NOVEMBER 2006/DECEMBER 2009/JULY 2013/MODIFIED AND UPDATED JULY 10, 2016
The Third Secret of Fatima and the Consecration of Russia
FR. GRUNER AND THE TRIDENTINE LATIN RITE CHURCH; THE “THIRD SECRET” OF FATIMA AND THE CONSECRATION OF RUSSIA TO THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY; EXCOMMUNICATED ARCHBISHOP EMMANUEL MILINGO, “MARRIED PRIESTS NOW” AND THE MOONIES CULT
HOW THEY ARE CONNECTED, AND WHAT CATHOLICS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THEM
Most Catholics must have come across the 21cms. by 13 cms.-sided quarterly magazine called
The Fatima Crusader
[at least 500,000 copies printed per issue, distributed free of cost/against donations]. Many have read it, consumed with interest in the good Catholic stories of the seers of various Marian apparitions, St. Maximilian Kolbe, St. Padre Pio, and above all, the Consecration of Russia, and the “Third Secret of Fatima”.
How many of us aware that Catholics must avoid reading this magazine [unless of course one reads it while fully aware of the Church’s position – which is contradictory to that of its promoters – on the above-mentioned issues]?
Then there are the ‘Pilgrim Virgin’ statues of Our Lady of Fatima that come around to our homes- do we know where they started from, or which organization is promoting the ‘pilgrimage’ and for what purpose ?
What about the ‘Third Secret of Fatima’ e-mail forwards – carrying apocalyptic warnings and exhorting us to do penance and prepare with blessed candles for the coming ‘three days of darkness’ – that are so commonplace on the Internet? And the superstitious ‘Third Secret’ novena letters: “Do not break this chain. Send it on to nine others…”
Have we at any time attended the old Latin Mass celebrated privately in a home, without the knowledge or permission of the local parish priest? [The Latin Mass, celebrated by a priest in union with Rome, is, however, still canonical.]
If we did attend such a Mass, what did we know about the organization which the celebrant belongs to?
In this compilation of information, I will first focus on three issues which are inter-related. One is the excommunicated
Archbishop Milingo, the second is Fr. Nicholas Gruner, the
Tridentine Latin Rite Church (TLRC)
Fatima Crusader magazine, and the third is a cult called the
‘Moonies’ and its founder, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon.
ARCHBISHOP EMMANUEL MILINGO AND “MARRIED PRIESTS NOW!”
He was the Archbishop of
Lusaka, Zambia. In May 2001, then 70 years old, he married Maria Sung, a 43-year old Korean
in a group wedding conducted at the New York Hilton Hotel by the Reverend Sun Myung Moon, Korean founder of the
Unification Church or ‘Moon sect’ [the adherents of Moon’s ‘church’ are known as the Moonies].
Maria was chosen for Milingo by Moon himself, and Milingo had never met her till two days prior to the ‘wedding’. Saying that he regarded her as “a twin soul”, Milingo then announced his adherence to Rev. Moon’s ‘church’. At that time, Fr. Gabriele Amorth, the exorcist of the diocese of Rome, a long-time friend of Milingo, said: “Reconstructing the last years of his life, we realize that the Moonies have hunted him mercilessly. We have even identified the people who kidnapped him; they have brainwashed him. It is an Italian family in particular, which has disappeared with him in the United States.”
May 29, 2001
Statement of the Bishops of Zambia Regarding Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo
We, the Catholic Bishops in Zambia, are deeply saddened and pained by the defection of Archbishop Milingo in his attempt to marry in the Moon Sect. For a long time we have tried to reach out to Archbishop Milingo, who has unfortunately rejected our regular and honest advice. Other people in the Church, including the Holy Father, have tried to reach out to him, but he took this advice as a form of persecution (Mt 18:15-17). In spite of all the efforts made by us and others, he decided to go on with his plan to marry, thereby turning his back on the Catholic Church.
By doing this, the former archbishop has put himself outside the Catholic Church. This implies that he is no longer a bishop nor part of the Catholic Church. The former archbishop has betrayed his vows by attempting marriage while still under his priestly commitments.
The defection of the former archbishop should not come as a surprise to us. Even among the apostles one of them did fall. His act portrays his failure to abide by sound apostolic tradition, which suddenly induced him not to perceive the advice from so many and not to discern the truth. He rather portrayed the others as not understanding his actions.
We feel deep sympathy for the many people who put their trust in the former archbishop and now feel betrayed and abandoned by his action.
challenge for them now is to make a right choice by committing themselves to follow Jesus Christ, who has the words of eternal life, rather than anyone else (John 6:8). The action by the former archbishop is a reminder to us of our own fragility in faith. It should therefore make us humble. Left to ourselves, without deep faith in Christ, we remain fragile and open to sin. However, the defection of any one of us does not change the Church of Jesus Christ, as it continues to bring His teaching and sacraments to the world. Finally, we invite all Christians to continue praying for the former archbishop in the hope that he will decide to repent and come back to the Church.
The Holy See published an official statement to express its “sorrow” over the case of Emmanuel Milingo, according to
May 30, 2001. “Obviously, the Holy See has heard with profound sorrow about the action taken by the archbishop, Monsignor Emmanuel Milingo,” Vatican spokesman Joaquín Navarro-Valls said in a written statement. “By participating in the public rite of marriage of the Moon sect, he has, in fact, placed himself outside the Catholic Church, and has caused grave injury to the communion that bishops especially must manifest to the Church.”
The Vatican statement continued: “Hence he will not be able to be considered as a bishop of the Catholic Church, and the faithful are requested to draw the appropriate conclusions from his behaviour and actions, which constitute the premise for the expected canonical sanctions, which will soon be communicated to him and then made public.”
After the wedding ceremony, Milingo told the press that the threat of excommunication meant “nothing” to him.
In 1982 he was summoned to Rome, and eventually pressured to resign as Bishop of Lusaka. Since that time he had been living in Italy, in the town of Zagarolo near Rome, where in 1996 complaints from Italian bishops about his impromptu “healing services” in various dioceses prompted a new disciplinary caution from the Vatican, instructing him not to hold services without the approval of the local bishop. Milingo had not been assigned any pastoral responsibility since 1983 because of his earlier “erratic behaviour”. As far back as the 1970s, when, as a young bishop in Zambia, he began conducting his particular ‘charismatic’ brand of healing services and exorcisms that prompted some complaints that he was acting as a “witch doctor”*,
disturbed Rome had described his faith-healing ministry as “pastorally divisive”.
*Even the liberal Church Resources CathNews (Australia) http://www.cathnews.com/news/609/150.php
he was “accused of promoting African local beliefs by performing mass exorcisms and healing ceremonies”.
July 18, 2001:
Notification Regarding Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo
In the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano [see full text]
The Congregation For The Doctrine Of The Faith, after mature reflection and by mandate of the Supreme Pontiff, and fulfilling its responsibility for protecting faith and morals in the life of the Church, finds itself obliged to proceed in accordance with Canon 1347 § 1 of the Code of Canon Law in order to protect the faithful from the serious harm caused by the recent behaviour of the Most Reverend Emmanuel Milingo, Archbishop Emeritus of Lusaka.
The said Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:
1. noting the grave public conduct and statements whereby the Archbishop has attempted an asserted “matrimonial union” with the Korean Maria Sung, has adhered to the sect of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon called the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, and has failed in communion with the Successor of Peter and the College of Bishops;
2. having verified the impossibility of communicating
with Archbishop Milingo in order to invite him to reflect on the grave consequences of his conduct and actions, to make amends for the scandal given, and to reform;
communicates to Archbishop Milingo, in accordance with the above mentioned Canon 1347 § 1 of the Code of Canon Law, the following public canonical admonition:
a) to separate from Maria Sung;
b) to sever all links with the sect, Family Federation for World Peace and Unification;
c) to declare publicly his fidelity to the doctrine and ecclesiastical discipline of celibacy, and to manifest his obedience to the Supreme Pontiff by a clear and unequivocal act.
Should Archbishop Milingo not formally act by 20 August 2001 to fulfill what is hereby required of him, excommunication reserved to the Holy See will be imposed.
The Church, obliged as she is to proceed to this painful action for the good of the faithful, does not cease to pray to the Lord, the Good Shepherd, for the desired return of the
Archbishop to the embrace of the Church and the common Father.
Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 16 July 2001.
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger,
Tarcisio Bertone, S.D.B.,
Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli, Secretary [all emphases theirs].
Following a meeting with Pope John Paul II in August 2001, Milingo “acknowledged that, having gone through a crisis, he sought recognition for his work in the Moon sect,” and then reaffirmed his Catholic faith, renouncing his ‘marriage’, and “disappeared for a year of reflection and prayer”. But, in November 2003, he “embarked on a trip to his native Zambia– against the advice of the Vatican, and despite the opposition of the Zambian bishops’ conference”, as reported at http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=26203.
Almost five years later, on July 13, 2006, after a few weeks of anyone not knowing his whereabouts [he had disappeared in June], the Italian Catholic newspaper Avvenire reported that he had surfaced in Washington, USA, where he now lives with the Korean woman.
At a press conference at the National Press Club on July 12 in an appearance with Rev. George Stallings, a suspended priest of the Washington archdiocese, Milingo said that “he had gone back to Maria Sung, that he had met again with Moon himself and that he was contesting [a change in Church discipline on] priestly celibacy.”
Just prior to that, there were rumours that Milingo would perform at an international soul-music festival in Porretta, near Bologna. The archbishop had already recorded a CD, with the proceeds going to a children’s hospital in Zambia.
On July 13, the Vatican issued a brief communiqué saying: “The Holy See has not yet received precise news on the purpose of the trip to the United States of Monsignor Emmanuel Milingo, archbishop emeritus of Lusaka, Zambia. However, if the statements attributed to him about ecclesiastical celibacy are true, there would be no alternative but to deplore them, the discipline of the Church in this respect being well known.”
On August 23, 2006, Catholic World News.com published a report that there were apprehensions in the Vatican “that the renegade Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo may join forces with Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code” according to reports in the Universe newspaper. “The troubled African prelate was reported to have reached a tentative agreement to assist Brown with a future novel about exorcism. Dan Brown’s book The Da Vinci Code is based on a premise – which the author contends is factual – that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, and their descendants are alive today. The novel depicts the Catholic Church as a brutal conspiracy to suppress this knowledge. The Da Vinci Code, which has sold over 40 million copies, has been roundly denounced by Church leaders as a vicious assault on Christian beliefs.”
On September 25, 2006, CWNews.com reported: “Defying a warning from the Vatican, Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo has ordained four married men as bishops, causing a new split within the Catholic Church. By ordaining bishops without the approval of the Holy See, the Archbishop has drawn an automatic excommunication for himself and the men he ordained. The ordination ceremony held in Washington on September 24 was valid, although illicit. Rev. George Stallings … promptly announced to reporters that the four men are ‘validly ordained Catholic bishops’. The possibility that Archbishop Milingo would create a fresh schism* in the Church by consecrating bishops had clearly troubled the Vatican.”
Stallings is a former Catholic priest who broke from the Church in 1989 and declared himself bishop of his own Cathedral in Washington, D.C. *Bishop Nicola de Angelis of Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, says, “A schismatic church is one that refuses submission to the Holy Father or communion with members of the Church that are subject to him and, in particular, to the diocesan bishop.” [From a CNS news report quoted in PETRUS magazine, July 2006] [Schism, Greek to “tear apart”.]
The following day, September 26, the Holy See Press Office released a statement that said, “With great concern, the Holy See has followed the recent activities of Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo … with his new association of married priests, spreading division and confusion among the faithful. Church representatives of various levels have tried in vain to contact [him] in order to dissuade him from persisting in actions that provoke scandal, especially among the faithful who followed his pastoral ministry in favor of the poor and the sick. Bearing in mind the understanding shown, also recently, by Peter’s Successor towards this aged pastor of the Church, the Holy See has awaited vigilant patience the evolution of events which, unfortunately, have led Archbishop Milingo to a position of irregularity and of progressively open rupture of communion with the Church, first with his attempted marriage and then with the ordination of four bishops on Sunday, September 24, in Washington D.C., U.S.A. For this public act both Archbishop Milingo and the four ordinandi have incurred excommunication ‘latae sententiae,’ as laid down in Canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law. Moreover, the Church does not recognize, nor does she intend to recognize in the future, these ordinations and all ordinations deriving from them; and she considers the canonical status of the four supposed-bishops as being that they held prior to this ordination. The Apostolic See, attentive to the unity and peace of the flock of Christ, had hoped that the fraternal influence of people close to Archbishop Milingo would cause him to rethink and return to full communion with the Pope. Unfortunately the latest developments have made these hopes more unlikely. At times of ecclesial suffering such as these, may prayers intensify among all the community of the faithful.” VIS news
“The Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops had reportedly demanded that the 76-year-old archbishop send the Pope a letter of repentance for his previous actions by Oct. 15 or face ‘canonical suspension’. The suspension would bar Milingo from ordaining priests, leading Mass and performing other sacraments. The Vatican said Milingo also violated Church law when he established his new organization, Married Priests Now, and when he celebrated Mass with married clergy.
Today’s statement from the Holy See concluded with a call for prayer. ‘At times of ecclesial suffering such as these, may prayers intensify among all the community of the faithful’.” according to
The four men are George Augustus Stallings [who, too, too had been married in Moon’s 2001 mass marriage along with Milingo] of Washington; Peter Paul Brennan of the African Orthodox Church,
New York, and the Ecumenical Catholic Diocese of the Americas; Patrick Trujillo of the Archdiocese of Our Lady of Guadalupe of New Jersey of the Old Catholic Church in America, Newark; and Joseph Gouthro of Las Vegas, presiding bishop of the Catholic Apostolic Church International. Members of Milingo’s organization called “Married Priests Now!” founded by him in July 2006 and installed by him as bishops during a ceremony at a Capitol Hill [Washington, D.C.] church, they claim affiliation to the breakaway “Synod of the Old Catholic Churches”.
They convoked a “Married Priests Now!” conference Sept. 17-19 in Saddle Brook, New Jersey. “Married Priests Now!” members reject Catholic Church teaching on celibacy for priests. Milingo performed his ordinations in one of their churches, the Imani Temple of Stallings’ African-American Catholic Congregation, established 1989.
ZENIT news agency September 26, 2006 reported that “in 1990 Stallings received episcopal ‘ordination’ by bishops of independent Old Catholic churches. He was supposedly re-ordained by Archbishop Milingo on Sunday. The other three (now excommunicated) said they had already been ordained bishops in the past, in fact, on several occasions.”
The Vatican communication notes that “the Church does not recognize, nor does she intend to recognize in the future, these ordinations and all ordinations deriving from them; and she considers the canonical status of the four supposed-bishops as being that they held prior to this ordination.” Though, by virtue of his episcopal status, Milingo is capable of validly ordaining the men, they are not considered Roman Catholic Bishops due to their schismatic act.
Incidentally, Milingo is the founder of an order of nuns with convents in Zambia and Rome. He is the author of Face to Face with the Devil, and other books.
But Milingo has his sympathisers. Church Resources CathNews [www.cathnews.com] of October 3, 2006 reports the commentary by the U.S. liberal newspaper, the liberal National Catholic Reporter
Renegade Zambian Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo ordained four married priests as bishops in a Sept. 24 ceremony in Washington, D.C., and 48 hours later the predictable notice of excommunication from the Vatican arrived…
On Sept. 27, Milingo held a press conference at the Imani Temple in Washington, D.C., to respond. He thanked Benedict “for his gracious and caring concern about us.” “We do not accept this excommunication and lovingly return it to His Holiness, our beloved Pope Benedict XVI, to reconsider, withdraw it and join us in recalling married priests to service once again,” Milingo said. Milingo said he regards the “Married Priests Now!” movement as a “personal prelature” within the church, referring to a category in canon law for a quasi-diocese whose membership is defined by person rather than by geography. At present, the only recognized personal prelature is Opus Dei.
spoke Wednesday morning with Stallings, a former priest of the Washington archdiocese (and one-time protégé of Cardinal James Hickey). He told me that Milingo’s plan now is to travel the country “preaching, teaching and casting out
demons,” and meeting with married priests. I asked if this effort will be supported by the
Unification Movement of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, given that Moon provided much logistical and financial assistance to Milingo both in 2001, when Milingo first broke with the church, and again this time. Stallings, however, said that Milingo’s travel and advocacy will not receive financial help from the Unification Movement.
In July, I had an exclusive interview with Milingo which can be found here:
If nothing else, Milingo provides an interesting thought exercise for canon lawyers and ecclesiologists: What, if anything, makes his ordinations different from those of the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1988, when Lefebvre consecrated four bishops without the pope’s authority for his breakaway Society of St. Pius X*? At least from the Vatican’s point of view, there seems to be a difference. Its Sept. 27 statement curtly said Milingo’s “supposed bishops” would not be recognized. Yet in the Lefebvre case, the Holy See has implicitly recognized some ecclesial status for his bishops, even though it proclaimed them excommunicated at the time. When Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, wrote to them in 1999, he addressed them as “my dear brothers.” Another example is Bishop Licínio Rangel of Brazil, ordained in defiance of the Vatican in 1991 by three of Lefebvre’s four bishops. When a deal was brokered in 2002 to bring Brazilian traditionalists back into communion with Rome, an apostolic administration was created and Rangel was made its administrator, with his 1991 ordination as bishop affirmed. *Rome later accorded recognition to the SSPX
Whether this reflects a difference in canonical analysis, or merely in pastoral approach, is not entirely clear. Underlying the question is the ancient sacramental principle of ex opere operato, which means that the validity of a sacrament does not depend on the worthiness of either the recipient or the minister. It’s a way of underlining the gratuitousness of God’s action, making clear that human beings cannot “earn” or “merit” the sacrament’s grace. Yet there are conditions: proper matter, proper form, and proper intent, and each must be present. To take a trivial example, a priest cannot consecrate Twinkies and beer because they’re improper matter, no matter how punctiliously he follows the ritual or how noble his intentions.
At face value, it would seem that the Milingo ordinations pass the test just as much as Lefebvre’s. Canon lawyers point out that the Sept. 27 Vatican statement on the Milingo case did not say, “These men are not bishops.” It said the church will not recognize their ordinations, which is not the same thing. One could theoretically argue that Milingo was under so much stress that he lacked the use of reason and therefore could not form the proper intent, although according to the Council of Trent the lone requirement on this score is that the minister “intends to do what the church does,” meaning that he wasn’t consciously faking it. As one canonist put it, “the likelihood of these being invalid ordinations is so minimal that it is not worth discussing.” Why, then, is the Vatican more inclined to take the Lefebvre bishops seriously?
Most importantly, Lefebvre’s movement is seen under the heading of “schism,” meaning a group of faithful which has broken communion with Rome, but which has nevertheless preserved important elements of what it means to be church. Lefebvre’s bishops were ordained to serve such a community; the Society of St. Pius X claims between one million and two million faithful worldwide, along with 450 priests. Milingo, on the other hand, is more of a “lone ranger.”
Given this background, some canonists suggest the best parallel to the Milingo case is not Lefebvre, but the late Bishop Pierre Martin Ngo Dinh Thuc of Vietnam, brother of the Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem. Thuc, himself a Catholic traditionalist, was excommunicated twice for ordaining bishops without the pope’s approval, first in 1976 and again in 1983.
(Thuc reportedly made peace with the church before he died in 1984). One of the eleven men Thuc ordained, a Spaniard named Clemente Dominguez Gomez, went on to proclaim himself Pope Gregory XVII, leading a tiny group of followers on a farm outside Seville where the Virgin Mary was allegedly appearing. In those instances, the Vatican took a position similar to its line with Milingo.
Politically, some analysts might say that the basic difference between Lefebvre and Milingo is that the Vatican has more sympathy for traditionalist dissent, though that’s hard to square with its reaction to Thuc. The real difference seems to be the schism factor; the Vatican takes Lefebvre’s bishops seriously because it wants them to bring their faithful home. While there are certainly lots of Catholics who might agree with Milingo on a married priesthood, there’s little evidence that a substantial body of people is prepared to follow him into or out of the church. We might thus tentatively formulate the Vatican attitude towards illicitly ordained bishops this way: No faithful, no service.
For his part, Milingo insists the ordinations are for real. In a Sept. 27 news conference, he said: “I was consecrated by Pope Paul VI and, equipped with that sacramental power from him, consecrated four married men in valid apostolic succession. These men are validly ordained Roman Catholic bishops today, and remain so in spite of Rome’s posture of denial of recognition.”
On November 16, Pope Benedict XVI met with top Vatican curia officials to consider how to respond to the creation of a “personal prelature” for married priests by Milingo, and to discuss the implications of the “disobedience” of the Zambian prelate, and priestly celibacy. In October 2005, the Synod of Bishops had rejected suggestions that the mandatory celibacy requirement for priests be dropped. But Milingo’s excommunication had brought the issue back into the spotlight.
CathNews reported [http://www.cathnews.com/news/611/83.php] that Rome had
stressed that the meeting would not open a general discussion of the celibacy requirement but would only examine the requests for dispensation made by priests wishing to marry and the requests for readmission made by clergy who had married in recent years. However, the spokesperson for the US Catholic lobby group FutureChurch, Sr Christine Schenk said: “We are delighted that the Vatican is considering permitting married priests to return to active ministry. Our Catholic people will welcome them with open arms.”
“I can’t imagine who would be more fit to serve the people of God than men who have already served them faithfully for many years and then were called to marriage. For these men, marriage will only enhance their priestly ministry. We must also work to enfranchise the tens of thousands of women ministering in the Church,” Schenk said in a statement.
Meanwhile, the World Peace Herald reported that Zambia’s Catholic Episcopal Conference had issued a stern warning reminding Catholics of Archbishop Milingo’s excommunication ahead of a planned visit by the rebel churchman, reminding Zambians “to be aware that if he holds religious functions, then those ceremonies will be done outside the Catholic Church. Therefore they are not Catholic services”. Archbishop Milingo responded in a 12 November statement saying: “The Episcopal Conference of the Married Priests Now! Prelature wishes to thank the Zambian Episcopal Conference for alerting the people of Zambia to expect the arrival of the Emeritus Metropolitan Archbishop of Lusaka. It is so wonderful that you have advertised his missionary activities and his healing ministry.”
On November 16, ZENIT reported: Benedict XVI and his collaborators in the Roman Curia reaffirmed the importance of priestly celibacy, and stressed the need for a “human and Christian formation” for priests and seminarians. The decision was confirmed in a communiqué issued by the Vatican press office, after a special meeting today held in the Apostolic Palace. The Pope presided at the gathering, which was attended by cardinals and archbishops who head dicasteries of the Curia. The press office note revealed that “the participants in the meeting received detailed information on the petitions for dispensation from the obligation of celibacy presented in recent years and on the possibility of readmission, to the exercise of the ministry, of priests who at present meet the conditions established by the Church.
“Reaffirmed was the value of the option for priestly celibacy, according to the Catholic tradition, and the need was confirmed of a solid human and Christian formation both for seminarians as well as for already ordained priests,” the communiqué said. According to data from the Vatican Congregation for Clergy, every year about 1,000 priests leave the priestly ministry. The congregation also published data on priests who have returned to priestly ministry between 1970 and 1995. They undergo a rigorous procedure, carried out case by case. Their number varies greatly from one year to another. In those years, a total of 9,551 returned. ZE06111605
CathNews of November 17 [http://www.cathnews.com/news/611/99.php]
added: According to Church law, a man who is allowed to leave the priesthood, under a procedure known as a laicisation, must receive a separate dispensation from the vow of celibacy from the Pope. Many men, however, have married without this dispensation and want to regularise their position in the Church. Some men who left the priesthood to marry are now widowers or separated, their children are adults and they want to return to active ministry. The statement said the meeting discussed “the possibility of readmission to the exercise of the ministry of priests who at present meet the conditions foreseen by the Church.” It did not elaborate.
Milingo, who rejects the automatic excommunication he has incurred, is planning a convention for more than 1,000 married priests and their wives in New York for 8-10 December. The Church insists that its priests remain celibate and has so far ruled out letting them marry. Advocates of a married priesthood and optional celibacy say this would make some men more willing to join the priesthood and ease the shortage of priests in many parts of the world.
