Yesterday on his RadTrad Thomist blog, Dr. Peter Chojnowski shared some of his firsthand knowledge concerning the inner workings of the Fatima Center in an article entitled, What Fr. Gruner Actually Thought and Wanted.
All of what I write here was either told to me by Fr. Gruner himself on numerous occasions or told me by my dear friend John Vennari in private conversations, either over the phone or face to face. For all of those involved in the controversy, we must remember what Aristotle said when confronted with a fundamental disagreement with his teacher, mentor, and colleague Plato, “Truth is more important than friendship”; and what are we all about but truth.
Among the insights offered by Dr. Chojnowski are those concerning Fr. Gruner’s deeply held conviction that the Third Secret included the following:
1) Our Lady’s warning that there would be an “evil Council.”
2) Our Lady’s warning that the Mass was “not to be changed.”3
3) Our Lady’s warning that “one third of the stars shall be swept from the heavens, by tail of the Devil”: Fr. Gruner interpreted this as indicating that 1/3 of the priests and bishops would serve Satan directly.
4) The Apostasy in the Church “would come from the very top,” in other words, from at least one or more men who were designated as being “the pope.” Cardinal Ciappi — who Fr. Gruner continually cited — was famous for indicating that this was the Third Secret, which he had read himself.
Leaving no room for doubt, Dr. Chojnowski immediately stressed:
In other words, Fr. Gruner saw the Third Secret as being a complete vindication of the traditionalist movement. Obviously, in Fr. Gruner’s understanding, the Third Secret was a condemnation of Vatican II, the New Mass, many of the clergy of the post-conciliar Church, and an indication that a man or men designated as pope would be the ones actually pushing the apostasy in the Church. What was Our Lady warning us against? The New Doctrine, the New Mass, the New Priesthood, and the New Popes.
How else can we possibly interpret what he said about the Third Secret? The whole purpose of the Third Secret was to warn people against the Novus Ordo religion. This is clearly what Fr. Gruner intended to convey to me. [Emphasis in original]
With this in mind, let it be said that those who now have the immense privilege of writing and speaking under the aegis of the Fatima Center are dishonoring Fr. Gruner’s legacy by engaging in tactics designed to win the support of neo-conservatives by dancing around the grave errors attached to “the Novus Ordo faith.”
Much more must it be said that holding one’s tongue while influential churchmen-of-the-council attempt to wed the message of Fatima to “the New Doctrine, the New Mass, the New Priesthood, and the New Popes” are dishonoring Our Lord and Our Lady!
Dr. Chojnowski went on to state:
With regard to the papacy, however, we must consider this. Fr. Gruner came to believe that Francis I was not a true pope, but that Josef Ratzinger/Benedict XVI had retained the office. So it would have to be Benedict that would consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart and not Francis.
I made mention of this fact back in June for the benefit of those who consider questions concerning the “resignation” of Benedict XVI the exclusive franchise of conspiracy theorists and kooks.
As I suggested at the time, while some may certainly disagree with my own sense that the resignation has all the hallmarks of invalidity, dismissing that opinion as sheer nonsense also means dismissing the concerns of men far brighter and holier than most of us combined; Fr. Nicholas Gruner among them.
I am especially grateful to Dr. Chojnowski for providing confirmation concerning Fr. Gruner’s assessment of this unprecedented situation, in particular for a reason that I have yet to share publicly.
A once hidden video rediscovered
As I prepared to write the aforementioned post, I went to the Fatima Center’s Youtube channel where I had previously watched a video wherein Fr. Gruner publicly called into question the validity of Benedict’s resignation, and likewise the pontificate of Francis.
The setting was Deerfield, IL; the date, 14 November 2014.
I was present for Fr. Gruner’s talk, but I wanted to post the video for the benefit of those who may have doubted the accuracy of my memory.
Strangely, however, upon returning to the Fatima Center’s list of videos taken at that conference, I discovered that the video I was seeking had apparently (as you may see for yourself) been made “private;” i.e., it was no longer available for public viewing.
I reached out to one of my friends at the Fatima Center for an explanation, but never received an answer as to why Fr. Gruner’s talk was no longer available.
Make of this what you will.
