As promised yesterday, I’m offering here brief commentary (albeit in a lengthy post) on certain portions of the CDF document, The Message of Fatima, that points rather clearly to the tangled web of deceit that is woven therein.
Please bear in mind that my comments are far from a comprehensive review of this convoluted document; there are many other abnormalities to be discovered beyond the ones mentioned here.
Little in this post will come as a shock to most of the regular commenters on the blog, but I suspect that of the larger group there are many who just never stopped to consider the numerous contradictions and inaccuracies that litter the Vatican’s “official” statement.
Perhaps you might share this with others who fit that description in the hope that they will at least take the time to examine the matter more closely on their own.
For those unaware, it is important to know that the public record of quotes offered by those who had read the Third Secret prior to June of 2000 – including the likes of Cardinal Pacelli (the future Pope Pius XII), Cardinal Oddi, Cardinal Ciappi and even Cardinal Ratzinger – indicate very clearly that it concerns a crisis of faith within the Church; warning of a great apostasy that reaches even to the highest places in Rome.
With this in mind, one notes that the CDF document immediately attempts to cast doubt on this fact with an introduction written by (then) Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone which reads in part:
Throughout history there have been supernatural apparitions and signs which go to the heart of human events and which, to the surprise of believers and non-believers alike, play their part in the unfolding of history. These manifestations can never contradict the content of faith…
It is true enough that authentic apparitions of Our Blessed Lord and Our Lady can never contradict the content of faith, and yet, the more perceptive among us cannot help but sense that His Excellency doth protest too much.
You see, for the contributors to this document (Archbishop Bertone, Cardinal Sodano and Cardinal Ratzinger) the “content of faith” is not synonymous with the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine so carefully transmitted throughout the centuries.
These men are fully committed to the novelties of Vatican Council II and thus determined to treat the conciliar propositions as dependable representations of the “content of faith,” even to the point of taking precedence over all of the conflicting magisterium that preceded it.
Anything, therefore, that might cast doubt on their conciliar ideology is, to them, anathema, and must be nipped in the bud.
It is for this reason, one senses, that these men are so loathe to publicly reveal Our Lady’s words, as all indications are that her warning points directly to the Church’s “suicide of altering the faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul” (as noted by Cardinal Pacelli in reference to Our Lady of Fatima’s warnings); events that all but the most deluded recognize as having begun to unfold in earnest at Vatican Council II.
Archbishop Bertone states:
John Paul II, for his part, asked for the envelope containing the third part of the “secret” following the assassination attempt on 13 May 1981.
Simply from the standpoint of common sense, this strains credulity.
We are being asked to believe that this pope whose motto, Totus Tuus, was chosen to reflect his deep Marian devotion; a man most certainly well aware of the air of controversy and anticipation surrounding the Third Secret of Our Lady of Fatima, waited nearly three years after his elevation to the papacy to read the text.
Hogwash.
In any event, Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls, in a statement made just the month prior to the release of the CDF statement, said that Pope John Paul II first read the secret within days of assuming the papacy in 1978.
This makes a great deal more sense, does it not?
Setting aside for the present discussion any speculation as to why the architects of the CDF statement chose to claim otherwise, one can hardly fail to recognize, on a merely practical level, that something is amiss.
In other words, it should be clear already that the contents of the CDF document are less than trustworthy, and only a fool will simply accept them without scrutiny. Obviously, if the persons involved cannot be trusted to speak with integrity concerning relatively small details, much less can they be trusted in matters substantial.
Turning his attention to the consecration of Russia, Archbishop Bertone maintains that it was done as Our Lady requested on 25 March 1984, in Saint Peter’s Square:
The Holy Father, in spiritual union with the Bishops of the world, who had been “convoked” beforehand, entrusted all men and women and all peoples to the Immaculate Heart of Mary…
Before commenting on the text of that entrustment, it is important to note the words of Our Lady as written by Sr. Lucy in a letter to her confessor:
Our Lady said: ‘The moment has come in which God asks of the Holy Father to make, and to order that in union with him and at the same time, all the bishops of the world make the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart.
In a separate letter to Fr. Pierre Caillon (the head of the Blue Army in France), Sr. Lucy explained in more detail the necessity and manner of the participation of the world’s bishops:
So that the bishops of the world be united to the Pope in this Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the Pope must either convoke all the bishops to Rome, or to another place – to Tuy, for example – or else order the bishops of the entire world to organize, each in his own cathedral , a solemn and public ceremony of Reparation and of Consecration of Russia to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary.
Clearly, none of this happened on 25 March 1984.
For one, the bishops of the world did not participate as required, and this in spite of Archbishop Bertone’s deliberate use (more properly, misappropriation) of the word “convoke.”
More obviously, that entrustment didn’t mention Russia by name even once!
Of the 1984 consecration, Archbishop Bertone declared:
Sister Lucia personally confirmed that this solemn and universal act of consecration corresponded to what Our Lady wished (“Sim, està feita, tal como Nossa Senhora a pediu, desde o dia 25 de Março de 1984”: “Yes it has been done just as Our Lady asked, on 25 March 1984”: Letter of 8 November 1989). Hence any further discussion or request is without basis.
At best, this is the result of the deliberate manipulation of a cloistered nun; at worst a wholesale fabrication.
For the most part, I will leave it to readers to discover in their research why this assertion is utterly untenable. Suffice it to say that there is much to consider in the way of evidence to the contrary.
I do wish to mention that Sr. Lucy was adamant in confirming, in relatively short order, that John Paul II’s previous consecrations of 1981 and 1982 were insufficient. This, of course, is what made the 1984 attempt necessary in the first place.
It should be noted that the 1981 and 1982 attempts are essentially the same as that which took place in 1984, and yet no explanation is offered as to what rendered that which all concerned understood as insufficient suddenly sufficient.
In other words, one wonders what changed?
Apparently, the only thing that changed is the level of hubris in Rome, which by the year 2000 had reached the breathtaking point where no further discussion of Our Lady’s simple, and as yet unfulfilled, request would be tolerated.
Furthermore, we are being asked once more to believe the incredible; namely, that it took Sr. Lucy five full years to confirm the status of this latest attempt.
All of this having been said, one of the most obvious and accessible indications that the 1984 consecration did not in fact correspond to Our Lady’s wishes are the words of Pope John Paul II himself.
Later that same evening, in a farewell prayer, he said while addressing Our Lady:
We wanted to choose this Sunday, the third of the Lent of 1984, still within the Holy Year of Redemption, for the act of custody, the consecration of the world, of the great human family, of all peoples, especially those who are in such need of this consecration of this reliance, of those people for whom you yourself are awaiting our act of consecration and entrustment. [emphasis added]
[Note: This prayer is available on the Vatican website in Italian.]
