S
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
pnewton
Guest
This miracle is the Seal of God that warrants that the Fatima’s messages aren’t optional for us to believe.
HereI never said that the Church reckoned it as the Seal of God.
On the death of Hezekiah the son stopped and retraced its path, then resumed.Where in the Bible do you read there was so a great miracle like the sun dancing, spinning, changing its colors before 70000 witnesses?
BTW - I never said I do not believe in the miracle of Fatima. I do, just like I believe Mary appeared to St. Juan Diego. I just do not believe all the Tom Hanks/Dan Brown intrigue that has surrounded this third vs. fourth secret. I guess the fifth secret will be the next sequel.But when I am taught by the Fatima kids that our Lady, 3 months before, prophesied the exact day and hour of this event, I personnally feel OBLIGED to believe so because our Lady added immediately : “SO THAT ALL MAY BELIEVE” . Is that clear?.
But my real point is that no private revelation is required. Furthermore, if it erodes one’s faith and serves to divide the Church then we can know by this fruit that it is not something one should pursue (on an individual basis only). Obviously any revelation that bolsters one faith and draws one deeper into communion with Christ and His body then it is a good spirituality.
S
Shoshana
Guest
- The terms of this unheard-of-accord were the voyage of monsignor Willebrands to Moscow, from September 27 to October 2, 1962 (see Zizola, John 23 pp210-211) and the so called Metz Pact, sanctioned in the springtime of 1962 between Cardinal Tisserant and Metropolitan Nikodim. Events had it that two observers arrived at the council precisely on October 13, 1962, the anniversary of the great miracle of Fatima during the last apparition. ‘The written intervention against Communism on the part of 450 Council fathers was ‘lost’ mysteriously after having been delivered to the Secretary of the council, and those council fathers who insisted on denouncing Communism were gently invited to be seated and remain silent.’ (Father Paul Kramer, The Devil’s Final Battle, pp57) Documentation of this history is furnished also by Romano Amerio, *Iota Unum: 1985, pp65-67) * who writes that ‘the initiative for the meetings was taken personally by John 23 at the suggestion of Cardinal Montini, and Tisserant ‘received his formal orders, both for the signing of the accord and overseeing its exact execution during the Council.” P198
- I am reminded of this extraordinary admonition that Padre Pio is said to have made public to his spiritual brothers in 1963, where he speaks of Fatima and of the tears of Madonna. It provokes much reflection precisely in reference to the Metz Pact and the Madonna of Syracuse: ‘Because of the spreading injustice and the abuse of power, we have arrived a t a compromise with atheistic materialism, denying the rights of God. This is the chastisement preannounced at Fatima …]. All of the priests who maintain the possibility of a dialogue with the deniers of God and with the Luciferian powers of the world are mad, they have lost the faith, they no longer believe in the Gospel! They thus betray the Word of God, because Christ came to bring ot earth a perpetual alliance only with men of good will, but not ally Himself with men thirsty for power and domination over their brothers…The flock is dispersed when the pastors ally themselves with enemies of the Truth of Christ. All of the forms of power made deaf to the will and authority of the heart of God are rapacious wolves who renew the Passion of Christ and cause the tears of the Madonna to pour forth.’ (Advenire, August 19, 1978).
- To tell the truth, on September 13, 1964, Pope Montini confided to the same French friend(John Guitton) that he expected to see ‘lay people animated by the spirit of prophecy,’ but he expected them as ‘fruits of the Council, not by the election (and gift) of Heaven as with the children of Fatima. We are still awaiting the ‘prophets’ born of the Council. On the other hand, there were soon seen other ‘fruits’ of the Council—terrible fruits. P200
- It was precisely Montini—the Pope according to whom ‘the Church does not have need’ of the extraordinary assistance of the Madonna and can do without Her maternal aid—who shortly thereafter had to recognize that, within a few years of the council’s conclusion, the church was in the process of auto-demolition. Paul VI even shouted out desperately his apocalyptic felling that ‘from somewhere or other, the smoke of Satan has entered the smoke of Satan had entered the temple of God.’ Then he added bitterly: It was believed that after the Council there should come a day of sunshine in the history of the church, Instead there came a day of clouds, tempests, of darkness. P200
- Pope Montini hinted at some self-criticism (‘The opening to the Church became a true and proper invasion of the Church by worldly thinking. We have perhaps been too weak and imprudent.) However, it was seen quite clearly who had opened the door to the world and to the ‘smoke of Satan.’ In fact, he persisted in error: The most devastating of the errors was the traumatic ‘coup d’etat’ by a minority ‘revolution’ that imposed the liturgical reform (with a thousand abuses), hailed by Paul VI but clearly not blessed by God. The prohibition of the millennial Latin liturgy of the Church was effectuated by a decision that contravened even the documents of the Council. The modality and the contents of the ‘coup d’etat’ have had disastrous effects on the orthodoxy and faith of the people, while-as the writer Guido Ceronetti has noted-that folly ‘pleased Communist authorities…who were not stupid, having in their bestial ignorance of the sacred perceived that a crack had been opened. P201
S
Shoshana
Guest
Here
On the death of Hezekiah the son stopped and retraced its path, then resumed.