In an open letter to the Pope issued two weeks ago, Milingo said “over 150,000 married priests stand waiting and willing to serve” the Church.
“These men are already trained and experienced in theology and ministry and have many years experience as married men. These are men who have loved their wives, and raised families. They ought to be called back to ministry immediately,” he said. “The very life of the Church is at stake. Without priests, there is no Mass or Eucharist. The Eucharist is the centre of the Catholic-Christian experience and faith. No Eucharist, no Church,” Milingo wrote.
Later that week, this writer received an email from a concerned lay person in Zambia, from which I quote, “[The excommunicated Archbishop] has since started a war with the Church. He is planning to come to his home country to conduct some masses and of course cause confusion. I am writing from his home diocese (Chipata) where his relatives are really disappointed with him. This diocese admired this man because of his many gifts of healing and deliverance but now we are so disappointed with him. We are told they are coming with a lot of money, with the poverty here he may woo some people. So please pray for him, especially [that] the power of hell will not prevail on the Church.”
FR. NICHOLAS GRUNER AND “THE FATIMA CRUSADER” ORGANIZATION
Who are they? Once led by the late Bishop Schuckardt, this sect denies the teaching authority of the Second Vatican Council [Vatican II] and the popes of the Council and succeeding.
Schuckardt broke away from the Church in 1968 with seven followers.
This sect is also known as
THE TRIDENTINE LATIN RITE CHURCH (TLRC).
The word Tridentine refers to the Council of Trent, 1545-1563. Since then, the Canonized Liturgy of the Mass has been generally referred to as ‘Tridentine’, which means ‘pertaining to Concilium Tridentinum’, i.e. of the Council of Trent.
During Vatican II [1962-1965], Pope Paul VI promulgated the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy on December 3, 1963.
Proceeding from its directives, the Novus Ordo Missae or New Order Mass was publicly celebrated for the first time in the Sistine Chapel on October 24, 1967. The Fatima Crusader sect reject, to this day, this Novus Ordo Mass as non-Canonical, and strictly celebrate the old Tridentine Latin Mass; they also completely abstain from distributing ‘communion in the hand’, dislike celebrating Mass “facing the people, free standing altars, and truncated prayers.”
FATIMA: The village of Fatima in Portugal was named after a Muslim princess who, following her capture by Christian forces during the Moorish occupation of that nation, was smitten by the Count of Ourem, converted to Catholicism, and was baptized before marrying the Count in 1158. Her baptismal name was Oureana, but her birth name had been Fatima, after the daughter of Muhammad. The Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to three children here in 1917.
FR. NICHOLAS GRUNER S.T.L., S.T.D.
A Canadian citizen, born in 1942, Fr. Nicholas Gruner is today the face of the Fatima Crusader. After completing his studies in Rome with high honours, he was ordained to the Italian diocese of Avellino in 1976. Failing to join a proposed Conventual Franciscan English-speaking community with Marian interests which never materialised, and unable to speak the local dialect, he returned to Canada. He was elected in 1978 to the board of directors of the apostolate known as the National Committee for the National Pilgrim Virgin of Canada which had custody of a ‘Pilgrim Virgin’ statue of Our Lady of Fatima blessed by Paul VI, and which is dedicated to spreading the ‘message of Fatima’. He published the first issue of The Fatima Crusader that year. The Fatima Crusader Apostolate is now headquartered in Fort Erie, Ontario.
Among other things, Fr. Gruner claims that Russia has never been truly consecrated by the Popes to the Immaculate Heart of Mary as per the desire of Our Lady as expressed to the three seers at Fatima, Portugal in 1917. He also stirs controversy over the secrecy concerning the revelations of Fatima’s so-called Third Secret [delivered to the Vatican in 1957 and read by John XXIII in private; and published in June 2000, but] according to Gruner, not the complete text. He has consistently maintained that Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Ratzinger, had misled the Church* regarding the ‘Third Secret” of Fatima.
In November 1989, he published his exposé that Sr. Lucy [the third Fatima seer] was silenced and her letters were forged.
With opposition rising from the Canadian bishops, he was able to obtain offers incardinating him in their dioceses**, from the Indian bishop Gilbert Rego of Simla-Chandigarh in 1993 and archbishop S. Arulappa [see p. 8] of Hyderabad, 1995.
The Catholic Family News newspaper***, which supports Fr. Gruner, reports in its August 1996 issue that Fr. Gruner was physically assaulted by two Shrine employees at the Fatima Shrine in 1992 in the presence of the Indian Cardinal Padiyara, who later “drew Gruner aside to warn him to ‘take care’ because his life was in danger as long as he was in Fatima.
Father Gruner has not returned to Fatima since 1992.”
*See pages 21, 33
**The first to do so was a Brazilian bishop
***Catholic Family News [CFN] editor John Vennari was a key speaker at Fr. Gruner’s Rome conference, see pages 7, 10.
Fr. Gruner runs a radio programme called Heaven’s Peace Plan, and a T.V. program called Fatima: The Moment Has Come.
He is the author of World Enslavement Or Peace… It’s Up To The Pope.
Fr. Gruner’s International Family Rosary Crusade promotes Our Lady of Fatima’s request for the daily Rosary, the devotion of the Brown Scapular [which they call sacramentals of predestination], and the First Five Saturdays novena.
Leading Fatima Crusader writers are Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité [The Secret and the Church], and Frére François de Marie des Anges [Mary’s Immaculate Heart and Your Salvation], Fr. Gregorius D. Hesse, STD, JCL, JCD., Fr. Paul L. Kramer, B. Ph., M. Div. STB, STL,
Fr. Stephen Somerville, Fr. Paul Trinchard, STL.,
Catholic Family News editor John Vennari [see page 10], Marian Therese Horvat, Ph.D., Christopher A. Ferrara, Coralie Graham, Iain Colquhoun, David Allen White Ph.D., Fr. Gérard Mura, etc. Priests who have refuted Fr. Gruner’s claims, and insist that Russia has been properly consecrated include Fr. James Morrow, Fr. Barry Bossa, and Fr. Robert Fox.
FC issues also reproduce their Open Letters to the Holy Father, their Canonical Complaints in the cause of Fr. Gruner, correspondence with the Congregation for the Clergy, stories related to the “third secret”, articles about saints like Alphonsus de Liguori, Anthony Mary Claret, Jean Marie Baptiste Vianney, Louis de Montfort, Thérèse of Lisieux, etc.
The front covers of the issues of The Fatima Crusader are graced with pictures of Our Lady in her various representations or apparitions- sometimes with dome of St. Peter’s or of the spires of Fatima in the background, or of the Pope, or of St. Padre Pio, thus giving the impression of being a regular Catholic journal. Inside, one might find more pictures of the Pope with a news item about the Pope which is then developed into an article in the context of the organization’s crusade.
Stories on the lives of Catholic saints are used in the same way. The FC issue no. 63 [Spring 2000] recounts the various miracles in the life of Fr. Pio, and adds, “It is not without reason that Padre Pio had such a deep love of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Long before the changes from the old to the new liturgy, Padre Pio intensely disliked the 1965 reforms of the Old Mass… Dietrich von Hildebrandt, called by Pius XII a Twentieth Century Doctor of the Church, quotes Padre Pio as saying, ‘At least they left Christ in Holy Mass.’ Not happy, then, with the liturgical reform, the saint asked to be exempted. The humble Capuchin never lived to see the New Mass. Yet even before the 1969 reform, he was persecuted for his attachment to the unchanging Mass of Always. Padre Pio was silenced and isolated by the Vatican under Pius XI because of doubts concerning the authenticity of his wonders and miracles. The persecution stopped under Pius XII… The persecution started again under John XXIII. Like Padre Pio, Father Gruner has been isolated and silenced for his attachment to miracles (Fatima), and to the Mass celebrated by the Holy Capuchin.”
A major study of Fr. Gruner is Fatima Priest, 1997, by Francis Alban with Christopher A. Ferrara, foreword by Dr. [Fr.] Malachi Martin, [see page 9], the author of Windswept House, 1996. Father Martin, former Secretary to Cardinal Bea in the Vatican, alleges in his book [as does Bishop Milingo, see page 9] that there are “high ranking Churchmen taking oaths signed with their own blood, who plot to destroy the Church from within and participate in meticulously enacted rituals that blaspheme and devilishly mimic the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.”
STATEMENT ON THE TRIDENTINE LATIN RITE CHURCH
by Bishop Lawrence Welsh
Because of the confusion the Fatima Crusaders, also known as the Tridentine Latin Rite Church, have caused in the Church, especially in the Spokane, Washington, and western Idaho area, we reprint here the statement of Bishop Lawrence Welsh in which he warns people of the errors of this group:
After much consultation and prayer, I have given approval for the Inland Register to publish the series of articles regarding the Fatima Crusaders, which begins in this issue. In the history of the Catholic Church, after almost every general Council there have been groups which have broken away from the mainstream of the church. They have done this in reaction to the restatement of the Christian tradition by the Fathers of that particular Council. It is a very sad phenomenon but also very human. In faith we grieve to see the fabric of the church so divided. Our life as Christians is directed toward the unity of all men and women in Christ. Whatever divides the church is to be mourned because it divides Christ himself.
We are sure that the Catholics who have joined the Fatima Crusaders are sincere in their belief. The Inland Register series presents the sorrows, the traumas, and the difficulties they have experienced for the sake of their belief.
They are seeking to do God’s will as they understand it. Yet, as Bishop of Spokane, I do not feel that I can stand by silently
while people from this group cause confusion in the minds of some of our Catholic people.
The Fatima Crusaders or the Tridentine Latin Rite Church cannot be identified as a legitimate expression of the Roman Catholic faith. Their denial of the papacy as incorporated in the lives of the last four popes is a denial of the church itself. How can one believe in the presence of Christ in the church and the power of his Spirit while denying the concrete presence of the office of the Pope?
Not legitimately Catholics
There is no such thing as a legitimate expression of the Catholic tradition that is not in union with the Holy Father. The Fatima Crusaders are therefore not legitimately Catholics. Their celebration of the sacraments is not a legitimate part of the life of the church. Bishop Schuckardt has received no mission from the church universal and does not accept the unity of the apostolic office. Yet these are some of the very elements which make the Church Roman Catholic. The past 18 years have been very challenging for the church. Given the direction by the bishops of the church in union with the Holy Father, Catholics have been about the difficult task of reform and renewal.
There have been extreme reactions at times and clearly abuses at times, but guided by the official teaching office of the church it has sought to live by and to teach the mainstream of Catholic tradition as it has been known for 2,000 years.
As your bishop, I must caution you, the faithful of this diocese, to protect yourselves from any error including this effort by the Fatima Crusaders. Their presentation of Catholic tradition distorts the mainstream of Catholic faith by a certain selected historical perception of Catholic life. They take a far too pessimistic view of world order.
Teaching authority denied
they deny the teaching authority of the Second Vatican Council and the last four popes.
Implicitly Bishop Schuckardt has set himself up as the final and last arbiter of Catholic tradition. This follows the pattern used by all so-called reformers of the past. They are above the then current expression of Catholic tradition. History over and over again has demonstrated that such movements are not from the Holy Spirit. Whatever the admitted weaknesses and sinfulness of the Roman Catholic Church, the Fatima Crusaders stand opposed to the unity, Catholicity, and apostolicity of the church. I truly believe the series that begins this week helps to identify this more clearly. I am grateful to Bob Cubbage and the Inland Register staff for their very competent and professional efforts to bring this story to the Catholic people of our diocese.
The above document was taken from “Cults, Sects, and the New Age,” by Rev. James J. LeBar, 1989, pages 212-214 available from Our Sunday Visitor Press, 200 Noll Plaza, Huntington, IN 46750 Trinity Communications 1994, provided courtesy of: The Catholic Resource Network, Trinity Communications PO Box 3610 Manassas, VA 22110
The referred book adds [pp. 87, 88], “According to the Inland Register, newspaper of the diocese of Spokane, the name Fatima Crusaders actually describes only a part of the TLRC, not the Church, itself. Schuckardt insisted that the TLRC is also known as the ‘Mary, Immaculate Queen of the Universe Community’. It is incorporated in the State of Idaho as ‘Christ the King Priory’. In Washington it is incorporated under the title of the ‘Tridentine Latin Rite Catholic Church of St. Joseph’…
In 1986, the Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, when it issued its own statement on the subject of ‘New Religious Movements, Sects and Cults,’ called specifically for the kind of study that resulted in the above referred book.
An October 1988 article by Thomas W. Case in Fidelity magazine titled ‘The Fatima Crusaders: Anatomy of a Schism’ gives a good summary of the belief system of this group:
“We declare that the New ‘Mass’ is invalid… We declare that the introduction of this New ‘Mass’ also signals the promulgation of a new humanistic religion in which Almighty God is no longer worshipped as He desires to be worshipped…
Those who have accepted this New ‘Mass’ have, in reality and without taking notice of it, apostasized from the true Faith; they have separated themselves from the true Church and are in danger of losing their souls, because outside the Church founded by Jesus Christ no one can be saved.”
Again quoting LeBar, “According to the Inland Register, many ex-members of the TLRC consider it to be a cult in the fullest sense of the word. Bishop Schuckardt’s legitimacy as a bishop is called into question as well, for his credentials are certainly not in conformity with the Catholic Church. In 1984, Schuckardt was forced to flee the Church under a cloud of scandal. The [Fatima] Crusaders sought leadership from men consecrated by the Vietnamese schismatic, Archbishop Ngo Dinh Thuc
[who] welcomed the overtures of Fatima Crusaders. George Musey was consecrated by a Thuc protégé in 1982, as was Robert McKenna O.P. by another Thuc bishop.”
At the time of LeBar’s writing, the leader of the Fatima Crusaders was thought to be “Father Denis (Robert Chicione) who was responsible for the ouster of Schuckardt”. Today, it is Father Nicholas Gruner who is President and Director of the Our Lady of Fatima Apostolate.
The Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy said in a September 12, 2001 notification that “the suspension* of Fr. Gruner was ‘confirmed by a definitive sentence of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature’ for spreading controversial interpretation of the message of Our Lady of Fatima… Although the suspension means that Fr. Gruner has no permission to perform priestly functions, he said he continues to do so publicly because he believes the suspension is invalid.”
The New Leader, Chennai, October 1-15, 2001. *see page 17, 26
In mid-November 1994, Fr. Gruner convened a Bishops’ Conference [his second] at the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico City. The number of bishops in attendance was far short of those who had agreed to come, because of letters issued by the respective national papal nuncios under instructions from Rome. Brandishing a copy of the nuncio’s letter, Archbishop Milingo, then the Special Delegate to the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerants, a Vatican post that kept him away from his dubious ministry and under observation in Rome called it “an abuse of authority” and said that the low attendance was the direct result of a slander campaign orchestrated by the Secretariat of State.
On July 12, 1995 Gruner published an “Open Letter**
to the Holy Father” in Italy’s largest newspaper, Il Messaggero, outlining the long history of his dispute with Rome, and announcing a third congress*** in 1996, this time in Rome.
In early 1996, the Vatican issued a letter urging all bishops to reject Fr. Gruner’s call because the Rome conference was “not authorized”. ***The first Fatima Congress sponsored by The Fatima Crusader was held at Fatima, Portugal in 1992.
**Hyderabad Archbishop S. Arulappa [see page 6] was the first signatory on the second “Open Letter to the Holy Father” published in Il Messaggero on April 2, 1998.
The 96-page Winter 1997 issue of the Fatima Crusader is almost exclusively dedicated to the ‘Fatima 2000 International Congress on World Peace and the Immaculate Heart of Mary’ hosted by Fr. Gruner in Rome, November 18-23, 1996.
Their star attraction was the presence and speech of Archbishop Milingo, introduced to the gathering as a “world renowned veteran exorcist”. The focus of Milingo’s speech, “The Three Dimensions of Evil,” was the startling revelation [see page 7] that “Satanism is practiced in the Vatican”*. A few days later at an Italian press conference, he maintained the same allegations- that “some members of the Vatican bureaucracy are satanists working to undermine the Church.”
Milingo is so important to the Fatima Crusaders that they brought out an unprecedented 16-page ‘Partial Edition’ of the Winter issue, totally dedicated to the Archbishop’s revelations, with a picture of him along with John Paul II on the cover.
*Dr. Father Malachi Martin, [see page 7 and also below], close associate of the Fatima Crusaders, stated in 1996 that “Anybody who is acquainted with the state of affairs in the Vatican in the last 35 years is well aware that the prince of darkness has had and still has his surrogates in the court of St. Peter in Rome”.
On both occasions, Milingo disobeyed the directives of the Holy See, to actively participate in Fr. Gruner’s movement.
Just as he has now defied Rome in promoting Married Priests Now! and ordaining married priests as bishops.
[At the fourth such congress in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, October 12-18, 1999, he was a guest speaker.]
Archbishop Benedict To Varpin of Madang, Papua New Guinea also opened and addressed the Rome conference. The invitation card contained a personal invite from him to delegates to come to the congress, and he gave the imprimatur to the Fatima Crusaders booklet on the First Five Saturdays devotion, which crossed the million mark in 1996.
Rome has always opposed these Fatima Crusader congresses. Papal Nuncios issued advisory letters to their respective bishops, visas were denied to bishops- like Salvador Laza of the Philippines whose name was on the 1996 conference invitation- who wanted to attend, and the Mexican bishops withdrew their permission for use of the Archdiocesan facilities for the Mexico City conference, compelling the Fatima Crusaders to relocate in an expensive hotel at the last moment.
Archbishop To Varpin had received his visa before his Apostolic Nuncio received the order from Rome to deny any requests.
Bishop-delegates included Batista Lopez, Martins Terra, and Mantilla Duarte [dioceses unknown] and Sr. Julieta Almeida, official representative of Cardinal Echeverria Ruiz Bernardino O.F.M. of Ecuador.
India was represented by Mr. Anthony Sebastian** who runs the Fatima Crusade from ‘Galilee’, the ancestral home of this
writer in San Thomé, Chennai, about 200 metres from the Bishop’s House. The parents of the present auxiliary bishop of Madras-Mylapore archdiocese live on the
ground floor of ‘Galilee’. To the best of this writer’s knowledge, no official notification about this sect has been issued by the archdiocese. Visiting TLR priests celebrate Mass at ‘Galilee’ on a regular basis, attended largely by women from the Sodality of Our Lady and the Legion of Mary. Vacancy advertisements for the Fatima Crusader office have been posted on the Basilica’s notice board. This writer had given all of this in writing several years ago to the then Vicar-General who is the present Bishop of Tiruchirappalli. **Earlier Mr. Sebastian had managed Fr. Gruner’s orphanage “Home of the Immaculate Heart of Mary” in Nandrakal, near Hyderabad under the patronage of Archbishop Arulappa. The Home, and the adjacent St. Joseph’s Health Care Centre are run by the Bethlemite Sisters.
Fr. Nicholas Gruner gets letters of encouragement and support from Bishops the world over, and he publishes them in The Fatima Crusader. Two such letters are from the then Archbishop of Bhopal and the Bishop of Khandwa, India [Issue no. 70]
It must however be mentioned that, after the 1996 Rome congress, since there were delegates from about 20 countries, the itinerary included a Wednesday morning general audience with Pope John Paul II. Some of the Bishops who attended the congress were on the stage with the Pope who warmly greeted them afterwards. Indian Bishop Ribeiro and one layman Joseph Cain placed in the hands of the Pope “the legal defense** of Fr. Gruner and the petition of the Apostolate”.
**On November 12, 1999, Fr. Gruner “submitted to the Holy Father a formal canonical recourse and complaint against [certain] Vatican bureaucrats, along with a 3-page cover letter to the Holy Father.” He submitted further letters to the Pope on April 20, 2000 and August 31, 2000 “confirming the Pope’s acceptance of the canonical complaint under Church law.”
FR. PAUL KRAMER, B. Ph., M. Div., S.T.L.
He is the author of The Devil’s Final Battle- How the Current Rejection of the Message of Fatima Causes the Present Crisis in the Church and the World, 2002, The Missionary Association, Conn. 06786. Price $14.95
The main themes of the nearly 300-page book are the “third secret of Fatima” and the “apostasy in the Church”. The book deals with “the alarming state of the Church”, the rise of neo-modernism and liberal Catholicism [progressing from the developments at Vatican II], the dangers of ecumenism, etc.
The book includes a Petition to the Supreme Pontiff, His Holiness John Paul II – concerning the actions of – Cardinal Angelo Sodano [Vatican Secretary of State], Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger [Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith], Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos [Prefect, Congregation for the Clergy] and Msgr. Tarcisio Bertone [Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]. This book is advertised in The Fatima Crusader.
“In 1972, my late friend Fr. Malachi Martin, in the opening lines of Three Popes and a Cardinal, wrote that the institutional Church that we knew then would no longer exist in the year 2000. At the [Second Vatican] Council, he saw firsthand what it had wrought, where it pointed, and the disintegration of the Faith then already underway.” Fr. Charles Fiore, FC no. 76. A month before his death in February 2003, he mailed The Devil’s Final Battle to a hundred of his friends, at his own expense.
[Along with the two books mentioned below, I was presented an ‘Advance Reading Copy- Uncorrected Proof’ of The Devil’s Final Battle by ex-Catholics in Bandra, Mumbai with the hope that it would influence me against the Catholic Church.]
FR. PAUL TRINCHARD S.T.L.
One of the key speakers at Fr. Gruner’s Rome conference was Fr. Paul Trinchard STL.
The group of people allied with him reject not only Vatican II and the Popes associated with and succeeding it, but also label as ‘satanic’, heretical, and influenced by Protestant observers and participants, the charismatic renewal and a number of other developments in the Catholic Church that followed the Second Vatican Council, especially the Novus Ordo Mass.
Offering theological arguments, the TLRC labels the Novus Ordo as a “New Age” Mass, whose liturgy is based on pantheistic New Age doctrines. The Bandra ex-Catholics gave me two books written by Fr. Paul Trinchard: “New Mass in Light of the Old”, and “New Age, New Mass”, both from Marian Publications, 1995.
However the Catholic Church declares the TLRC [The Fatima Crusaders] itself to be a NEW AGE cult, as seen earlier. And, Archbishop Milingo, a key TLRC supporter, is himself associated with the Moonies, a NEW AGE sect.
WHAT’S BEEN HAPPENING AT FATIMA?
DESECRATION AT FATIMA, by John Vennari [see page 7]
Catholic Family News Special Report: Pictures of a Desecration. Photo Report of Hindu Ritual at Fatima
I’m forwarding a link to a website which apparently has the pictures to an inter-faith ceremony held at the Basilica of Our Lady of Fatima. For photographs, please visit
[see May 5, 2004 below]*
came across this information on a Q and A forum of a catholic website called
http://www.ewtn.com. Click on this and it will take you directly to that particular Q and A:
EWTN: HINDU RITUALS IN THE SHRINE OF FATIMA
Question from Teresa on 7/8/2004:
Dear Father Levis, In your answers to the faithful who asked you a question about Hindu/Catholic mixed ceremonies in the Shrine of Fatima you provided always very short replies, refraining from commenting on the very core of the issue. You also said you were told that those ceremonies did not happen. However, I was provided with the website below and saw the pictures about the event. Could you please see yourself and make a deeper comment on this strange situation. Why the Portuguese clergy did not speak up about the issue, as the clergy in general. Do you mean that the pictures were forged?
[Catholic Family News]
God bless you dear Father Levis for answering to all our questions. -Teresa
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 7/9/2004:
Dear Teresa, Yesterday in another post I made a judgment about what has actually occurred at this wonderful Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima,
that it was a sacrilegious event. I have no other information than you do but that the event actually occurred. I shall try to get more info later on. Fr. Bob Levis
*May 5, 2004:
[photographs with captions] John Vennari
Portugal’s SIC television announces its coverage of an “uncommon ecumenical experience“.
There will be a Hindu ritual at the Fatima Shrine.