Here, John Paul II is confirming, in no uncertain terms, that he knows very well that Our Lady is still, even after his prayer of consecration offered earlier that day, “awaiting” the consecration of Russia as she had requested it.
Moving on to the Third Secret, the official interpretation of which maintains that the vision of a “bishop dressed in white” who is killed corresponds to the 1981 assassination attempt against Pope John Paul II, Archbishop Bertone states:
Sister Lucia had already given an indication for interpreting the third part of the “secret” in a letter to the Holy Father, dated 12 May 1982:
He then provides the contents of that letter.
One should note that even though this letter was written just one day shy of a full year after Pope John Paul II was shot, Sr. Lucy, in providing what Archbishop Bertone labeled an “indication for interpreting” the Third Secret, doesn’t mention this event at all.
In other words, it seems rather obvious that Sr. Lucy saw no connection between the vision of the “bishop dressed in white” and the 1981 attempt on John Paul’s life.
Even so, the CDF statement asserts the implausible notion that Sr. Lucy wholeheartedly approves of their conclusions, as we shall see.
The document goes on to provide a report of a private meeting that took place between Sister Lucia, Archbishop Bertone, and Bishop Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva (Bishop of Leiria-Fatima) on 27 April 2000. It states:
When asked: “Is the principal figure in the vision the Pope?”, Sister Lucia replied at once that it was…
Really?
That’s not what she wrote in her (just mentioned) letter of May 1982, much less is this what she conveyed when she committed the vision to paper wherein she plainly stated that she and the other two visionaries had the impression that it was the pope.
In any case, the CDF statement goes on:
As regards the passage about the Bishop dressed in white, that is, the Holy Father—as the children immediately realized during the “vision”—who is struck dead and falls to the ground, Sister Lucia was in full agreement with the Pope’s claim that “it was a mother’s hand that guided the bullet’s path and in his throes the Pope halted at the threshold of death” (Pope John Paul II, Meditation from the Policlinico Gemelli to the Italian Bishops, 13 May 1994).
Again, the children most certainly did not “immediately realize” that the bishop dressed in white is the Holy Father.
Secondly, Pope John Paul II was not, obviously, “struck dead.”
Furthermore, even if Sr. Lucy fully agreed with Pope John Paul II that the hand of the Blessed Mother saved his life in 1981, there is no indication whatsoever that she related the 1981 event to the vision attached to the Third Secret.
The Vatican apparatus is clearly at pains to give the impression that Sr. Lucy is fully on board with the official interpretation, and yet, at the very same time, the CDF document attempts to play both ends against the middle by minimizing her competency in the matter.
For instance, the CDF attributes to Sr. Lucy the following statement:
I wrote down what I saw; however it was not for me to interpret it, but for the Pope.
One will note, however, that the “official” interpretation offered by the Vatican does not come from the pope at all; rather, it comes most directly from Cardinal Sodano!
The contradictions continue to pile up as we come, at last, to the rather lengthy portion of the CDF document that was written by Cardinal Ratzinger, the same who confirmed on more than one occasion (prior to the great deception under discussion here) that the Third Secret pertains to a crisis of faith in the Catholic Church.
Cardinal Ratzinger begins his treatment of the Third Secret by insisting:
No great mystery is revealed; nor is the future unveiled.
Seriously?
The official interpretation itself very clearly indicates that Third Secret pertains to future events; namely, (and lamely) the attempt on John Paul II’s life in 1981.
Furthermore, no one contests the fact that the future was “unveiled” when Our Lady foretold of World War II in the second part of the message, even going so far as to name the future pope, Pius XI, on whose watch the war would break out.
Cardinal Ratzinger’s intent here is plain; he wishes to imply (as he will explicitly state later on) that while the Third Secret did pertain to the future, that future is now well confined to the past; i.e., it’s time to move on.
Of course, this assertion naturally leads one to question why, if indeed the Third Secret pertained so directly to the shooting of John Paul II, did it take the Holy See more than nineteen years to make it known?
The answer seems obvious enough; it took that long for the masterminds of this deception to concoct their plan for putting to rest for good a warning that speaks very directly to the loss of faith in post-conciliar Rome; a crime for which they themselves bear guilt.
Cardinal Ratzinger, to his great shame, then went on to cast aspersions upon the reliability of Sr. Lucy’s account, asking rhetorically, but nonetheless pointedly:
Or are these only projections of the inner world of children, brought up in a climate of profound piety but shaken at the same time by the tempests which threatened their own time?
One gets a sense for the treachery involved here when considering the comments offered by Cardinal Ratzinger prior to his participation in the scam of 2000.
For instance, he said that the Third Secret, the contents of which he had read, concerns:
…the dangers threatening the faith and life of the Christian, and therefore the world. And also the importance of the last times. … If it is not published—at least for the moment—it is to avoid confusing religious prophecy with sensationalism. But the things contained in this Third Secret correspond to what is announced in Scripture and are confirmed by many other Marian apparitions, beginning with the Fatima apparitions themselves in their known contents.
Did you get that?
He said that it pertains not only to dangers threatening the faith, but also to “the importance of the last times.”
So much for his suggestion that it doesn’t concern the future.
He also very clearly confirmed that the Third secret does indeed concern “religious prophecy,” even warning that its contents, if known, may be confused with “sensationalism.”
In a separate statement, Cardinal Ratzinger even went so far as to confirm that the Third Secret of Fatima and the warning issued by Our Lady at Akita, Japan (another approved Marian apparition) are essentially the same.
At Akita, Our Lady warned, among other things:
The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see Cardinals opposing Cardinals, Bishops against other Bishops. The priests who venerate Me will be scorned and opposed by their confrerers. Churches and altars will be sacked. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises, and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.
Imagine the agonizing memories that must haunt the so-called “Pope Emeritus” as he witnesses this vision coming into ever sharper focus with every passing day.
One can only hope that his guilt will become so overwhelming at some point prior to his death that he will be moved to unburden his soul by setting the public record straight.
After a lengthy dissertation on the nature of private revelation, clearly intended to minimize the importance of Our Lady’s message at Fatima, Cardinal Ratzinger continues:
For one terrible moment, the children were given a vision of hell. They saw the fall of “the souls of poor sinners”. And now they are told why they have been exposed to this moment: “in order to save souls”—to show the way to salvation.
Odd, is it not, that Our Lady was moved to explain this all-too-obvious vision of hell to the children, and yet we are being asked to believe that she spoke not one syllable in explanation concerning the complex vision attached to the Third Secret.