In any case, I am pleased to say that I have since been able to obtain a copy of Fr. Gruner’s presentation. The relevant excerpt (about 6 minutes in length in order to provide adequate context) follows; with specific mention of Benedict’s resignation beginning at roughly the 5 minute mark. [NOTE: Father misspeaks when giving the date of Benedict’s alleged departure when he says “2012.” It actually took place in 2013.]
One may have noticed that Fr. Gruner left precious little doubt that, in the celebration of Holy Mass, he did not pray for Francis as if he were a true pope!
Is the current brain trust of the Fatima Center embarrassed by this? Are they concerned that Father’s well-founded doubts concerning the so-called Bergoglian “pontificate” may scare off potential new supporters from among the ranks of the neo-conservatives?
I cannot say for certain, but what I do know is that even though, according to Dr. Chojnowski, “John Vennari was not pleased by [Fr. Gruner’s position on the papacy] at all, not at all,” the decision to remove from public viewing the video under discussion didn’t take place until after John had passed.
Again, make of that what you will.
For those of you who have yet to read Dr. Chojnowski’s blog post directly, I would encourage you to do so.
At this, I will repeat in essence a thought that I recently shared privately with my confreres, Peter Chojnowski and Cornelia Ferreira, as it applies to all who wish to spread the true Fatima message:
We need to be careful to always frame our views in terms of faithfulness to Our Lord, Our Lady and tradition; not in terms of what either Fr. Gruner or John Vennari may have done; what they may have believed, or what they may have wanted.
If we do this, there will be no need for devising tactics that may, or may not, garner support among those who oppose us – in the manner of the “traditional-conservatives.”
Our task is far simpler than that; we need only speak and defend the truth, while renouncing error wherever it may arise.
It needs to be clearly stated- a papacy of Benedict xvi is as invalid as that of Francis. Neither men can be considered as ever having been valid Popes because of the heresy they profess. Perhaps Francis is more belligerent than Benedict but both have an obvious clear record of anti-Catholic beliefs and explicit anti-Catholic teaching. Why is it so hard for Catholics to see that?
Thank you for posting this! Regarding the Vision, Lucy wrote, he (The Bishop dressed in white) as “something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it”. I hope that means Francis’ “reign” will be brief.
Ding, ding, ding we have a winner! Great to get confirmation on what I knew in my heart already about our dear departed Fr. Gruner. Reqiuem in aeternam.
You are contradicting Our Lord who told Lucia at Rianjo, “Make it known to My ministers, given that they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My command, they will follow him into misfortune. It is never too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary.” So keep that Sedevacantist fantasy, your rash judgement and disobedience to yourself.
Are non-Catholics, Catholics?
What do you think of this
Umm, you’re making a purported private revelation the basis of making a theological conclusion or criticizing another person’s theological conclusion???? Sure doesn’t sound like a good idea to me.
Thank you for sharing the video. I tried to find the video you mentioned on your earlier post as well with no success. God bless you, Louie.
It’s funny but I must have heard this 100 times before, but until now it has dawned on me that when one looks into a mirror they see themselves as they see themselves, but if we where to look into that same mirror viewing the pope looking at himself, he would appear in a “horizontal” mirror image of himself. So it’s possible that the phrase Sr. Lucia is alluding to is some sort of flipped perception of what appears to be accepted as true.
Im assuming, employing simple logic, that those who believe that Benedict is still the true pope, will be forced to become sede’s if Benedict does before Francis?
There’s nothing logical about becoming a sede.
Long live the Pope! Long live Pope Benedict!
1 Thessalonians 5:19
Extinguish not the spirit. Despise not prophecies.
Fatima is not a private revelation.
Will Francis become Pope if Benedict dies? It’s a good question, how will resignationists answer this conundrum?
Sorry, but the citation in the comment above wasn’t at Fatima, but Rianjo and this wasn’t made known to a crowd of 70k people but only to Sr. Lucy. Also, Fr. Gruner did admit that Fatima does not belong to the deposit of Faith. He was less clear on the concept of public revelation and he was pushing the envelope to state that it was public revelation because “someday” the Church “might” declare it a fulfillment of Rev 12. That said, I am a big believer in Fatima.