Morning prayers in the Radha Krishna temple in Lisbon
“All the invocations of the pagans are hateful to God because all their gods are devils” – St. Francis Xavier
A young Hindu woman explains the importance of their various gods
About 60 Hindus travel by bus to Fatima
Arrival at the Fatima Shrine
The Hindus bring a gift of flowers. For them, Our Lady of Fatima is a manifestation of one of their gods
SIC broadcasting says, “This is a unique event in the history of the Sanctuary and of devotion itself…the Hindu priest, the Shastri recites at the (Catholic) altar the Shanti Pa, the prayer for peace.”
The Hindu ritual — a ceremony to false gods — desecrates the Fatima Shrine, making it necessary for the chapel to be re-consecrated
The “Hindu family of Portugal” worshipping at the shrine after the Hindu ceremony
Shrine Rector Guerra speaks approvingly about the Hindu worship at Fatima
Crossing the esplanade to meet the Bishop and the Shrine Rector
Received by the Bishop of Fatima.
SIC explains, “the Hindu pilgrims are received as if they were an embassy, an unheard of gesture…..which can be understood as an invitation for other visits” This means that the pagan desecration of Fatima is likely to happen again.
The Bishop of Fatima says, “We do not want to be fundamentalists”
Shrine Rector Guerra receives from the Hindus a shawl covered with verses of the Bhagwad Gita, a “sacred book” of Hinduism whose basic message is, all of life is an illusion.
The Bishop of Fatima also receives a shawl laden with verses of pagan mythology.
Acknowledgement to SIC Television for video footage from which these photos were extracted.
Catholic Family News has obtained a video copy of the SIC television broadcast of the Hindu ritual performed at Fatima. As reported last month, the sacrilege took place on May 5  with the blessing of Fatima Shrine Rector Guerra, and the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, D. Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva. SIC, a national television station in Portugal, reported on the Hindu ritual at Fatima the same day it took place. The announcer called it an “uncommon ecumenical experience.”
The broadcast shows morning prayer at the Radha Krishna temple in Lisbon. “Light and water, energy and nature, mark the rhythm of
the Arati, (see page 51), the morning prayer,” the announcer says. “Hinduism is the oldest of the great religions. It is characterized by multiple deities, worshiped through a triple dimension of life and sacredness: the creator god, the preserver god, and the god who has the power to destroy.”
Thus the Hindus spent the morning worshiping their false gods, which are nothing more than demons.
Francis Xavier, the apostle to India, said of Hinduism: “All the invocations of the pagans are hateful to God because all their gods are devils.”
A young Hindu woman appears on screen with statues of gods in the background. She explains, “This is god Shiva and his wife Parvati. In the center we can see god Rama, to our right his wife Sita and to our left, his brother and companion Lakshmana. Now we can see Krishna Bhagwan and his consort Radha. The deities are always accompanied by their respective consorts or wives. As a rule, when we address the deities or want to ask for their graces, we address the feminine deity, who is very important to us.” “About 60 Hindus”, said the broadcast, “leave Lisbon with the chandam, the sign on their foreheads which shows the wish for good fortune in a noble task. And this is the day dedicated to the greatest of all female deities. She is called the Most Holy Mother, the goddess Devi, the deity of Nature who many Portuguese Hindus also find in Fatima.” Another young Hindu lady explains, “As a Hindu, who believes the whole world, or rather all human beings, are members of a global family, it would be natural for me to see any manifestation of God, including Our Lady of Fatima, as a manifestation of the same God.” Here, this young lady speaks as a true Hindu, since Hinduism regards the various false gods they worship as manifestations of “God”. Thus, they are not honoring Our Lady as the Mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ, but worshiping Her as a manifestation of their pagan god.
The newscast then shows the Hindus bringing flowers to the statue of Our Lady inside the Capelinha, the little chapel built over the spot where Our Lady of Fatima appeared. The Hindu priest stands at the Catholic altar and recites a Hindu prayer. Meanwhile, the SIC announcer says, “This is a unique moment in the history of the Sanctuary and of devotion itself. The Hindu priest, the Shastri, recites at the altar the Shanti Pa, the prayer for peace.”
Pope Pius XI, in a liturgical prayer consecrating the human race to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, prayed for the conversion of all who are not members of the Mystical Body. He invoked Our Lord, “be Thou King of all those who are involved with the darkness of idolatry”.  This idolatry is now practiced at the Fatima Shrine, desecrating the sacred site, making it necessary for the chapel to be re-consecrated.
In another clip, the Hindu priest explains that he finds a
“It is an energy that permeates the whole place,” he says. “It has the power to be present here, around us. Whenever I come here, I feel this vibration …”
SIC then explains that the display of this group of Hindus at Fatima “is not well-accepted by all Catholics”.
The camera then shifts to Fatima Shrine Rector Guerra who defends Hindu worship at the Catholic Shrine. “It is obvious” says Rector Guerra, “that these civilizations and religions are quite different. But I think that there is a common background to all religions. There is a common background that, how can I put it, is born from the common humanity we all possess. And it is very important that we recognize this common background, because, due to the clashes of the differences, we sometimes forget our equality. These meetings give us that occasion.”
The Hindus are then welcomed by the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima in a room containing a large model of the modernistic Fatima Shrine now under construction. “This time,” says the broadcast, “the Hindu pilgrims are received as if they were an embassy; an unheard of gesture which can be understood as an invitation for other visits.” This means that the pagan desecration of the Fatima Shrine is likely to happen again and again. The Bishop of Leiria- Fatima then says, “We don’t want to be fundamentalist, we don’t want that, but we want to be honest, sincere and want to communicate by osmosis the fruitfulness of our rituals, so that we may produce fruits. I am pleased to meet them.”
At this point, the Hindu priest places on the shoulders of the Bishop of Leiria- Fatima and Shrine Rector Guerra a shawl covered with verses of the Bhagwad Gita, one of Hinduism’s sacred books. The report ends with a close-up of a guest book that includes the signatures of Pope John Paul II, Mother Teresa, and a Hindu high priest. It goes on to say that Hindus intend to keep Fatima “on the road map of places where they claim they can find
vibrations of holiness…”
Catholic Family News has reported on the interfaith orientation at Fatima since it was launched at the
interreligious Congress held at Fatima in October 2003. 
We warned repeatedly that this type of desecration was inevitable if Catholics did not resist the new ecumenical program.
Predictably, the enablers of the “New Fatima” such as Father Robert J. Fox ridiculed our efforts and tried to dissuade Catholics from taking us seriously. Father Fox, on an April 25 EWTN broadcast, claimed that the reports about the interfaith activity at Fatima were nothing but “fabrications,” that he knows Shrine Rector Guerra personally, and that Rector Guerra would never allow such interfaith activities to take place. Less than two weeks after this EWTN broadcast, the Fatima Shrine was desecrated by pagan worship, with the blessing of Rector Guerra and the Bishop of Leiria- Fatima.
Pope Leo XIII, along with his predecessors taught “we are bound absolutely to worship God in the way which He has shown to be His will”.  Hinduism worships false gods who are demons. It is sacrilegious for Rector Guerra and the Bishop of Fatima to permit these rituals in a Catholic sanctuary. Pope Pius XI called it “ignominious” to place the true religion of Jesus Christ “on the same level with false religions”. 
Pope Leo XIII likewise taught “it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights.”
Thus the “equality” that Msgr. Guerra speaks of, and his notion of various religions coming from a “common background,” defies Catholic truth.
Rector Guerra and the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima are also guilty of grave scandal. Their actions tell these poor Hindus, who are in bondage to a heathen religion, that they are pleasing to God as they are. This is contrary to the manifest will of Christ, Who said, “No one comes to the Father but through Me.” “He who believes and is baptized will be saved, He who does not believe will be condemned.”
Hindus reject Jesus Christ. They have no interest in baptism or in the truths revealed by God. Rector Guerra and the Bishop of Leiria of Fatima counsel and encourage this apostasy. By their bad example, they scandalize not only the Hindus, but others who observe their actions.
“Scandal” says St. Thomas Aquinas, “is a word or act which gives occasion to the spiritual ruin of one’s neighbor.” St. Leo calls the authors of scandal murderers who kill not the body but the soul. St. Bernard says that, in speaking of sinners in general, the Scriptures hold out hope of amendment and pardon, but the Scriptures speak of those who give scandal, as persons separated from God, of whose salvation there is very little hope. Perhaps this is why we see a spiritual blindness in these men. They persist in their apostasy despite the outrage from concerned Catholics. Nonetheless, we must pray for them.
And what of the Hindus themselves? The Shastri comes to Fatima because he feels there a “divine energy,” “vibrations of holiness“. Members of all religions worship the same god and are part of the “global family”.
This is the language of paganism, not of our received Catholic tradition.
“Holy vibrations” is what Hindus call Shakti, and they go to various places to seek it. They will rush to be in the presence of the Dalai Lama or Pope John Paul II or
Gandhi because this gives them ‘darshan‘, the good fortune that comes from being in the sight of a holy man. Each and every one of their terms is rooted in heathen superstition, not in the truths revealed by Christ.
In short, the Hindus did not go to the Fatima Shrine to be Catholicized. Rather, they Hinduized the Fatima Shrine, folding their pagan myths and superstitions into one of Catholicism’s most sacred sites. This is not honoring the Mother of God, but a blasphemy against Her, since there is nothing honorable in placing Our Lady on the same level as one more goddess in their pantheon of demonic deities. “What concord hath Christ with Belial?” says Saint Paul, “or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?” (2 Cor. 6:15). At the end of the visit, the Hindus presented Msgr. Guerra and the Bishop of Fatima with a shawl covered with verses of the Bhagwad Gita. This book contains a story which illustrates a central tenet of Hinduism. Arjuna, a warrior, is on the eve of a great battle. He dreads the next day, because he knows he will have to kill his friends, relatives, teachers. Arjuna’s charioteer, who turns out to be the god Krishna in disguise, tells Arjuna not to fear the coming battle because none of it is real. No one is going to die. All of it, and all of life, is illusion. Arjuna then thrusts himself into the bloody conflict believing it to be his Dharma, his given path, to hack his friends and relatives to pieces. It is all illusion anyway. No one really dies. This is Hinduism in a nutshell. You are god, everything else is illusion. 
Catholics who behold the Fatima Shrine Rector and the Bishop of Fatima draped in shawls laden with verses from a pagan mythology certainly would wish that the Hindu desecration of Fatima was an illusion, that none of it was real.
But no, it really happened!!! And Catholics must register their outrage to Rome and to Fatima, as they offer prayers of reparation for Catholic leaders who hand over the chapel of Our Lady of Fatima to a religion whose god is the devil.
HINDUS WORSHIP AT FATIMA ALTAR
May 22, 2004:
The Portugal News, Portugal’s weekend newspaper in English. Front Page online http://the-news.net/
Last October  The Portugal News reported on the Interfaith Congress held at Fátima, one of Catholicism’s most sacred sites, where representatives of the world’s leading religions allegedly explored the possibility of opening the shrine to a whole variety of faiths. While the newspaper received many letters and emails congratulating it for reporting on the congress, it was also criticised by some groups who claimed that Fátima would remain exclusively Catholic.
Now, however, we can report that
the first steps in developing Fátima as a multi-faith centre could have been taken. On May 5th, SIC and SIC Notícias carried a report on
a Hindu religious service held in the Chapel of the Apparitions at the shrine. SIC’s broadcast appears, to some extent, vindicate The Portugal News’ October report.
Sixty Hindus led by a high priest had travelled from Lisbon to pay homage to the Goddess Devi, the divinity of nature.
SIC’s reporter described how before leaving Lisbon the Hindus had gathered at their temple in the city to pray to and worship various statues of Hindu gods. Arriving in Fátima the pilgrims made their way to the Chapel of the Apparitions,
where from the altar a Hindu priest led prayer sessions.
A commentary on the service was given by the TV reporter who explained: “This is an unprecedented unique moment in the history of the shrine. The Hindu priest, or Shastri, prays on the altar the Shanti Pa, the prayer for peace.”
The Hindus can be seen removing their shoes before approaching the altar rail of the chapel as the priest chants prayers from the altar’s sanctuary. During the newscast the Rector of the shrine Father Luciano Guerra says: These meetings give us the opportunity to remind ourselves that we live in community”.
After worshipping their gods and praying in the chapel the Hindus are shown being escorted to an exhibition hall where a model of the controversial new basilica currently being constructed is on display. In a setting described as ambassadorial by the commentator, each Hindu is personally greeted by the Bishop of Leiria – Fátima, who bows to the Hindu priest repeating his gesture of greeting. The Hindu priest is then seen clothing the Rector of the Fátima Shrine and the bishop with a Hindu priestly shawl. “On the shoulders of the highest representatives of the Church in Fátima, the Hindu priest places a shawl with the inscriptions of the Bhagavad Gita, one of the sacred books of Hinduism,” the reporter tells his viewers.
The newscast finishes with scenes of the Hindu priest lighting a candle at the shrine while his followers dance outside the Chapel of the Apparitions chanting praises to their gods.
The TV commentator concludes by saying: “In 1982, a Guru, a high priest of Hinduism, came from Bombay to Fátima… He signed the book of honour right after Pope John Paul II and on the same page as Mother Teresa of Calcutta.”
In other reactions to the Hindu ritual, a long-standing member of the Leiria-Fátima diocese was less accepting of the opening of the sanctuary to other cults and religions, telling the Jornal de Leiria: “I understand the opening of the site to other religions. But I disagree with the practise of non-Catholic rituals at the sanctuary’s holiest site”.
Bishop of the Diocese, D. Serafim Ferreira e Silva, has a different opinion. He told the regional newspaper: “We don’t want to be fundamentalist, but sincere and honest”.
August 20, 2004:
Catholic shrines draw Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims
By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor LOURDES, France (Reuters) [Yahoo! India news]
In an unexpected twist of globalisation, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and other pilgrims regularly worship at famous Roman Catholic shrines to the Virgin Mary such as Lourdes in France and Fatima in Portugal.
They drink the holy water, light votive candles and pray fervently to the Madonna for help with life’s hardships. Many venerate her like one of their own goddesses, a view that would be a heresy if a Catholic theologian tried to defend it.
Rather than turned away, the newcomers are free to join the crowds from Ireland, Italy, Spain, and other traditionally Catholic countries who flock to Europe’s most popular shrines.
In Fatima, the warm welcome they have received has caused an uproar among traditionalist Catholics.
No one can say how many non-Catholics worship at shrines where the Virgin is said to have appeared, but they have become a familiar minority there over the past five to 10 years. “There are lots of them,” Bishop Jacques Perrier of Lourdes told Reuters during Pope John Paul’s visit to the southwestern French “miracle shrine” on August 14-15. “Their numbers may be small as a percentage of the 6 million pilgrims here each year, but they’re big in absolute terms.” The sight of some south Asian women in splendid saris mingling with the European pilgrims is the first hint that reverence for Mary has crossed religious borders. Standing near the grotto where she was said to have appeared in 1858, two women wearing the Hindu red dot or “bindi” on their foreheads said they prayed daily to the Madonna. “I come here for peace of mind and heart,” said Buvaneswary Palani, a Hindu from southeastern India who now lives in southern France. “Gods are the same everywhere,” explained her mother Darmavady. “She is like our mother goddess Mariamman.”
MARY, MARIAMMAN, MARYAM
Catholics revere Mary and believe she can intervene with Jesus to help them, but they do not consider her divine. Hindu or Buddhist pilgrims could be forgiven for thinking she is, though, when they see the faithful kneeling in silent prayer before her statue or admire the huge mosaic of her that looms over the altar at the Lourdes basilica. The Virgin also resembles goddesses they venerated back home before moving to Europe. Tamils in southeastern India and northern Sri Lanka worship a goddess Mariamman who protects villages and wards off disease. Among the Buddhists of China, Vietnam and other Asian states, the “compassionate Saviouress” Kwan Yin offers the maternal love that Catholics find in Mary.
Although Islam teaches there is no god but Allah, folk traditions in some Muslim societies have smuggled in a devotion for saints much like that seen in other religions. The Koran contains a whole chapter on Mary, far more than the Gospels have on her. In it, Maryam (her Arabic name) is a virgin and Jesus a great prophet but neither is divine.
With its mass pilgrimages, devotion to a mother figure and belief in water with miracle healing powers, Lourdes combines elements familiar to followers of several other faiths. “In a globalised age, it’s normal that Lourdes attracts them,” said Patrick Theillier, a physician who heads the Medical Bureau which examines every claim of miracle healing at Lourdes. The bureau has certified only 66 healings as genuine miracles.
FATIMA UNDER FIRE
Perrier saw no theological problem with pilgrims of other faiths worshipping at a shrine central to Roman Catholicism.
“There are no religious services at the grotto,” the bishop explained. “They have great respect for Mary. They come to drink the water and touch the rocks. But they don’t attend mass here. That would have no meaning for them.” But the line between hospitality to outsiders and blurring of religious borders is close, as Portugal’s Fatima shrine to the Virgin has learned. Traditionalist Catholics are up in arms against the shrine’s directors for allegedly being so open to Hindu pilgrims that they let them perform religious rites there. “They have sinned against God and given scandal to the faithful,” thundered the U.S. monthly Catholic Family News. “They allowed Mary to be worshipped as God by pagan apostates.”
Fatima’s director, Father Luciano Guerro, issued a statement in late June denying that a Hindu pilgrim group led by its own priest had somehow defiled the shrine during a visit in May. “The priest sang a prayer which lasted a few minutes,” he said. “No gesture was made, no rite was performed, on or off the altar.” Guerro also denied charges that a new church now being built there would be open to rites from all faiths.
The blurring of religious borders that globalisation has brought to Marian shrines has also touched the higher levels of Catholic theology, causing deep concern at the Vatican.
Father Jacques Dupuis
[see page 27]
an 80-year-old Belgian Jesuit who spent 20 years in India, has broken new ground in recent years by arguing that God works through many faiths to save all believers. This contradicts the Catholic position that faith in Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation and even other Christian churches are imperfect paths to that goal.
Challenging that view earned the respected theologian a secretive three-year investigation by the Vatican’s stern doctrinal chief, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. The issue calmed in 2001 when Dupuis, under heavy Vatican pressure, issued a statement saying his writings had contained some doctrinal ambiguities. But he has not changed his view.
“The Holy Spirit is present in the Hindu and Buddhist traditions,” he said in a lecture in February. “The diverse paths are conducive to salvation because they have been placed by God Himself.”
September 29, 2004: Vatican Calls for Resignation of Bishop of Fatima and Fatima Shrine Rector Guerra: Portuguese Newspaper Reports. Despite denials from Fatima officials, Portuguese newspaper sticks to its story. Click here for details! or try
Catholic Family News NEWS FLASH
www.oltyn.com Catholic Family News • MPO Box 743 • Niagara Falls, NY 14302
A personal letter from Jose Maria Horta e Costa, a close friend of the Bishop of Fatima
[This letter was received by me against enquiries made by me on the above reports]
None of the above has been confirmed by the VATICAN or the Portuguese Bishops Conference.
It is true that on September, one newspaper of the local Press here did report such news, but they were immediately rebuked by the Bishop’s Conference and the Vatican. The news did contain facts that are incorrect, like the Bishop’s Conference does not in any circumstance hold the power to make a Bishop resign or replace him. It is the Vatican exclusive prerogative to do so.
On the other hand, the Bishop of Fatima is becoming 75 years of age on June 2005, and he has publicly announced on several occasions and likewise to the Pope, that he is sick and would like to be replaced by than without delays. At the same time, it is also a confirmed fact that he has been asking from the Vatican for the last two years, that an auxiliary Bishop is appointed to help him during this transition, and probably to dilute the preponderance of the Rector’s decisions over matters at the Sanctuary of Fatima.
It must also be said that the Bishop of Fatima is a very close personnal friend of the Pope, with direct access to him, which oftenly takes him to Rome, and leaves little room for mishaps between them two.
Whilst it has been confirmed on Television here, by the most important Portuguese Vaticanologist journalist Aura Miguel, member of the Press Room of the Vatican, and proeminent member of the 55 journalists that accompany the Pope on his plane journeys and author of several books on the Pope and the Message of Fatima, and a very proeminent member of the CL (Communione et Liberazione) movement in Portugal, that the visits to the Fatima Shrine by the Dalai Lama and some Hindu priests did cause perplexity and opposition by Cardinals at the Vatican, it is also true that it is an exclusive right of the Vatican to change that setting.
For the Portuguese public opinion the matter has been seen as follows:
First those visits did cause shock and discussion. There seemed to be a grave confusion between Ecumenism and Inter-religious dialogue, and the excess to let other religions conduct apparent religious ceremonies or rituals in Catholic consecrated holy places of veneration and celebration. The discussion and it’s potential positive contribute to change the situation and responsibles, didn’t gain anything by being taken by known fundamentalist like some Priest in Canada and/or Germany, who have long been foes of the Hierarchy in Fatima, with paid publicity campaigns in newspapers, that only amounted to reduce the credibility of this present debate, thus providing a cutting hedge between fundamentalist and tolerant views, whereas a right or wrong approach should have prevailed.
It is also known that the ongoing construction of the new Basilica in Fatima, due to be ready in 2 ½ years, costing some 50 million Euros, under the promotion of the Rector of the Sanctuary (Rev. Dr. Guerra), is generating a lot of exposure and criticism. It not only exposes the richness of the yearly contributions of pilgrims to the Sanctuary and his welloffness, but also has attracted discussion on it’s opportunity and basic usefulness. The fact that author of the project is a Greek Orthodox Architect and not a Catholic and preferentially Portuguese has also been under controversy.
As on other occasions and about other matters, it is well known that there people and currents inside the Vatican that would advocate a direct pontifical (meaning curial) control over some sanctuaries and institutions of the Church. It has been the case for long, about the intented control over the largest Catholic Italian magazine “Famiglia Cristiana” of the Paulist Congregation. Common to all those attempts is the cash-richness of the institutions or facts whose control is envisioned.
At this point in time my humble point of view is that the people of God can and should manifest his views in matters of sensibility towards his Church, but not accept the replacement of one manipulatory attempt by another.
Prayer seems therefore to be the first adviseable approach on this matter, to safeguard unity and communion.
October 16, 2004:
Bishop – Fátima open to all
The Bishop of Leiria-Fátima, D. Serafim Ferreira e Silva, has this week admitted to the existence of “enemies” of Fátima, saying many emanate from within the Catholic Church. Speaking at a press conference held at the Sanctuary, the Bishop preferred not to identify these “enemies”, saying only that some of them are involved in “science or pseudo-science”. He added he has personal instructions from the Pope to promote interfaith dialogue.
The Bishop used the conference to highlight the fact that the Fátima Sanctuary is open to all, including the “Dalai Lama or an agnostic, and to those who believe and to those who do not”.
He further explained that he has “personal instructions” from the Pope regarding inter-religious dialogue.
The Bishop was reacting to recent news reports that stated the Vatican had reacted negatively to visits at the Sanctuary by the Dalai Lama and Hindu priests, along with the staging of an interfaith congress at Fátima a year ago.
The Bishop also reiterated his full confidence in the Rector of the Sanctuary, Luciano Guerra, during the press conference, shortly before the two clergymen prepared to lead the annual October 13 procession to the Sanctuary.
Furthermore, D. Serafim Ferreira e Silva also presented the minutes of the 2003 congress, citing the introduction of Bishop Michael Fitzgerald, who wrote: “It is obvious that the a Sanctuary such as Fátima, founded on an experience of faith, has to open itself to all categories of people”.
This is only one of the many “Third Secret”s doing the rounds:
THIRD SECRET OF FATIMA REVEALED!!
LUCIA REVEALS THE THIRD SECRET OF FATIMA
November 14, 2001
Independently of any Creed or Religion, is better to be prepared and be in good terms with GOD, though we never
know when we will be leaving this world….