BTW - I never said I do not believe in the miracle of Fatima. I do, just like I believe Mary appeared to St. Juan Diego. I just do not believe all the Tom Hanks/Dan Brown intrigue that has surrounded this third vs. fourth secret. I guess the fifth secret will be the next sequel.
But my real point is that no private revelation is required. Furthermore, if it erodes one’s faith and serves to divide the Church then we can know by this fruit that it is not something one should pursue (on an individual basis only). Obviously any revelation that bolsters one faith and draws one deeper into communion with Christ and His body then it is a good spirituality.
Code:
A
Albizzi
Guest
Are you aware of the Paray-Le-Monial apparitions of Jesus Sacred Heart and peculiarly that of the year 1689 to Marguerite-Marie Alacoque? With the utmost seriousness Jesus required the reigning king of France Louis XIV to make a solemn consecration of the kingdom to His Sacred Heart.Look, all that we really need to know came out 2,000 years ago. Not getting the message and not living by the message are two different things.
What’s needed here is some clarity of thought.
Unfortunately the king despised this request and his successors too: Exactly 100 years date to date the French Revolution begun and Louis XVI was beheaded soon after.
Although France was “the Church’s first daughter”, although the church of France was in full communion with the Holy See, although the king helped a lot to prevent heresies of all sorts like protestantism, jansenism and gallicanism to grow in the kingdom, the poisonous ideas of the 18th century began to infiltrate the minds, that nobody could stop but only God. Arrogantly the king thought he had all under control.
What any catholic needs to know was revealed 2000 years ago, yes of course. But catholics are frail men, they may err, they may be on the wrong path without even suspecting it. Fortunately Heaven in His infinite Love unceasingly sends warnings to the men in subtle ways or sometimes striking ones because of the emergency.
Anyway He lets us free to heed them.
S
Shoshana
Guest
Are you aware of the Paray-Le-Monial apparitions of Jesus Sacred Heart and peculiarly that of the year 1689 to Marguerite-Marie Alacoque? With the utmost seriousness Jesus required the reigning king of France Louis XIV to make a solemn consecration of the kingdom to His Sacred Heart.
Unfortunately the king despised this request and his successors too: Exactly 100 years date to date the French Revolution begun and Louis XVI was beheaded soon after.
Although France was “the Church’s first daughter”, although the church of France was in full communion with the Holy See, although the king helped a lot to prevent heresies of all sorts like protestantism, jansenism and gallicanism to grow in the kingdom, the poisonous ideas of the 18th century began to infiltrate the minds, that nobody could stop but only God. Arrogantly the king thought he had all under control.
What any catholic needs to know was revealed 2000 years ago, yes of course. But catholics are frail men, they may err, they may be on the wrong path without even suspecting it. Fortunately Heaven in His infinite Love unceasingly sends warnings to the men in subtle ways or sometimes striking ones because of the emergency.
Anyway He lets us free to heed them.
Code:
Heaven does come down and gently demands something because heaven KNOWS what is going to happen. No different than with LaSalette and Lourdes. Why would heaven ask for a grotto when we have 2,000 years of Sacred Tradition? Would not the Eucharist Itself heal people? It’s supposed to but people still today do not hear or listen…we are the wandering Jews in the desert!