I have wondered about that “bishop in white” expression. Perhaps Bergoglio is meant, but he is not being called the Pope, merely a bishop, because he isn’t the pope. Looking for other opinions on this thought.
Will Benedict’s resignation be declared null and void if Francis dies?It’s like playing Musical Chairs with the Throne of Peter. The whole mess is sickening.
My dear Rushintoit,
First of all it is not rash judgment or fantasy or illogical to believe that we must base our faith on Catholic doctrine. So just to refer to one authority that of Pope Pius xii- he said that heretics and schismatics are not members of the Catholic Church. I’m just putting 2 and 2 together to arrive at 4 which means neither Francis nor Benedict nor John Paul nor Paul vi could have been valid Popes. So what I believe is not merely private opinion but is based on evidence and logic. As far as an alleged private revelation made to Lucy which you speak of I am less influenced than that of clear Catholic doctrine from Popes and councils and Saints!
Christina64, I recall reading an article a little while ago (I’m sorry I can’t remember where though) which stated how Francis has rejected the monarchy of the pope’s office and refers to himself as ‘the Bishop of Rome’ rather than ‘Pope’. If I recall correctly, I believe he even travels on his Argentinian passport. Not definitive but interesting in this context.
God (and Our Lady in this case) does not perform miracles only so that people can become “big believers” but to confirm some other thing. For Fatima, that would be the veracity of the seer, Sister Lucy. Fatima imposes an obligation on the Pope and the Church to consecrate Russia, why? because Sister Lucy, the person chosen by God, and confirmed by the greatest of miracles, said so. Now you seem to be saying that this is an optional private revelation. Therefore, sorry, you are mistaken. Please explain if I misrepresent your position.
We will be “sede vacante” until the next Pope is elected. How sad, because there will nothing to argue about for a few months.
As far as I am aware, we are never without a Pope. If there is no valid earthly Pope, for whatever reason, St Peter takes over until a legitimate Pope is elected. Hence Jesus’ words ‘I will never leave you orphans.’ or words to that effect. Looking at the dire warnings in the prophecies the remnant Church may need to remember that. God bless all here.
Thank you AClay. Not only interesting but I’d say also very relevant.
You may be a mathematician but you are not a theologian. First of all it is still a matter of speculation whether a Pope can be a manifest heretic, if so, who can judge him? …etc. etc. etc., People argue this all day long on this blog.
Please see my response above to fast ferrari regarding Fatima as a private devotion…or maybe you consider some parts of it private, such as Rianjo. If so, please explain which parts are private and which are not.
Oh dude, that is going on the front page of the next Remnant. Thanks for the scoop! 🙂
The Remnant Team
On Aug 10, 2017, at 10:07 PM, wrote:
Father Gruner told me as well that he did NOT believe Francis is Pope. It was in my Rec Room in Summer 2014 while watching Canadian Football. How’s that for certainty?
Fr. Gruener, suspended a divinis, and which suspension was upheld by the Apostolic Signatura, seems a very troubled and confused priest but we are supposed to consider his judgment worthy?
You forgot to add “by modernists.” He was suspended by modernists and it was upheld by modernists. What is confusing is calling modernists Catholic. That’s what has me comfused as to why so called Catholics would call modernists (who are not Catholic) Catholic. So ABS, without going off into a diversionary rant, can you explain how a modernist is a Catholic?
If he does answer, it will have all sorts of polemics about “authority” and “judgment” and “visibility” and other accusation against sedes. But will not answer the actual question.
Also, for the record, I am not a Fatimista and do not support Gruener. He was ordained in 1976, does anyone know if it was in the new rite or the old rite?
Well, Tom A, the “modernists” do not believe in Fatima and they do not like Fr. Gruner so here you have some points in common for dialog.
I do believe in the Fatima apparition and it appears Pius XI and XII failed to heed the request. So therefore we had WWII and the Soviet Union spreading evil and socialism. Its all a moot point now since there is no Pope. We are in a new phase of the end times. The modernists have totally corrupted the meaning of Fatima while the semi-trads have put all their hopes of restoring the Church if Russia gets consecrated. The ship sailed, 1960 passed. Its time to move on. There is no Catholic Pope to consecrate my backyard let alone Russia.
