The Third Secret of Fatima *Was* Fully Revealed!

[pnewton]

Father Coelho in July of 1989 confirmed that an order came from the Vatican, (probably Cardinal Cassaroli), ordering that Sr. Lucia and others begin stating that the consecration had been completed despite the fact that she had done two interviews a few years earlier making it clear that it had not been done.

It was at this point that these computer-generated letters supposedly from Sr. Lucia began appearing, directly contradicting what she said in interviews a few years earlier. One letter in particular is a proven fraud.

Oh, and while we’re talking about computer-generated letters, then we have Cardinal Bertone stating that Sr. Lucia never even used a computer in his nasty book, only later in the same book to turn right around and say “Sr. Lucia even used a computer.” I guess it’s whatever suits Bertone at the particular moment. He can’t even keep his own lies straight. It’s a good thing he’s not Pinocchio, because if he were his nose would have grown so far that it would have traveled all the way around the world and poked him in the butt by now.

Then we have the interview by Carlos Evaristo. He published a pamphlet claiming that Sr. Lucia gave assurances as to the consecration. A Portuguese-speaking priest present at the interview gave a formal declaration that his nasty little booklet was full of lies.

Yes, there have been forgeries. They’ve been orchestrated by certain persons within the Vatican.

Have you ever considered writing for Jack Chick? This sounds so much like him.

One thing no one has explained is why, in light of the fact that no one has to believe in these revelations anyway, would the Church go to any trouble at all, much less the massive conspiracy portrayed, that connects the Vatican, EWTN and almost all of Catholicism, except the wise few who see through it. This is a massive effort and huge risk for no gain.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

I have said many times, if you find I posted uncharitably, please go back and report it. Yes, you probably do feel you are counselling the ignorant and all are confused who see things differently. More’s the pity.

PNewton,

1. Now, why would I bother to ‘report you to the moderators’ if I found you uncharitable? What is the point behind such behavior? But, actually, I wasn’t talking about you. You’re very rarely uncharitable, though sometimes off-base.
2. As for the ignorance - I see that you are not contesting the (implicit) explanation of Church authority and infallibility that I gave, illustrating how the standard you’re proposing (were proposing) is completely outside of Church teaching and unworkable in the light of even the most cursory glance at Church history - that’s good and says something positive about you. But there was clearly ignorance there - and I should have to say this, but to point that out is no insult.

'Putting such a phrase on an assumption, (that the Pope* really* meant xyz) doesn’t make an assumption anything but an assumption.

What are you referring to? John Paul II’s sermon at Fatima? Where he directly likened the Fatima message to those verses in Revelation? Exactly where do you see an assumption? And what do YOU think sensible interpretations of this sermon would be?

If this was NOT what you were talking about, I have no idea - nobody’s making any (flawed) assumptions - certainly no more leaping than what’s being done by the ‘other side’ of the debate.

Again, those arguing Bertone’s case here will simply do so, completely blindly, not really considering, thinking about, the great amount of evidence against it. STILL, nobody has really discussed the issues (save Lily) - just a couple of them, just on the surface, with no plausible counter-explanations offered.

I see the logic in it. I work under authority and go to Church under authority. The degree of importance determines whether it should be questioned, challenged or resisted.

Now that is a very interesting standard of logic & truth indeed. So, first we make a (personal) judgment on whether something is ‘important’ - and only then is it relevant whether or not we’ve gotten the truth.

That is some fishing for justification.

One thing no one has explained is why, in light of the fact that no one has to believe in these revelations anyway, would the Church go to any trouble at all, much less the massive conspiracy portrayed, that connects the Vatican, EWTN and almost all of Catholicism, except the wise few who see through it. This is a massive effort and huge risk for no gain.

The fact that you see no motive here does illustrate that you don’t understand the situation. I will try to help.

To say that the Church was under no obligation or pressure to release the Secret in the first place is very interesting - I can’t say I’ve ever heard that before. In case you weren’t aware, Sr. Lucy had told the world in numerous interviews that Our Lady had requested that the Secret be revealed ‘no later than 1960’. As soon as 1960 came & went - there was ‘pressure’ from the faithful. Good Pope John’s decision that this was ‘Not for our time’ was not a popular one (regardless of what you might think of anyone’s right to question him). So, there was pressure, and the fact is that the very bizarre and clearly incomplete release of 2000 has only made it worse, if anything.