The Church has given permission to reveal to the people the last part of the message. The Blessed Virgin appeared to three children in Fatima, Portugal, in 1917, this is a proven fact; one of these children is still alive, her name is Lucia, she is a Cloistered nun and lives in a monastery in Portugal. Lucia disclosed the message for the first time to Pope Pius XII whom, after reading it, he sealed it and stored away without making it public. Later Pope John XXIII read it and, in the same manner as his predecessor he kept it out of the public eye because he knew that once revealed; it will bring desperation and panic to human kind.
Now the time has come, and permission has been granted from Pope John Paul II to reveal it to the children of God, in order not to create panic but to make people aware of this important message so everybody can be prepared.
The Virgin told Lucia: “Go my child and tell the world; what will come to pass during the 1950’s – 2000’s. Men are not practicing the Commandments that our Father has given us. Evil is governing the world and is harvesting hate and resentment all over. Men will fabricate mortal weapons that will destroy the world in minutes, half of the human race will be destroyed, the war will begin against Rome, and there will be conflicts amongst religious orders.
God will allow all natural phenomenon’s like smoke, hail, cold, water, fire, floods, earthquakes, winds and inclement weather to slowly batter the planet. These things will come to pass before the year 2010. “Those who won’t believe, this is the time” your beloved mother told you “those lacking charity towards others and those who do not love thy neighbor like my beloved Son has loved you, all, cannot survive. They will wish to have died, millions are unimaginable, they will come, and there is no doubt. Our Lord God will punish severely those who do not believe in him, those who despise him and those who did not have time for him.” “I call upon all of you to come to my son Jesus Christ, God helps the world but all of those who do not show fidelity and loyalty will be destroyed”
Father Agustin, who lives in Fatima, said that Pope Paul VI gave him permission to visit sister Lucia who is a Cloistered nun (she does not leave the monastery nor is allowed to receive any visitors). Father Agustin said that she received him greatly overwhelmed and told him: “Father, our lady is very sad because nobody is interested in her prophecy of 1917, though the righteous are walking through a narrow path, the evil ones are walking through an ample road that is leading them straight to their destruction, believe me father, the punishment will come very soon.
“Many souls will be lost; many nations will disappear from the earth. But, in the middle of all these, if men reflect, pray and practice good deeds, the world can be saved. One of all these, if men persist with its evil, the world will be lost forever.
The time has come for all to pass on the message of our Blessed Lady to their families, friends, and to the entire world.
Start praying, to make penitence and sacrifices. We are at the last minute of the last day and the catastrophes are near. Due to this, many that were far from the church will return to the open arms of the Church of Jesus Christ. The joining of the churches will result in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church; England, Russia, China, Jews, Muslims and Protestants. All will return believing and worshipping God our creator, in his beloved Son and in our Blessed Mother Virgin Mary”.
WHAT AWAITS US???
Everywhere there will be “Peace Talks”, but punishment will come.
A MAN IN A VERY IMPORTANT POSITION WILL BE ASSASSINATED AND THIS WILL PROVOKE THE WAR. A POWERFUL ARMY WILL DOMINATE ALL THROUGH EUROPE AND THE NUCLEAR WAR WILL COMMENCE.
This war will destroy everything, darkness will fall over us for 72 hours (three days) and the one third of humanity that survives this obscurity and sacrifice, will commence to live a new era, they will be good people.
In a very cold night, 10 minutes before midnight, A GREAT QUAKE will shake the earth for 8 hours.
This will be the third signal that God is who governs the earth. The righteous and those who propagate the faith
and the message of the Lady of Fatima is one “SHOULD NOT FEAR, DO NOT BE AFRAID”.
WHAT TO DO???
Bow your heads, kneel down and ask God for forgiveness. Because, only what is good and is not under the power of evil’ will survive the catastrophe. In order for you to prepare and remain alive I will give you the following signs:
ANGUISH…….. AND IN A SHORT PERIOD THE EARTHQUAKE WILL COMMENCE… THE EARTH WILL SHAKE….
The shake will be so violent that will move the earth 23 degrees and it will return it to its normal position.
Then, total and absolute darkness will cover the entire planet… All evil spirits will be mingling around and free, doing harm to all those souls that did not want to listen to this message and those who did not want to repent.
To the faithful souls, remember to light the blessed candles, prepare a sacred altar with a crucifix in order to communicate with GOD and implore for His infinite mercy….
All will be dark; IN THE SKY A GREAT MYSTIC CROSS will appear to remind us the price that his beloved Son had to pay for our redemption…. In the house the only thing that can give light will be the HOLY CANDLES…
Once lit, nothing will put them off until the three days of darkness are over. Also, you should have Holy water that should be sprinkled abundantly on windows and doors. The Lord will protect the property of the chosen ones…
Kneel down before the powerful cross of my beloved Son,
pray the Rosary and after each Hail Mary you must pray
the following: “Oh God forgive us our sins, preserve us from the fire of hell, take all souls to heaven, especially those who are in more need of they mercy. Blessed Virgin Mary protect us, we love you, save us and save the world”.
Pray 5 Creeds and the Rosary which is the secret to my Immaculate Heart. All those who believe in my words go and take the message to everyone, DO NOT FEAR. FEAR NOTHING DURING THE LORD’S GREAT DAY.
Talk to all the souls now that there is time, those who keep quiet will be responsible for all those souls who
will perish in ignorance. All those who pray humbly the rosary will have the protection of heaven and those who are bound to die will help them die in peace and they will be holy when they enter the other world.
wish all my children to attend mass every first Friday and every first Saturday of each month, to confess and receive Holy Communion and in doing so, save the world from its TOTAL DESTRUCTION.
WHEN the earth shakes no more, those who still not believe in our Lord will perish in a horrible way. The wind will bring gas and it will disperse it everywhere, then the sun will rise. Maybe you will survive this catastrophe.
Do not forget that God’s punishment is holy and ONCE IT HAS STARTED YOU SHOULD NOT LOOK OUTSIDE, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE, GOD DOES NOT WANT ANY OF HIS CHILDREN TO SEE WHEN HE PUNISHES THE SINNERS….
All this encompasses with the writings of the Holy Scriptures….. Read on the New Testament:
Lucas 21 – 5:121, 12:19, 20:20, 29:33 Letters of St Paul 3 – 8 – 14 Isaiah 40, 1:5:9.
You must understand that God allows all this to happen. The Pope and Bishops are now awaiting another message that speaks about repentance and prayer. Remember that Gods words are not a threat, but good news….
Please reproduce these pages and send them to all you know so we all can have the opportunity to repent and be saved. We do not know if those receiving this message believe or not in GOD, but think that if you are receiving this message is for a reason!! Maybe the Creator is giving us the chance to be saved, no matter what religion or creed. If you don’t believe in this message at least send it to others, it costs you nothing. To all those receiving it, they can have the opportunity to judge for themselves.
This is definitely NOT authentic. The “last secret of Fatima” predicted the attempted assassination of the Pope in St. Peter’s Square in 1981, and the many horrors that came upon the world in the late 20th century. It said nothing whatever about the year 2002. The communication you received is highly irresponsible alarmism. Disregard it. -Dr. William Carroll, EWTN
There are superstitious Fatima and “Third Secret” letters in circulation. Quite a few of them end [actual quotes] this way:
“Send 5 copies within 9 minutes of reading this and see what happens.”
“Just send this to 4 people and see what happens on the fourth day.”
“Send to ALL your friends! But you have to do this within an hour after you open this mail! Now… MAKE 1 WISH!!!!!! “
“Send this to 7 People within the next 5 minutes and your wish will come true.”
“Do not keep this message. It must leave your hands in 6 minutes. Otherwise you will get a very unpleasant surprise.
This is true, even if you are not superstitious, agnostic, or otherwise faith impaired.”
“If you don’t send this to at least 10 people…. who cares?”
“If you delete this after you read it… you will have 1 year of bad luck! But… if you send it 2 of your friends, you will automatically have 3 years of good luck!!! ”
“No More Secrets,” Visionary Said in 2001
Sister Lucia Confirmed That Russia Had Been Consecrated to Mary
Vatican City, February 14, 2005
The Fatima secret has been totally revealed by the Vatican, and Russia has already been consecrated as Mary requested, confirmed Sister Maria Lucia of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart. The witness of the apparitions of the Blessed Virgin of Fatima made this statement to the then secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, on Nov. 17, 2001, contradicting those who say that the Church still has secrets about the Marian apparition. The content of the interview held between the Vatican representative and Sister Lucia in the convent of Coimbra, Portugal, where she resided, was made public by the Vatican press office on Dec. 20, 2001.
The text of the document states: “In recent months, especially following the sad events of the September 11 terrorist attacks, articles appeared in newspapers alleging new revelations by Sister Lucia, announcements of letters of warning to the Pope, and apocalyptic reinterpretations of the Fatima message.” “Moreover, emphasis was placed on the suspicion that the Holy See had not published the entire text of the third part of the secret, and some ‘Fatimist’ movements have repeated the accusation that the Holy Father has yet to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary,” the document continues. As a result, the Vatican note clarifies, it was considered necessary that Archbishop Bertone go personally “to clarify and obtain direct information from the visionary.”
The meeting was held in the presence of Father Luis Kondor, vice postulator of the cause of Blessed Francisco and Jacinta (the other Fatima visionaries), and of the prioress of St. Teresa’s Carmelite Convent. The conversation took place on the afternoon of that Nov. 17 and lasted more than two hours. Sister Lucia, then 94, “was in great form – lucid and vivacious,” the Vatican envoy said. The meeting addressed the question of the third part of the secret of Fatima. The Portuguese religious said that she had read “carefully and meditated on the fascicle published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and confirms everything that is written,” the Vatican statement noted. When the archbishop explained that there are doubts that part of the secret remains unknown, Sister Lucia replied: “Everything has been published; there are no more secrets.” “If I had received new revelations, I would not have communicated them to anyone, but I would have told them directly to the Holy Father,” the religious added.
There was then talk about the statements of Nicholas Gruner, a Canadian priest suspended* “a divinis,” who is collecting signatures insisting that the Pope finally consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and alleging that this has never been done. Sister Lucia told the archbishop: “The Carmel community has rejected the forms for the collection of signatures. I have already said that the consecration requested by Our Lady was done in 1984, and it has been accepted in heaven.” *see page 8, 26
Lastly, the conversation turned to Sister Lucia’s personal life. Some press articles suggested that her concern robbed her of sleep and that she was praying night and day. The religious answered: “It’s not true. How would I be able to pray during the day if I did not sleep at night? How many things they attribute to me! How many things they make me do! They should read my book; the advice and appeals that correspond to Our Lady’s wishes are there. Prayer and penance, with great faith in God’s power, will save the world.”
Sister Lucia Has Told All Details, Says Researcher
Coimbra, Portugal, February 20, 2005
Sister Lucia’s writings will not reveal any new details of the Fatima apparitions, though they provide more insight into the 1917 events, says the head of a research panel.
“Sister Lucia’s experience is one of continuity and she was faithful. I think what the future holds in store is an even more profound development,” Father Jacinto Farias, president of the Scientific Commission of the Fatima Congress, told the Portuguese news agency Ecclesia. “We should not find any novelties,” he added. The “richness of the Fatima message is its extreme simplicity and, at the same time, great fruits at the pastoral and theological level.” Father Farias made his statements about the last witness of the Fatima apparitions shortly after her death Feb. 13. He said Sister Lucia’s texts constitute a fundamental testimony for the Church. Her writings are categorized as “Fatima 1” and “Fatima 2,” and reflect her testimony written at different stages in her life. Father Farias explained that the writings show an “internalization of the events.”
“A 10-year-old girl and a woman of 40 have a different perception of things,” he noted. But he added that the writings show continuity “in an interior rereading.” The evolution does not depend on the political, national or international events of the moment, as has been proposed, the priest said. This, in fact, would imply “extreme intellectual preparation on the part of Sister Lucia to be able to follow these events and make a critical reading of them — something which does not seem likely to me,” he continued. “On the specific question of the Fatima message and Marxism’s militant atheism and dialectical materialism, there are documents which state that Sister Lucia thought that Russia was a woman or a person who was being asked to convert. It was a message that was beyond the awareness of the visionary herself,” Father Farias explained.
The fact that the message has now been interpreted and translated by the Church into a pastoral strategy is “perfectly legitimate,” said Father Farias. “Cardinal Gonçalves Cerejeira himself said that it was not the Church that imposed Fatima, but Fatima that imposed itself on the Church,” the priest added. Cardinal Manuel Gonçalves Cerejeira, the former patriarch of Lisbon, died in 1977. Moreover, it was only at the beginning of the 1930s that the Church recognized the Fatima miracle “in virtue of the massive popular adherence not only in Portugal, but worldwide,” he said. Analysis of the Fatima message “is now in the hermeneutic plane,” as the “historical analysis is closed.”
“It is necessary to make a theological analysis, to take advantage of the potential latent in the content of the secret,” he continued. “In the beginning, Francisco did not hear or see; Jacinta saw and heard, but did not speak. Lucia was the voice, the leader, so her spirituality will always be the core of these experiences,” said Father Farias, referring to the other two little shepherds present during the Virgin’s apparitions. There will be no “great novelties” from the theological point of view now that the last witness has died, he said, but Fatima will probably have a greater development “in terms of its spiritual and pastoral irradiation.”
“It Was Done,” Sr. Lucia Says: “You Can Tell All Your Friends”
By Steve Mahowald
An interview with Dr. Zugibe, Steve Mahowald (Editor’s Note: Steve Mahowald is a traditional Catholic journalist from Omaha, Neb., and the publisher of Catholic News & Commentary. The following article and interview with Dr. Frederick T. Zugibe is an abridged version of a piece that appeared in September/October 2003 issue of Catholic News & Commentary. Dr. Zugibe is one of the world’s leading authorities on human crucifixion. He recently visited with Sr. Lucia, the seer of Fatima, and asked her, “Was Russia consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary or not?” For the full text of Mahowald’s article and interview, please visit http://www.sacramentals.org/Sept.Oct2003.htm.)
There are those who have speculated for years about the longevity of Sr. Lucia of Fatima, who turned 96 in April of this year. Some propose that she has been given a long life in order to accomplish one more task — that being to confirm once and for all that the requested consecration of Russia has not yet been accomplished, and that it must be performed as requested if the promised peace is to come about. The thought — and a fair amount of rumor — proposes that Sr. Lucia is locked away in a cloister, a virtual prisoner, unable to make her real thoughts known because of her unwavering obedience to her superiors. It has further been proposed that no one is able to meet with her without the permission of Cardinal Ratzinger of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Thus, I was a little surprised when one of my readers alerted me to the following news item that first appeared on spiritdaily.org. Last year, Dr. Zugibe was invited to present his findings [on the crucifixion] to Carmelite nuns in Coimbra, Portugal, including the famed Fatima seer, Sr. Lucia. The doctor spent two hours in the visionary’s presence and found her to have a strong sense of humor and in “excellent” physical condition despite her age, 95 at the time. “She told us all kinds of stories about when she was young and different things,” Dr. Zugibe recounts about his visit with her. “She made rosaries and gave them to me and my wife, and a copy of her book Calls. I said, ‘Sr. Lucia, I want to ask you one question directly:
‘Was Russia consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary or not, because there is all this controversy about that’. She said in these words: ‘It was done. The Holy Father did it. It was done and you can tell your friends it was done‘.”
Certainly this was not the first time reports have come out of Portugal claiming that Sr. Lucia had stated that the consecration had been performed. What, then, makes Dr. Zugibe’s report any different from the others? Is it more smoke and mirrors? Another attempt to entice us to follow the Vatican’s party line? Or, is there something here that is indeed different? Wanting to make certain I had the story straight, I requested an interview with Dr. Zugibe, to which he graciously agreed. According to his biography, which one can access at http://e-forensicmedicine.net/mdex.html, Dr. Zugibe developed the Medical Examiner System in Rockland County, N.Y., in 1969 and served as Rockland County’s first chief medical examiner for over 33 years. He holds a bachelor of science, master of science (anatomy/ electron microscopy), Ph.D. (anatomy/ histochemistry), and an MD. As a medical professor he holds many titles and honors that are too numerous to mention. He is also a faithful Catholic and a daily communicant. As one of the world’s leading authorities on human crucifixion, Dr. Zugibe’s forensic findings have been presented to scientific communities around the world. He is also known for his work on the Shroud of Turin. In a word, it is fair to say that the testimony of Dr. Zugibe in this matter (which is attested to by his wife, also a witness to the visit with Sr. Lucia) is unimpeachable.
My Interview with Dr. Zugibe
Steve Mahowald (S.M.). It has been a common view for many years that Sr. Lucia has been silenced in both the matters of the “secret” and the “promise” of Fatima: Was that your impression prior to your journey to Portugal?
Dr. Zugibe (Dr. Z). Well, prior to that I had heard, through the writings of one particular priest, through these long dissertations, that — Sr. Lucia’s aunt — or someone, had said that it was not done, uh, or, never done properly. It wasn’t done right. It was supposed to be done with all the bishops all over the world.
S.M. Let me draw you back to the question — we’ll get to that, but prior to your going there, was it your impression that she was under silence in these matters, before you traveled to Portugal?
Dr. Z. No,
I was under the impression that Sr. Lucia had verified to one particular priest, and all the rest of them, that it wasn’t done properly.
S.M. Why did you go there? Under what circumstances were you allowed to visit Sr. Lucia at her cloister?
Dr. Z. I was invited to Coimbra by the sisters, to give my talk on the crucifixion. And also, I had written there. My son had a medical problem a couple of years before, and asked for Sr. Lucia to pray for him, and Sr. Lucia’s niece, through a friend of mine who knew her sisters, took the request there, and they even asked for a picture of him. And she prayed for him, and he did very, very well. So I felt, at the same time, that I wanted to thank Sr. Lucia for her prayers.
I went there and gave a full talk on the crucifixion to Sr. Lucia and the group there. In fact, Sr. Lucia had open arms out to me when I went there. I gave the talk — it was really beautiful because we had a nice conversation. In fact her doctor, a young woman, whom I had met — I inquired, I said that I would love to take some pictures with Sr. Lucia, but I understand that it is not allowed. So she asked the mother superior. The mother superior relayed my request to Sr. Lucia. Sr. Lucia came out and said, “I don’t mind at all.” She let us take a bunch of pictures, and we talked about different things.
Then I went ahead, at that particular time, and I said, “I don’t know if it’s off-limits here, but I’ve been hearing a lot of different rumors and a lot of different ideas — I’d like to know about this, Sister. I’d like to ask you a question. Was the consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary done? I heard it wasn’t done — that it wasn’t done right and so forth. That she [Sr. Lucia] had indicated that it was not done.
Sr. Lucia looked both me and my wife right in the eye, and she said, “It was done! The Holy Father willed it. It was done, and you can tell your friends that it was done.”
[…] Sister said specifically, right to me and my wife, “It was done!” And that’s the reason why I have related it […]. Especially after we were conversing. I could not get over this woman, who was 95 at the time — this was in April [2002—editor] — she is 96 now — smart as a whip! Extremely smart. She made rosaries — she even gave us rosaries she had made. And also, she has a book called Calls — it is fantastic — you have to read the book […].
We really made out well with her, and we had this conversation. She was really sweet, she opened right up to my wife and I. Maybe it was because of the crucifixion lecture, I don’t know; that I had shown how Christ suffered and so forth, and told her that we were grateful for her prayers, and she opened right up. There was not even any kind of a gesture to say differently, in other words, she didn’t make any kind of gesture—she just said that it was properly done — and “You can tell your friends;” she said […].
S.M. Doctor, this not about your credibility — how would you answer those people who claim that the person presented to you was not Sr. Lucia?
Dr. Z. Such a claim would be totally preposterous. I will tell you why it was Sr. Lucia. A number of years ago, I was asked — one time someone asked me — they said they had met Sr. Lucia and wrote an article about Sr. Lucia — a fellow by the name of Carlos Everisto. He wrote several books over there, of sights in Fatima. He had written a letter to the chief of police and said that he had written an article about Sr. Lucia, and had a picture of himself with her. He thought that it was not Sr. Lucia. He wanted to know if the chief of police knew any forensic specialist who could compare that picture with known pictures of Sr. Lucia. He came to me, and I went ahead and did a complete study, called an anthropomorphic study, of the photos showing that it was definitely the same person. I’m very, very familiar with what Sr. Lucia looks like after looking at a whole big bunch of pictures — I know exactly what she looks like, in all ways.
Then, I also had a long conversation with Sr. Lucia’s doctor. And Sr. Lucia’s doctor said that she would be there when I gave the talk […]. The picture is taken with her behind the cloister grille, as they would not allow her to come out. For my part, I went there to give a lecture on the crucifixion. Being able to meet with Sr. Lucia just happened […].
S.M. Was there any other conversation you had with her?
Dr. Z. She told us all kinds of stories about when she was young, and about her family life, and everything else — we spent over two hours with her… The reason I asked about the consecration is because it seemed to be a debatable thing: Some say it was done, others say it wasn’t done. And she just marveled at this Pope. You can tell when you are talking with her that she just loves our present Pope. This is the one that did it right — this Pope.
S.M. Did she say that? That he did it right?
Dr. Z. Yes. I even spoke with the other sisters. I wanted to be sure. I wanted to be clear. I had no intention of coming over here and then publicizing any of this until after I was asked about it by Fr. Andrew, who is my very close friend. He later mentioned it on EWTN. Then I would bump into people who are donating all sorts of money to those whom the sisters have asked not to return to their convent, nor to bring any pilgrims there. They don’t believe it […].
Here’s my whole thing. I go to Mass and Communion every single morning — I’ve been doing it for 22 years.
S.M. So do I. We go to the Traditional Latin Mass.
Dr. Z. That’s beautiful, I’m glad to hear that. That’s great.
S.M. The thing about this is, okay, that I have believed for a long time that the consecration wasn’t done, because there have been no results. In other words, according to the promise, when the consecration was done, Russia would be converted and there would be peace.
Dr. Z. I asked about that […]. I said, you take a situation like Russia. Russia has prostitution, and the criminal aspect of things there is so prominent, and everything else. If Russia was consecrated, why?
The answer was this: [The sisters] said that the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary gave people the right to free will, to make their own choice. In other words, it opened it up so that they could go to church, they could go to Confession, whereas before they were under a regime where there was only a fear of going to church, a fear of religion. The consecration opened this up so that they were free to believe, and that no matter in what country, no matter wherever you are, you are free —you have free will to save your soul — to do what you want. That was opened up to them. Not a great or big holiness that you could see- people have the wrong impression of that… Over there, they were not allowed to have the same freedom of religion- but this opened up a freedom of religion where they can make their own free choice….
S.M. Dr. Zugibe, I have just a couple more questions: If we could move back to the consecration for a moment — did Sr. Lucia indicate the involvement of the bishops in the consecration?
Dr. Z. No. The exact protocol involving the bishops was not discussed. This was not important because she emphatically stated without hesitation, “It was done! The Holy Father willed it to be done and it was done and tell all your friends.” This clearly told all of us that it was done properly.
S.M. Do you feel that there was anything in the conversation with Sr. Lucia that was lost in the translating?
Dr. Z. Absolutely no! The person that translated for us was amazing. He was brought up and educated near the Canadian border, speaks perfect American with absolutely no accent, is an author, a writer, and does instantaneous translations. His Portuguese according to Sr. Lucia’s physician was also impeccable, without accent […]. Also, Sr. Lucia’s physician, with whom I have become friends (we also correspond with each other), also speaks English and also confirmed what Sr. Lucia said during our conversation with her.
S.M. When you were with Sr. Lucia, did you observe anything which would indicate any impairment of Sister’s faculties — perhaps because of her age?
Dr. Z. Sr. Lucia was 95 years old and mentally acute […]. We were amazed because she answered our questions and told us stories of her youth with great clarity. She and the other sisters inquired about different stories they had heard about our children that had been previously told to them I was informed that her recent book, Calls From the Message of Fatima, was essentially written by her and it is excellent.
S.M. Thank you so much, Doctor, for the time, and for your candor. It has been a pleasure to visit with you about this. I can’t impress upon you how important I believe this is.
Dr. Z. Thank you. It has been my pleasure.