A
Albizzi
Guest
How many were they to witness the sun stopping? Was this miracle predicted before by Hezekiah?Here
On the death of Hezekiah the son stopped and retraced its path, then resumed.
BTW - I never said I do not believe in the miracle of Fatima. I do, just like I believe Mary appeared to St. Juan Diego. I just do not believe all the Tom Hanks/Dan Brown intrigue that has surrounded this third vs. fourth secret. I guess the fifth secret will be the next sequel.
But my real point is that no private revelation is required. Furthermore, if it erodes one’s faith and serves to divide the Church then we can know by this fruit that it is not something one should pursue (on an individual basis only). Obviously any revelation that bolsters one faith and draws one deeper into communion with Christ and His body then it is a good spirituality.
Fatima isn’t a matter of Revelation. Of course it adds nothing to what a catholic must know…Fatima is a warning that Hell exists (that priests no longer teach) that the sins of the men are exceeding God’s patience (how many priests are speaking seriously of sin in their homilies?), that men must repent, and atone for their sins (ridiculous isn’t it?), etc… all things that are contained in the Revelation and the Deposit of the Faith, but things that must be reminded in a striking way to the mankind, don’t you think so?
Besides, comparing the book of Socci to that of Dan Brown is not at all charitable. The last one is a stuff of lies, blasphemies, inventions and approximations while all in the Quarto Segreto is well documented, proved, analyzed by its author who is a fervent, pious and obedient catholic. Did you even know that Socci got some written encouraging words from Benedict XVI for this book?
I recommend you to read it instead of denigrating it.
A
Albizzi
Guest
Shoshana,
Desperately Paul VI said: “From somewhere or other, the smoke of Satan had entered the temple of God.”
I never heard from JPI, JPII or Benedict that the smoke of Satan hadf left out of the Church until now.
Desperately Paul VI said: “From somewhere or other, the smoke of Satan had entered the temple of God.”
I never heard from JPI, JPII or Benedict that the smoke of Satan hadf left out of the Church until now.
P
peary
Guest
When Pope Paul VI spoke about the “smoke of Satan” entering the Catholic Church, he was referring to liturgical abuses. Cardinal Virgilio Noe, the chief Vatican liturgist during the pontificate of Paul VI, had an interview and that is what he says the pope meant.Shoshana,
Desperately Paul VI said: “From somewhere or other, the smoke of Satan had entered the temple of God.”
I never heard from JPI, JPII or Benedict that the smoke of Satan hadf left out of the Church until now.
You can find the whole interview linked from this site:
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=58473
S
Shoshana
Guest
When Pope Paul VI spoke about the “smoke of Satan” entering the Catholic Church, he was referring to liturgical abuses. Cardinal Virgilio Noe, the chief Vatican liturgist during the pontificate of Paul VI, had an interview and that is what he says the pope meant.
You can find the whole interview linked from this site:
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=58473
Code:
Even more embarrassing is the response that (Montini) he will give ot his friend Jean Guitton in November 1976. During a private meeting Guitton, confronted with the disastrous product of the liturgical reform with its many permitted abuses, indicated to Paul VI the irrationality and authoritarianism with which it was proceeding: ‘The general opinion cannot admit that all Masses are allowed except that of St Pius V, the Mass that all of the bishops said during the Council.’ Then he said to the Pope that ‘It would be suspicious…to annul the interdiction in France of the Mass of St Pius V that the Council never pretended to abolish.’ The response by Montini is preremptory and chilling: ‘This never!’ Even more incredible is the motivation: ‘This Mass, as we have at Econe, became a symbol of condemnation of the Council. I will never accept that one can condemn the Council by means of a symbol.’ (John Guitton, *The Secret Paul VI, pp144-145.) *It is useless to underline, as Guitton did, that the Council had not all wanted to abolish that Mass, that the new ligurgy has been disastrous for the Church, and that it was an authoritarian imposition by Paul VI himself, who should have taken responsibility instead of offering the excuse of the Coucil. Pope Montini was stubborn and did not wish to give a victory to Econe and to his other critics. While watching the church ‘auto-demolishing’ itself, he did not wish to admit that he had erred. Thus he remained until the end. P201