If you think it’s so obvious that it would be illogical for ‘the Church’ to go to ‘any trouble at all’, why do you think Bertone has spent probably hundreds or thousands of hours writing a book to counter Socci’s (but that doesn’t address his arguments) and making multiple TV and radio appearances to discuss the whole thing?

Basic problems with what was revealed and how it was done:

• The notion of a vision with no explanation from the Virgin is really, at least, a complete disconnect from the other parts of the revelation of Fatima. The first two ‘Secrets’ were explained by the virgin. Lucy had indicated in the past there was an explanation. Bertone, in one of his slip-ups on Italian TV, stated that Lucy had kept memorized ‘the words of the virgin’ in relation to the Third Secret for more than two decades! But, no words of the Virgin in the release.
• The interpretation given is essentially nonsensical and doesn’t jive with what anybody who had ever read the secret previously had commented about it. Not even close.
• Not only was the (non-binding, non-authoritative) interpretation nonsensical in the light of all the other testimony, it was not self-consistent at all.

As far as why and by whom this was done (orchestrated) - well, the Pope was not part of the whole thing! He certainly wasn’t central! How many people are not even attentive enough to question the fact that the Vatican Secretary of State is running the show here? The Secretary of State - a politician. A man who has no spiritual authority over the faithful at all, frankly. Why was that? What had happened in the Church that such a state of affairs is taken as ‘normal’ by much of the faithful? (If you haven’t noticed, by the way, Benedict is ‘taking back’ the papacy.)

These are some of the reasons why the controversy has not gone away and despite your constant attempts to paint everybody who sees the problems as a bunch of ignorant nuts, there are indeed many people who are able to look at all of this and say ‘something is fishy’.

Exactly what ‘conspiracy’ connects ‘almost all of Catholicism’?

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

[Continuation of last post.]

Once again, very clearly, with one exception, the people arguing so vociferously here against the idea that everything is 100% settled have not looked at the evidence. #1, it’s clear several, included you, have rather assumed that nothing’s gone in the last couple years. You aren’t familiar with what’s in Socci’s book - except what I’ve layed-out here - and don’t try to explain Cardinal Bertone’s several very strange & damaging public appearances about the controversy.

As for attacking the Church or disbelieving the Church - again, I love the infallible Church of Jesus Christ with all my being. I also happen to support our Holy Father not just in matters where his teachings are authoritative and binding (a very narrow area) but in just about every other, personal, way as well. Anybody who is not aware of the divisiveness in the Church - the fact that the Supreme Pontiff is ignored and resisted by many, in and out of the Vatican, nearly constantly, is utterly naive. The people who are attacking the Church are those within it who would ignore or downplay her doctrines & dogmas! Those so blinded or corrupted by this sense of ‘false ecumenism’ that they have ceased to be fully Catholic. These are the Church’s enemies.

As I said originally, I don’t think the matter’s settled. Who would have thought Benedict would have completely freed the Mass of All Ages and announced that he wants to see it in every parish? Who would have thought he would have gone so far to bring the hardest-core ‘traditionalists’ back in the fold that he would lift the SSPX excommunications?

I can tell you one thing - Cardinal Bertone didn’t like these things, and I don’t think the Pope is finished displeasing him.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Re: The Third Secret of Fatima Was Fully Revealed!

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa Mike

1. What the world do you believe then?

Its really none of your business what I believe and has no bearing on the discussion as to whether or not the Church has fully revealed the Third Secret.

Your right, it is none of my business. But your beliefs do have a bearing on these discussions because you have taken a side. You have emphatically said that the consecration of Russia is a done deal and that the Third Secret has been revealed in it’s entirety. Your arguments have revealed your beliefs intended or not.

Quote:

OK. But one final word. When you keep you beliefs hidden then you will be judged by what you say.

You well know that people are judged every day by what they say and do. This is an undeniable fact of life. I’m not judging your soul, only God can render such a decision. But as the old adage says, "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck…it’s a duck.

This is nonsense. We are called not to judge. You may do so if you wish but you will most likely be in error. Especially when you are judging something that really has no bearing on the discussion.