Getting to the meat of the matter, Cardinal Ratzinger continued:
Thus we come finally to the third part of the “secret” of Fatima which for the first time is being published in its entirety. As is clear from the documentation presented here, the interpretation offered by Cardinal Sodano in his statement of 13 May was first put personally to Sister Lucia.
Sister Lucia responded by pointing out that she had received the vision but not its interpretation. The interpretation, she said, belonged not to the visionary but to the Church.
After reading the text, however, she said that this interpretation corresponded to what she had experienced and that on her part she thought the interpretation correct.
More contradiction: Did Sr. Lucy provide an “indication for interpretation,” or not?
Previously, the document quotes Sr. Lucy as saying, “I wrote down what I saw; however it was not for me to interpret it, but for the Pope;” not “the Church.”
Even so, the present document is concerned very specifically with “the interpretation offered by Cardinal Sodano,” who no one in their right mind imagines to be synonymous with “the Church.”
In either case, why are Cardinal Ratzinger and his collaborators so intent on making a point of Sr. Lucy’s alleged agreement?
Again, one cannot help but get the sense that these men protest too much.
Cardinal Ratzinger goes on to assert:
… we must totally discount fatalistic explanations of the “secret”, such as, for example, the claim that the would-be assassin of 13 May 1981 was merely an instrument of the divine plan guided by Providence and could not therefore have acted freely, or other similar ideas in circulation. Rather, the vision speaks of dangers and how we might be saved from them.
This is most assuredly a straw man argument, deliberately crafted to create the false perception that Sodano’s interpretation is both widely accepted and incontrovertible.
There was no groundswell of public opinion from 13 May 2000 when Sodano first floated his “interpretation,” and the issuance of the CDF text some six weeks later, asserting that the would-be assassin of 1981 was merely “an instrument of the divine plan.”
This is entirely bogus.
As to what “similar ideas” the cardinal specifically has in mind is anyone’s guess, but the point appears to be, nonetheless, that anything other than what the “oracle” Sodano provided is to be dismissed as “fatalistic.”
Cardinal Ratzinger is correct, however, in saying that the Third Secret “speaks of dangers and how we might be saved from them;” namely, it is those dangers to the faith of which he once spoke with relative candor.
Perhaps knowing that he offered at least a tidbit of truth amidst all of the fabrications is how he comforts (and deceives) himself this very day…
In any case, Cardinal Ratzinger offers more contradiction when he states:
We must always keep in mind the limits in the vision itself, which here are indicated visually. The future appears only “in a mirror dimly” (1 Cor 13:12).
Again, recall that he opened his reflection by saying of the Secret, “No great mystery is revealed; nor is the future unveiled.”
So, which is it?
He repeats this very same sort of contradiction on a number of other occasions in this document. I will pass over them from here on out as the point has presumably been made.
Cardinal Ratzinger then attempts to further discredit Sr. Lucy, saying:
The concluding part of the “secret” uses images which Lucia may have seen in devotional books and which draw their inspiration from long-standing intuitions of faith.
How shameful it is to call into question the credibility of this holy nun who was most certainly under obedience not to comment publicly in her own defense.
Furthermore, the implication itself is laughable.
Cardinal Ratzinger is suggesting that Our Lady, who was so determined to make certain that all would know that her message comes from heaven that she provided the miracle of the sun, witnessed by upwards of 70,000 people, many of whom were previously skeptical, and yet she has left transmission of this most important part of her message to the limitations of a child’s imagination.
Coming to the punch line, Cardinal Ratzinger, referring back to the ludicrous interpretation given by Cardinal Sodano for the fourth and final time, said:
First of all we must affirm with Cardinal Sodano: “… the events to which the third part of the ‘secret’ of Fatima refers now seem part of the past”.
As of this writing, the 1984 consecration that allegedly fulfilled Our Lady’s request was performed just over 31 years ago, and the conversion of Russia and the period of peace that she promised in return are nowhere to be found.
So, there you have it; either the collective masterminds of this document, or the Blessed Virgin Mother, have been duly painted a liar.
I, for one, am crystal clear as to which one is which.
How frustrating it is dealing with those that refuse to provide the truth. Yet they insist we accept what we are given–and this comes from those that should be honest, open and truthful in their MAJOR ROLE as Christ’s followers. Very disturbing, indeed.
Awesome analysis, Louis. A few months ago I would never have believed this was happening. However, even prior to today’s report of yours, a hearing of Vatican Radio’s report in English by Ms. Veronica Scarisbrick on 2015-05-13 seemed questionable even more so after a second hearing. I do not purport to do a complete analysis of that radio report by Ms. Scarisbrick but a cursory observation. Here goes.
1) The radio report introduces the subject stating that “three young children had a vision of Our Lady” on May 13. It does not state in its introduction that there was an apparition of Our Lady, and furthermore —- and more disturbingly — it does not say there were 6 other apparitions nor the miracle of the sun 6 months later witnessed by thousands of persons. Only 5 and 1/2 minutes into the report does Ms. Scarisbrick make a soft reference to the apparitions stating that it was “the first of the apparitions”, and later so another soft reference stating…”83 years after the 1st apparition.” One can only conclude the official Vatican report is downplaying the event, and refuses to focus on all of the monthly apparitions nor the miracle of the sun.
2) We must wait seven minutes into the report to find reference to Sr. Lucia’s as a “third visionary”. (Note again the avoidance of Our Virgin Mother’s as an active agent in these apparitions.) The report then clouds Sr. Lucia s character — and possibly her intentions — by referring to her at the JP II event on May 13, 2000, as “a charismatic figure with the visionary past.”
3) Ten minutes into the official radio report, Ms. Scarisbrick then referring to Cardinal Angelo Soldano’s reading of the 3rd message, states that the messages of Our Lady of Fatima were “incomplete messages.” Note well, the idea is not that Cardinal Soldano did not read the complete message, but that the messages of Our Lady were in themselves “incomplete messages.”
4) It is only 11:45 minute into the radio report that there is mention of the “gunshots”. Of course, with reference to the “past” event.
5) The most interesting entry in the radio report occurs exactly 12:00 minutes into Ms. Scarisbrick’s English radio report where, when the report mentions the secrets of the 3rd message, the report states the 3rd message was never entirely revealed except “until that 13th of May of the new millennium”. But on just a simple cursory hearing of the report it is clear that this clause, “until the 13th of May of the new millennium” is artificially inserted in the radio report after the fact. In my observation, this clause was deliberately added by the editors and Ms. Scarisbrick to an already taped report. (I challenge you to hear it carefully.)
