The Third Secret

[Victorious]

Also, Our Blessed Mother made it quite clear, when Russia was consecrated to her Immaculate Heart…THERE WOULD BE PEACE IN THE WORLD! Look around you…do you see peace? Popes have consecrated the’ world’ to The Immaculate Heart of Mary…THAT IS NOT RUSSIA…and also, this was to be done WITH ALL THE BISHOPS PUBLICLY! The whole world would have set up and taken notice of this…and you ’ know’ this has not been fulfilled as Our Blessed Mother requested…

Well, first off, the Blessed Mother said there would be a period of peace. She did not promise an end to all conflict. Jesus told His disciples that there would be wars and rumors of war and trials and tribulations through which we must persevere until the end.

Secondly, if you read the act of consecration (linked elsewhere in this thread), you will find, among other things, that JPII’s act incorporates by reference Pope Pius XII’s earlier act of consecration which DOES mention Russia by name. This seems – to me, at any rate – to be sufficient.

Thirdly, the fact is inescapable that the Soviet Union is dead and the Iron Curtain fell, all within just a few years of JPII’s act of consecration. Those of us who are old enough to remember these events recall how sudden and dramatic they were; just before they happened, who could have imagined that they would happen?

Fourthly, remember that Our Lady’s prophecies at Fatima were conditional. The fulfillment of the promises depended on enough people responding to her requests for prayer and penance. If they had done so sooner, before Russia had had a chance to spread her errors throughout the world, or in greater numbers, the results might have been even more dramatic and more complete than they in fact were. To the extent the effects of the consecration were not as sweeping as you think they should have been, I think it’s highly likely that the fault lies not with the Pope, but with those of us (e.g., me) who did not pay attention to the Fatima message.

Finally, we just can’t know, this side of paradise, what was averted because of JPII’s consecration. All we can know is what did in fact happen. If it were revealed to us what was averted, it would probably be a great shock.

P.S. Beautiful signature pic.

 

[Shoshana]

I have read the book by Socci and am re-reading it a second time to highlight different passages to give here. It is a well-documented book given in a very objective POV without any nastiness at all, actually with even ongoing respect for our Popes. Very well written!

 

[pnewton]

Finally, we just can’t know, this side of paradise, what was averted because of JPII’s consecration. All we can know is what did in fact happen. If it were revealed to us what was averted, it would probably be a great shock.

What a blessed thought. Only God sees eternity and its endless possibilities.

Yes, a prophecy is a prophecy, whatever that means, but it is the Church that guides our understanding of such private revelation (remembering that even Fatima is not on par with Sacred Scripture). Such apocalyptic endtime scenarios are permitted from Revelation, but not required by a long shot. So denying such cataclysmic thoughts is not denying any prophecy as much as taking the role of the student at the feet of Mother Church instead of trying to play Mata Hari with Her.

 

[Tony9712262]

I am a Fatima, Portugal addict!!!

The third secret is of a “bishop dressed in white,” with priests, bishops, and lay people being shot to death by soldiers with arrows, while the bishop was trying to climb a mountain with a cross at the top.

There were reporters who asked Sister Lucia if it was the foretelling of Pope John Paul II being shot on May 13, 1981, and she said “yes.”

However, skeptics believed that it was the foretelling of the scandals of the Catholic Church, and the collapse of the Church.

This is a picture of the incorrupt body of Jacinta, after 30 years of her death. They exhumed her body and her body was still in tact, and they said her body smelled like “beautiful flowers.”

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Victorious]

I am a Fatima, Portugal addict!!!

The third secret is of a “bishop dressed in white,” with priests, bishops, and lay people being shot to death by soldiers with arrows, while the bishop was trying to climb a mountain with a cross at the top.

There were reporters who asked Sister Lucia if it was the foretelling of Pope John Paul II being shot on May 13, 1981, and she said “yes.”

However, skeptics believed that it was the foretelling of the scandals of the Catholic Church, and the collapse of the Church.

This is a picture of the incorrupt body of Jacinta, after 30 years of her death. They exhumed her body and her body was still in tact, and they said her body smelled like “beautiful flowers.”

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o70/Tony770/mary033.jpg

Of course, prophecies can and often do have more than one meaning.

One of the amazing things about Jacinta’s body is that she was buried in quicklime, as was Francisco. When Francisco was exhumed, only his skeleton was left, but his fingers still clutched his rosary.

That picture is kind of hard to make out, but I’m guessing that’s her face from the nose up, with the head turned slightly to its left?