This is a private belief in a private revelation. Something that is not required for salvation. If you want to talk about those things that are required for salvation I will gladly tell you my beliefs but as a vowed religious I refrain from giving my opinion publicly in matters dealing with private messages/revaltions as some people may be swayed by the fact that I am a member of the Church and a vowed religious.

This is a point of agreement between us. No one is obliged to believe private revelation.

Because you are a religious doesn’t mean to you must keep you opinions to yourself. I know many priests, nuns and brothers. In fact I have some ‘shirt tail’ relatives that belong to the Brothers of Peace" and others who are priests, nuns etc. None of these religious are reluctant, in the least, to tell you what their beliefs are. I recently sought the advice of several priests and pro-life organizations to guide me on a matter of how one dispositions frozen embroys brought about by In Vetro fertilization. This is a matter that the Church as not spoken on definitively. I received conflicting suggestions on the best way to accomplish this. So I went to my parish priest who is a member of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. He gave me the guidance that I was looking for. He confirmed that the Church had not spoken definitively but he believed…he believed and then went one to give me his suggested resolution. I explained that I had conflicting (name removed by moderator)uts from other priests and pro-life organiations. His reply, please trust me…I could go into the deep theological basis for what I am suggesting but what I have said to you is, in my belief…in my belief the best way and the way that most closely follows the teachings of the Church. Thank God for his guideance. If he would have responded by saying, “Iowa Mike, the church hasn’t spoken definitively on this matter so you can pretty much do whatever you like.” If I would have then asked him he believed and if he responded that his personal beliefs weren’t relevent, I would have been left hanging. Let me also say, I have religious disagree with me and leave no doubt that in their belief…in their belief I was totally out of bounds.

So I am accustomed to religious who are outspoken in their personal beliefs as supported by the Faith and they never miss an opportunity to convince the rest of us of the errors of our ways.

I thank God for your vocation and I hope my remarks to you, as blunt as they are, haven’t caused you any distress.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

Br. David, O.Carm.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Even the Telegraph is spot-on sometimes:

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_thompson/blog/2009/03/20/the_popes_worst_enemies_are_catholics

 

[pnewton]

If you think it’s so obvious that it would be illogical for ‘the Church’ to go to ‘any trouble at all’, why do you think Bertone has spent probably hundreds or thousands of hours writing a book to counter Socci’s (but that doesn’t address his arguments) and making multiple TV and radio appearances to discuss the whole thing?

If I suggested that money might have motivated Socci, then let me balance that by saying Bertone might be motivated by pride. Two strong personalities that clash tend to get louder and stronger as their own pride gets tied up in their position. This may be mundane, but people are often motivated by such things.

You aren’t familiar with what’s in Socci’s book - except what I’ve layed-out here -

This is true of me and others.

I can tell you one thing - Cardinal Bertone didn’t like these things, and I don’t think the Pope is finished displeasing him.

I do not know the man enough to know what he will like or even if he let’s his own opinions become relevant to his obedience, but I have no doubt the Holy Father will do many things that will disappoint those who place their own vision of the Church above his.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

PNewton, let’s quit now while we’re ahead.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

If I suggested that money might have motivated Socci, then let me balance that by saying Bertone might be motivated by pride. Two strong personalities that clash tend to get louder and stronger as their own pride gets tied up in their position. This may be mundane, but people are often motivated by such things.

This is true of me and others.
I do not know the man enough to know what he will like or even if he let’s his own opinions become relevant to his obedience, but I have no doubt the Holy Father will do many things that will disappoint those who place their own vision of the Church above his.

Did you know that in the beginning Socci was an ally of Cardinal Bertone. He orginally set out to discredit the Fatimists. Someplace along the way his investigation led him to believe the Fatimists and oppose Bertone. He wrote the book, because he is a dedicated Catholic, to expose Cardinal Bertone.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Because you are a religious doesn’t mean to you must keep you opinions to yourself. I know many priests, nuns and brothers. In fact I have some ‘shirt tail’ relatives that belong to the Brothers of Peace" and others who are priests, nuns etc. None of these religious are reluctant, in the least, to tell you what their beliefs are.

This is their choice. Because I am a religious doesn’t mean that I have to make my opinions public either. I chose not to do so as I know there are people out there who will be swayed by the very fact that I am a religious. I do not wish to have that on my conscience.