Over all, one can generally conclude that the official Vatican radio report’s main message is not the apparitions of Our Virgin Mother to the three shepherds, not the messages of warning and guidance from Our Holy Mother, not the witness of Sr. Lucia, but an overwhelming obsession to glorify Pope JP II and the event which occurred on May 13, 2000 involving JP II. The report downplays the Fatima message. In conclusion, the official Vatican radio report appears to be propaganda for the “conciliar” church.
I’m certain others in this site with vastly more knowledge of the events of Fatima and the history of the church can discern even more contradictions and apparent foul play in that report.
Millions of words have been written regarding the dire messages of Fatima (a lot of it very confusing), therefore, we must be very grateful to you, Louie, for this concise, but clear, analysis of Our Lady’s warnings. The bottom line, as Louie explains, is that the true message of Fatima is a direct and absolute condemnation of the Second Vatican Council. The powers that be in the Vatican since the 1960’s (and perhaps before) cannot allow Vatican II to be discredited in any way, shape or form. Why did Our Lady instruct that the Third Secret be revealed in 1960? Many of you have heard that Sr. Lucia in the later years was an imposter. I don’t particularly like delving into what is known as “conspiracy theories”. However, the Sr. Lucia shown to the world at that time just did not look “sad enough”. There appears to be more intrigue and deception inside the Vatican than any where else on earth. Ignoring Our Lady for the sake of protecting the “New” god (Vat2) puts every soul in dire jeopardy.
Our Lady of Fatima, protect us! save us!
I couldn’t agree with you more.
Alarico: is this the Veronica Scarisbrick programme?
http://www.news.va/en/news/fatima-saint-john-paul-ii-and-the-third-secret
Got only to the 22 second mark of the revisionist history: @:16 “sparked off the devotion to Our Lady of Fatima–an inspiration for millions to work and pray for peace.”
Louie,
The Fatima Center is currently in need of a leader, no?
When you get settled in, use the blog to tell us all how we can help.
🙂 🙂
It could be that Sodano and Ratz were trying to kill two birds w/one stone. As Louie notes the CDF statement contradicted statements Ratzinger had made previously about the secret as well as what others had said about it. However, it could be that JP2, was convinced that the secret was about his assassination and so rather than say,”Look, boss, you’re crazy–there’s no way it’s about you!” (and Sr. Lucy too – what person is going to contradict the pope especially when he was almost killed?), they try to spin it to please him. They also might have thought it a good way to put this whole “third secret” craze to rest.
Re: “Consecration”. It seems to me would be very hard for a pope to do anything that would indicate that previous popes (including Pius XII) had not done what Our Lady had asked. Also it would be very difficult to get ALL the bishops to do something so rather than give certain bishops a platform to show their dissent (or get martyred like in China), the pope would never put them on the spot. But, even if it ever happened, would all those who have made a life work demanding this consecration be satisfied or because this or that bishop was on his deathbed or something would they just go on demanding another consecration, and another, another…?
When the pope has consecrated “the world” to the immaculate heart of Mary I don’t know how people can insist that he hasn’t consecrated “Russia”. The pope doesn’t own Russia, so it actually makes no logical sense for him to consecrate Russia specifically. I could consecrate my neighbor’s house to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, but to my mind I should be more concerned about consecrating my OWN house to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. It seems to me many people ignore what the word “consecrate” means and focus on this issue as some kind of sacred spell. Nothing can every be right until this sacred spell Our Lady asked for is cast, but it can never be cast to satisfy them and rather than face reality they funnel millions of dollars to Fr. Gruener to buy a bill board demanding the pope consecrate Russia! I have a heard priest who has a deep devotion to Fatima state that what we each need to do now that the world has been consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, is to consecrate ourselves — and then actually live that consecration.
I think all the speculation about the third secret and all the talks and conferences and Malachi Martin speculations etc. is a colossal waste of time (how much money has been wasted on this?). Think some people are going to be told by Jesus and Mary you’re going to hell because you squandered your life on the third secret (just like Medjugorgia).
Finally, how can anyone get upset about these men lying about Fatima when they lied (and are still lying) about the sex abuse of children?
Also how does one get upset about Ratz patronizing and discrediting Sr. Lucia when he and all his sidekicks Muller, Kaspar, Bergoglio, Pell ad nauseam have spent their lives patronizing and discrediting Jesus “of Nazareth”, the apostles (peasants who don’t provide a faithful witness), and Bible?
“April 21, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – According to the chairman of the Catholic bishops’ conference of Germany, the death of Jesus Christ was not a redemptive act of God to liberate human beings from the bondage of sin and open the gates of heaven. The Archbishop of Freiburg, Robert Zollitsch, known for his liberal views, publicly denied the fundamental Christian dogma of the sacrificial nature of Christ’s death in a recent interview with a German television station. Zollitsch said that Christ “did not die for the sins of the people as if God had provided a sacrificial offering, like a scapegoat.” Instead, Jesus had offered only “solidarity” with the poor and suffering. Zollitsch said “that is this great perspective, this tremendous solidarity.” The interviewer asked, “You would now no longer describe it in such a way that God gave his own son, because we humans were so sinful? You would no longer describe it like this?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/22/conchita-wurst-archbishop-vienna-schonborn_n_5374127.html
Like Obama and Clinton these prelates wax eloquent about the poor and the smell of the sheep when they want votes or money, but the only Conchitas’ these perverts get excited about are the Conchita wursts.
TWN, you seem to forget that we are talking about a request from Mary, Mother of God! Do you think she was asking for something that was so difficult to do, that those who refused are off the hook?
–
Like Our Lord asking us to be perfect as Our Father in Heaven is perfect – too hard? Impossible?
–
Our Lady asked for something very, very simple. What was, and is, missing is the WILL to do something difficult, in the face of criticism from ‘the world.’
–
Our Lady has said this consecration will be done, albeit late. She knows it will be difficult to do it now after all the apostasy. Although it might be easier than we think. I have a feeling when things really get sticky, after we get a taste of a chastisement or two, the pope and bishops will be falling over each other to effect what Our Lady has asked for.
–
O Mary, Refuge of Sinners, please help us, help especially those in mortal sin and those most obdurate.
Consecration is not a magic spell. To consecrate means to “set aside” for some sacred purpose. So the Holy Eucharist is consecrated. Meaning changed into the Body and Blood of Our Lord for the purpose of sanctifying our souls. Priests are ordained – their hands are consecrated for the specific purpose of offering the Holy Sacrifice.
When Russia is consecrated it, meaning the state and people, will be converted to the One Holy Catholic Church – including the heretical and schismatic clergy they have in the Eastern Orthodox group. God has set aside other nations for sacred purposes before. Israel before the time of Christ comes to mind. As well as does France – the Eldest Daughter of the Church – France, which converted so many souls with so many missionaries and holy saints. Remember France could have eventually become Protestant if it had fallen to the English except some teenage girl named Joan of Arc saved it. If she had never existed, we would never have had Our Lady of Lourdes, St. Jean Marie Vianney, Archbishop Lefebvre, etc. France would have been a unfruitful Protestant country much like Scotland and Wales.
