The Third Secret of Fatima *Was* Fully Revealed!

[Iowa_Mike]

I’m trying to find compromise and you’re harshing my mellow.

I just meant that it’s not necessary for anyone’s personal salvation (obviously).

Far be it from me to harsh anyone’s mellow but I think the message is indeed critical…

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[thistle]

Now I think that most people who are actually familiar with the facts would find that ridiculous.

But thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Maybe we can agree on the fact that whatever the Secret is or whether everything’s been told about it, it does not change the nature of the Church or anything about our spiritual lives. Despite what some seem to think, it is not ‘absolutely critical’ that it be revealed.

Well we agree on one thing and that is that messages in private revelations have absolutely no bearing on our salvation.

 

[masondoggy]

Well we agree on one thing and that is that messages in private revelations have absolutely no bearing on our salvation.

True, but they also may or may not affect the life we’re living here on earth.

My personal opinion is that there are bad things coming (don’t know what) and God, in his mercy, is warning us so that we don’t panic when it happens. It doesn’t hurt to pay attention, cautiously, with an open mind.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Well we agree on one thing and that is that messages in private revelations have absolutely no bearing on our salvation.

I guess I’ll have to opt out of the ‘we agree on one thing’…thing. I believe that the message given to us in private revelation (if that is how you are characterizing Fatima) are intended to aid in our salvation. One only has to read the messages and connect the dots.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[benedict_XVIII]

Excuse me if I am too stupid, but it seems to me that if Our Lady’s messages had no importance, no bearing on our salvation, no pertinence to a Christian’s life, she wouldn’t waste her time giving them to us

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Excuse me if I am too stupid, but it seems to me that if Our Lady’s messages had no importance, no bearing on our salvation, no pertinence to a Christian’s life, she wouldn’t waste her time giving them to us

That’s quite poignant. Our Lady’s messages most definitely have importance - quite serious practical importance, certainly.

My point was just that the period of public revelation - that necessary for salvation - ended with the death of the last apostle (John). That much is infallible Church teaching.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Excuse me if I am too stupid, but it seems to me that if Our Lady’s messages had no importance, no bearing on our salvation, no pertinence to a Christian’s life, she wouldn’t waste her time giving them to us

Did you ever hear the song, “Let Charity and Love Prevail”? Let’s agree to disagree without being disagreeable.

Like you I believe Our Lady’s messages are profound and are given to aid our salvation; others don’t see it that way.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[thistle]

Excuse me if I am too stupid, but it seems to me that if Our Lady’s messages had no importance, no bearing on our salvation, no pertinence to a Christian’s life, she wouldn’t waste her time giving them to us

Then why does the Church say we do not have to believe them??

 

[Eucharisted]

Text of Pope John Paul II’s words at the Beatification of Fransisco and Jacinta

1. “Another portent appeared in heaven; behold, a great red dragon” (Rv 12:3).

These words from the first reading of the Mass make us think of the great struggle between good and evil, showing how, when man puts God aside, be cannot achieve happiness, but ends up destroying himself.

How many victims there have been throughout the last century of the second millennium! We remember the horrors of the First and Second World Wars and the other wars in so many parts of the world, the concentration and extermination camps, the gulags, ethnic cleansings and persecutions, terrorism, kidnappings, drugs, the attacks on unborn life and the family.

The message of Fatima is a call to conversion, alerting humanity to have nothing to do with the “dragon” whose “tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth” (Rv 12:4). Man’s final goal is heaven, his true home, where the heavenly Father awaits everyone with his merciful love.

God does not want anyone to be lost; that is why 2,000 years ago he sent his Son to earth, “to seek and to save the lost” (Lk 19:10). And he saved us by his death on the cross. Let no one empty that Cross of its power! Jesus died and rose from the dead to be “the first-born among many brethren” (Rom 8:29).

In her motherly concern, the Blessed Virgin came here to Fatima to ask men and women “to stop offending God, Our Lord, who is already very offended”. It is a mother’s sorrow that compels her to speak; the destiny of her children is at stake. For this reason she asks the little shepherds: “Pray, pray much and make sacrifices for sinners; many souls go to hell because they have no one to pray and make sacrifices for them”.