A Concluding Reflection
This is not the first report of Sr. Lucia confirming the completion of the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of
Mary as commanded by our Lady at Fatima — but I, like many traditional Catholics, rejected any such statement because I doubted the people who delivered the message. Had I read an account such as this one a couple of weeks ago — and were I not at all familiar with the work and reputation of Dr. Zugibe — I would likely have dismissed it as just so much modernist propaganda. But this week, well, things are different. My longtime readers know how convinced I was that the consecration was yet to be performed. But consider the present circumstances: Dr. Zugibe is likely the only person in the world who could be trusted to identify Sr. Lucia from a forensic perspective- he made a lengthy and detailed study of her. He is credible. He is a solid Catholic and above reproach. He is unimpeachable. Dr. Zugibe has simply retold what Sr. Lucia told him.
In reality, this interview consists mostly of the eyewitness testimony of a remarkably credible individual. It is not about whether or not the consecration has been accomplished. It is only about whether or not Sr. Lucia — the only person to actually hear our Lady come to ask for the consecration of Russia — believes the consecration has been accomplished and accepted by Heaven. She is adamant in expressing that belief.
What about Sr. Lucia herself? Well, clearly, there is no “double” — no impostor. She is living out the short amount of time she likely has left in a cloister — living a life of self-denial, prayer, and sacrifice. Do you suppose that after 80 or so years of doing that she is going to knowingly tell a falsehood about the consecration? The answer to this rhetorical question, obviously, is no. Therefore, since it is never a wise thing to cross Our Blessed Mother, the time has come for traditional Catholics to seriously rethink our version of the events surrounding our Lady’s message at Fatima.
Taken from: The Wanderer 30 October 2003, page 1. The Wanderer Press, 201 Ohio Street St. Paul, MN 55107
Sr. Lucia: “No More Mysteries in Fátima Secret”
Vatican City, December 20, 2001
Sister Maria Lucia said that the secret of Fátima does not refer to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, that its contents have been completely revealed by the Holy See, and that Russia has been consecrated to the Virgin Mary, as Our Lady requested. The sole survivor of the visionaries of the Marian apparitions made this statement Nov. 17 to Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The content of the meeting between the Vatican aide and the elderly visionary, held at her convent in Coimbra, Portugal, was published today by the Vatican Press Office. The text of the document states: “In recent months, especially following the sad events of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, articles appeared in newspapers alleging new revelations by Sister Lucia, announcements of letters of warning to the Pope, and apocalyptic reinterpretations of the Fátima message.”
“Moreover, emphasis was placed on the suspicion that the Holy See had not published the entire text of the third part of the secret, and some ‘Fatimist’ movements have repeated the accusation that the Holy Father has yet to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary,” the document continues. As a result, the Vatican note clarifies, it was considered necessary that Archbishop Bertone go personally “to clarify and obtain direct information from the visionary.”
The meeting was held in the presence of Father Luis Kondor, vice postulator of the cause of Blessed Francisco and Jacinta, and of the prioress of St. Teresa’s Carmelite Convent. The conversation took place on the afternoon of Nov. 17 and lasted more than two hours. “Sister Lucia, who will be 95 on March 22, was in great form — lucid and vivacious,” the Vatican envoy said. The meeting addressed the question of the third part of the secret of Fátima. The Portuguese religious said that she had read “carefully and meditated on the fascicle published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and confirms everything that is written,” the Vatican statement noted.
When the archbishop explained that there are doubts that part of the secret remains unknown, Sister Lucia replied: “Everything has been published; there are no more secrets.” “If I had received new revelations, I would not have communicated them to anyone, but I would have told them directly to the Holy Father,” the religious added.
The group then spoke about the statements of Nicholas Gruner, a Canadian priest suspended “a divinis,” who is collecting signatures insisting that the Pope finally consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and alleging that this has never been done. Sister Lucia told the archbishop: “The Carmel Community has rejected the forms for the collection of signatures. I have already said that the consecration requested by Our Lady was done in 1984, and it has been accepted in heaven.” Lastly, the conversation turned to Sister Lucia’s personal life. Some articles in the press suggested that her concern robbed her of sleep and that she was praying night and day. The religious answered: “It’s not true. How would I be able to pray during the day if I did not sleep at night? How many things they attribute to me! How many things they make me do! They should read my book [“The Appeals of the Fátima Message”]; the advice and appeals that correspond to Our Lady’s wishes are there. Prayer and penance, with great faith in God’s power, will save the world.”
Meeting with Sr Maria Lucia in the convent of Coimbra, Portugal, 17 November 2001 L’Osservatore Romano, the newspaper of the Holy See firstname.lastname@example.org
Weekly Edition in English, page 7,
January 9, 2002
Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
In recent months, especially after the sad event of the terrorist attack last 11 September, articles on alleged new revelations by Sr Lucia, announcements of letters of warning to the Pope and apocalyptic reinterpretations of the Fatima message have appeared in the Italian and foreign press. The suspicion that the Holy See did not publish the whole text of the third part of the “secret” is being reaffirmed and
certain “Fatimist” movements have repeated their accusation that the Holy Father has not yet consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. It was therefore considered necessary, with the agreement of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and the Bishops of both Leiria-Fatima and Coimbra, that I meet Sr Lucia in the presence of Rev. Luis Kondor, SVD, Vice-Postulator of the cause of Bl. Francisco and Bl. Jacinta, and of the Prioress of the Carmelite Convent of St Teresa, to obtain explanations and information directly from the only surviving visionary.
The conversation that lasted for more than two hours took place on Saturday afternoon, 17 November. Sr Lucia, who will be 95 on 22 March this year, seemed in excellent form, lucid and vivacious. During the conversation, she professed her love for and devotion to the Holy Father, for whom, along with the whole Church, she very much prays. She was delighted with the distribution of her book, “Os apelos da Mensagem de Fatima” (“The Appeals of the Fatima Message”), now translated into six languages (Italian, Spanish, German, Hungarian, Polish and English), and for which she is receiving many letters of thanks. Going on to discuss the problem of the third part of the secret of Fatima, she says that she has read attentively and meditated upon the booklet published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and confirms everything it says.
She answers those who have voiced a doubt that some part of the ‘third secret’ might not have been revealed: “Everything has been published, there are no more secrets.” To those who are talking and writing about new revelations, she says:
“There is not a grain of truth in them. If I had had new revelations, I would not have spoken of them to anyone, but would have told them directly to the Holy Father!” She then gladly recalled her youth and the difficulties she had encountered, first in becoming a sister; but even in gestures of kindliness, as when she remembers the “holidays” in Braga in the years 1921-24, with Mrs. Filomena Miranda, her Confirmation sponsor. When asked: “What effect did the vision of 13 July have on your life before it was written down and presented to the Church?” she replied:
“I felt safe under the protection of Our Lady, who would watch carefully over the Church and the Pope”, and she adds a new detail to her account of the famous prophetic vision: “During the vision, Our Lady, shining bright, held a heart in her left hand, and in her right, a Rosary”. What does the heart in Our Lady’s hand mean?
“It is a symbol of love that protects and saves. It is the Mother who sees her children suffering and suffers with them, even with those who do not love her. For she wants to save them all and not to lose any of those the Lord has entrusted to her. Her Heart is a safe refuge. The devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is the means of salvation for these difficult times in the Church and in the world. Cardinal Ratzinger’s reflection at the end of his comment on the third part of the “secret” is very relevant: ‘My Immaculate Heart will triumph’.
What does this mean? The heart open to God, purified by contemplation of God, is stronger than guns and weapons of every kind. The fiat of Mary, the word of her heart, has changed the history of the world, because it brought the Saviour into the world- because, thanks to her ‘Yes’, God could become man in our world and remains so for all time. The Evil One has power in this world, as we see and experience continually; he has power because our freedom continually lets itself be led away from God. But since God himself took a human heart and has thus steered man’s freedom towards what is good, the freedom to choose evil no longer has the last word. From that time, this is the final word: In the world you will have trouble, but take courage, I have overcome the world” (Jn 16:33) is well founded. The message of Fatima invites us to trust in this promise”.
I asked her three more questions:
“Is it true that speaking to Rev. Luigi Bianchi and Rev. José dos Santos Valinho, you cast doubt on the interpretation of the third part of the “secret”?
Sr Lucia answered, “That is not true. I fully confirm the interpretation made in the Jubilee Year”.
“What have you to say about the stubborn assertions of Fr Gruner, who has been collecting signatures, asking the Pope to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary at last, as if this has never been done?”
Sr Lucia replies, “The Carmelite community has rejected the forms for the collection of signatures. I have already said that the consecration desired by Our Lady was made in 1984, and has been accepted in Heaven”.
“Is it true that Sr Lucia is deeply upset by recent events, that she can no longer sleep and is praying night and day?”
Sr Lucia answers, “It is not true. How could I pray during the day if I did not rest at night? How many things they are putting in my mouth! How many things they make me seem to do! Let them read my book: in it are all the recommendations and appeals that correspond with Our Lady’s wishes. Prayer and penance, together with great faith in God’s power, will save the world”.
Pope Believes That Ali Agca Didn’t Act by Chance
Vatican City, February 23, 2005
In the epilogue of his latest book, “Memory and Identity,” John Paul II recounts for the first time details of the 1981 attack on his life in St. Peter’s Square. “The Pope has the conviction that Ali Agca did not act by chance,” said Vatican spokesman Joaquín Navarro Valls when presenting the volume in Rome on Tuesday. Explaining what occurred in that attack, the Holy Father opens his heart to “discover another form of evil,” revealed the Vatican spokesman.
The director of the Vatican press office said that in the book’s epilogue “one sees how Ali Agca, already since his conversation with the Pope in prison, was totally obsessed with the mystery of Fatima: He could not understand how something that he should have controlled technically, the attack on the Pope, did not happen as planned.” *see page 36
“Ali Agca is concerned only with technical questions, not moral ones,” said the Vatican spokesman. He pointed out that the would-be assassin “did not ask the Pope for forgiveness.” Asked by journalists during the book’s presentation in Rome’s Colonna Palace, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger revealed that he has received letters from Mehmet Ali Agca. “He has also written to me saying: ‘Tell me what is this mystery of Fatima,'” said the cardinal. “Ali Agca was convinced that in it he would find a technical answer to an incomprehensible mystery: the reason why the attack on the Pope did not work.”
On Feb. 15, after the death of Sister Lucia, the Fatima visionary, Ali Agca sent a newspaper a text entitled “Open Letter to the Vatican.” In the text he expresses his sympathy for the religious’ death, and insists that the secret of Fatima is linked to the end of the world, and asks the Vatican to reveal the identity of the Antichrist. “They are deliriums, an obsession that Ali Agca has had for years,” Navarro Valls told television reporters, outside the book’s presentation.
In the epilogue of his book, the Pope comments on the moment of the attack: “All this has been a testimony of divine grace: Agca knew how to shoot, and he certainly [shot to kill]. It seems as though someone deflected the bullet.” The book includes a conversation between the Pope and his personal secretary, Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, on that dramatic event. Archbishop Dziwisz is direct: “Agca shot to kill. That shot should have been mortal.” The Holy Father writes in the epilogue that “I had the sensation that I would survive: I was in pain, I had reason to be afraid, but I had this strange feeling of confidence.” “I told Don Stanislaw that I forgave the author of the attack,” recalls the Pope. The epilogue also refers to the testimony of John Paul II’s visit to Ali Agca in prison, at Christmas in 1983. “Ali Agca, as everyone says, is a professional killer. This means that the attack was not his initiative, someone else planned it, someone else ordered it.” “During the whole meeting it was clear that Ali Agca continued to wonder how it was possible that the attack did not work,” recalls John Paul II. The Pope believes that “probably Ali Agca intuited that, beyond his power, beyond the power of shooting and killing, there was a higher power. And then he began to seek it. My hope is that he found it.”
Cardinal Rejects Idea of Fatima as Interreligious Center
Continued Rumors Prompt Statement by Vatican Official
Vatican City, March 26, 2005
Cardinal José Saraiva Martins expressed publicly his opposition to any talk about turning the Shrine of Fatima into a center of interreligious dialogue with Muslims. The statements by the cardinal prefect of the Vatican Congregation for Sainthood Causes were in reaction to the announcement by some groups and Web pages of the construction of an “ecumenical church” in the shrine. Last June 29, in fact, the rector of the Fatima shrine, Father Luciano Guerra, issued a statement saying that the Church of the Most Holy Trinity, under construction, would not be an “ecumenical church.” Given the continued rumors about the center, Cardinal Saraiva Martins said, in statements in the latest issue of Il Consulente RE magazine, that he is “totally opposed to transforming the Shrine of Fatima into a center of interreligious dialogue with Muslims.”
“Fatima has been and always will be a Catholic Marian shrine,” insisted the Portuguese cardinal. “Naturally, this does not exclude, indeed it includes, the continuation of dialogue with all religions, including Muslims. However, I confirm, I am opposed to all the different types of confusion that it might create: Fatima will always be the Catholic shrine that began with the wonderful mystery transmitted by the Virgin to the three little shepherds, beginning on May 13, 1917.” The cardinal observed that the Blessed Virgin Mary chose for her apparitions the only place in Europe named after Mohammed’s favorite daughter. “We are used to frequently calling ‘coincidence’ what is, on the contrary, an express divine plan,” Cardinal Saraiva Martins said. “We don’t know what the coincidence means in the case of Fatima.
I, however, prefer to think that we must take advantage of this coincidence to develop the dialogue with our Muslim brothers. “Of course, the Virgin came to Fatima to remind us of the Gospel, which is for all Christians, but also for all men.”
PILGRIMAGE OF REPARATION – August 18-25, 2005
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:50 AM
On May 5, 2004, a Hindu ceremony was allowed to be enacted at the altar at the Little Chapel of the Apparitions at Fatima. Thousands of Catholics will converge on Fatima on August 21 to make public reparation for this crime against God and His Holy Church. Please join us in this Historic pilgrimage of reparation. “I will be on the full Portugal-Spain pilgrimage and look forward to see you there” – John Vennari, CFN
For details, go to:
For more on recent events at Fatima, see special Fatima section at
DRAMA AT FATIMA
Shrine Authorities Disrupt Pilgrimage of Reparation
By John Vennari, August 18-25, 2005
“I think they would have been more intelligent to leave us alone,” said Bishop Richard Williamson. “As it is, they fired up a sense of combat in quite a few combative Catholics.”
unique Pilgrimage of Reparation was organized, primarily by the
Society of Saint Pius X, to make public reparation for the May 5, 2004 desecration of the Fatima Shrine. On that day, as documented in Catholic Family News with pictures from a television broadcast of the event, Hindus were permitted by the Shrine Rector to commandeer the sanctuary.
A Hindu priest at the Catholic altar in the Little Chapel of the Apparitions chanted a prayer for peace to the false gods of Hinduism. A Hindu congregation chanted Hindu responses.
This public defilement called for public atonement. On August 21 and 22 , thousands of concerned Catholics from around the world converged on Fatima to make this Act of Reparation. I traveled to Portugal for the event with a Pilgrimage organized by Father Gruner’s Fatima Center. I file this report from Fatima on the day of the Act of Reparation.
From the time that the Hindus desecrated the Sanctuary, Fatima Shrine Rector Luciano Guerra has been hostile to traditional Catholics protesting the outrage. That hostility reared its head during the day of reparation on August 22.
On the previous day — Sunday, August 21 — a solemn High Mass was celebrated for the pilgrims in a field about a mile from the Fatima Shrine. Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, was celebrant. Then on Monday, a low Mass was held at the same outdoor site, followed by a procession to the Shrine. Upon arriving at the Shrine, the hundreds of priests, four bishops, many religious, and thousands of faithful, confronted a barricade that blocked their way to the Little Chapel of the Apparitions, even though the SSPX had made an agreement with Shrine authorities to be at the Little Chapel at that hour. This coincided with another oddity. We arrived at 1:30 p.m. as had been long-planned and announced, and the Shrine had their charwomen vacuuming the sanctuary. One priest who has often been to Fatima said he never saw this before — women vacuuming the sanctuary in the middle of the day.
The men from the procession opened up the barricade themselves, and the huge crowd took its place in front of the Little Chapel of the Apparitions. We never entered the Chapel itself. The four bishops of the Society of Saint Pius X knelt in front of the Little Chapel. The ensemble of pilgrims chanted the Litany of the Sacred Heart, and then began to pray the Rosary in Latin. At about the third decade of the Rosary, three nuns from the Fatima Shrine approached the podium in the sanctuary, as if they were going to start a ceremony of their own. We had just finished a decade, so we began to sing Christus Vinces. Immediately after we started our hymn, the nuns from the Shrine began to sing over the microphone a different hymn from ours, in an attempt to disrupt our prayers. It was a dramatic stand-off. We stood at full height and sang louder.
The nuns continued the challenge, singing their own hymns over the microphone. It was as bizarre as it was childish. Tension mounted. We were outraged that the Shrine representatives would hurl such contempt at our group, which was merely praying the Rosary at the Fatima Shrine.
This “got the Irish up” of an Irish Brother who stepped over the small outside wall around the Little Chapel and made his way toward the nuns. His plan, he later told me, was to pull the microphone away from these peculiar Sisters treating us with derision. As he approached the nuns, he was seized by Shrine guards. A scuffle ensued. Various pilgrims in the crowd gasped in horror. Bishop Alfonso de Galarreta from the SSPX rose to his feet to establish calm. The guards released the Brother. The Shrine nuns withdrew from the sanctuary and we continued our prayers.
Within two minutes, the Shrine authorities retaliated. Sacred music suddenly began to blast from the Shrine’s sound system. It was full volume, so loud that I could barely hear the Rosary recited by the people around me. The entire esplanade vibrated from the Shrine’s state-of-the-art sound system, designed to project sound to tens-of-thousands of people.
Later, a hotel owner who has been in Fatima for twenty years, and whose establishment is a twenty minute walk from the Shrine, said he has never heard Shrine music from his hotel before. Today was the first time. It was Sacred music used as a weapon against traditional Catholics. Clearly, the Shrine authorities blasted the music to drown us out and drive us out.
They may have drowned us out, but they did not get rid of us. We continued the Rosary as the music blared. The bishops, priests and people renewed the Act of Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. The pilgrims sang a final hymn to Our Lady and broke into applause while doing so. Then the entire group solemnly processed from the Little Chapel.
The Act of Reparation was concluded. We completed what we set out to do, despite the Shrine authorities’ clumsy attempt at disruption. Afterwards, I interviewed priests and bishops from the Society of Saint Pius X for their reaction.
Australia’s Father Kevin Robinson said, “We’ve just witnessed an incredible scene. This is the power of Tradition over the devil-inspired new religion. I think everybody here is very happy to have experienced the Consecration of the Society. And please God we can overcome these modernists.” I asked Father Robinson if he sensed that when the Shrine authorities cranked up the music, it strengthened the resolve of the entire group. It bolstered everyone to stand taller, pray longer and sing louder. “That’s exactly what happened,” he responded. “They provoked us to pray more, to pray for their conversion. This is the place where conversions happen.”
Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, said, “We had, during our little Act of Reparation, a very, very nasty reaction from the side of the Sanctuary. They provoked, but there was a happy end.” The happy end he refers to is the fact that the priest and pilgrims did not budge. They completed the Act of Reparation as they had set out to do. Father Geraldo Zendejas, Prior of Saint Ignatius Retreat House, said, “We came here for a public act of Reparation. And we received the answer from them (the Shrine). They want to silence us. Everybody’s accepted here, even the Hindus. But today, we were rejected. We were 2,000 people just praying on our knees for the glory of God …”
This is true. Under Rector Guerra, Hindus were welcome to pray at the altar. Interfaith Congresses were held at the Fatima Shrine’s conference center. Anglicans have conducted retreats at the Shrine. But Traditional Catholics, who believe everything the Church has always taught and practiced, are not welcome.
Father Jean Violette, District Superior of Canada, made a similar point: “I’m sure if we would have worn turbans, the Rector would have greeted us at the Statue. We all would have held hands, and we would have had a nice ecumenical meeting. Instead, we were received very rudely — a typical, Novus Ordo, ecumenical gesture.”
Father Anthony Mary from the traditionalist Redemptorists in Great Britain, said, “I heard from Father Schmidberger that everything had been organized. They (at the Shrine) knew we were coming.” Conditions, he explained, were agreed to with the Shrine regarding the public prayer in front of the Little Chapel. “We kept the conditions to do the consecration … and Father Schmidberger said that he was very surprised that they broke the conditions (the agreement). And once they at the Shrine broke the conditions of keeping the arrangement, then, well, we actually had to break through the barriers to get through. So I think the whole attitude of them was despicable. The least they could have had was the simple, natural charity to let us say our prayers and not try to interrupt it. But it’s wonderful that we managed to do what we had to do and I’m sure graces will be won for the Fraternity (SSPX), for Tradition, and reparation done as well.”
PHOTOS: The four bishops from the Society of Saint Pius X, along with the pilgrims, kneel in front of the Little Chapel of the Apparitions, making reparation for the Hindu ceremony enacted there on May 5, 2004; Procession into the Fatima Shrine for the Act of Reparation; Pilgrims praying during the Act of Reparation, despite the
attempts by Shrine authorities to disrupt their prayers; Part of the procession [dozens of nuns] from the outdoor Mass site to the Shrine.
THE FATIMA POPE – Interview With Journalist Renzo Allegri
Rome, May 14, 2006
Pope John Paul II survived an attempt on his life in 1981 and said a “maternal hand” had saved him. A quarter-century after the attack, journalist and writer Renzo Allegri reconstructed the event in a book entitled “Il Papa di Fatima” (The Fatima Pope), published by Mondadori. Allegri explains the connection between John Paul II and Fatima.
Q: Why is John Paul II the Fatima Pope?
Allegri: First of all, because he himself recognized himself in that “bishop dressed in white” that the three children, Lucia, Francisco and Jacinta, “saw” during the July 17, 1917, apparition, when the Lady confided in them the so-called secret of Fatima. And also because, after becoming aware of that mysterious event, Pope John Paul II lived determined to comply with the petitions and desires contained in the Fatima messages. He gave himself to this mission with all his being, offering himself as victim for the salvation of the world, promoting a worldwide “crusade” of prayer, especially among young people, and obtaining the historic results that all know: the fall of Communism in Eastern countries, the return of religious freedom in those countries and, perhaps, he also contributed to avoid a tremendous nuclear conflict that, according to historians, was visible on the horizon. The relationship between Fatima and Pope John Paul II is, in my opinion, very great and still remains to be discovered.
Q: In your book you state that, although Karol Wojtyla was still little known, Padre Pio had already realized that he would become a very important man. You know Padre Pio’s life well; could you explain what the saint of Pietrelcina was referring to?
Allegri: In the biographies of saints, it often happens that they have strong and precise “channels” of communication, which escape the control of rationality.
This phenomenon was also verified between Padre Pio and Karol Wojtyla, and there are two concrete episodes, related in themselves, that demonstrate it. In 1948, the young priest Karol Wojtyla, a student in Rome, had heard talk of Padre Pio and wanted to meet him. He traveled to San Giovanni Rotondo during Easter vacation and stayed a week. It was never known what they spoke about. It seems that the saint of Pietrelcina “saw” him dressed as Pope – and with blood stains on his white cassock. Of this prophecy, spread rapidly after Wojtyla’s election as Pope, there was never confirmation.
However, undeniable is the fact that that meeting marked Wojtyla profoundly, arousing in him a great veneration for Padre Pio. In 1962, Wojtyla returned to Italy as a bishop to participate in the Second Vatican Council. In Rome, he received dramatic news that a collaborator of his, Wanda Poltawska, a doctor and psychiatrist, had a serious tumor. The doctors decided to attempt an operation, but the hope of saving her was almost nothing. Wojtyla wrote a letter immediately to Padre Pio asking for his prayers for Poltawska. Padre Pio, in those years, was subjected to very serious accusations. The Holy See decreed serious disciplinary restrictions against him, prohibiting priests and religious from contacting him.
Wojtyla was certainly informed about this situation, but he paid no attention because, for reasons unknown to us, he had “knowledge” of Padre Pio.