We must not lose hope. We must always trust in Divine Providence. Remember God allows evil that one day good might come of it. The delay of the consecration is evil, but good will come out of it in the end. God will see to that, you can be sure.
Yes it is.
To understand what is going on in the minds of the hierarchy regarding Fatima, you have to understand modernism.
If you can wrap your mind around modernism (which ain’t easy), the picture and the deception becomes much clearer.
You see, these guys really don’t believe and look at Fatima the way we do. They don’t believe in miracles for crying out loud, how could they believe in Fatima the way we do? They acknowledge a “phenomena” took place, but they think it all bubbled up for the subconscious of the three children and then with the crowd. But then they believe Sr Lucia conjured up the visions with her own (old-fashioned, out of date, no longer relevant) childhood experience of religious books and what not. Since all that stuff is “no longer true”, it’s their job to steer this event/phenomena in the right, modernist direction that backs up, rather than condemns, the new orientation that they’re convinced is the only path that can save the institution of the Catholic Church.
Of course they can’t be straightforward about this because the “commoners” aren’t quite ready to give up all that silly old stuff. So they’ll do the “noble lie” and ever so gently continue to nudge folks in the new enlightened direction.
I could go on, but that’s enough for now.
TWN,
–
A consecration of the “world” is the same as a consecration of “Russia”?
Right…
I guess none of us need to consecrate ourselves specifically to the Immaculate Heart of Mary now that the world has been consecrated.
–
Aren’t you enjoying the beautiful “peace” enjoyed by so many martyrted and persecuted Christians throughout the middle east and elsewhere too – the fulfilment of Our Lady’s promise, “A period of peace will be granted to the world”?
I guess, in today’s inverted world, bombs are “peace” now…
Oh – and North Korea. I bet you’d love moving your family over there to enjoy the wondrous “worker’s paradise”.
–
And to call Our Lady’s request for consecration some kind of “spell”… What a shame.
I.F.,
–
Louie would make for a great leader, but it’d be much more appropriate for the movement to be led by a priest.
–
My “vote” would go for Fr Patrick Perez:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwMWYD4xvDs
The contrast between what Cardinal Ratzinger and what Benedict XVI (however briefly) taught on the prophecies of Our Lady of Fatima are a fruitful focus.
–
Basically, Pope Benedict concurs with this post. “[T]he conversion of Russia and the period of peace that she promised in return are nowhere to be found…hence any further discussion or request is without basis.” So much for Novus Ordo ‘dialogue’ (but then they aren’t into truth promulgating).
–
Louie points out that the bizarre idea from modernists that ‘the “content of faith” isn’t synonymous with the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine so carefully transmitted throughout the centuries’ is poison. It is this amputation of ‘faith’ and ‘doctrine’ adeptly promulgated by the Novus Ordo heirarchy in the name of new order faith and new order doctrine that is the problem. (Thank God that He named this amputation a New Order, so the we who have ‘ears to hear’ would, in Faith, hear).
–
PS. The Faith doesn’t and never will “[conflict with the] magisterium that preceded it.”
Fr Patrick Perez pretty much deals with the same subject here:
(1:00:13)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo4lyayT2KA
“The answer to Fr Gruner’s question: ‘The pope and the bishops must know that the command from Our Lady to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary comes from heaven and must therefore be true; how can they ignore the truth?’ : It’s because they don’t know what truth is, they’re modernists! Every one of them has been and is a modernist – they don’t believe that three children saw the Mother of God who had a message and a command from her son…”
Very much apropos, from a truly masterful article by Chris Ferrara from “The Fatima Crusader”, issue 66:
–
“In George Orwell’s 1984, an allegory of totalitarian communism, the mythical society of Oceania is ruled by the omnipresent god-like dictator known as Big Brother. The main character, Winston Smith (who struggles against the regime’s effort to reprogram him) recalls how the chocolate ration was cut, but the brainwashed citizens were told the ration had been increased. The people obediently rejoiced at their good fortune, and praised Big Brother for his generosity.
–
The state of affairs in the post-conciliar Church is similarly Orwellian. We are expected to proclaim with joy that which is not, while ignoring that which plainly is. Although the Roman liturgy has been wrecked by unprecedented innovations, we are expected to rejoice at the “liturgical renewal.” Although ecumenism is a manifest failure, with Protestant sects drifting ever further from the true Church and even from the natural law, we are expected to proclaim the “growing unity” of Christians. Although the great majority of Catholics practice abortion, contraception and divorce as readily as Protestants and Jews, we are expected to marvel at the lively faith Vatican II has engendered. Although Catholics are being slaughtered by Muslim fundamentalists around the world, local wars rage on every continent, and the abortion holocaust flames higher and higher in the sight of God, we are expected to hail the advent of the “civilization of love.”…
And then there is the Message of Fatima. In 1984, oddly enough, there took place at the Vatican a ceremony we are now told was the Consecration of Russia requested by Our Lady of Fatima. Mind you, the Pope himself does not say this. Quite the contrary, both during and after the 1984 ceremony the Pope clearly indicated in spontaneous remarks that Our Lady was still awaiting the specific consecration of Russia. It is not the Pope, but the ecclesial bureaucrats he allows to rule the Church de facto, who tell us that the 1984 ceremony was the Consecration of Russia…”
http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr66/cr66pg06.asp
There is a lot of speculation that we have entered the chastisement phase.
The fact that there are 2 popes in the Vatican only adds to the air surreality.
The Vatican should publish in full the text concerning the words of Our Lady
How is this for diabolical disorientation? Our Lady warned us!
http://www.gloria.tv/media/Zxagc3sHJP8
There are so many weird ideas coming from the heirarchy and so much committment by willfully ignorant ‘faithful’ to those weird ideas that disorientation no longer covers it. It’s just diabolical orientation, plain and simple.
This talk I’ve linked to below is slightly off topic, but it brings forth how far Poor Francis and other leaders have strayed from Scripture – the Word of God. The talk is by Father Linus Clovis from the West Indies – active internationally in the pro-life movement. He clearly explains how wrong it is to be loved by ‘the world’ instead of being hated by it.