Ignorance is the sister of confusion. Knowledge is the sister of truth.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Then why does the Church say we do not have to believe them??

If you go to Mass on the Feast of Our Lady of Fatima, are you truly in the spirit of the faith if you reject that private revelation?

Same question WRT Divine Mercy?

I can’t say I know. I do know I do not think there is any ‘legitimate’ reason for rejecting the Fatima apparition.

 

[Eucharisted]

• The Secret concerns a ‘divine warning’ about ‘suicidal’ alterations in the liturgy and theology of the Church (the future Pope Pius XII, 1931).

The Church already knew about liturgical abuses before Fatima; she’s been dealing with them since apostolic times, if the Epistle to the Church in Corith says anything.

• A prediction that after 1960, ‘the devil will succeed in leaving the souls of the faithful abandoned by their leaders’ by causing ‘religious and priest to fall away from their beautiful vocation… dragging numerous souls to hell’ and that ‘nations will disappear from the face of the earth’ (Sr. Lucia to Fr. Fuentes in 1957).

Yet she didn’t tell this to the Vatican when her Bishop ordered her to tell everything? That would be disobedience. How strange, especially since she wrote a memoir in obedience to her Bishop.

• Contents ‘so delicate’ that they cannot be allowed ‘for whatever reason, even fortuitous, to fall into alien hands’ (Cardinal Ottaviani, 1967).

Then why did Mary tell them to children? Did she take advantage of their ignorance? Only Satan works like that!

• A text ‘diplomatically’ withheld because of the ‘seriousness of its contents’ and which predicts, after 1980, ‘great trials’ and ‘tribulation’ for the Church which ‘it is no longer possible to avert’ and the destruction of ‘whole areas of the earth’ so that ‘from one moment to the next millions of people will perish’ (John Paul II at Fulda, 1980).

The Church has known about trials since her beginning, if the Book of Revelation says anything. And the Church would be guilty of falsehood - which completely contradicts her infallibility - if she would hide knowledge for diplomatic reasons.

• A ‘religious prophecy’ of ‘dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian and therefore of the world’ (Cardinal Ratzinger, 1984).

Nothing new. The Church knows dangers will come. Jesus Himself prophecised they would come.

• A predication of apostasy in the Church that ‘begins at the top’ (Cardinal Ciappi, 1995).

Again, Jesus prophecised an apstasy and His Apostles warned about it.

• A warning of a material chastisement of the world which accompanies the great apostasy in the Church, like that predicted in the Church-approved apparition of Our Lady of Akita in 1973, whose message is ‘essentially the same’ as the message of Our Lady of Fatima (Ratzinger to Howard Dee, 1998).

Essentially the same, as in, prayer and penance? Yes I agree. The essense of a private revelation is the message of the gospel: Prayer and penance. Becuse private revelation is oriented toward Public Revelation. Even Sister Lucia confirmed this when she was asked what Our Lady wanted.

• A warning to avoid the ‘tail of the dragon’ referred to in Revelation (12:3-4), which sweeps one-third of ‘the stars’ (priests and bishops, according to traditional interpretation) from Heaven (their true vocations) (Pope John Paul II, May 2000, sermon at Fatima when he beatified Jacinta and Francisco). (Many believe the Pontiff was here revealing the Secret in a subtle manner.)

I’ve already addressed this in my first post.

 

[Eucharisted]

The accusations against the Church are nothing new. The Apostles had to deal with a lot of it. Just read the Epistles: they make a lot of warnings against false prophets and teachers and they tell Christians not to accept false gospels. It’s because some churches were accepting false prophets and false gospels that they had to make these warnings. It’s a problem the Church deals with in every generation, too. Which is why we must be obedient to our Bishops and love the Church, heed her teachings, and not get into weird claims or beliefs.

Remember: if it dosen’t make sense, it isn’t true.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

The Church already knew about liturgical abuses before Fatima; she’s been dealing with them since apostolic times, if the Epistle to the Church in Corith says anything.

What your point is behind these and all your other comments is rather difficult to decipher. Are you implying that because the Church had previously dealt with liturgical problems (and when were there liturgical problems on the scale of what we’ve seen recently?) the Mother of God should not have bothered to show up at Fatima?

Are you calling Pope Pius XII a liar?