I recently sought the advice of several priests and pro-life organizations to guide me on a matter of how one dispositions frozen embroys brought about by In Vetro fertilization. This is a matter that the Church as not spoken on definitively. I received conflicting suggestions on the best way to accomplish this. So I went to my parish priest who is a member of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. He gave me the guidance that I was looking for. He confirmed that the Church had not spoken definitively but he believed…he believed

and then went one to give me his suggested resolution. I explained that I had conflicting (name removed by moderator)uts from other priests and pro-life organiations. His reply, please trust me…

This is a different matter altogether. You sought out advice. If someone came to me in this way I would share with them but that is not the case here.

I could go into the deep theological basis for what I am suggesting but what I have said to you is, in my belief…in my belief

the best way and the way that most closely follows the teachings of the Church. Thank God for his guideance. If he would have responded by saying, “Iowa Mike, the church hasn’t spoken definitively on this matter so you can pretty much do whatever you like.” If I would have then asked him he believed and if he responded that his personal beliefs weren’t relevent, I would have been left hanging. Let me also say, I have religious disagree with me and leave no doubt that in their belief…in their belief I was totally out of bounds.

Again, this is totally different than what is going on here. Apples and Oranges.

So I am accustomed to religious who are outspoken in their personal beliefs as supported by the Faith and they never miss an opportunity to convince the rest of us of the errors of our ways.

That is fine for them, but it is not the way I am.

I thank God for your vocation and I hope my remarks to you, as blunt as they are, haven’t caused you any distress.

All that has caused distress is your assumption that you know what is in my heart.

 

[VitaminC]

One thing no one has explained is why, in light of the fact that no one has to believe in these revelations anyway, would the Church go to any trouble at all much less the massive conspiracy portrayed, that connects the Vatican, EWTN and almost all of Catholicism, except the wise few who see through it. This is a massive effort and huge risk for no gain.

That doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t matter whether people have to believe in Fatima, what matters is that millions of Catholics “DO”. And this includes clergy, those people who are or who will be in the near future controlling Vatican affairs.

Whatever the content of the hidden part of the Third Secret is that required those who read it to take an oath not to reveal it, it must be so very important that many within the Vatican are willing to go to any lengths necessary to keep the information concealed from the public. You have to remember what Cardinal Ciappi said about the Third Secret – that among other things it speaks of an “apostasy that begins at the top.”

 

[pnewton]

Whatever the content of the hidden part of the Third Secret is that required those who read it to take an oath not to reveal it, it must be so very important that many within the Vatican are willing to go to any lengths necessary to keep the information concealed from the public. You have to remember what Cardinal Ciappi said about the Third Secret – that among other things it speaks of an “apostasy that begins at the top.”

This is still circular reasoning. All of this assumes the truth of this conspiracy in showing the reason for it. If Bertone can be lying, why not Ciappi, or even Sr. Lucia for that matter? Best to trust all, or no one.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

This is their choice. Because I am a religious doesn’t mean that I have to make my opinions public either. I chose not to do so as I know there are people out there who will be swayed by the very fact that I am a religious. I do not wish to have that on my conscience.

This is a different matter altogether. You sought out advice. If someone came to me in this way I would share with them but that is not the case here.

Again, this is totally different than what is going on here. Apples and Oranges.

That is fine for them, but it is not the way I am.

All that has caused distress is your assumption that you know what is in my heart.

Brother I wish you will be it is impossible to carry on a conversation with someone, clergy or not, that is completely obstinate in their views.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Brother I wish you will be it is impossible to carry on a conversation with someone, clergy or not, that is completely obstinate in their views.

Can you rephrase this as the wording you have chosen makes it next to impossible for me to figure out what you are trying to say here.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Can you rephrase this as the wording you have chosen makes it next to impossible for me to figure out what you are trying to say here.

Brother,

Let me put it this way. When you want to have an honest exchange I’m ready. I know and interface with too many clergy to accept your logic. The religious I know are quick to tell me what they believe and why. They are quick to tell me what they think about any issue. They don’t hide behind their habit, order or the fact that they belong to a religious order. You don’t want people to be swayed by your personal beliefs, why are you a Brother?

From your postings I don’t think your interested in having an honest converstation.

I wish you well.