–
This brings it home regarding Fatima. How the first pope who had the opportunity to obey Our Lady would have been hated by this world if he had obeyed Her!!!! And it’s down hill from then on. But as Father Clovis points out Our Lord was hated, and the servant is not above his Master. Poor Francis is loved by ‘the world.’ This is a clear sign that he’s doing Satan’s work.
http://www.onepeterfive.com/leading-pro-life-priest-laments-the-francis-effect/
Yes. However difficult, we must try to enter the minds of these disoriented folk. Once you jettison St. Thomas you are entering a world where you must fashion words and action anew each morning when you wake up. No tradition, no history, no listening to elders/parents/teachers/Saints. YOU get to decide what’s right and act according to how you feel at any given moment. Chaos.
I’m watching that video now, thanks
The other darker side to the non-consecration is this possibility: that there are those in the hierarchy who are actively and knowingly in the service of Satan. They know the truth and fight against the consecration because they do not want to see the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This faction is there as well. They’re the ones involved in ritual child sexual abuse. Can you imagine the Hell that awaits these individuals?
I cringe at the judgment not only of “these individuals” but the superiors, bishops etc who presided over cover-ups of crimes that cry out to heaven for vengeance.
–
And, lest anyone forgot, “Saint” John Paul II “The Great” was a close friend (at the very least, supporter) of long-time sexual pervert Fr Marcial Maciel, as far as I can tell, right up to the pontiff’s death.
–
A picture is worth a thousand words:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/father-marcial-maciel-dad-sexually-abused-raul-gonzalez-claims-lawsuit-article-1.181520
–
When was the last time we heard a saint of the Catholic Church forming a friendship with a sexual pervert?
Barbara, John Vennari has posted similar video in re: to upcoming synod:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYOlD-AnK9I
“Kasper Says Don’t Rely on Jesus’ Words” – Vennari shows a textbook by Kasper that has been used “for years” to teach theology — discredits Jesus miracles and articles of faith contained in the creed that Kasper, Bergoglio and Ratz recite at every mass.
Thanks for the link to Msgr. Perez. I’d heard this talk before but there is so much there it rewards every time it’s heard.
–
The reason modern popes do not consecrate Russia, or listen to what Our Lady said, is that they don’t believe in the basic TRUTH of the apparition.
–
Father Perez points out that their vision of truth is not the same as ours. This talk is well worth the hour it takes. Father Perez is a gem.
In Hoc Signo Vinces —– Yes!
And we are to “obediently” REJOICE when the pope (Benedict XVI) who, instead of calling for the reign of Christ the King, asks for “a true world political authority”……”to manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration.” (Paragraph 67 from his encyclical
CARITAS IN VERITATE, 2009)
——-
Call me crazy, but sounds like a call for the antichrist to me!
——-
Paragraph 67 from this encyclical:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate.html
————
How could we expect a pope who calls for the antichrist to carry out Our Lady of Fatima’s commands???!!!!!
Our Lady specifically asked for the consecration of “Russia” not “The World”. All evidence would suggest that this has not been done as requested.
Your reference to the act of the solemn consecration of Russia akin to the casting of a sacred spell, for me, is offensive and borders on blasphemy.
We, of course all have to do our own part by consecrating ourselves to Jesus through Mary, the urgency of which cannot be overstated.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
http://reignofjesusthrumary.co.uk/
“How could they ignore to truth?” They cannot, but they will fight it with all their being to bring about their own “utopia” and the reign of the antichrist.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bev/114bev10-29-2009.htm
Even if we human beings refuse to obey Our Lord and His Holy Mother, nature will respond with docility. Here is a beautiful story which was reported
“worldwide in the secular and religious press, to the wonderment of many,” about three white doves who hovered near Our Lady of Fatima’s statue during a ceremony in Portugal in 1946.
——–
Here is part of the account given by one of the priests, called Fr. Oliveira, who was present at the procession in honour of the solemn crowning of Our Lady of Fatima – it’s well worth reading: –
“Let me tell the incident of the doves, about which the newspapers here in Portugal have spoken so much and which is on the lips of every person in the nation.
“It began in a town called Bombazral, a short time after the statue had left Fatima.
Scenes from the Portuguese “miracle of the doves”
“As part of the ceremony in that particular town, while the streets filled with people were singing hymns to Our Lady and pressing to be near the statue someone freed four white doves. The greater part of the crowd hardly noticed it.
“After flying off into the air, three of the doves … instead of flying from the great crowd to some roof-top … made several evolutions over the statue and then suddenly, to the amazement of all who saw them, plummeted downwards, and alighted at Our Lady’s feet!
“This was the beginning…..”
———
You may read more here, if you wish: http://guildofblessedtitus.blogspot.com/2011/09/englands-nazareth-our-lady-of.html
Scroll down to where you see the picture of Our Lady of Fatima statue with the white doves.
Dear Louie and All:
To us, this is the BEST NEWS STORY we’ve seen in a LONG time.
We linked the written transcript of this video in
the Forum on His Holiness Pope Francis.
called: “Fr. Linus Clovis speaks out courageously” as a “permanent” source for future quotes.
Its of a presentation Fr. Linus Clovis gave at a seminar for pro life leaders in Rome on May 8, 2015, and is far more that we ever expected to hear today—finally a priest speaking out directly and clearly against the harm this Pope is doing, while still clearly respecting and upholding the Papacy, and acknowledging Francis our Pope –but one in need of public correction. Complete teaching package with Scripture to support every idea.
VIDEO LINK http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/1747-the-francis-effect-discussed-in-rome-itself-the-catholic-church-is-waking-up
TRANSCRIPT LINK
https://www.facebook.com/KeepingItCatholic/posts/993272424050791
link to the transcript in the Harvesting Forum:
https://akacatholic.com/topic/fr-linus-clovis-speaks-out-courageously/
============
Well worth the listen AND read. 🙂 🙂
A leader has emerged. We hear the voice of Christ here –clearly.
Dear Louie and ALL,
Finally, some GOOD news. A FEARLESS Catholic Hero emerges–We hear the voice of Christ.
Our full comment with links to the video and written transcript went into moderation, but we can’t wait to share this, so to avoid major duplication, here is the link to the transcript we put in the forum : His Holiness Pope Francis
–the video link is there as well.
https://akacatholic.com/forum/his-holiness-pope-francis/
P.S. Please add Fr. Linus Clovis to your daily prayers, as we are doing.
Nice commentary. Regarding the conflicting information regarding on which date John Paul II read the Secret, a quite likely explanation is that there were and are two separate texts – one, the vision, which is what was released in 2000, and the other Our Lady’s explanation of that vision. Not only do logic and consistency compel the existence of the latter, but there is a large amount of direct evidence for that as well. Furthermore, John Paul II is not the only pontiff who was said to have read the Secret on two distinct dates.
Books by Ferrara & Salza provide all the details.
Amen!