Are you disputing the accuracy of this and all the other quotes? They are all documented by reliable sources and the burden would certainly be on you to prove them otherwise!

Yet she didn’t tell this to the Vatican when her Bishop ordered her to tell everything? That would be disobedience. How strange, especially since she wrote a memoir in obedience to her Bishop.

And how exactly would you know what she did and did not tell her bishop? Yes, of course, she DID communicate the Secret (although it took a direct command from Heaven to get her to do it!). Your comment here does not make any sense whatsoever. For you to insinuate that it is those who actually believe what Sr. Lucy herself said about the Secret are accusing her of disobedience here is - laughable? Or just strange? Can you explain?

Then why did Mary tell them to children? Did she take advantage of their ignorance? Only Satan works like that!

The comment from the Cardinal was merely that the Secret should not fall into alien hands. You appear to be arguing here with a scattergun approach of multiple non-sequiturs. I don’t think it’s going to work with reasonable people who understand the Church and can think.

The Church has known about trials since her beginning, if the Book of Revelation says anything. And the Church would be guilty of falsehood - which completely contradicts her infallibility - if she would hide knowledge for diplomatic reasons.

The Church isn’t guilty of falsehood. You don’t understand what you read.

Do you think that no member of the Catholic Church ever in her history has been less than complete forthright about any topic?

Or do you just think that of the clergy?

Do you know how ridiculous that is?

Nothing new. The Church knows dangers will come. Jesus Himself prophecised they would come.

Again, Jesus prophecised an apstasy and His Apostles warned about it.

Again, if you wish that Mary should not have bothered, I think we cannot address those issues here.

Essentially the same, as in, prayer and penance? Yes I agree. The essense of a private revelation is the message of the gospel: Prayer and penance. Becuse private revelation is oriented toward Public Revelation. Even Sister Lucia confirmed this when she was asked what Our Lady wanted.

Essentially the same would probably mean in its central theme, yes? The apparitions of Akita deal both with a worldwide chastisement and apostasy and/or disobedience in the Church.

Do you or do you not consider the fully Church-approved apparitions of Akita, Japan valid?

Do you or do you not believe Cardinal Ratzinger when he likened the Third Secret to those apparitions?

It seems that buy buying 100% into Bertone’s version of the truth here, you are of necessity pointing your finger at a number of other high-ranking prelates.

I think you do not really understand what you’re saying. You are made uncomfortable by the implications of the facts you’ve read here and so you are rebelling against that.

 

[Eucharisted]

Nice fallacies. Now I see your true intent. Good day.

 

[benedict_XVIII]

Then why does the Church say we do not have to believe them??

Dear Thistle.

You sound to me like you insist on only half of the Church’s statement because you DO NOT want people to listen to Our Lady.
The Church says we are free to believe.
Or not.
I am not doing anything wrong when I choose to believe.
And I do.
Many many people do.
You see, if Our Lady appears so often it is because despite masses and homilies we are still going astray.
I don’t think many Catholics bother to read the Bible and the Catechism.
I always ask this to people but never get a yes.
I naver hear my parish priest say that we must read the Bible.
I often say that a Catholic who doesn’t read the Bible is like a brainsurgeon who wants to carry out an operation without ever having read a medicine book.
People do not listen to the Pope. They listen but that’s all they do.
In the end, they just carry on with their jobs as usual.
Basically, we neer hear at mass the basic fact about the Gospel: that the Christian way is the Way of the Cross.
Priests are scared of scaring people away from church.
The message gets diluted for fear of emptying the church.
Our Lady comes to restore the Truth.
Our Lady hopes we shall at least listen to her.
One thing Our Lady says is that our Catholic Church is in a complete mess.
That’s a fact.
Why should we ignore everything the Pope says but listen when He says that we can ignore Mary’s apparitions ?
It doesn’t sound right to me.

 

[LilyM]

“the Secret should not fall into alien hands”? What does that even mean?

Since when are Our Lady’s messages even particularly ‘secret’ - since when are they not for the whole world? None of this ‘secrecy’ surrounded St Margaret Mary, St Catherine Laboure, St Bernadette, St Faustina, not even Sr Agnes of Akita.