S
Shoshana
Guest
- Joseph Ratzinger, My Life, P115). In these pages the future Pope recalls ‘the publication of the Missal of Paul VI, with the almost complete prohibition of the preceding missal.’ Ratzinger comments: ‘I was dismayed by the prohibition of the old missal, since nothing of the sort had ever happened in the entire history of the liturgy. The impression was even given that what was happening was quite normal. The preceding missal was produced by Pius V in 1570, in keeping with the council of Trent; it was therefore normal that, after 400 years and a new council, a pope would publish a new missal. But the historical truth is otherwise. Pius V limited himself to making a revision of the Roman Missal than in use, as had always happened in the living history of the Church down through the centuries…without ever substituting one missal for another. This has always involved a continuous process of growth and purification, in which, however, continuity has never been destroyed…Now instead,’ writes Ratzinger, ‘the promulgation of a ban of the Missal which had developed over the course of centuries, from the time of the sacramentaries of the ancient Church, has produced a rupture in the history of the liturgy whose consequences could only be tragic. Pieces of the edifice were taken and a new one constructed from them…What is dramatically necessary for the life of the Church is a renewal of liturgical conscience, a liturgical reconciliation, which returns to recognizing the unity of the history of the liturgy and understand Vatican II not as a rupture, but as an evolutionary moment.’ (pp113-115)
S
Shoshana
Guest
- The unimpeachable witness, Henri de Lubac, who even took part in the cause, made this terrible diagnosis: The drama of Vatican II consists in the fact that instead of having been conducted by saints, as was the Council of Trent, it was monopolized by intellectuals. Above all it was monopolized by certain theologians, whose theology started off with the preconception of updating the faith according to the demands of the world and to emancipate it form pre-supposed condition of inferiority with respect for modern civilization. The place of theology ceased to be a Christian community, that is, the Church became the interpretation of individuals; In this sense the post-Conciliar period represented the victory of Protestantism within Catholicism.’ P203
- The victory of Protestantism within Roman Catholicism? Is this not already an apocalyptic event? And the sign of this Protestant victory was precisely the hostility (Pelegian, modernist, and activist) against Mary which was manifested during the Council and in the post-conciliar Church. It is also seen in the hostility to Fatima and the hard-fought battle which had been waged against the recognition of our Lady’s titles—Mediatrix of All Graces and Co-Redemptrix—which springs forth from all Catholic Tradition. Yet, in the tempest of the post-conciliar period, only one thing has descended into crisis: the Marian sanctuaries which represented the lifeboat for rescuing the faith and the people, so despised by theologians precisely because they are linked to Mary, ‘Help of Christians.’ P203
P
pnewton
Guest
Yes, it was, sort of. It was said prior to the event that if the sun reversed direction that Hezekiah would recover and live. Since the sun reversed its course, Hezekiah lived.How many were they to witness the sun stopping? Was this miracle predicted before by Hezekiah?
Fatima isn’t a matter of Revelation. Of course it adds nothing to what a catholic must know…Fatima is a warning that Hell exists (that priests no longer teach) that the sins of the men are exceeding God’s patience (how many priests are speaking seriously of sin in their homilies?), that men must repent, and atone for their sins (ridiculous isn’t it?), etc… all things that are contained in the Revelation and the Deposit of the Faith, but things that must be reminded in a striking way to the mankind, don’t you think so?
The message of Fatima above is why I said I do believe there is value in what was said. I was not referring to Book of Socci, as I have not read it, but more of the Grunerites that see Fatima with gnostic and conspiritorial overtones. And yes, I think it not only would make a Dan Brown novel, I think it will some day now that the Catholic Church has become his cash cow and whipping boy. I mean there are only so many conspiracies out there and I would think this one will get its turn. My view of secrets is that I could care less about them. Even apocalyptic literature like Revelation is about **revealing **Jesus, not keepins stuff hidden. I will stick with what is open and overt. I will never plumb the depth of revealed truth as it is.