 

[Shoshana]

I am a Fatima, Portugal addict!!!

The third secret is of a “bishop dressed in white,” with priests, bishops, and lay people being shot to death by soldiers with arrows, while the bishop was trying to climb a mountain with a cross at the top.

There were reporters who asked Sister Lucia if it was the foretelling of Pope John Paul II being shot on May 13, 1981, and she said “yes.”

However, skeptics believed that it was the foretelling of the scandals of the Catholic Church, and the collapse of the Church.

This is a picture of the incorrupt body of Jacinta, after 30 years of her death. They exhumed her body and her body was still in tact, and they said her body smelled like “beautiful flowers.”

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o70/Tony770/mary033.jpg

I have never heard (or I mean read) that Sr Lucy said that the Pope in the vision was JP2. And I have read much. She has always maintained that it was a Pope…but never singled out PJ2. Could you please find a link that states and confirms your belief?

 

[Victorious]

I have never heard (or I mean read) that Sr Lucy said that the Pope in the vision was JP2. And I have read much. She has always maintained that it was a Pope…but never singled out PJ2. Could you please find a link that states and confirms your belief?

If I recall correctly, in her written account of the Third Secret, Sr. Lucia specifically said that the Blessed Mother did not identify the Pope in the vision. However, my understanding, based on documents linked earlier in this thread, is that she agreed with Rome’s official interpretation of the Secret.

 

[Shoshana]

If I recall correctly, in her written account of the Third Secret, Sr. Lucia specifically said that the Blessed Mother did not identify the Pope in the vision. However, my understanding, based on documents linked earlier in this thread, is that she agreed with Rome’s official interpretation of the Secret.

Not completely…I will respond to this to-morrow as I am very, very tired. But hang on to your thought…

 

[Tony9712262]

I have never heard (or I mean read) that Sr Lucy said that the Pope in the vision was JP2. And I have read much. She has always maintained that it was a Pope…but never singled out PJ2. Could you please find a link that states and confirms your belief?

LOL. I read it from somewhere else on the web…but luckily, while i was searching on google, I hit a different site, that says it.

When you click on the link, go down to page 162, where it says “April 27, 2000” The paragraph beginning with “Tarcisio Bertone meets…” it’s at the bottom of that first paragraph.

books.google.com/books?id=81nF3iyA640C&pg=PA161&lpg=PA161&dq=sister+lucia+on+third+secret+and+shooting+of+pope+john+paul+II&source=bl&ots=nb5yNfd8Nh&sig=nAXxItcmtAuWXqGtYDdLb9rKm88&hl=en&ei=JKZ_SoaZCJ6PtgekrbmAAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false

 

[John_Larocque]

I stopped paying attention to the renegade priest Fr. Gruner and his ilk years ago, and I suppose it’s comforting to know that he is still out there, pimping this stuff.

 

[Shoshana]

I stopped paying attention to the renegade priest Fr. Gruner and his ilk years ago, and I suppose it’s comforting to know that he is still out there, pimping this stuff.

This is not about Fr Gruner. This is about a very reliable source in the person of Antonio Socci who was an unbeliever of Gruner’s stance and when he began to research the subject took a completly different stand. In this book, we encounter Frere Miche also who wrote extensively about the event. This book is very objective and very well documented…

 

[John_Larocque]

This is not about Fr Gruner. This is about a very reliable source in the person of Antonio Socci who was an unbeliever of Gruner’s stance and when he began to research the subject took a completly different stand. In this book, we encounter Frere Miche also who wrote extensively about the event. This book is very objective and very well documented…

If you see hostility with some of these people, it’s because it’s some of the same people. Chriostopher Ferrera and Catholic Family News regularly cross-promoted SSPX-type and Feeneyite material along with the Gruner Fatima line over a decade ago, and as I look for English language stuff on Socci, there it is. The very same people.

Fatima - or rather - what people believe Fatima to be - has become what I have argued elsewhere, a “parallel mastisterium” against which people demand their Church to submit. Some of the Fatimist claims were backed up by false Marian apparition sites, also obsessed with the validity (or rather non-validity) of the consecrations done by the Vatican. There were absurd theories years ago that Sister Lucy was somehow a “prisoner” of the Vatican. I glanced an interview where Lucy refuted claims specific to the conversion of Russia (in reference to people turning to the Russian Orthodox Church). If there is a conspiracy, Lucy was a willing part of it. “Fatimists against Sister Lucy” is a great headline.