He sent the letter urgently by hand to Padre Pio through Angelo Battisti, an employee of the Secretariat of State and collaborator of Padre Pio. Battisti told me the story, handing me a copy of that letter, which Padre Pio asked that he read to him and, at the end, after a moment of silence, said: “Angiolino, one cannot say no to this.” Knowing that every word of Padre Pio had a mysterious and concrete repercussion in reality, Battisti was very surprised by that phrase. “Who might this Wojtyla be?” he wondered. He asked for information but in the Vatican no one knew him, except the Poles for whom he was only a young bishop. Eleven days later, Battisti was asked to take another letter of Wojtyla to Padre Pio.
And in this letter the Polish bishop thanked Padre Pio because Poltawska “had been suddenly cured before entering the operating room.” These are the certain facts we know and that demonstrate that Padre Pio, as on many other occasions, “intuited” God’s plans on Wojtyla with disconcerting precision.
Q: How does the third part of the secret of Fatima enter in Pope John Paul II’s history?
Allegri: In a mysterious way, as always happens with events of the Spirit. In theory, Pope John Paul II formed part of that “secret” since he was born. The mission was entrusted to him before being born and the history of his existence developed freely attuned to the designs of providence. But, in fact, perhaps, he became aware of his mission only after the 1981 attack. We do not have scientific proofs, explicit documents that demonstrate the relationship between Wojtyla and the secret of Fatima — only the conviction of the Pope himself that, after the attack, reflecting on what happened and reading Sister Lucia’s text on the third part of the famous secret, recognized himself in that account. Sister Lucia wrote that, during the apparition of July 13, 1917, she, Francisco and Jacinta had seen a bishop dressed in white who, half trembling, with halting step, afflicted by pain and sorrow, crossed, together with other bishops, priests, men and women religious, a great city in ruins, praying for the souls of the dead that he found on the way and [he] climbed up a steep mountain, on whose summit was a cross at whose foot he was killed. In the light of what happened, Wojtyla was convinced that the vision had the characteristics of an authentic prophecy.
And, with the passing of time, his conviction was strengthened until it became a certainty. It is licit to think that he had, from Sister Lucia, other information and clarifications that we do not know. In the year 2000, nineteen years after the attack, Pope John Paul II was so sure of his conviction that he wished to make it known to the whole world. That became a reality in Fatima, at the end of the ceremony of beatification of Francisco and Jacinta, through an address of Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Vatican secretary of state, before more than 1 million pilgrims, and countless millions of faithful connected live on television. Also Wojtyla’s determination to make his conviction public is an argument full of significance.
Rome, May 15, 2006:
There is a mysterious link between Pope John Paul II and Our Lady of Fatima, says journalist Renzo Allegri. And there is also a tie between the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the fall of Communist regimes, he contends. On Saturday, the 25th anniversary of the assassination attempt on John Paul II, the statue of Our Lady of Fatima was processed through St. Peter’s Square, where the Polish Pope shed his blood.
Q: When did John Paul II understand that he was the Pope of Fatima, and what did he do after he became aware of it?
Allegri: As I already mentioned, it is thought that Pope Karol Wojtyla became aware of his own role in relation to the message of Fatima, after the attack, reflecting on what happened, the coincidence between the attack and the date of the apparitions of Fatima, and reading the text of the secret. Since his youth, his Marian devotion was always very great. In his devotional practices, he gave priority to Polish Marian shrines, because they were part of his religious tradition, and also because he could not leave Poland. But he knew the history of Fatima well and the part of the secret already revealed by Lucia, which speaks about Russia, Communism and the persecution of believers.
The attack made him “center” his attention on his own role in regard to Fatima. He was very impressed by the coincidence of the date of the attack, May 13 at 5:17 p.m., with that of the start of the apparitions on May 13, 1917. He requested that a document be taken to him in hospital relative to the famous secret and he read it, discovering, in the still-unpublished part, details relative to his person that made quite an impression on him, to the point that he speaks about it three times in his testament. And he began immediately, with ardor, to make the spirit of Fatima a reality. He reflected above all on the Virgin’s request to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart. And, despite infinite difficulties, he did so.
Q: You maintain in the book that there is a direct relationship between the Virgin’s request to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Why?
Allegri: The connection is suggested by two events and two dates. In 1917, the Virgin said that if things were not going well, she would come to request the consecration of Russia. She made the petition in 1919, in an apparition to Lucia, specifying that the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart should be carried out “by the Church,” that is, by the Pope in union with all the bishops. But 14 years passed before the Virgin’s petition arrived. Pius XII took it into consideration personally and carried out the consecration twice, naming Russia explicitly. But it was a private initiative and not made in union with the bishops.
To involve the whole Church in this consecration, naming one country specifically, Russia, implied enormous ideological and political difficulties, which many bishops did not wish to address. In fact, neither Pius XII, nor John XXIII nor even Paul VI was able to carry out the consecration in the way the Lady requested it. John Paul II addressed this obstacle. But he was forced to take recourse to complicated and indirect stratagems to be able to name Russia. He sent a letter to all the bishops of the Church, inviting them to join him in the solemn consecration of the world, which would be carried out on March 25, 1984.
He did not name Russia in the letter but quoted the consecration formula that he would read, based on that pronounced by Pius XII in 1952, which named Russia explicitly. On reading the letter and the formula of consecration, the bishops would understand that it was the consecration that corresponded to that requested by the Virgin to Sister Lucia and that, therefore, specifically included Russia. The ceremony was held. As though by magic, in just six years, there was a drastic change in the world, with the end of the Cold War, the collapse of several Communist regimes, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the dissolution of the Soviet empire and the return to religious freedom in Russia and in all the other countries of the former Communist empire.
All occurred without the shedding of blood; not only that, but there were very curious and enigmatic details, or signs.
Observing the dates of the most important events of this great change, one sees that they took place on the dates of Catholic solemnities. For example, the Soviet Union ceased to exist when, at the end of a meeting, the presidents of Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia announced its dissolution formally. This occurred on Dec. 8, 1991. The 8th of December is the feast of the Immaculate Conception and it is easy to link it to the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
The definitive sign that indicated the end and defeat of Soviet Communism occurred the day when the red flag was lowered which for many decades was raised in the Kremlin, and in its place the national Russian flag was raised. This occurred on December 25, 1991, one of the most important religious feasts of the Catholic Church: the Nativity of Jesus.
Coincidences? Of course, they probably are only coincidences, but they might also be signs.
DECLARATION ON SUSPENDED PRIEST
Congregation for the Clergy
L’Osservatore Romano, the newspaper of the Holy See. email@example.com Weekly Edition in English
On 13 September 2001, the following declaration was released by the Congregation for the Clergy. It was signed by Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos, congregation prefect, and by Archbishop Csaba Ternyak, secretary:
“The Holy See has received several news reports concerning the so-called Conference for Peace in the World, which is being planned for Rome for October 7 to 13 and which has been organized by Fr. Nicholas Gruner of Canada.
The Congregation for the Clergy, upon the mandate from a higher authority, wishes to state that Rev. Nicholas Gruner is under an ‘a divinis’ suspension, which has been confirmed by a definitive sentence of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature. The activities of Fr. Gruner, therefore, including the above-mentioned conference, do not have the approval of legitimate ecclesiastical authorities.” [See pages 8, 17]
STATEMENT ON FATHER NICHOLAS GRUNER
from the Congregation for the Clergy
Declaration published on
4 October 1992
of English edition of L’Osservatore Romano:
The Congregation for the Clergy declares that the International Meeting on the topic, “Peace in the World and the Immaculate Heart of Mary”, scheduled for 8-12 October in Fatima, Portugal, and organized by Fr. Nicholas Gruner, has not been approved by the competent ecclesiastical authorities. The Congregation also declares that the same Fr. Nicholas Gruner does not have faculties from the Diocese of Leiria-Fatima to perform ministerial acts.
Cardinal Jose T. Sanchez, prefect Archbishop Crescenzio Sepe, secretary.
Father Nicholas Gruner, suspended priest who led Fatima Crusader, dead at 72
May 4, 2015
Father Nicholas Gruner, the controversial leader of the Fatima Center, died suddenly on April 29.
A Canadian native, Nicholas Gruner was ordained to the priesthood in the Diocese of Avellino, Italy, in 1976. He devoted himself tirelessly to promoting his own interpretation of the message of Our Lady of Fatima, which he advanced in the magazine, The Fatima Crusader. His radical message—including a claim that the Vatican had been subverted by the Soviet Union—won him a strong following among traditionalist Catholics but brought him increasingly into conflict with Church authorities.
In 1992, Father Gruner, who had built an international movement, was ordered to return to the Avellino diocese. When he failed to do so, he was suspended from priestly ministry in 1996. He appealed, but the Vatican upheld the suspension in 2001, and in later years, Church authorities repeatedly cautioned the faithful that his work did not have ecclesiastical approval.
Father Gruner died at his office of an apparent heart attack, just short of his 73rd birthday.
THE UNIFICATION CHURCH OF REV. SUN MYUNG MOON
The earlier referred book on New Age cults by Fr. James LeBar includes a short study [pages 39, 40] of this cult, also called the “The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity”. It was founded in 1954 by the Korean who first introduced it in Japan, and in 1972 took it to the US. Originally a Presbyterian, he claims that Jesus appeared to him when he was 16 and gave him his mission. He is notorious for his large-scale weddings at which he joins thousands of couples in wedlock. While this group recruits members in the usual manner, it has front organizations and also conducts conferences. Like CAUSA [the Confederation of Associations for the Unity of Societies of America] which has seventeen regional centres in Brazil. In 1986, CAUSA launched an ant-Communist manifesto and targeted a collection of eight million signatures. Our Sunday Visitor [January 4, 1987], in the article “Are millions of Brazilians leaving the Church?” reported that “a handful of conservative Catholic prelates, worried at the possibility of a communist take-over, still distrust the new democracy and covertly supported Moonie-backed groups in the campaign.” CAUSA-USA specializes, among other things, in workshops for the clergy, again stressing the anti-communist nature of their efforts.
Some basic teachings in the Moonies’ principal source book, the Divine Principle, include:
God has dual qualities- spirit and energy*. *ENERGY– a typical New Age characteristic of god.
Jesus is not the Son of God.
The death of Jesus did not effect redemption. His resurrection brought man spiritual redemption.
Salvation can only come through a Messiah who achieves perfection, marries and has perfect offspring.
Since Jesus wrought only spiritual redemption, the Lord of the Second Advent, who will bring physical redemption, is the Messiah born in Korea approximately 2000 years after Christ. By implication, it is the Rev. Moon himself. [From around 1975, dozens of Christians have authored books exposing the Moonies. The sect is also analysed in every book of New Age cults.]
THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY
We have noted that the Fatima Crusaders promote several traditional Catholic pieties and devotions to Mary and the saints, like the Brown Scapular, the 15-decade Rosary, the First Friday and other novenas, Ignatian retreats [with the exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola], visits to holy sites, etc. They do this promotion through teams called ‘Our Lady’s Volunteers’, through pilgrimages, personal visits, telephone calls, insertion of advertisements in newspapers, distribution of pamphlets, audio-tapes and CDs, radio and television, etc. They also have a great devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and encourage ‘frequent Confession and Communion’- attendance at daily Mass and the regular use of the Sacrament of Reconciliation [which they insist on still calling Confession]. The Fatima Apostolate also campaigns against the crime of abortion.
The Fatima Crusaders warn of an imminent new One-World Religion. They note that in this New World Order, the reality of sin will be denied, and so too the existence of heaven and hell. That religion[s] will disappear, and that there will be persecution of those who believe in God. Specific topics at the Rome congress included such burning issues as The New One-World Religion, The Threat of Atheistic Globalism, Evolution, Feminism, etc., and these were simultaneously translated into French, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian. This is most commendable because they are issues of great and immediate concern to the Universal Catholic Church which is herself addressing them through frequent encyclicals and statements from the Holy See [not forgetting the February 3, 2003 Provisional Report on the New Age Movement].
The fourth Fatima World Peace Conference [at the Royal Connaught Hotel, Hamilton, 1999] which was “broadcast on the World Wide Web” had over 350 delegates including 7 bishops and 50 priests listening to speeches on subjects that included the falsehood of the Theory of Evolution, the errors of the ‘Father of the New Age’- Jesuit priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, the persecution of the Church in China, the Godless United Nations, the New Age ‘United Religions’ Initiative, the dangers of Rock Music, etc., thus exhibiting commendable awareness of major 21st century spiritual threats. They also campaign against the aberrations that have crept into genuine ecumenism and interfaith dialogue.
The Fatima Crusaders express great concern about the rise of “Modernism, the synthesis of all heresies” which Pius X had strongly condemned and sought to eradicate. They also believe that “Modern Ecumenism is a Fraud”, because of its alleged Protestant origin and heritage in the World Council of Churches, and because “it places all religions on the same footing”; and they “warn faithful Catholics of surrendering their ‘pearl of great price’, their one true Holy Roman Catholic Faith to the liberal spirit of the age”.
In the Issue no. 75 and 76 [Winter and Spring 2004], John Vennari refers to Mortalium animos, the 1928 encyclical of Pope Pius XI “which condemns the same ecumenism that has been nurtured since Vatican II. In this encyclical, Pope Pius XI wrote that the Holy See has ‘always forbidden’ Catholics to take part in inter-religious assemblies. Pope Pius rightly insisted, ‘unity can only arise from one teaching authority, one law of belief, one faith of Christians’. Pope Pius also wrote that the ‘fair and alluring words’ of the pan-religious orientation ‘cloak a most deadly error subversive to the Catholic faith’.
…Keep in mind that at the 2003 Fatima Congress organized by Shrine Rector Guerra, [Jesuit] Father Jacques Dupuis and Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald explained that dialogue does not mean working to convert those outside the Catholic Church to Catholicism. Rather, dialogue is a means for all religions to work together in harmony, and to make a ‘Christian a better Christian and a better Hindu,’ as Dupuis said in his lecture that was applauded by Shrine Rector Luciano Guerra… [Dupuis* also said,] ‘There is no need to invoke here that horrible text from the Council of Florence in 1442′ concerning no salvation outside the Catholic Church… He said that the Holy Spirit is present and operative in the sacred books of Hinduism or of Buddhism. That he is present and operative in the sacred rites of Hinduism’. *His theology has been censured by Rome.
Spirit Daily [www.spiritdaily.com] asked if the Rector has any concerns that ecumenism might lead to compromise or to a tinge of the New Age… [At] the church of San Pietro at Assisi… on October 27, 1986, [quoting the New York Times], ‘Buddhists, led by the Dalai Lama, quickly converted the altar of the church by placing a small statue of the Buddha atop the tabernacle and setting prayer scrolls and incense burners around it.’ The other churches and holy places at Assisi were likewise farmed out for use by Muslims, Hindus, Zoroastrians, and African snake worshipers to perform their false, idolatrous rituals.” “Perhaps this congress should have been called ‘Fatima Meets the Age of Aquarius“. [Issue no. 75]
In their Open Letter to the Faithful of Portugal [Issue no. 76] “Concerning the Scandal at the Fatima Shrine”, [regarding the inter-religious congress October 10-12, 2003 at the Fatima Shrine] they raise important issues concerning the defilation of many Catholic sites, including one in India: “Rector Guerra’s guest at the conference was Fr. Arul Irudayam, Rector of the Catholic Marian Shrine Basilica in Vailankanni, India… Fr. Irudayam rejoiced to inform the audience that, as a further development of ‘inter-religious dialogue’, the Hindus now perform their religious rituals in the shrine at Vailankanni. The audience, including Rector Guerra, applauded this sacrilege.”
The Fatima Crusader Apostolate also wages war on what they term as “Approved” Pagan Inculturation. FC no. 76:
“Looking further at the ‘ecumenism guided’ by today’s progressivist guidelines, we behold the continuing horrors of pagan religious ritual incorporated into Catholic ceremonies. I personally witnessed, at World Youth Day 2002, a screaming thump-thump-thumping Native American pagan ritual that opened WYD’s Sunday Papal Mass! Then there’s the inculturation of voodoo practices in the Catholic Church in Africa. Then there’s the Hindu dance of arati and puja – a dance to the demon gods of Hinduism – which was performed within the beatification Mass of Mother Teresa on October 19, 2003…”
The Fatima Crusader exposes the threats to Catholicism from secular humanism, Freemasonry [both within and without the Church], and Communism.
THE ‘THIRD SECRET’ AND THE CONSECRATION OF RUSSIA
On June 26, 2000, at a press conference, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone presented a forty two-page booklet titled The Message of Fatima in which the Cardinal stated that the text of the Third Secret was “published here in its entirety”. Fr. Gruner analysed this booklet and determined, “Third Secret revealed, but not all of it.”
He also says, “Cardinal Angelo Sodano’s distorted account of the vision of the Third Secret accommodates the problematic interpretation of the vision- that it refers to the 1981 assassination attempt on the life of Pope John Paul II”.
From his study of all available Fatima material, Fr. Gruner believes that the shooting of the Pope by the lone gunman, Ali Agca, has nothing to do with the vision of the third seer, Lucy, and that the Vatican interpretation is false. He states that in Sr. Lucy’s vision, the Pope is shot dead by soldiers.
The Vatican says that, as desired by Our Lady, the Pope fulfilled her request at Tuy, Spain on March 25, 1984 when he consecrated the whole world to her. On June 13, 1929, Sr. Lucy had the vision of the Most Holy Trinity and Our Lady of Fatima, at Tuy. Here, Mary said, “The moment has come in which God asks 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, promising to save it by this means…” Seven years later, Jesus Himself confirmed the same to her, according to Sr. Lucy.
Fr. Gruner maintains that the 1984 consecration was “not done correctly” and hence “has not yet been accomplished”.
He quotes Sr. Lucy as saying in the September 1985 issue of Sol de Fatima that “There was no participation of all the bishops, and there was no mention of Russia”. The interviewer then asked, “So, the consecration was not done as requested by Our Lady?”, and Sr. Lucy answered, “No”. For justification of his stand, he refers to Sr. Lucy’s official letter of March 19, 1983, to the Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Sante Portalupi, where she maintains that “Russia must be clearly indicated as the object of the consecration”, and that the consecration must be collegial, “Each bishop must make a public and solemn consecration in his own cathedral”.
The Fatima Crusaders’ position: It is clear that the conditions laid down by Our Lord and Our Lady for the consecration of Russia have not been done. It must be the Pope together with all the Catholic bishops of the world to consecrate specifically Russia. The acts of Pope John Paul II of 1982, 1984, 1991, and 2000 have never made ‘Russia’ the specific object of their consecration. Pope Paul VI, in 1964, was the only Pope who had all the bishops of the world present with him in his solemn consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, but the bishops did not join in the act, nor did the Pope mention ‘Russia’. Pope Pius XII did two consecration attempts in 1942; on October 31 and on December 8. Neither mentioned ‘Russia’. Pope Pius XII made another consecration attempt on July 7, 1952. This time he mentioned ‘Russia’, but not together with all the Catholic bishops of the world, as was requested.
Despite all this apparent conflicting position, Rome and Gruner keep the line open between them, which is rather strange since the priest does not recognize the teaching of the Church though the same Pope. Fr. Gruner received a Christmas 2003 card [in acknowledgement of his], which is proudly displayed in the Spring 2004 issue of FC, from the office of the Pope.
Sister Lucia’s Unpublished Writings Released
Rome, June 2, 2006
A small book of unpublished writings by Fatima visionary Sister Lucia will soon be published in Italy. The 64-page volume, entitled “The Message of Fatima,” focuses on the message of Our Lady of Fatima in relation to events that have taken place.
The young Lucia dos Santos witnessed the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima that began on May 13, 1917, along with Francisco Marto and Jacinta Marto. Sister Lucia died at age 97 in February 2005. For 45 years, the Holy See did not reveal the content of the so-called third secret of Fatima, while Sister Lucia lived in religious silence. The unpublished text has been edited by the Carmel of Coimbra, Portugal, and issued by the Little Shepherds’ Secretariat.
The imprimatur, dated Feb. 13, is by retired Bishop Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva of Leiria-Fatima.
In the introduction, Father Geremia Carlo Vechina, Sister Lucia’s confessor, reveals that the visionary had already worked on the editing of the writings, at the request of the then general superior of the order, the future Cardinal Anastasio Alberto Ballestrero, on the occasion of his visit to Coimbra in 1955. That work was sent to Rome by order of Pope Paul VI, but “it remained forgotten in the Vatican Archives,” noted Father Vechina. In the essay, Sister Lucia says that on May 15, 1982, she received an invitation from Father Vechina, then provincial of the Order of Discalced Carmelites, “to write all the details that refer to the message of Fatima, from the beginning.” The visionary said she remained skeptical, fearful that she didn’t have the authorization of the Holy See to write on such questions. Her doubts vanished when she had the opportunity to speak with Cardinal Eduardo Pironio, then prefect of the Vatican Congregation for Religious, during his visit to the community on Sept. 9, 1983… [T]he consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary [by] Pope John Paul II [was] carried out in Rome on March 25, 1984. In Italy, the book, being issued by St. Clement Publications, goes on sale June 10. The book will eventually be published in other languages.
December 28, 2004
There are some wackos out there who have done with La Salette what they have done with Fatima — claiming that the “secrets” have not been fully revealed. I always find this amusing — if it is a secret, how would THEY know if it has been fully revealed unless they were privy to the secrets themselves – they are SECRETS, after all? 🙂 –Bro. Ignatius Mary OMSM
November 6, 2011
Why do you list Fr. Gruner and the Fatima Crusade as a group not to be associated with? I can say from my personal experience that he has done much to promote Our Lady, I can say he has helped me grow more in love with the Virgin and to pray the rosary. Please explain your position in this matter. I know there are issues with Rome (but that is because there are those in the Church to seek to null the message of Fatima, that is undeniable) but he does not teach anything contrary to Traditional Catholic teaching.
The Conferences he has in Rome are attended by Bishops and Cardinals in good standing. Fr. Gruner wants the entire message revealed and for the Holy Father in union with the Cardinals to do what was asked by Our Lady. That has not occurred, it is fact. We could argue the different points, but his web site explains all, as does your site. I think both of you work for the Lord within the structures of our Roman Catholic faith, division being from the devil. –Jose
I praise God that you have been helped by Fr. Gruner. Unfortunately, Fr. Gruner has been suspended as a priest the last time I checked. He was disobedient to his bishop.
I am also amazed by people who think the Third Secret has not been released or that it is incomplete. How would anyone know this unless they read the original document? This is calling Pope John Paul II and Sister Lucia liars about both the Consecration of Russia, which happened in 1984 and the Third Secret which was released in 2000.
Since both Pope John Paul II and Sr. Lucia have authenticated these documents, the case is closed. All that Our Lady asked has been completed. That is a demonstrated fact and verified by Sr. Lucia herself.
Anyone, including Fr. Gruner, is committing a sin by accusing the Pope of lying. The burden of proof of such accusations belong to the accusers. Fr. Gruner has provided no proof. All he has done is posit unsubstantiated opinions and hearsay.
Fr. Gruner has been an author of division. The devil is the father of division and accusation. Fr. Gruner needs to seek counseling if he is suffering from obsessive thinking.
As Colin B. Donovan, STL, states on the EWTN site: Catholics who associate themselves with such efforts participate in at least material disobedience to lawful papal authority. This means that externally, in themselves, their acts are disobedient, though internally, through ignorance or lack of intention, they may not be morally culpable (formal disobedience). However, they could, over time, find themselves in formal schism from the Church, that is, knowingly and willfully disobeying papal authority. This is because in the human will it is not very far from whining and complaining about what you don’t like about the Church and this pontificate to formally (that is, with full moral culpability) breaking communion with Peter, especially when you have taken the first step of material resistance to papal authority.
Also read, Canon Law and Fr. Gruner’s Suspension a divinis, by Peter John Vere, JCL/M (Canon Law)
This issue is a closed issue. The Church has spoken; the debate is ended as I believe St. Augustine once said.