S
Shoshana
Guest
- With John Paul 2 the declared hostility to Fatima finally ended. The Pope of *Tostus Tuus *especially protected precisely by the Madonna of Fatima—who saved his life in 1981—will go on pilgrimage to the Portuguese sanctuary no fewer than three times. It will be he who beatifies Jacinta and Francisco, and in that context will publish a part of the Third Secret (although with a hypothetical interpretation that is unconvincing and rife with twisted readings of the text). P204
- ‘With Wojtyla we knew since the years of the Council,’ recalls Monsignor Pavel Hnilica to Andrea Tornelli. ‘I had occasion to greet him a few days after the election, and I said to him: ‘God has called you because your first work must be the consecration and conversion of Russia.’ He answered me: ‘I am willing to do it even tomorrow. If you convince the bishops.’ After the assassination attempt, on December 8, 1981 the pope pronounces these words in Sat Mary Major: ‘Mary, to You we entrust the fate of humanity.’ Monsignor Hnilica was present, and recounts: ‘After the ceremony, while in the sacristy, I said to the Pope: ‘Holiness, an entrustment does not suffice. What is needed is a consecration.’ He answered me: ‘I know, but many theologians are opposed.’ P204
- The following year the Pope did the consecration, but it was not a solemn act in communion with all the bishops and addressed to Russia in particular. Sister lucia, consulted by the Apostolic Nuncio to Portugal, monsignor Portalupi, declared on March 19, 1983: ‘The consecration of Russia has not been done as Our Lady of Fatima requested.’ P205
- And here is a disturbing explanation: ‘Given the anxiety of the holy Father, concerning the consecration…and, on the other hand, the scandalous hostility aroused by his request for Episcopal participation in the solemn act of 1984, it can be deduced with moral certainty that until now one thing in particular has impeded the holy Father from ordering the bishops of the universal Church to unite themselves with him in the consecration of Russia: his fear that it could really provoke a formal schism.’ P205
- At any rate, Cardina; Stickler, who was very close to the Pope, confided on November 26, 1987 that the Pope had not been able to perform the consecration, he would have wished ‘the bishops do not obey him.’ And this leads to the intuition that perhaps there is already in progress a silent schism with respect to Catholic truth. Or—as De Lubac said—that Protestantism has triumphed within Catholicism. And the great sign of contradiction is inevitably Mary—who, as the Fatima event demonstrated, hears and assists Popes in every way. Mary is the the ‘vanquisher of all heresies,’ as Cardinal Ratzinger underlined in Maria, Chiesa nascente (p19). P206
- The visionary has affirmed (very probably thanks to the apparition of 1985 of which Cardinal Bertone has also hinted) that this act spared the world a catastrophic war that should have erupted precisely in 1985. Naturally we find ourselves on a supernatural plane and thus there is no historical ‘document’ containing this ‘news’. However there are surprising clues: It is startling to reconstruct the situation during the months between 1984 and 1985 in order to understand what happened. P206
- It is a fact that these were the years of the grave crisis of the Euromissiles. All indications are that this would have involved an atomic conflict, a road with no return. (In forty years of cold war 130,000 nuclear arms had been produced, a quantity sufficient to destroy the planet thousands of times.) P207
- It is at this white-hot moment that, on March 25, 1984, in St Peter’s Square in Rome, before the statue of the Madonna, John Paul 2 pronounces his dramatic and solemn consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. P207
- What happened? Within a span of a very few months, the Kremlin puts aside the option of war. Indeed, this was only the beginning of the ‘thank yous’ raining down from heaven after March 25, 1984, Mikhail Gorbachev was able to sign the first fundamental treaty within the United States for the reduction of armaments and the elimination of Euromissles, thereby moving away from a nuclear Apocalypse. P208
- That there was a beneficial intervention of the Madonna, therefore, is what the Pope and the church think. And also Sister Lucia, who then questioned concerning this by Thirty Days, declared: ‘I am completely in accord with what the holy Father has said…I believe this involves an action of God in the world, to liberate it from the danger of an atomic war that could destroy, and an insistent call to all humanity for a more lively faith. Nevertheless, neither she nor the Pope has ever maintained that the promise of Fatima has been realized: there is, in fact, not a trace of the ‘conversion of Russia’ and true ‘peace’.P210
A
Albizzi
Guest
Peary,When Pope Paul VI spoke about the “smoke of Satan” entering the Catholic Church, he was referring to liturgical abuses. Cardinal Virgilio Noe, the chief Vatican liturgist during the pontificate of Paul VI, had an interview and that is what he says the pope meant.
You can find the whole interview linked from this site:
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=58473
I didn’t know this and I find the Pope’s words very harsh if they refer only to liturgical abuses.