One does not play about with an instruction from the Mother of God – it is profoundly irreverent and hubristic. It is tantamount to testing God. Our Lady gave clear, simple instruction – and she was intentionally disobeyed. “We are so sophisticated, evolved, nuanced – we know better than the Mother of God”!
Now we talking CraigV. See the photos of Paul VI wearing the ephod – insignia of the Jewish High Priest. See the photos of Benedict hiding his crucifix before the Jews. These men are Judeo-masons. Masons worship lucifer. Satan was enthroned in the Vatican. What has happened in the Church is by cold blooded diabolical design and it will continue until the Chastisement.
Thank you Indignus!!! 🙂 🙂 Now we talking. I’ve just read the Fr. Clovis transcript. This is what a real Catholic Priest sounds like! When the crunch comes, more like him will step into the breech.
I took a little quote apropos my previous comment:
“We are not fighting flesh and blood, but principalities and powers. We’re fighting hell itself. And the gates of hell are very close now.”
Thank you, Lord, for Fr Clovis. Please protect him from his enemies. And give him the graces necessary to continue to do his priestly duty in the face of terrible opposition.
“The Remnant” posted this video of Father Clovis’ homily on Our Lady of Fatima—-talking about Why she appeared on the 13th of the month, and the relation to the Book of Esther–including the Star on her garment.
http://clara-media.gloria.tv/vg/mediafile-534031-1-sd.mp4?upstream=justina-media.gloria.tv%2fj&sum=sdm8wQ1i9BNAifBYCLxcow&due=1431907200
p.s. Found this short BIO of Fr. Clovis online:
Fr. Linus F Clovis is a priest of the Archdiocese of Castries, St. Lucia in the West Indies. He studied at the Angelicum in Rome and was ordained in 1983 by Saint Pope John Paul II.
Fr. Clovis is a qualified teacher and holds a doctorate in Mathematics and degrees in Theology, Canon Law and Latin Literature. He has served as dean of the Science Faculty of the Sir Arthur Lewis Community College and for seven years was principal of St. Mary’s College, St. Lucia
He is also the archdiocesan spiritual director of the Legion of Mary in St. Lucia, through which he promotes devotion to Our Lady, especially the Rosary, Perpetual Help novena, and the First Friday and First Saturday. Additionally, he has led outreaches to the neighbouring islands, and annual pilgrimages to Marian shrines in, at least, fourteen different countries. He is also a versatile speaker on pro-life issues, scripture, Mariology and Catholic teaching and has a large number of talks and homilies on CD to his credit. He has also made literary contributions to newspapers and international magazines. Fr Clovis is the author of the book A Biblical Search for the Church Christ Founded.
In 2003, Fr. Clovis single handedly led the resistance to the St Lucia Government’s surreptitious legalization of abortion in his Catholic island which made him enemy number one, especially after his refusal to give Holy Communion to Pearlette Louisy, the head of state who had signed abortion into law.
Fr. Clovis is the eldest of five brothers who are all actively in the pro-life apostolate
JPII is not saint. He wasn’t valid matter given his public unrepented sins. To call him a saint is to define holiness as including sins against the first commandment – it can’t be done, it is against divine law:
–
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KmfgIeh9Hk
PS. Bergoglio has just appointed a notorius sodomy advocate to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. The sooner we have one mind against this miserable lot of sodomitic, devil worshipping Judases the better. It’s time to stop trying to reconcile Christ and belial.
–
http://voxcantor.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/pope-francis-appoints-gay-sex-advocate.html
Dear Salvemur,
We already seem to be of one mind about the evils being done (and vocal in our condemnations of those-including actions of JPII, Francis. and any other popes, which qualify. But as long as the Church designates them Popes or Saints, we accept it.
–We’re happy to learn that this good priest is not afraid to stand up to his superiors when they are wrong, as evidenced by his refusal to give Communion to one of the top government dignitaries who came to his Church just after his island country made abortion legal, and then rebuking his Bishop who tried to get him to reverse his position. (on the grounds that it was morally wrong, and the CDF had just reiterated the great need for such actions at the time.
p.s.
Judging from the things JPII wrote and said, we doubt very much that he was actually intending to worship false gods. Given the belief by many after the Council, that the Holy Spirit was guiding the Church to “open the doors” it seems more likely he was blinded by his desire to open up relations with leaders of other religions, into making gestures that were very damaging by implication-and even specifically condemned in the past. (Diabolic disorientation probably a major factor, as Our Lady warned).
Whatever anyone’s intentions they are nothing a man can judge. We are called to judge objective acts and words. JPII and John XXIII are not valid ‘saint’ material. That Bergoglio ‘officiated’ over such a declaration makes it even more public ‘millstone around the neck’ material, but that seesm to be his specialty. ‘Canonizations’ have never been defined by the Church as strickly infallible – no one is required to call JPII a saint, thank God. In 1969, the Novus Ordo hierarchy removed St Christopher from altars – according to them, he was simply a figment of the imagination of the early Church (but then so much of the Church was declared a figment of the imagination by VII and its popes – the Traditional Mass, the Traditional Rites, the anathemas of the Council of Trent, and now the indissolubility of marriage the sinfulness of sodomy). So anyone out there still venerating poor ‘St.’ Christopher, you have no remit to do so according to your Novus Ordo authorities; however, if you want to venerate a man who publicly worhsipped demons (he did this repeatedly throughout his pontificate (remember the pagan priestess of shiva ‘blessing’ him? (Eph. ‘and do not have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather also reprove them.’) – any exorcist will tell you such invovlment invites demonic influence (without even getting into the public and repented scandal of it)) those who venerate his ‘saintliness’ are saying, ‘go ahead’.
Just got done listening to the Fr Clovis sermon. I was pleased to hear him state the fact that Russia has not been consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, but I was disappointed to hear him state the often repeated error: that Our Lady allegedly said in the August 19 apparition that the miracle to take place on the last apparition would not be as great due to the children being kidnapped (11:20)
These are her actual words during that apparition:
https://www.ewtn.com/fatima/apparitions/August.htm
Thank you for the reminder about the non-sainthood of JP II (and for the link to the Fatima video). In this day and age, it appears that such an obvious fact needs to be repeated often to prevent the lie from gaining the upper hand.
I also can not accept that John Paul II is a saint, as traditionally understood. I can accept that he may have made it to heaven by an unseen miracle there at the end, but merely making it to Heaven is not the traditional understanding of what a canonization is.
The law of non-contradiction will not allow me to hold to the traditional catholic faith, and also hold up someone who publicly and repeatedly acted and spoke in ways contradictory to that faith as an ideal model of that faith.
