank you.
Although, sometimes, I hear that Eastern Catholics, for example the Ruthenian Eastern Catholic Church, considers itself to be a separate Church, which is in communion with the RCC, and not just a different rite under the RCC. For example, the Maronite Church is sometimes said to be a separate Church, but in full communion with the RCC. I am not fully up to speed on the various nuances between considering the Maronite Church as a separate rite and part of the RCC, versus considering it as a separate Church in full communion with the RCC. I could be wrong, but I thought that the latter description was preferable at this point in time.
 
40.png
trth_skr:
Regardless of this or this or that, consecrating the world is not consecrating Russia. I don’t care what JPII may have mutterd under his breath. I just cannot accept things that are that clear. Obviously JPII did not do it right the first time, so why are we so sure he did the second? I hate to have to say that about JPII, but he is not the first, nor only pope who could not seem to do it. It was attempted 5 times, and obviously done wrong at least four times, and in my personal opinion (and many others) actually five. Don’t be so shocked.

Oh! I’m not shocked, but very sad that a Catholic would not trust in the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. Especially when he was so dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary. And, I can not imagin JP II going to his death knowing he had spoken such a falsehood. I do not know as to why the consecration was not done prior to the 1984 consecration & have often wondered about that. I will pray about it!

God Bless!
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Like:
…Oh! I’m not shocked, but very sad that a Catholic would not trust in the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. Especially when he was so dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary. And, I can not imagin JP II going to his death knowing he had spoken such a falsehood. I do not know as to why the consecration was not done prior to the 1984 consecration & have often wondered about that. I will pray about it!

God Bless!
Click to expand...
Believe me, I am sad, too.

Sad that the consecration was not done.

Sad that I have to doubt something JPII said, as well as the fact that the other popes attempted it and (apparently) failed (otherwise why was it attempted again and again and again…?).

We live in very confusing times.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
The Pope tried the consecration once. He went to Lucia and asked if it was acceptable. She said “no”. He did it again, asked her and she said “yes”. She had reiterated “yes” again after that. You can only say that it’s not consecrated by using conspiracy theories with no proof to back them up. I agree. You are confused. Please see Like’s links.
 
40.png
bear06:
The Pope tried the consecration once. He went to Lucia and asked if it was acceptable. She said “no”. He did it again, asked her and she said “yes”. She had reiterated “yes” again after that. You can only say that it’s not consecrated by using conspiracy theories with no proof to back them up. I agree. You are confused. Please see Like’s links.
Click to expand...
not true… and you have no proof… unless you want to count some guy’s “interpretation” of what Sr typed. Yes typed… the only time in her life she did not hand write her words - all of which deny the proper consecration.

In the meantime, I will extend the courtesy of reviewing your links.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top