I suppose Socci deserves some sort of scrutiny, but my patience ran out with the “Fatimists” years ago, so I’ll need to find a way to clearly distinguish and discard the one element before even beginning to look at the other.

 

[Shoshana]

If you see hostility with some of these people, it’s because it’s some of the same people. Chriostopher Ferrera and Catholic Family News regularly cross-promoted SSPX-type and Feeneyite material along with the Gruner Fatima line over a decade ago, and as I look for English language stuff on Socci, there it is. The very same people.

Fatima - or rather - what people believe Fatima to be - has become what I have argued elsewhere, a “parallel mastisterium” against which people demand their Church to submit. Some of the Fatimist claims were backed up by false Marian apparition sites, also obsessed with the validity (or rather non-validity) of the consecrations done by the Vatican. There were absurd theories years ago that Sister Lucy was somehow a “prisoner” of the Vatican. I glanced an interview where Lucy refuted claims specific to the conversion of Russia (in reference to people turning to the Russian Orthodox Church). If there is a conspiracy, Lucy was a willing part of it. “Fatimists against Sister Lucy” is a great headline.

I suppose Socci deserves some sort of scrutiny, but my patience ran out with the “Fatimists” years ago, so I’ll need to find a way to clearly distinguish and discard the one element before even beginning to look at the other.

Socci is not a Fatimist like Gruner and so many others. He disbelieved the fatimists and is a devout Catholic who believed what the Vatican had to say about the third secret. In his book, he admonishes the Fatimists for their belligerance and over the top criticisms. Socci changed his mind when he investigated the different sources that contradicted themselves. But he is still respectfull of the Vatican…so please, do not put him in the same category. And many things that he does say confirms SOME allegations made by the Fatimists.

 

[Shoshana]

I could not find it…but here are a couple of paragraphs from Socci’s book…that I have had to re-type twice because of time limit.

But let us sum up the events jsut considered. On May 13, 2000, Cardinal Sodano announces that the famous Third Secret of Fatima will soon be published, and at the same time will do something else: anticipate the theological interpretation of that extremely delicate text (which would have exactly have been his affair). ‘What happened at Fatima on May 13, 2000 represents therfore something unique in the history of the church. A correct interpretation was offered even before the TEXT to be interpreted was provided.’

The other paradoxial aspect ios that this interpretaion is explicitly suggested by Sodano and Bertone, but it is not openly declared by either of them. Nor is it found explicitly in the Vatican texts. Besides, it is resoundingly denied by the same letter of Sister lucia that the Vatican will publish with the TEXT of the vision.
Antonio Socci, The Fourth Secret of Fatima, PP48

Ratzinger here adds that Sodano’s interpretaion was 'presented personnally to Sister. Concerning it, Sister lucia above all observed that to her had been given the vision but not its interpretation. The interpretation, she said, was not given to the visionary, but to the Church. After reading the text, however, she said that this interpretaion corresponds to what she had experienced and that on her part she thought the interpretaion was correct. In Italian the adjective ‘correct’ (corretta) would not necessarily imply that Sister lucia agreed with that interpretaion. Rather, it remains the fact that from the meeting with Monsignor Bertone it does not result that Sister Lucia ever approved or defined as ‘correct’ the interpretaion that identifies the Secret with the attack of May 13, 1981.
Ibid, PP49

That the ‘secret’ was a prophesy of the death of a Pope…who does not die? The Madonna did not know that She Herself would divert the trajectory of the fatal bullet? And why, while knowing this, would She have preannounced that which would not happen?
Ibid, PP50

 

[Shoshana]

LOL. I read it from somewhere else on the web…but luckily, while i was searching on google, I hit a different site, that says it.

When you click on the link, go down to page 162, where it says “April 27, 2000” The paragraph beginning with “Tarcisio Bertone meets…” it’s at the bottom of that first paragraph.

books.google.com/books?id=81nF3iyA640C&pg=PA161&lpg=PA161&dq=sister+lucia+on+third+secret+and+shooting+of+pope+john+paul+II&source=bl&ots=nb5yNfd8Nh&sig=nAXxItcmtAuWXqGtYDdLb9rKm88&hl=en&ei=JKZ_SoaZCJ6PtgekrbmAAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false

I could not find it…but here are a couple of paragraphs from Socci’s book…that I have had to re-type twice because of time limit.