To hold that John Paul II is a saint in the traditional sense of the word, I either have to ignore the traditional teachings of the Church that he repeatedly violated, or I have to ignore his violations of those teachings.
I cannot in conscience refer to him as Saint John Paul II. Take that for what it’s worth. It’s just another thing that will be rectified, one way or the other, when this crisis is over.
I also can not accept that John Paul II is a saint, as traditionally understood. I can accept that he may have made it to heaven by an unseen miracle there at the end, but merely making it to Heaven is not the traditional understanding of what a canonization is.
The law of non-contradiction will not allow me to hold to the traditional catholic faith, and also hold up someone who publicly and repeatedly acted and spoke in ways contradictory to that faith as an ideal model of that faith.
To hold that John Paul II is a saint in the traditional sense of the word, I either have to ignore the traditional teachings of the Church that he repeatedly violated, or I have to ignore his violations of those teachings.
I cannot in conscience refer to him as Saint John Paul II. Take that for what it’s worth. It’s just another thing that will be rectified, one way or the other, when this crisis is over.
Sorry for the double post.
Dear In Hoc,
Can you tell us why you think that is in error? We’ve never heard that claimed before. And isn’t that an abbreviated quote you cited from EWTN?
Here’se the one from “Vol 1. of The Whole Truth about Fatima…” by Frere Michel de la Sainte Trinite. Page 235 (paperback)
Words of our Lady in response to Lucy’s Aug 19th question,
“What do you want of me?”
Our Lady: “I want you to continue going to the Cova da Iria on the 13th, and to continue praying the rosary every day. In the last month, I will work a miracle so that all may believe. If you had not been taken away to the city, the miracle would have been even greater. St. Joseph will come with the child Jesus, to give peace to the world. Our Lord will come to bless the people. Our Lady of the Rosary and Our Lady of Sorrows will also come.”
:
p3 .s. That same book quoted above, has a longer quote about many souls going to hell, also. ..”because there are none to sacrifice themselves and pray for them.” rather than the EWTN “because no one is willing to help them with sacrifices.”
If memory serves, Father Gruner always recommended the Frere Michel 3 volume set for accuracy.
Thanks for posting that link containing a really superb address by Father Clovis.
The gift to speak clearly, concisely and truthfully, is with Father Clovis. It was a privilege to listen to his address.
Thanks again.
Dear Paul,
Our pleasure. He struck us the same way-very genuine. Gentle but at the same time strong enough to challenge any and all who threaten the Faith and Truth. This is rare treat. A great blessing for the Church. Wish we’d found him years ago. He has a number of homilies online which we’re looking forward to savoring.
Exorcist priest fr Gabriele amorth says consecreation of russia not been done 10 min vid
http://youtu.be/vG3Bw3Z_gbM
John salza (how 7 popes failed to consecrate russia)
http://youtu.be/kXj-atEETUY
Regarding Frere Michel’s volumes on Fatima, I have ordered volumes II and III from Loreto but volume one seems very hard to find. Anyone know where it can be found?
–
Our Lady said to Lucy: “My Son wishes to establish the devotion to My Immaculate Heart throughout the world.”
–
She then said: “I promise salvation to whoever embraces it.”
–
Imagine Our Lord’s wishes being made directly known to us!!! How blessed we are…and so simple even children can practice devotion to Our Lady – without even knowing any theology – without being able to really feel the emotion some think is necessary…but through this ‘practice’ of devotion through honouring her in the home, and praying a Rosary daily – salvation is promised.
–
What a deal!
–
And what a sham devotion practiced in public by Poor Francis and many Cardinals and Bishops – only God knows what’s in their hearts – but can any of them say they are devoted to Our Lady while ignoring her requests and warnings?
–
I’ll post a link to a wonderful talk on this devotion below.
Here’s the link. The speaker is Father Karl Stehlin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ-6j-ONZl4&index=3&list=PLtLZ3BcBezkJ2H4Cc4cxyRJ42sqGEINgF
Craig, we are given saints – from what I understand – to be shining examples on which to model our lives.
–
Was John Paul II’s life one you would like to emulate? There are dozens of men and women whose lives were based on faithfulness to Church teaching – some dying directly because they ‘would not offer one pinch of incense’ or would not compromise one iota of Truth.
–
The hysteria surrounding John Paul’s supposed charisma, and the emotional orgy his death turned out to be, are surely not things we look to for examples.
–
Mass hysteria canonized this man – remember Princess Diana? How near to sainthood she appeared in death when she was an adulterer, and died with her lover for all the world to see while she lived.
–
Same with Mother Theresa. She may have been a saint and lived a saintly life – but she was put on the fast track for canonization for her social work not her holiness of life. She is almost the poster girl for today’s mercy and peripheries dwellers.
–
Please note I am NOT saying these examples are not saints. My opinion, however, is that they were declared so for the wrong reasons.
Dear Barbara,
They have it on Amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/176-8777131-5511069?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=The+Whole+Truth+about+Fatima+by+Frere+Michel+de+la+San+Trinite+3+volumes&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3AThe+Whole+Truth+about+Fatima+by+Frere+Michel+de+la+San+Trinite+3+volumes
If your not looking for used–Have you tried the Fatima center’s bookstore?
Dear Barbara,
We agree. We spent the bulk of the years he was pope, feeling like Rome had abandoned us to the dissenters who did more and more scandalous things each week, with nothing to stop them coming from the Vatican (Curran at Catholic U, McBrien at Notre Dame, etc. )
We shook our heads over Assisi and all the other ecu scandals, and wondered what was going on for years. When our extended families started falling apart as a result, it put an end to our wondering and started us on a crusade to denounce error. The problem is, we keep finding it in those at the top who are supposed to be protecting the flock from it. Canonization is becoming a joke these days. Someone quipped recently that they’ve already started the process for the “next” pope–whoever that may be.
True. Right-hand man, then. 🙂 🙂
You are with the conscience of the Church then. Canon Law code 1258 forbids Catholics from actively worshipping with non-Catholics – this is Church law because to worship with false religions is to recognise religions not founded by Christ is to witness to falsehoods, in other words, witness to things not revealed by the Catholic God – the True God. Objectively, therefore, so many of the Novus Ordo hierarchy of the passed 50 years have committed this grave ecclesiastical crime. One who breaks Canon 1258 is under suspician of heresy and, if after six months, he doesn’t make amends, Canon 2316 states he is to be considered at heretic.
–
Here’s a free talk: “Satan Will Try To Deceive Even The Elect (Part 1)”
–
ttp://www.restorationradionetwork.org/season-4-from-the-pulpit-episode-40-satan-will-try-to-deceive-even-the-elect-part-1
It turned out to be twice as good!
LOL! 🙂