I hope this has not soured you to our site, but you well know that I call a spade a spade. It does not matter what opinion I, you, or Fr. Gruner hold. The competent authority was Pope John Paul II and Sr. Lucia. No one else had the competence, or standing, to offer an opinion, including Fr. Gruner.
I pray that Fr. Gruner will be healed of his obsessions and that he reconciles with his bishop so that he can be restored to licit ministry. –Bro. Ignatius Mary OMSM
Private Revelations [Fatima]
July 22, 2012
On your comments on private revelations and reading of bible as well as other books, hope you do recognise that some of them are very good help, especially in our times, to be able to understand The Word better; as an example, it was from private revelations to Bl. Emmerich that the Church came to find about the Bl. Mother’s house in Ephesus, now a major pilgrimage center; her writings also help to clarify some of the biblical passages and truths. –M.M.
I can understand how people can misinterpret my words to think I am against Private Revelations. I am not anti-private revelation. I wear a Miraculous Medal ring, my habit includes a scapular, a real scapular that goes over the shoulders and down to the ankle that is silver-gray on one side as the Scapular of St. Michael, and Brown on the other side as the Brown Scapular. When praying the rosary I include the Fatima prayer.
There are some great devotions that have come from private revelations, but there has not be even one dotted “i” of information about the faith or how to live the faith that I did not already know from the Bible, Sacred Tradition, and the Saints. Not one. The Church herself says that private revelations are not needed and that no one must even believe in them — not even Fatima. That says it all in putting this into perspective.
The Fatima groupies, by the way, illustrate the severe imbalance I am talking about. Some of these people will say a person is going to hell if they do not believe in Fatima. What nonsense and sad superstition these people have.
But, if it takes a Private Revelation to get a person’s hind-end in gear, to do what they should have been doing all along, then praise God. That is why Mary in her love comes to us; she wants us to get into gear. But, the people need to move beyond chasing apparitions and begin to eat meat like an adult. I am reminded of St. Paul who had to deal with this exact same thing:
(1 Corinthians 3:1-2) But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food; for you were not ready for it; and even yet you are not ready,
(1 Corinthians 13:11) When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways.
When her children cannot eat the meat of Public Revelation, Mary comes and gives them milk in hopes that they will grow up and eat the meat that God intended for them.
We see this in that Mary always points to her Son, and pointing to her Son means pointing also to her Son’s love letter to us called the Bible and Sacred Tradition. Her Son is Logos, the very Word. To point to Him is to point to the Word. To ignore or relegate to secondary place God’s Word, His love letter to us, in favor of private revelations is utterly out of line and I believe, insulting to God. I mean, this is like reading a newspaper reporter’s account of the war, instead of reading the love letters sent from the war by loved-ones to you personally.
The issue here is balance with the scales strongly tilted in favor of Public Revelation, first, foremost, and always. –Bro. Ignatius Mary OMSM
Private Revelation: Disturbing Easter Vigil video [Fatima]
July 23, 2012
Here’s a link to a video on the internet of an Easter Vigil Mass at the Vatican in which an alleged satanic invocation is said. It happens at 27 minutes and 30 seconds in the video. A translation of the invocation from Latin to English is given and I as a Catholic am shocked. The link is: http://thirdsecret.forumotion.com/t11-benedict-xvi-invokes-thedevil-during-easter-vigil-mass. Please let me know your thoughts about this. God bless! –Tony
With all due respect, if what you are saying is that you think a demonic invocation is actually happening and this is so-called proof of it, or that you suspect it, then I think the real question is why you are listening to anti-Catholic bigots and idiots? This should not cause you any pause at all. It is obviously that website you referenced and their misinterpretation of the prayer are the work lunatic bigots and maybe even mentally ill. There is nothing to be shocked about other than such idiots as these people exist on the planet. I am glad to know about them, by the way, because I am putting together a website to identify websites that are hateful to the Catholic Church. They will be included.
Anytime, and I mean anytime you see such outrageous attacks upon the Church it will be 100% of the time coming from some bigot or idiot either outside or inside the Church. Do not listen to it and do not let your faith be shaken or shocked even to the weight of a feather.
These people do not know Latin and assert the absurd. This prayer in the Easter Vigil Mass is NOT, I repeat, is NOT an invocation to Satan. Sheesh. Somebody needs to knock the bajebees out of these numbskulls.
The prayer properly, and officially, interpreted into English is:
May the Morning Star, which never sets find this flame still burning: Christ, that Morning Star, who came back from the dead, and shed his peaceful light on all mankind, your Son who lives and reigns for ever and ever.
Ya, that sounds like a prayer to Satan, all right. Good grief. Lucifer is Latin for Morning Star. This lucifer, this morning star, is identified in the prayer as Christ.
By the way, before the Rebellion of the Angels, the Angel Lucifer, was a Godly angel of God. Lucifer was his heavenly name. When the angels were tested Lucifer rebelled against God, his name was changed to Satan, his fallen name.
Thus, there is nothing nefarious or evil about the word lucifer. It simply means “morning star”. Satanas (Satan), by the way means, “the deceiver, the enemy,” to which he certainly is.
Satan no longer has title to the name “Morning Star”. He is no longer Lucifer. Satan tries to steal the name Lucifer by his followers sometimes using that name in order to confuse people (like the owners of that website), but, Satan has no right whatsoever to the heavenly name Lucifer. He lost that moniker when he rebelled.
Christ is the only Morning Star that “never sets” and whose flame burns forever. This Morning Star of Christ is the only one who “came back from the dead.” It is crystal clear that this is a prayer about Christ.
Since “Morning Star” in Latin is lucifer, and the prayer is in Latin, the word lucifer had to be used. This is not rocket science, but these people at that website appear to be a lot of nuts short of a fruitcake.
P.S. I have briefly looked over that website. These people are part of the Fatima Nut Brigade who think they know more then the Magisterium (in other words, liberals). I believe, and I mean I truly believe, that in my opinion, all those so-called Catholics who are part of the Fatima Nut Brigade, like Fr. Gruner, Fatima Crusader, and others in that ilk, desperately need to visit a psychiatrist or an exorcist, or both. –Bro. Ignatius Mary
Private Revelation: Fatima groups
July 28, 2012
In general, these are the markers that need to be evaluated to determine if Fatima site is legit.
1) needs to be loyal and obedient to the Church,
2) admit that the Third Secret has been fully published by the Holy See,
3) that the Consecration of Russia has been done, and
4) that Fatima is a private revelation to which no one is required to believe.
Some Fatima groups think that the apparitions there were Public Revelation and anyone not believing them is sin. That is not correct. All Public Revelation ceased at the end of the First Century. There is no such thing as any Public Revelation since that time. That is one of many reasons why so-called new revelations to the John Smith (Mormons) or to Muhammad (Islam) are objectively false. Both these men were false prophets.
Organizations such as Fr. Nicholas
Gruner‘s Fatima Network (Fatima.org), Fatima Crusader, International Fatima Rosary Crusade, and other organizations of his should be avoided at all costs, and any other website that agrees with Fr. Gruner should be avoided.
The only site dedicated to Fatima to which I am aware that is loyal to the Church, and objectively accurate on the Fatima issues, is the Fatima Family Apostolate. -Bro. Ignatius Mary
UPDATE ON MILINGO
COMMUNIQUE: MILINGO DISMISSED FROM THE CLERICAL STATE
Vatican City, 17 December, 2009 (Vatican Information Service)
The Holy See Press Office released the following English-language communiqué at midday today:
“For a number of years the Church has followed with great concern the difficulties caused by the regrettable conduct of Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo. Many attempts have been made to bring Archbishop Milingo back into communion with the Catholic Church, including the consideration of suitable ways to enable him to exercise the episcopal ministry. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI were directly involved in those efforts and both Popes personally followed the case of Archbishop Milingo in a spirit of paternal solicitude.
“In the course of this unhappy series of events, Archbishop Milingo became irregular in 2001 as a result of his attempt to marry Mrs. Maria Sung, and incurred the medicinal penalty of suspension (cf. canons 1044 para. 1, n. 3; 1394 para. 1 of the Code of Canon Law). Thereafter, he headed certain groups calling for the abolition of clerical celibacy and gave numerous interviews to the media in open disobedience to the repeated interventions of the Holy See, creating serious upset and scandal among the faithful. Then, on 24 September 2006 in Washington, Archbishop Milingo ordained four bishops without pontifical mandate.
“By so doing, he incurred the penalty of excommunication ‘latae sententiae’ (canon 1382) which was declared by the Holy See on 26 September 2006 and is still in force today. Sadly, Archbishop Milingo has shown no sign of the desired repentance with a view to returning to full communion with the Supreme Pontiff and the other members of the College of Bishops. Rather, he has persisted in the unlawful exercise of acts belonging to the
episcopal office, committing new crimes against the unity of Holy Church. Specifically, in recent months Archbishop Milingo has proceeded to several other episcopal ordinations.
“The commission of these grave crimes, which has recently been established, is to be considered as proof of the persistent contumacy of Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo. The Holy See has therefore been obliged to impose upon him the further penalty of dismissal from the clerical state.
“According to canon 292 of the Code of Canon Law, the penalty of dismissal from the clerical state, now added to the grave penalty of excommunication, has the following effects: loss of the rights and duties attached to the
clerical state, except for the obligation of celibacy; prohibition of the exercise of any ministry, except as provided for by canon 976 of the Code of Canon Law in those cases involving danger of death; loss of all offices and
functions and of all delegated power, as well as prohibition of the use of clerical attire. Consequently, the participation of the faithful in any future celebrations organised by Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo is to be
“It must be pointed out that the dismissal of a bishop from the clerical state is most extraordinary. The Holy See has felt obliged to act in this way due to the serious consequences for ecclesial communion resulting from repeated episcopal consecrations carried out without pontifical mandate; nevertheless, the Church hopes that Archbishop Milingo will see the error of his ways.
“As for those recently ordained by Archbishop Milingo, the Church’s discipline in imposing the penalty of excommunication ‘latae sententiae’ upon those who receive episcopal consecration without pontifical mandate is
well-known. While expressing hope for their conversion, the Church reaffirms what was declared on 26 September 2006, namely that she does not recognize these ordinations, nor does she intend to recognise them, or any subsequent ordinations based on them, in the future. Hence the canonical status of the supposed bishops remains as it was prior to the ordination conferred by Archbishop Milingo.
“At this moment, as the Church experiences profound sorrow for the grave acts perpetrated by Archbishop Milingo, she entrusts to the power of prayer the repentance of the guilty party and of all those who – be they priests or lay faithful – have in any way co-operated with him by acting against the unity of Christ’s Church”.
Vatican Dismisses Milingo From Clerical State. Calls Move an “Extraordinary” Measure
Vatican City, December 17, 2009
Retired Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo of Lusaka, Zambia, who attracted the world’s attention in 2001 when he attempted to marry a Korean acupuncturist during a ceremony of Sun Myung Moon’s Unificationist Church, has been dismissed from the clerical state.
A communiqué published today by the Vatican press office notes that the “dismissal of a bishop from the clerical state is most extraordinary,” and adds that the Church “hopes that Archbishop Milingo will see the error of his way.”
Although the scandal of Milingo’s attempted marriage — so noted because the Church doesn’t recognize its validity — garnered much more media attention, the Church didn’t take the extreme measure to dismiss him from the clerical state until after he began in September 2006 to ordain bishops without permission from the Vatican. The ordinations are part of an effort to abolish celibacy in the priesthood.
“By so doing,” the Vatican statement affirms, “he incurred the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae (Canon 1382) which was declared by the Holy See on 26 September 2006 and is still in force today.”
“Sadly, Archbishop Milingo has shown no sign of the desired repentance with a view to returning to full communion with the Supreme Pontiff and the other members of the College of Bishops,” the note continues. “Rather, he has persisted in the unlawful exercise of acts belonging to the episcopal office, committing new crimes against the unity of Holy Church.
“Specifically, in recent months Archbishop Milingo has proceeded to several other episcopal ordinations. The commission of these grave crimes, which has recently been established, is to be considered as proof of the persistent contumacy of Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo.
“The Holy See has therefore been obliged to impose upon him the further penalty of dismissal from the clerical state.”
“While expressing hope for their conversion, the Church reaffirms what was declared on 26 September 2006, namely that she does not recognize these ordinations, nor does she intend to recognize them, or any subsequent ordinations based on them, in the future,” the Vatican affirms. “Hence the canonical status of the supposed bishops remains as it was prior to the ordination conferred by Archbishop Milingo.”
Citing Canon 292, the communiqué explains that dismissal from the clerical state implies the “loss of the rights and duties attached to the clerical state, except for the obligation of celibacy; prohibition of the exercise of any ministry, except as provided for by Canon 976 of the Code of Canon Law in those cases involving danger of death; loss of all offices and functions and of all delegated power, as well as prohibition of the use of clerical attire.”
“Consequently, the participation of the faithful in any future celebrations organized by Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo is to be considered unlawful,” the note says, adding that the Church “entrusts to the power of prayer the repentance of the guilty party and of all those who — be they priests or lay faithful — have in any way cooperated with him by acting against the unity of Christ’s Church.”
From Lusaka to Rome
Emmanuel Milingo, 79, was born in Mnukwa, Zambia. He was ordained a priest in 1958 and was named archbishop of Lusaka in 1969. He was 39.
Before being named archbishop, he had founded the Daughters of Zambia Helpers’ Society and the Daughters of the Redeemer.
In 1983, he was called to Rome to answer accusations of improper use of the powers of exorcism. The Pope accepted his resignation as archbishop and was transferred to the Vatican as a functionary in the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People.
Archbishop Milingo spent his time, however, organizing exorcisms and healing services, attended by thousands of faithful. Since these ceremonies were often emotional, with “reinterpretations” of the exorcism ritual, the Italian bishops prohibited Archbishop Milingo from holding them in their dioceses
As a result, the Zambian started holding the services in hotel reception rooms. It also led him to seek recognition of his work from the Unification Church.
In 1999, the archbishop was removed from his post in the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People.
In May 2001 — at the age of 71 — Milingo attended a group marriage ceremony with Maria Sung celebrated within Sun Myung Moon’s Family Federation for World Peace and Unification.
Milingo met his future wife — a 43-year-old Korean acupuncturist — two days before the wedding. Although she was chosen by Unification Church founder Moon himself, Milingo said he regarded her as “a twin soul.” He said he had no idea where they would live. Shortly after the ceremony Milingo visited Pope John Paul II in Rome and expressed his desire to return to the Catholic Church and leave Maria. The reconciliation was mediated by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Pope’s secretary of state, who at the time was an archbishop and the secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
After a long period of spiritual retreat in Argentina, the archbishop returned to his ministry in the town of Zagarolo near Rome.
In 2006, the situation changed. After weeks of keeping out of the public eye, he appeared on July 12 in Washington, D.C., to announce that he would again be living with Maria Sung and would publicly contest priestly celibacy.
So, has the Third Secret been fully revealed? The debate rages on…
UPDATE ON THE “THIRD SECRET” AND THE INGO DOLLINGER CONTROVERSY
Cardinal Ratzinger: We have not published the whole Third Secret of Fatima
All emphases theirs
By Maike Hickson, OnePeterFive, May 15, 2016
[UPDATE: The Vatican has responded to this story with a direct denial attributed to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI himself. You may read their statement and our response to it here.]
Today, on the Feast of Pentecost, I called Fr. Ingo Dollinger, a German priest and former professor of theology in Brasil, who is now quite elderly and physically weak. He has been a personal friend of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI for many years. Father Dollinger unexpectedly confirmed over the phone the following facts:
Not long after the June 2000 publication of the Third Secret of Fatima by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger told Fr. Dollinger during an in-person conversation that there is still a part of the Third Secret that they have not published! “There is more than what we published,” Ratzinger said. He also told Dollinger that the published part of the Secret is authentic and that the unpublished part of the Secret speaks about “a bad council and a bad Mass” that was to come in the near future.
Father Dollinger gave me permission to publish these facts on this High Feast of the Holy Ghost and he gave me his blessing.
Father Dollinger was ordained a priest in 1954 and served as secretary of the well-respected bishop of Augsburg, Josef Stimpfle. In God’s providence, I met this bishop once when I was not yet a Catholic, and I was deeply touched by his humility, warmth and welcome. He invited me to visit him once in Augsburg. When I was in the process of conversion, I did reach out to him, but then, to my chagrin, I discovered that Bishop Stimpfle had already passed away. (He is greatly missed.)
Father Dollinger was himself also involved with the German Bishops’ Conference’s discussions concerning freemasonry in the 1970s at the end of which came the statement that freemasonry is not compatible with the Catholic Faith.
He later taught moral theology at the seminary of the Order of Canons Regular of the Holy Cross which belongs to the Opus Angelorum. Bishop Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, is member of that same Order of Canons Regular of the Holy Cross. Most importantly, Father Dollinger had Padre Pio (d. 1968) as his confessor for many years and became very close to him. Dollinger is also personally known to one of my beloved family members.
This sensitive information pertaining to the Third Secret, which has been circulating among certain Catholic groups for a few years now, has now been personally confirmed to me by Fr. Dollinger himself, at a time in history where the Church seems to have fallen into a pit of confusion. It might help explain, at least in part, why we are where we are now.
Importantly, it shows the loving mercy of the Mother of God to warn us and to prepare her children for this battle that the Church now finds herself in. In spite of the decision of those in responsible places within the Church, She has made sure the fuller truth would still be revealed and spread.
This information also might explain why Pope Benedict XVI, once he had become pope, tried to undo some of the injustices that are directly related with this Dollinger revelation, namely: he freed the Traditional Mass from its suppression; he removed the excommunication of the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX); and lastly, he publicly declared in 2010 in Fatima: “We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete.” He also added these words in an interview during his airplane flight to Fatima:
As for the new things which we can find in this message today, there is also the fact that attacks on the Pope and the Church come not only from without, but the sufferings of the Church come precisely from within the Church, from the sin existing within the Church.
This too is something that we have always known, but today we are seeing it in a really terrifying way: that the greatest persecution of the Church comes not from her enemies without, but arises from sin within the Church, and that the Church thus has a deep need to re-learn penance, to accept purification, to learn forgiveness on the one hand, but also the need for justice.
With this statement, Benedict XVI effectively contradicted his own earlier words of June, 2000, where he had stated:
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’. Insofar as individual events are described, they belong to the past. Those who expected exciting apocalyptic revelations about the end of the world or the future course of history are bound to be disappointed.
All these actions of Pope Benedict XVI show that he must have known, in his conscience, that he somehow had to correct certain injustices and confusing ambiguities of the recent past. He defended the traditional Mass, he gave back dignity to the SSPX, and he re-inserted the importance of the Fatima message. Additionally, he also tried to deal with the mystery of Vatican II, although, it seems, in too vague of a manner.
In this context, it might be worth mentioning that my husband and I were both together told by a priest who had met privately with Pope Benedict XVI that Pope Benedict himself considers Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre “to be the greatest theologian of the 20th century.” My husband and I both vouch for having heard these exact words directly from this priest — words which were allegedly spoken by Pope Benedict in the context of the pope’s proposal to re-introduce Marcel Lefebvre’s teaching more widely into the Catholic Church.
While we contemplate the gravity of the cumulative omissions and delays concerning the actual release of the full Third Secret, and when heaven had asked us to do it – namely, not later than 1960 – we are grateful to the Holy Ghost that He has seemingly made possible now this affirmative telephone conversation today on the Feast of Pentecost. May the true message of Fatima – together with the recent revelations of Fr. Brian Harrison and Dr. Alice von Hildebrand about what it also contains – spread far and wide and thereby help free all faithful Catholics from any bondage to half-truths and deficient loyalties. May we all freely and fully adhere to the full Truth of the Message of Mary’s Mercy – which will surely, under grace, help to set us free!
606 readers’ comments
On Fatima Story, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI Breaks Silence
All emphases theirs
By Steve Skojec, OnePeterFive, May 21, 2016
Today, May 21, 2016, the Holy See Press Office has released, in its daily bulletin, a statement attributed to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. The statement categorically denies the affirmation, reported here, from Fr. Ingo Dollinger, which speaks of a private conversation in which then-Cardinal Ratzinger spoke to Dollinger, a personal friend, about there being more to the Third Secret of Fatima than was published by the Vatican in June of 2000. Here is the full text of the Vatican statement:
Communiqué: on various articles regarding the “Third Secret of Fatima”
Several articles have appeared recently, including declarations attributed to Professor Ingo Dollinger according to which Cardinal Ratzinger, after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (which took place in June 2000), had confided to him that the publication was not complete.
In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares “never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima”, clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter “are pure inventions, absolutely untrue”, and he confirms decisively that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”.
[00855-EN.01] [Original text: Italian – working translation]
As the Publisher of OnePeterFive, I wish to respond to this statement. One cannot take lightly a rebuttal from someone of the stature of Pope Emeritus Benedict. It is noteworthy that — to our knowledge — this is the first time since his abdication in 2013 that the Pope Emeritus has issued an official statement through the Vatican press office. With all that is currently troubling the Church, with all the confusion that now assails the faithful, this is the story which has prompted Benedict to break his silence. Clearly, this is a matter of unusual importance in the eyes of the Holy See.
This statement is received by us with filial respect and love for the Pope Emeritus. And yet, it presents a problem. It conflicts directly with statements we have reported, and accuses us of false “attribution” and “invention.” It also flatly contradicts our source, Fr. Dollinger, not offering the possibility even of a misinterpretation, but rather, an accusation that the events he recounts are completely fabricated.
It is, in itself, a strangely perfunctory communique, and is presented in a way that prompts questions about its provenance and completeness. It is not a full, unabridged statement from Pope Emeritus Benedict; nor does it bear his signature. We are presented instead with pull quotes attributed to Benedict, and lacking the full context in which they originally appeared. Neither is it given to us to know who conducted this apparent interview with him, or how the questions were phrased.
We are, in other words, asked to take it on faith that the statement contains the authentic, complete, and ratified sentiments of the Pope Emeritus on the matter.
It is noteworthy that when we presented the words of Fr. Dollinger as reported by Dr. Hickson, we were accused by some of reporting unverifiable hearsay. But now we are given partial statements attributed to Benedict by an unnamed member of the Vatican communications staff — statements which implicate us, and also Pope Benedict’s old friend, Fr. Dollinger, in willful deception — and we are asked to believe that the matter is therefore settled?
I hope you will forgive my skepticism.
I have two questions about the semantics of this carefully-constructed statement. I believe they merit consideration.
First, I would like to draw attention to the portion which states, “the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter ‘are pure inventions, absolutely untrue’.”
Dr. Maike Hickson, who personally called Fr. Dollinger, attests to the truth of what she recounted from that conversation. Inasmuch as the Vatican statement accuses her of “attributing” statements which are “inventions” to Fr. Dollinger, it is false. She did not imagine the conversation she had with Fr. Dollinger, she reported it, and I stand by her testimony with full confidence in her integrity, both as a journalist and as a faithful daughter of the Church.
Further, this morning Dr. Hickson telephoned Father Dollinger with the news of the Vatican statement, and at that time he again confirmed to her emphatically and clearly his previous remarks. In other words, he stood by his story.
We must also reiterate that Dr. Hickson’s original conversation with Fr. Dollinger could not have been an “invention” inasmuch as it was not original in its content. It was not an attempt to break news, but rather to seek direct confirmation of a story that had already been attributed to Fr. Dollinger years ago. As stated in Dr. Hickson’s original article, “This sensitive information pertaining to the Third Secret, which has been circulating among certain Catholic groups for a few years now, has now been personally confirmed to me by Fr. Dollinger himself…”
The first published account of Fr. Dollinger’s testimony (of which we are aware) appeared in an interview with Fr. Paul Kramer in Fatima Crusader in May of 2009. It has since been referenced in various Catholic publications and venues. Anecdotally, one of our commenters on the Fr. Dollinger story recalled that as a Brazilian, he had heard this same story from a priest who was a student of Fr. Dollinger in 2003 or 2004. (Fr. Dollinger was the rector of the Institutum Sapientiae in Brazil, where he taught moral theology.) The only thing new about our report is the direct confirmation made by Fr. Dollinger (in German, his native language) to Dr. Hickson, which she sought in an attempt to gain clarity on the matter.