But let us sum up the events jsut considered. On May 13, 2000, Cardinal Sodano announces that the famous Third Secret of Fatima will soon be published, and at the same time will do something else: anticipate the theological interpretation of that extremely delicate text (which would have exactly have been his affair). ‘What happened at Fatima on May 13, 2000 represents therfore something unique in the history of the church. A correct interpretation was offered even before the TEXT to be interpreted was provided.’

The other paradoxial aspect ios that this interpretaion is explicitly suggested by Sodano and Bertone, but it is not openly declared by either of them. Nor is it found explicitly in the Vatican texts. Besides, it is resoundingly denied by the same letter of Sister lucia that the Vatican will publish with the TEXT of the vision.
Antonio Socci, The Fourth Secret of Fatima, PP48

Ratzinger here adds that Sodano’s interpretaion was 'presented personnally to Sister. Concerning it, Sister lucia above all observed that to her had been given the vision but not its interpretation. The interpretation, she said, was not given to the visionary, but to the Church. After reading the text, however, she said that this interpretaion corresponds to what she had experienced and that on her part she thought the interpretaion was correct. In Italian the adjective ‘correct’ (corretta) would not necessarily imply that Sister lucia agreed with that interpretaion. Rather, it remains the fact that from the meeting with Monsignor Bertone it does not result that Sister Lucia ever approved or defined as ‘correct’ the interpretaion that identifies the Secret with the attack of May 13, 1981.
Ibid, PP49

That the ‘secret’ was a prophesy of the death of a Pope…who does not die? The Madonna did not know that She Herself would divert the trajectory of the fatal bullet? And why, while knowing this, would She have preannounced that which would not happen?
Ibid, PP50

 

[KyivAndrew]

Just out of curiosity: Why is this thread in the Non-Catholic Religions Subforum?

God Bless.

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

Just out of curiosity: Why is this thread in the Non-Catholic Religions Subforum?

God Bless.

Fr Gruner perhaps? Seems apropos to me!

 

[Shoshana]

Fr Gruner perhaps? Seems apropos to me!

Not charitable whatsoever. Gruner is still a Catholic…a disobedient one, but Catholic nonetheless. Do not forget that Sister Lucia was under a gag order also…and Padre Pio was sent to his cell for a long time not allowed to use his priestly faculties. All at the same time. The difference is that Sr Lucia and Padre Pio were obedient!

 

[missal]

Well, first off, the Blessed Mother said there would be a period of peace. She did not promise an end to all conflict. Jesus told His disciples that there would be wars and rumors of war and trials and tribulations through which we must persevere until the end.

Secondly, if you read the act of consecration (linked elsewhere in this thread), you will find, among other things, that JPII’s act incorporates by reference Pope Pius XII’s earlier act of consecration which DOES mention Russia by name. This seems – to me, at any rate – to be sufficient.

Thirdly, the fact is inescapable that the Soviet Union is dead and the Iron Curtain fell, all within just a few years of JPII’s act of consecration. Those of us who are old enough to remember these events recall how sudden and dramatic they were; just before they happened, who could have imagined that they would happen?

Fourthly, remember that Our Lady’s prophecies at Fatima were conditional. The fulfillment of the promises depended on enough people responding to her requests for prayer and penance. If they had done so sooner, before Russia had had a chance to spread her errors throughout the world, or in greater numbers, the results might have been even more dramatic and more complete than they in fact were. To the extent the effects of the consecration were not as sweeping as you think they should have been, I think it’s highly likely that the fault lies not with the Pope, but with those of us (e.g., me) who did not pay attention to the Fatima message.

Finally, we just can’t know, this side of paradise, what was averted because of JPII’s consecration. All we can know is what did in fact happen. If it were revealed to us what was averted, it would probably be a great shock.

P.S. Beautiful signature pic.

thank you.

Where oh where does or Ever did the name of Russia be mentioned? Show me. The world is waiting…come on “SHOW ME”!View attachment 6334

 

[Shoshana]

thank you.

Where oh where does or Ever did the name of Russia be mentioned? Show me. The world is waiting…come on “SHOW ME”!View attachment 6334

I concur. Nowhere is there the word ‘Russia’ ever used by any Pope since 1960.

Heaven was pleased when the world was entrusted to the immaculate heart of Mary…nonetheless, the full effect of the benefits was not produced BECAUSE our Lady said that also. She said it will eventually be consecrated to Her but it will be late. She also promised that Her Immaculate Heart will reign.

She also (or Jesus) said that the world will suffer no different than when the King of France was supposed to entrust France to His Most Sacred Heart. But it was too late. The King was beheaded and France became what she is today. All because of disobedience…