Anyway, have the liturgical abuses ceased today?
You already know the answer.
A
Albizzi
Guest
Poor Pope Paul,I wasn’t going to include this quote with the rest but here goes:Code:
Even more embarrassing is the response that (Montini) he will give ot his friend Jean Guitton in November 1976. During a private meeting Guitton, confronted with the disastrous product of the liturgical reform with its many permitted abuses, indicated to Paul VI the irrationality and authoritarianism with which it was proceeding: ‘The general opinion cannot admit that all Masses are allowed except that of St Pius V, the Mass that all of the bishops said during the Council.’ Then he said to the Pope that ‘It would be suspicious…to annul the interdiction in France of the Mass of St Pius V that the Council never pretended to abolish.’ The response by Montini is preremptory and chilling: ‘This never!’ Even more incredible is the motivation: ‘This Mass, as we have at Econe, became a symbol of condemnation of the Council. I will never accept that one can condemn the Council by means of a symbol.’ (John Guitton, *The Secret Paul VI, pp144-145.) *It is useless to underline, as Guitton did, that the Council had not all wanted to abolish that Mass, that the new ligurgy has been disastrous for the Church, and that it was an authoritarian imposition by Paul VI himself, who should have taken responsibility instead of offering the excuse of the Coucil. Pope Montini was stubborn and did not wish to give a victory to Econe and to his other critics. While watching the church ‘auto-demolishing’ itself, he did not wish to admit that he had erred. Thus he remained until the end. P201
He must be upset in his tomb:
- Benedict XVI confirmed that the St Pius V mass never was abolished nor forbidden.
- In addition he allowed any priest to say it without his bishop’s permission.
- The Lefebvrites are currently in talks with the Vatican to reintegrate into the Church, probably under the Pope’s personal prelature.
In the case these discussions will succeed, I was told recently that not less than ONE QUARTER of the priests in France will have the Lefebvrite label of origin.
I am afraid the French bishops will be obliged to swallow their hats.
A
Albizzi
Guest
Any act of Consecration to the Sacred Heart, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, so imperfect, so weak, so humble it is, cannot stay without results.
- With John Paul 2 the declared hostility to Fatima finally ended. The Pope of *Tostus Tuus *especially protected precisely by the Madonna of Fatima—who saved his life in 1981—will go on pilgrimage to the Portuguese sanctuary no fewer than three times. It will be he who beatifies Jacinta and Francisco, and in that context will publish a part of the Third Secret (although with a hypothetical interpretation that is unconvincing and rife with twisted readings of the text). P204
- ‘With Wojtyla we knew since the years of the Council,’ recalls Monsignor Pavel Hnilica to Andrea Tornelli. ‘I had occasion to greet him a few days after the election, and I said to him: ‘God has called you because your first work must be the consecration and conversion of Russia.’ He answered me: ‘I am willing to do it even tomorrow. If you convince the bishops.’ After the assassination attempt, on December 8, 1981 the pope pronounces these words in Sat Mary Major: ‘Mary, to You we entrust the fate of humanity.’ Monsignor Hnilica was present, and recounts: ‘After the ceremony, while in the sacristy, I said to the Pope: ‘Holiness, an entrustment does not suffice. What is needed is a consecration.’ He answered me: ‘I know, but many theologians are opposed.’ P204
- The following year the Pope did the consecration, but it was not a solemn act in communion with all the bishops and addressed to Russia in particular. Sister lucia, consulted by the Apostolic Nuncio to Portugal, monsignor Portalupi, declared on March 19, 1983: ‘The consecration of Russia has not been done as Our Lady of Fatima requested.’ P205