What Fr Gruner explains sure makes sense of Francis insistence to be called bishop instead of pope. The cannon Law states such a law n pope Benedict openly made that remark which I’ve read myself. How else can anyone proceed. Earring these facts in mind, up until now I’ve been so confused by all of this. But so many arguements have been put forward on both sides, too many private conversations were kept behind closed doors. The Protestant practice of sola scriptoria has invaded in interpreting the cannon laws and articles of discipline of the church.
Our Lady’s message can clear all of this up, but untill it’s revealed and the consecration of Russia is completed this is going to continue. One thing is for certain Our Lord n Lady never said once that there’s was going to be a period without a Holy Father , they insistent on us praying for the Holy Father. But tpregarding the Holy Father My question has always been who is he ? How can we pray for the Holy Father if I’m confused about who he really is ? So I simply say Holy Father instead of a name. Sometimes I pray for Francis and sometimes if pray for Benedict, but I have doubts about both of them. Almighty God must be shaking His head at such prayers.
Here’s the interesting thing, when I was attending the NO mass, people were putting forward prayer request for both pope Benedict n pope Francis, the priest never refused one or the other, so they were giving the signal that they accept the two popes, this created more confusion.
Not surprising as the NO false mass is one big ball of confusion anyway.
Lol! Good point. But what about this new Peter 2 rumour, if it’s true it’s a scary outlook for us cats hanging into the faith. hearing they want Francis gone n replaced by the so called acute strong politician as pope known as the surgeon.
Additionally Francis not being the true pope, he cannot be one of the worm ridden popes. So we can rule him out at least, but notice what he said at Fatima this year relating himself as the bishop dressed in white, was this Francis openly telling the world n us that he is not the true pope ? From What Fr Gruner said in the past Francis as archbishop was one of the few bishops who always responded to his annual letters, so he knows more about Fatima than many people presume.
Don’t know, but Fr Hesse was ordained in the new rite and he fought the modernist tooth n nail u till his death, he like Fr Gruner stayed faithful to the church as is Fr Micheal today coaching cats to the truth faith and promoting the Latino rite, and what about all those cats baptized in the new rite are they catholic?
He was persecuted much like padre Pio was presucted and accused of working for the devil by the Vatican. Should Padre have his sainthood revoked ?
Those modernist who accused Fr Gruner is messing with your head, stay clear of heretics. Fr Gruner was one of the most sound minded priest I’ve known, he would answer your questions and not turn his back on you like the modernist priest did.
Your idea of framing our words around our Lord n Lady is the best way, and I assure you, the neo cons will attack you for it, but at least it’s the truth and it will be passed over n ignored. I’ve done this many times, and met silence. Now try it with a Russian orthodox n you’ll have a big fight on your hands. Lol.
I know for sure that John Vennari is. Why the dismissive comment, Lou???
I’m fighting a losing battle to protect his legacy. It seems he has been forgotten, but dismissing him is another matter. No single Trad Catholic has contributed to the movement.
Wanna help, Lou? Then celebrate him, don’t minimize him, OK?
Did you read brother micheals books ? I did and what Fr Gruner explains above about Sr Lucy writing down is documented in his books, the vision is authentic, but the words of Our Lady in 26 lines talks about the apostasy is not included in the 2000 publication, which is the first thing I looked for. The Cardinal was witness to that particular document,
we also know in the book, another priest sent by the pope to interview Sr Lucy that the third secret is in two parts one is the vision we now have the other is the extension of Our Lady’s words “. The dogma of the faith will always be preserved in Portugal ….etc …….” etc is St Lucy’s addation indicating there is more Our Lady said, and thus is the part which she could not write down on Jan 3rd. As Our Lady told her not to do so at that time.
It took me some time to understand the order of this, but it is simple really, perhaps that’s why I didn’t understand it at first. Why Almighty God allowed it done that way, we do not know. All we can do is accept His divine intervention on this matter as He knows the final outcome of it all.
Since this article has been linked elsewhere this week, I checked out the status of the original Fatima Center Fr. Gruner “Welcome Speech” YouTube video. It has been changed so that it is no longer blacked out as a “[Private video]”. https://youtu.be/B4lFkj04Ncc Most of what is relevant to this discussion begins around the 1 hour mark.