God Bless,

Iowa MIke

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Brother,

Let me put it this way. When you want to have an honest exchange I’m ready. I know and interface with too many clergy to accept your logic. The religious I know are quick to tell me what they believe and why. They are quick to tell me what they think about any issue. They don’t hide behind their habit, order or the fact that they belong to a religious order. You don’t want people to be swayed by your personal beliefs, why are you a Brother?

From your postings I don’t think your interested in having an honest converstation.

I wish you well.

God Bless,

Iowa MIke

Ah, so you resort to insulting me when I disagree with you.

I do not know who you speak to or what their motives are but I think it is very insulting of you to question my motives and to say that I am hiding behind my habit because I do not wish to speak of what my beliefs are on private revelations/apparitions especially when those beliefs have no bearing on the issue of whether or not the Church has fully revealed the Third Secret.

Obviously you do not wish me well when you resort to the sort of disrespect and insulting comments you just made.

You have no right to the information you are requesting of me. If we knew each other and we were engaged in a talk on a private revelation/apparition and/or you were seeking advice on such a thing then I might reveal my personal thoughts to you on the matter but I do not know you nor does my personal thoughts on those things have any bearing on whether or not I believe about the Church fully revealing the Third Secret.

I will pray for you.

 

[VitaminC]

Ah, so you resort to insulting me when I disagree with you.
I do not know who you speak to or what their motives are but …]

I think his questioning your motives in this instance was appropriate, and he did it in an appropriate fashion. And after all, earlier in this thread you did call him a “conspiracy nut.”

If you feel so strongly that Cardinal Sodano’s version of the Third Secret is the truth, then perhaps in future threads you should attempt to argue your beliefs in a rational and honest fashion.

 

[VitaminC]

I pray that the cloud of diabolical disorientation surrounding those that try to conceal the truth about Fatima or persuade others not to take heed of the messages of the Blessed Virgin at Fatima and Akita be lifted, such that they may receive the holy spirit into their hearts and accept Jesus as their savior.

 

[LilyM]

I pray that the cloud of diabolical disorientation surrounding those that try to conceal the truth about Fatima or persuade others not to take heed of the messages of the Blessed Virgin at Fatima and Akita be lifted, such that they may receive the holy spirit into their hearts and accept Jesus as their savior.

Amen - whether or not that truth be that Cardinals Bertone and Sodano are correct.

By the way - Akita has been approved and Our Lady’s messages there are all a matter of public record to my understanding - I know of no one discouraging the faithful from listening to them at least.

Again, it is most peculiar that Akita has been made public when Fatima has allegedly been concealed - to do so makes no sense.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Ah, so you resort to insulting me when I disagree with you.

I do not know who you speak to or what their motives are but I think it is very insulting of you to question my motives and to say that I am hiding behind my habit because I do not wish to speak of what my beliefs are on private revelations/apparitions especially when those beliefs have no bearing on the issue of whether or not the Church has fully revealed the Third Secret.

Obviously you do not wish me well when you resort to the sort of disrespect and insulting comments you just made.

You have no right to the information you are requesting of me. If we knew each other and we were engaged in a talk on a private revelation/apparition and/or you were seeking advice on such a thing then I might reveal my personal thoughts to you on the matter but I do not know you nor does my personal thoughts on those things have any bearing on whether or not I believe about the Church fully revealing the Third Secret.

I will pray for you.

Brother,

Whether you like it or not when you pick a side you make your views know. I’m sorry you feel insulted but I don’t accept your logic…it just doesn’t comport with the many many religious I know.

God Bless and thanks for your prayers.

Iowa Mike

 

[pnewton]

I pray that the cloud of diabolical disorientation surrounding those that try to conceal the truth about Fatima or persuade others not to take heed of the messages of the Blessed Virgin at Fatima and Akita be lifted, such that they may receive the holy spirit into their hearts and accept Jesus as their savior.

No one has encouraged anyone not to heed Akita, of the message of Fatima as we have been told. Your second statement, using “such” as a conjunction means that what follows is dependent on what precedes. If so, then that is a religion other than Catholicism. Catholicism does not require even knowing the messages of Fatima and Akita to receive Confirmation (reception of the Holy Spirit) or salvation.

I saw the word Fatimist used earlier. I wondered then what that meant.