Is there some ‘special knowledge’ - connected with the Fatima apparitions - that a precious few must guard with their lives, apparently forevermore? Is Our Lady incapable of herself revealing messages at the appropriate time for them? Why not appear again NOW to Sr Lucy or someone else, if the message pertained so particularly to our times?

If Sr Lucy said all should be revealed at her death if not sooner, don’t you think it WOULD have been revealed at her death? Is the Church hiding its light under a bushel contrary to Our Lord’s (and, apparently, Our Lady’s) command?

 

[benedict_XVIII]

Good point.
I don’t have the answer.
All I can say is that Sr Lucy always said that Our Lady wanted the secret to be made public within 1960 (I think) but the Church didn’t do it.
There is too much arrogance in Church hierarchy, that’s my explanation.
All I can say Our lady demanded that Russia be consacrated to Her Immaculate Heart in a certain way but the Church didn’t do it.
I would find nothing unusual, considering that, if the Church had hidden part of the secret.

 

[LilyM]

Good point.
I don’t have the answer.
All I can say is that Sr Lucy always said that Our Lady wanted the secret to be made public within 1960 (I think) but the Church didn’t do it.
There is too much arrogance in Church hierarchy, that’s my explanation.
All I can say Our lady demanded that Russia be consacrated to Her Immaculate Heart in a certain way but the Church didn’t do it.
I would find nothing unusual, considering that, if the Church had hidden part of the secret.

Our Lady never demanded anything of the church at Fatima. She could not demand, she had no right to demand, anything of church authorities through private revelation at any time. Unless that revelation is directly to the Pope himself, and even then it would still be binding only upon him as an individual - she would be unable to demand anything of the Church as a whole.

To call Our Lady’s requests for a consecration* demands* - and consider the Church bound by them in any way, or to presume that they are in any way wrong for not doing something that they in no way had to do, is arrogant in itself on the part of those devoted to Fatima. It puts her apparitions on the same level as public revelation which as an article of faith they are not.

Besides which, John Paul 2 had such a devotion to her that I’m sure if he didn’t actually achieve an acceptable consecration of Russia (and firstly - reports were Sr Lucy said he had, secondly - it was NOT something the bishops were in any way bound to do, so it isn’t even a question of whether what they did was acceptable - anything they did was more than what was required of them) then it was because it simply can’t be achieved.

 

[thistle]

Dear Thistle.

You sound to me like you insist on only half of the Church’s statement because you DO NOT want people to listen to Our Lady.
The Church says we are free to believe.
Or not.
I am not doing anything wrong when I choose to believe.
And I do.
Many many people do.
You see, if Our Lady appears so often it is because despite masses and homilies we are still going astray.
I don’t think many Catholics bother to read the Bible and the Catechism.
I always ask this to people but never get a yes.
I naver hear my parish priest say that we must read the Bible.
I often say that a Catholic who doesn’t read the Bible is like a brainsurgeon who wants to carry out an operation without ever having read a medicine book.
People do not listen to the Pope. They listen but that’s all they do.
In the end, they just carry on with their jobs as usual.
Basically, we neer hear at mass the basic fact about the Gospel: that the Christian way is the Way of the Cross.
Priests are scared of scaring people away from church.
The message gets diluted for fear of emptying the church.
Our Lady comes to restore the Truth.
Our Lady hopes we shall at least listen to her.
One thing Our Lady says is that our Catholic Church is in a complete mess.
That’s a fact.
Why should we ignore everything the Pope says but listen when He says that we can ignore Mary’s apparitions ?
It doesn’t sound right to me.

You are talking without knowing me or even trying to understand what I have said.
You seem to think I do not believe in apparitions and messages. What is that stupid conclusion based on? You are absolutely wrong. I firmly believe in the messages of Fatima, Lourdes, Our lady of the Miraculous Medal, and the Divine Mercy.

My point, if you could have stopped being so self righteous and thought about it, is that Catholics do not have to believe any messages from private revelations and nor are these messages necessary for our salvation although some posters try to imply they are.

By the way, to say there is a difference between “do not have to believe” and “believe or not” is frankly silly. They both mean exactly the same thing.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Now I think that most people who are actually familiar with the facts would find that ridiculous.

Seems that you mistake opinion for fact.

The facts are that the the seer, Sr Lucia, and those in authority in the Church have stated differently than you do.