- And here is a disturbing explanation: ‘Given the anxiety of the holy Father, concerning the consecration…and, on the other hand, the scandalous hostility aroused by his request for Episcopal participation in the solemn act of 1984, it can be deduced with moral certainty that until now one thing in particular has impeded the holy Father from ordering the bishops of the universal Church to unite themselves with him in the consecration of Russia: his fear that it could really provoke a formal schism.’ P205
- At any rate, Cardina; Stickler, who was very close to the Pope, confided on November 26, 1987 that the Pope had not been able to perform the consecration, he would have wished ‘the bishops do not obey him.’ And this leads to the intuition that perhaps there is already in progress a silent schism with respect to Catholic truth. Or—as De Lubac said—that Protestantism has triumphed within Catholicism. And the great sign of contradiction is inevitably Mary—who, as the Fatima event demonstrated, hears and assists Popes in every way. Mary is the the ‘vanquisher of all heresies,’ as Cardinal Ratzinger underlined in Maria, Chiesa nascente (p19). P206
- The visionary has affirmed (very probably thanks to the apparition of 1985 of which Cardinal Bertone has also hinted) that this act spared the world a catastrophic war that should have erupted precisely in 1985. Naturally we find ourselves on a supernatural plane and thus there is no historical ‘document’ containing this ‘news’. However there are surprising clues: It is startling to reconstruct the situation during the months between 1984 and 1985 in order to understand what happened. P206
- It is a fact that these were the years of the grave crisis of the Euromissiles. All indications are that this would have involved an atomic conflict, a road with no return. (In forty years of cold war 130,000 nuclear arms had been produced, a quantity sufficient to destroy the planet thousands of times.) P207
- It is at this white-hot moment that, on March 25, 1984, in St Peter’s Square in Rome, before the statue of the Madonna, John Paul 2 pronounces his dramatic and solemn consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. P207
- What happened? Within a span of a very few months, the Kremlin puts aside the option of war. Indeed, this was only the beginning of the ‘thank yous’ raining down from heaven after March 25, 1984, Mikhail Gorbachev was able to sign the first fundamental treaty within the United States for the reduction of armaments and the elimination of Euromissles, thereby moving away from a nuclear Apocalypse. P208
- That there was a beneficial intervention of the Madonna, therefore, is what the Pope and the church think. And also Sister Lucia, who then questioned concerning this by Thirty Days, declared: ‘I am completely in accord with what the holy Father has said…I believe this involves an action of God in the world, to liberate it from the danger of an atomic war that could destroy, and an insistent call to all humanity for a more lively faith. Nevertheless, neither she nor the Pope has ever maintained that the promise of Fatima has been realized: there is, in fact, not a trace of the ‘conversion of Russia’ and true ‘peace’.P210
We could see that the Consecration of the world by Pius XII certainly hasted the end of WWII, and the Iron curtain fall no doubt is due to Russia’s Consecration by JPII.
But if that consecration had been performed by the Pope like it was required, in particular Russia namely, in union with the bishops worldwide, the true CONVERSION of Russia would have happened.
The excuse of the badwill of the bishops in my opinion isn’t valid: We know that there is a strong opposition from them, but the Pope could override it since the bishops cannot forbid anything to him. It was enough to send a letter ordering them to participate in the Consecration. The disobedient bishops would have one day to face their Judge, the Pope couldn’t be held accountable of their disobedience, and yes, the Consecration is done at last like was required.
I remember an article of Cathy Pearson in the Aug. 2008 issue of the magazine “Inside the Vatican” “NOW IS THE TIME” (…to make the Consecration)
renewamerica.us/images/columns/081210abbott.pdf
She has unscrewed all the so called obstacles to the Consecration. Very interesting.
S
Shoshana
Guest
- But is the comprehensive interpretation given by this Fatima scholar plausible? Do there exist precedents in the history of the church that could support this theology of history, according t which the infidelity or deafness of the pastors of the Church brings persecutions to the Church and terrible disasters to the world? There is a resounding precedent which corresponds—not by accident—with the other great collapse seen by the Church in her two thousand years: that of the Protestant schism. It was Pope Adrian VI, the last non-Italian Pope before John Pau 2, who formulated a courageous me culpa that provides an interpretive key to the subsequent events quite consonant with that which the Madonna will utter at Fatima. The protestant ‘bomb’ had exploded and, addressing himself in 1523 to the delegates to the Imperial Diet meeting at Nuremburg, he declared:
- Modernity is a result of the Protestant heresy…From which is born the absolution of the state, the rebirth of the 1800s of a political paganism, founded on the myth of the nations and the State, which will give birth to the crisis of Europe. It is the first great attempt to destroy the Church: what follows is modern totalitarianism in which Communism and Nazism will try to extinguish radically the memory of Christ. The protestant heresy was not ecclesially innocuous, because the redivinized State is a consequence of the rejection of the Church as body of Christ, of the church as one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic. (Gianni Baget Bozzo, The Antichrist, pp133)
- The apparition of Guadeloupe—according to the general acknowledgement of historians—was what attracted the Indians to Christianity. Therefore, it was precisely Guadeloupe that gave birth to Latin American Christianity. It was not born of ecclesiastical projects (which, on the contrary, were being met with hostility from the indigenous populations) but from the initiative of Heaven, manifested through Mary. Precisely at the moment in which the Church in half of Europe was being mutilated by a heresy that, among other things, was profoundly hostile to the Holy virgin, the Madonna gifted to the Church an entire continent, which today is the greatest Catholic continent in the world. The apparition happened—notice the coincidence-- on the Feast to of the Immaculate Conception (which in those times was celebrated on the 9th of December nor the 8th). This is the Feast of the Woman who crushes the serpent’s head. P213
S
Shoshana
Guest
- This Our Lady announces after making a series of historical prophecies (all of which, as we have seen, came to pass: revolutions, persecutions and wars); therefore the ‘triumph’ prophesied by Mary will have a resounding historical, and even cultural and political obviousness. Like the victory at Lepanto, but much greater. P217
- Ultimately, what Father Rene Laurentin writes is true: ‘Never have the popes been pushed so far to obey, at the level of the universal Church, the request of a visionary.’ However, this is true above all for John Paul 2 and Pius XII. For the others, no. And it is also true that the words concerning the ‘ministers’ of the Church who do not listen to Heaven and act like ‘the King of France’ were heard by Sister Lucia during an apparition, and therefore are decisively authoritative. However, on the other hand, the visionary was always exhorted by Heaven to pray and do penance for the Popes, and to request always from her superiors what Heaven had indicated to her, while recognizing always their authority and central role. P218
- And the same Frere Michel emphasizes: ‘Our Lady never ordered Sister Lucia to write or disclose this or that part of the Secret…No, She has willed that the initiative come from the church: confessors, bishop, or pope. P218Indeed, ‘hell hates Her and trembles before Her,’ declares Saint Maximilian Kolbe, a paladin of the Immaculate and who died at Auschwitz (on August 14, 1941), victim of one of the modern demons that he conquered with his love for Christ and for His Mother, and therefore for all men. ‘We do not yet know Mary, and for this reason we do not even know Christ in the way we should, Montfort explained. Mary indeed came to Fatima to open our eyes to the infinite value of our existence and of the blood of He who has redeemed it. First of all, She showed us, for a chilling instant, Hell thus reminding all men of the great drama of their liberty Then—as we have seen—She invited the ‘ministers’ of Christ to exercise the ‘power’ that Christ has conferred on them to prevent vast throngs from being lost forever in horror. P221
- But She came also to exalt the power of simple Christians and to appeal to them. It is often said that thanks to Vatican II the place of the laity was recognized in a Church that up until then had been suffocated by clericalism. But if the Council created a dispute over rules and power, clericalism has, however remained. And it is not understood that it was precisely the Madonna, well before the Council, who pointed out the road at Fatima: something more revolutionary—in the church totally centered on priests and hierarchal power—by the mother of God appearing to lay people, indeed to three children who, apart from Lucia, had not even made their First Communion, as was the case with Bernadette Soubirous of Lourdes? And the Queen of heaven and of earth called precisely them to the highest of missions, to exercise, therefore, the power for which we are qualified by a simple Baptism, which transforms every human being into ‘priest, king and prophet.’ P221
S
Shoshana
Guest
I am finished, Alleluia!
Hail Mary, full of grace
the Lord is with Thee!
Blessed art thou amongst women
and blessed id the fruit of thy
womb, Jesus!
Holy Mary Mother of God,
pray fo rus now
amd at the hour of death!
O my Jesus forgive us our sins,
save us from the fires of hell,
and lead ALL souls into heaven
especially those in need of Thy Mercy!
AMEN!
Hail Mary, full of grace
the Lord is with Thee!
Blessed art thou amongst women
and blessed id the fruit of thy
womb, Jesus!
Holy Mary Mother of God,
pray fo rus now
amd at the hour of death!
O my Jesus forgive us our sins,
save us from the fires of hell,
and lead ALL souls into heaven
especially those in need of Thy Mercy!
AMEN!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.