Second, the communique quotes Pope Benedict as saying that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”. This is very cautious language, in a legal sense. If the Vatican has already published all that it intends to publish about the Third Secret of Fatima — even if there is more that they do not intend to publish— one would be technically correct in saying that “the publication is complete.” It does not in any way dispel the notion that a text written by Sister Lucia at the prompting of Our Lady as a means of interpreting the symbolic import of the Third Secret may yet exist.
As I stated in my follow-up to our original article, one needn’t assume that the popes who have potentially concealed additional information relating to the Third Secret have lied to us; if they fear that the information it contains will cause severe damage to the Church in some way, they may be using broad mental reservation in their concealment of the portion of the text in question. There is also the issue, raised by Marco Tosatti, of internal questioning within the Vatican apparatus about which portions of an additional explanatory text, if it exists, can be attributed to Our Lady, and which to Sister Lucia. If there were sufficient doubt, one could conceivably conceal such a text while remaining technically correct stating that the full secret (i.e., the portion that they were confident came from Our Lady) had been revealed. The legalistic sense, therefore, is noteworthy in this regard.
I believe that beyond the questions raised by the text of the communique, there are other known facts which simply do not add up in this statement as attributed to Pope Benedict. The language is strong, even harsh, and it seems uncharacteristic in that regard. Benedict has a reputation for kindness and gentleness, and the source of the information he is refuting comes from a long-time friend – a friendship that his statement does not deny.
The statement also appears to close the door emphatically on the question of any further undisclosed import in the Third Secret. And yet Benedict’s own position on this issue has seemingly evolved over the past 16 years, and it would be difficult to characterize it as a settled matter. On June 26, 2000, when the Vatican announced the text of the Third Secret of Fatima, it was accompanied by a theological explanation by then-Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In it, he said:
And so we come to the final question: What is the meaning of the “secret” of Fatima as a whole (in its three parts)? What does it say to us? 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”. Insofar as individual events are described, they belong to the past. Those who expected exciting apocalyptic revelations about the end of the world or the future course of history are bound to be disappointed. Fatima does not satisfy our curiosity in this way, just as Christian faith in general cannot be reduced to an object of mere curiosity. What remains was already evident when we began our reflections on the text of the “secret”: the exhortation to prayer as the path of “salvation for souls” and, likewise, the summons to penance and conversion.
But as Pope Benedict, Ratzinger travelled to Fatima in May of 2010. And at that time, he offered a somewhat different interpretation. From his airplane on May 11, 2010:
I would say that, here too, beyond this great vision of the suffering of the Pope, which we can in the first place refer to Pope John Paul II, an indication is given of realities involving the future of the Church, which are gradually taking shape and becoming evident. So it is true that, in addition to the moment indicated in the vision, there is mention of, there is seen, the need for a passion of the Church, which naturally is reflected in the person of the Pope, yet the Pope stands for the Church and thus it is sufferings of the Church that are announced. The Lord told us that the Church would constantly be suffering, in different ways, until the end of the world.
Two days later, at a Mass at the Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima on May 13, 2010, Pope Benedict said:
We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete.
Christopher Ferrara, a noted expert and author on the topic of Fatima, recounted the following earlier this week, related to Antonio Socci’s book on the topic:
[I]t should be said that, in fact, the Popes themselves have not told us that the Message has been fully revealed. The vision pertaining to the Secret was not revealed until 2000, after which John Paul II observed a conspicuous silence concerning the controversy over the completeness of the revelation. And in 2010, as Socci has put it, Benedict not only declined to say that all had been revealed but rather “reopened the dossier” on the Third Secret by alluding to contents that clearly do not appear in the vision. Further, Benedict sent Socci a note thanking him for publishing The Fourth Secret of Fatima (which I translated into English), even though it accuses the Vatican apparatus of concealing a pertinent text.
For his part, in a blog post dated May 12, 2007, Socci relates that he keeps
the letter Benedict XVI wrote to me about my book, thanking me “for the sentiments it inspired in me.” [per i sentimenti che l’hanno suggerito] Words that comfort in the face of insults and accusations…
The inspiration for Dr. Hickson to seek out confirmation from Fr. Dollinger came, in part, from the new testimony of Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, who recently published formerly private information regarding an additional portion of the Third Secret which indicated an “infiltration of the Church to the very top.” This information, according to Dr. von Hildebrand, was revealed to her and her late husband in 1965 by Monsignor Mario Boehm, a former editor of the official Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano.
Is Dr. von Hildebrand also to be accused of inventing her story? What of the late Cardinal Ciappi, the papal theologian to Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II? It is Ciappi who is widely credited with the public revelation of the information that Alice von Hildebrand has now confirmed: “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
There is a great deal that does not add up. There are many questions left unanswered. We offer our sincere prayers for the Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and our gratitude that he broke his silence to address this open question.
At the same time, we are being asked to believe that we are being lied to by our sources. That we are being deceived by individuals in the last years of their life, with nothing apparent to gain. Individuals who have established strong reputations as noteworthy and orthodox Catholics, and whose reputations have now been put on the line by presenting an alternate version of events.
This is a great deal to ask, and we must respectfully request, therefore, that we be given a complete response — a full, unaltered, and witnessed statement from the Pope Emeritus himself. The filtered words of the Vatican Press office do not suffice.
345 readers’ comments
Do a Google search and one will find a lot of information on this unresolved controversy -Michael
Pope emeritus: Third Secret of Fatima was released in full
May 21, 2016
(Vatican Radio) Pope emeritus Benedict XVI has said he never told anyone the publication of the “Third Secret of Fatima” in the year 2000 was incomplete, and confirmed the document was published in its totality.
A Communiqué was published Saturday by the Holy See Press Office on various articles regarding the “Third Secret of Fatima.”
“Several articles have appeared recently, including declarations attributed to Professor Ingo Dollinger according to which Cardinal Ratzinger, after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (which took place in June 2000), had confided to him that the publication was not complete,” – the Communiqué reads – “In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares ‘never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima’, clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter ‘are pure inventions, absolutely untrue’, and he confirms decisively that ‘the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete’.”
Three children in Portugal saw apparition of the Virgin Mary six times between May and October 1917.
According to one of the visionaries – Sr. Lúcia de Jesus Rosa Santos – on July 13, 1917, Our Lady entrusted the children with three secrets, which she later wrote down and delivered to the Pope.
The third secret was not revealed with the others, but Pope John Paul II decided to release it in the Jubilee Year of 2000.
Vatican: 3rd Secret of Fatima Has Been Released in Full
By Susan Brinkmann, May 23, 2016
Contrary to rumors circulating throughout the Catholic world lately, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI denies having ever said that the release of the third secret of Fatima in the year 2000 was incomplete.
[see immediately above] is reporting on the communique, issued Saturday by the Holy See Press Office, which confirms that the contents of the third secret have been published in their entirety.
“Several articles have appeared recently, including declarations attributed to Professor Ingo Dollinger according to which Cardinal Ratzinger, after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (which took place in June 2000), had confided to him that the publication was not complete,” the Communiqué reads.
“In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares ‘never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima’, clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter ‘are pure inventions, absolutely untrue’, and he confirms decisively that ‘the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete’.”
According to Sr. Lucia de Jesus Rosa Santos, one of the three children to whom Mary appeared between May and October of 1917, Our Lady entrusted the children with three secrets in a vision that occurred on July 13, 1917. Lucia later wrote down these three secrets and delivered them to the Pope.
Two of the secrets were released to the public, but the third secret remained in a sealed envelope with the instructions that it should not be opened before 1960.
In a meeting that took place on April 27, 2000 between Sr. Lucia and Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Lucia was asked about the stipulations regarding the third secret.
“Why only after 1960? Was it Our Lady who fixed that date?” Archbishop Bertone asked.
Sister Lucia replied: “It was not Our Lady. I fixed the date because I had the intuition that before 1960 it would not be understood, but that only later would it be understood. Now it can be better understood. I wrote down what I saw; however it was not for me to interpret it, but for the Pope.”
At the directive of St. John Paul II, Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Secretary of State at the time, was asked to interpret the secret. He found it to be symbolic in nature and summarized it as follows:
“The vision of Fatima concerns above all the war waged by atheistic systems against the Church and Christians, and it describes the immense suffering endured by the witnesses of the faith in the last century of the second millennium. It is an interminable Way of the Cross led by the Popes of the twentieth century.”
Click here* for a complete description of the secret and its interpretation.
*THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA – The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, JUNE 26, 2000
Pope Benedict: ‘the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete’
May 23, 2016
Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has denied a report that he once told Father Ingo Dollinger, a German priest who lives in Brazil, that the third secret of Fatima has not been published in its entirety.
“Several articles have appeared recently, including declarations attributed to Professor Ingo Dollinger according to which Cardinal Ratzinger, after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (which took place in June 2000), had confided to him that the publication was not complete,” the Holy See Press Office stated on May 21, adding:
In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares “never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima,” clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter “are pure inventions, absolutely untrue,” and he confirms decisively that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete.”
Following the publication of the Vatican statement, Father Dollinger stood by his statement, according to the OnePeterFive blog, which had earlier recounted the priest’s remarks.
And, has Russia been consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary?
Most Traditionalists say “No”.
Do a Google search and one will find a lot of information on this unresolved controversy -Michael
Chronology of Four Cover-up Campaigns: Consecration of Russia Disinformation
Consecration and Conversion
In the third of Her six apparitions at Fatima, on July 13, 1917, the Blessed Virgin told the three shepherd children that She would return later to ask for the consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. Our Lady emphasized the importance of this request, which was accompanied by a dire warning:
If My requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated. In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.
These are the words of the Mother of God, as recounted by Sr. Lucia in her memoirs about the apparitions, first published in the 1940s.
The Request is made
In June of 1929, Our Lady appeared to Sr. Lucia in her convent in Tuy, Spain. As promised, the Blessed Virgin requested the consecration she had mentioned 12 years earlier at Fatima. Our Lady’s words were recorded in Sr. Lucia’s memoirs:
The moment has come in which God asks the Holy Father, in union with all the Bishops of the world, to make the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means. There are so many souls whom the Justice of God condemns for sins committed against Me, that I have come to ask reparation: sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray.
Our Lord Adds a Warning
Two years later, in the summer of 1931, the urgency of the request was underlined by another visit. This time, Our Lord Himself spoke to Sr. Lucia, and gave her a warning about the consecration of Russia:
Make it known to My ministers given that they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My command, like him they will follow him into misfortune.
This was a reference to Louis XVI, who failed to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and was later overthrown in the French Revolution and beheaded in 1793.
Sr. Lucia Urges Action
Early in 1935, Sr. Lucia wrote to her confessor, Father Bernardo Goncalves, to answer some questions he had about the consecration of Russia: “Regarding the matter of Russia, I think it would please Our Lord very much if you worked to make the Holy Father comply with His wishes … I think that it should be exactly as Our Lord asked it …” Clearly, the consecration was a matter of some urgency to Sr. Lucia, but there was little indication of any response from the Church hierarchy.
In the spring of 1936, Our Lord told Sr. Lucia that the conversion of Russia would only occur when it was solemnly and publicly consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Pope, together with all the world’s bishops. Our Lady came to tell Sr. Lucia that unless “that poor nation” was consecrated as requested, Russia would become the instrument of world chastisement.
A Consecration — But Not As Requested
In October of 1942, with World War II at its height, Pope Pius XII performed a consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. He made no mention of Russia, nor did any of the world’s bishops participate in the ceremony. The following spring, as the war continued, Our Lord told Sr. Lucia that world peace would not result from the Pope’s consecration, but the war would be shortened.
Request Unsatisfied: Sr. Lucia
On July 15, 1946, Sr. Lucia answered some questions from Professor William T. Walsh of New York, regarding the consecration. He is author of the most popular book on Fatima. She pointed out that Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of the world, but specifically and only Russia. The Pope’s consecration in 1942 therefore failed to satisfy Our Lady’s request.
Another Inadequate Consecration
In mid-1952, with the Korean War raging, Pope Pius XII performed another consecration. In this case, he specifically mentioned Russia, but did not ask any of the world’s Catholic bishops to join him in the ceremony. Without their participation, the consecration still failed to satisfy Our Lady’s request.
A New Obstacle Arises
A decade later, in the fall of 1962, the opening of the Second Vatican Council created a new obstacle to performing the consecration. To obtain Moscow’s approval for two observers from the Russian Orthodox Church to attend, the Vatican formally agreed not to condemn Soviet Russia or communism in general at the Council. This decision launched the policy of “Ostpolitik,” under which the Vatican was constrained from opposing communism by name, or condemning communist regimes that persecuted Catholics. Instead, the Church was supposed to engage in dialogue and negotiations with these governments. This policy was a radical departure from the Church’s long-standing opposition to atheistic communism and its repressive treatment of Catholics within the Soviet bloc. For most of the next two decades, the issue of the consecration was pushed into the background, and disappeared from the Vatican’s agenda.
A Petition Ignored
In the late 70s, Cardinal Josyf Slipyj launched a public petition seeking the consecration of Russia, as requested by Our Lady of Fatima. In only three years, the petition garnered over three million signatures. This massive appeal from the faithful was delivered to the Vatican in 1980. It was ignored, and no action was taken.
Another Consecration Omits Russia
While still recovering from wounds inflicted in a failed assassination attempt, Pope John Paul II performed another consecration to the Immaculate Heart in June of 1981. However, the official wording referred to the world, without mentioning Russia specifically, and all the world’s bishops were not asked to participate. This consecration thus failed once again to satisfy Our Lady’s request, even though the Pope credited Our Lady of Fatima with saving him from the assassin’s attack.
Sr. Lucia Speaks Again
A year later, in May of 1982, the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano published an article about Sr. Lucia by Father Umberto Maria Pasquale, a Salesian priest who had known her since 1939. Fr. Pasquale reported that Sr. Lucia told him emphatically that Our Lady had never asked for the consecration of the world, but only of Russia. He also published a photographic reproduction of a handwritten note to him from Sr. Lucia confirming this point.
The Pope Makes an Admission
The day after this article appeared, Pope John Paul II visited Fatima, where he again consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. A few days later, in an article in L’Osservatore Romano, the Pope explained why he had failed to mention Russia specifically, saying he had “tried to do everything possible in the concrete circumstances.” This was widely interpreted to mean that he could not violate the terms of the Vatican’s continuing policy of appeasing Russia.
Our Lady Still “Awaiting Our Consecration”
Two years later, this evasive approach was taken again when the Holy Father once more consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in a ceremony before 250,000 people in Rome in March of 1984. But this time, the Pope made his position clearer. In a departure from his prepared text, he asked Our Lady of Fatima to “enlighten especially the peoples of which You Yourself are awaiting our consecration and confiding.” The Pope thus publicly acknowledged that the consecration requested by Our Lady had still not been performed. These words were included in an official report of the event in L’Osservatore Romano on March 26, 1984. A similar report appeared the next day in the Italian bishops’ newspaper Avvenire, describing the Pope praying in St. Peter’s several hours after the consecration ceremony, asking Our Lady to bless “those peoples for whom You Yourself are awaiting our act of consecration and entrusting.”
A Fatima Scholar Speaks
Also in 1984, Father Messias Coelho, a Fatima scholar of many years, publicly insisted that the requested consecration had still not been done. Five years later, Fr. Coelho was to reveal that Vatican officials had issued instructions to Sr. Lucia and others to contradict this statement, and claim the consecration had actually been done.
A Cardinal Agrees With Sr. Lucia
In September of 1985, in an interview in Sol de Fatima magazine (published by the Blue Army in Spain), Sr. Lucia confirmed that the consecration still had not been done, because the 1984 ceremony did not mention Russia, and the world’s Catholic bishops did not participate. Later in the year, Cardinal Edouard Gagnon acknowledged in another interview that the consecration had still not been done as requested. He later objected to having his remarks published, though he did not deny making them.
Confirmation from a Cousin
For many years, Sr. Lucia’s cousin, Maria do Fetal, publicly quoted Sr. Lucia as saying the consecration had not been done. Maria do Fetal continued to maintain this position until mid-1989, when she suddenly reversed herself, in accordance with the Vatican “instruction” revealed by Fr. Coelho.
More Confirmation from Cardinals
In a brief interview outside her convent while voting in an election in the summer of 1987, Sr. Lucia confirmed to journalist Enrico Romero that the consecration had not been done. Her view was confirmed a few months later by Cardinal Paul Augustin Mayer in an audience with a dozen Catholic leaders, among them the Catholic journalist Victor Kulanday, and again by Cardinal Alfons Stickler a month after that. Cardinal Stickler maintained that the Pope had failed to perform the ceremony as requested because he lacked the necessary support from the world’s bishops. “They do not obey him,” he explained.
Bishops Raise Voices
Since the Vatican had ignored petitions with more than three million signatures of lay persons, Fr. Nicholas Gruner, the “Fatima Priest,” turned to a much smaller but much more influential group. In 1989, he obtained written confirmation from 350 Catholic bishops of their willingness to perform the requested consecration of Russia specifically. In the same year, petitions bearing another million signatures of the faithful calling for the consecration were also delivered to Rome.
In the summer of 1989 at the Hotel Solar da Marta in Fatima, Sr. Lucia’s longtime friend Fr. Coelho made a surprising disclosure. He told several witnesses that Sr. Lucia and her fellow religious had received instructions from the Vatican to say that the Fatima request had been satisfied by the consecration performed in 1984. In evident obedience, Sr. Lucia’s cousin Maria do Fetal suddenly repudiated her previous statements, and claimed the consecration had been done. This claim flatly contradicted the Pope’s own comments made in his prayers both during and after the 1984 ceremony.
Maria do Fetal now showed how unreliable she was as a witness when, in obedience to the Party Line, she claimed she “was inventing” when she reported that Sr. Lucia had said the 1984 consecration did not satisfy Our Lady’s request.
An Opportunity Missed
After another decade of inaction, the Vatican prepared once again to perform a consecration. With over 76 Cardinals and 1,400 bishops gathered in Rome for “the Jubilee of Bishops” in October of 2000, a golden opportunity to perform the ceremony as requested presented itself. Some bishops actually believed the long-awaited event would finally take place, but they were doomed to disappointment. When the text of the consecration was released the day before the ceremony, it made no mention of Russia whatsoever but contained only an “entrustment” of various groups of people, including the unemployed and “youth in search of meaning.”
A month later, Inside the Vatican magazine reported that a Cardinal said to be “one of the Pope’s closest advisors” admitted that the Holy Father had been advised not to mention Russia, for fear of offending the Russian Orthodox Church. This provided high-level confirmation that the Vatican’s “Ostpolitik” and “Ecumenism” were indeed preventing the specific consecration of Russia.
No Conversion in Sight
If the consecration was performed in 1984 as some Vatican officials claim, then the promised conversion of Russia should surely be evident by now. No such evidence has appeared. Instead, there are now two abortions for every live birth in Russia, and the Catholic Church is still hemmed in by impossible legal restrictions. Catholic bishops and priests are not even permitted to become permanent residents, and can only visit that country for three months at a time. And, over the past several years, Russian President Vladimir Putin has erected a veritable neo-Stalinist authoritarian state in Russia — silencing all major media and hobbling his major political opponents with criminal investigations and indictments. New York Times columnist William Safire calls this “Putin’s creeping coup”. At the same time, Russia is developing a whole new generation of nuclear missiles, which Putin promises will be unstoppable by any missile defense.
As The Washington Post observed in late 2003: “We must now recognize that there has been a massive suppression of human rights and the imposition of a de facto Cold War-type administration in Moscow.” In a recent statement to Congress, Republican congressman Christopher Cox told the truth that Fr. Fox never reports in his “don’t worry, be happy” magazine: “Russia does not enjoy an open, competitive political system that protects freedom of expression and association, and its government does not uphold universal standards of human rights.” Russian analyst Nikolai Zlobin of the Center for Defense Information put it most simply: “We’re fighting a kind of new Cold War.”
Clearly, Russia is continuing to “spread her errors throughout the world” as Our Lady of Fatima predicted. Those who claim that the consecration was done nearly two decades ago must therefore explain how it has failed to produce the results the Mother of God promised. Has Our Lady failed? Or has the Vatican failed to respect Her wishes? These are questions millions of Catholics are still asking, despite decades of official maneuvers and manipulations aimed at evading the issue. Pope John Paul II has publicly declared that the Message of Fatima “imposes an obligation on the Church.” So far, the Church has failed to fulfill that obligation, and the whole world is suffering the consequences.
Why hasn’t the pope consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart?
When the Virgin Mary appeared at Fatima, she stated emphatically that there would not be world peace unless the pope consecrated Russia to her Immaculate Heart. Why won’t the pope do this?
The consecration took place on March 25, 1984 when Pope John Paul II, in union with the bishops of the world, consecrated the world and “in a special way . . . those individuals and nations which particularly need to be thus entrusted and consecrated” to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Russia was named indirectly, probably for political and ecumenical reasons, but Sr. Lucia dos Santos, the last surviving Fatima seer, assured the papal nuncio to Portugal that our Lady’s request for the consecration had been fulfilled. A timeline of the consecration and related events can be found at http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/FatimaConsecration.htm. -Michelle Arnold
Letter of Sr. Lucia to Pope Pius XII requesting the Consecration of the World and Russia to the Immaculate Heart
Most Holy Father,
Humbly prostrated at your feet, I come as the last sheep of the fold entrusted to you to open my heart, by order of my spiritual director.
I am the only survivor of the children to whom our Lady appeared in Fátima (Portugal) from the 13th of May to the 13th of October 1917. The Blessed Virgin has granted me many graces, the greatest of all being my admission to the Institute of Saint Dorothy. (To here this is copy of the sketch the Bishop sent me.)
I come, Most Holy Father, to renew a request that has already been brought to you several times. The request, Most Holy Father, is from our Lord and our good Mother in Heaven.
In 1917, in the portion of the apparitions that we have designated “the secret,” the Blessed Virgin revealed the end of the war that was then afflicting Europe, and predicted another forthcoming, saying that to prevent it She would come and ask the consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart as well as the Communion of reparation on the first Saturday. She promised peace and the conversion of that nation if Her request was attended to. She announced that otherwise this nation would spread her errors throughout the world, and there would be wars, persecutions of the Holy Church, martyrdom of many Christians, several persecutions and sufferings reserved for Your Holiness, and the annihilation of several nations.
Most Holy Father, this remained a secret until 1926 according to the express will of our Lady. Then, in a revelation She asked that the Communion of reparation on the first Saturdays of five consecutive months be propagated throughout the world, with its conditions of doing the following with the same purpose; going to confession, meditating for a quarter of an hour on the mysteries of the Rosary and saying the Rosary with the aim of making reparation for the insults, sacrileges and indifferences committed against Her Immaculate Heart. Our good Heavenly Mother promises to assist the persons who practise this devotion, in the hour of their death, with all the necessary graces for their salvation. I exposed the request of our Lady to my confessor, who tried to have it fulfilled, but only on the 13th of September 1939 did His Excellency the Bishop of Leiria make public in Fatima this request of our Lady.
I take this opportunity, Most Holy Father, to ask you to bless and extend this devotion to the whole world. In 1929, through another apparition, our Lady asked for the consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart, promising its conversion through this means and the hindering of the propagation of its errors.
Sometime afterwards I told my confessor of the request of our Lady. He tried to fulfill it by making it known to Pius XI.
In several intimate communications our Lord has not stopped insisting on this request, promising lately, to shorten the days of tribulation which He has determined to punish the nations for their crimes, through war, famine and several persecutions of the Holy Church and Your Holiness, if you will consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, with a special mention for Russia, and order that all the Bishops of the world do the same in union with Your Holiness. I truly feel your sufferings, Most Holy Father! And, at much as I can through my humble prayers and sacrifices, I try to lessen them, close to our Lord and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Most Holy Father, if in the union of my soul with God I have not been deceived, our Lord promises a special protection to our country in this war, due to the consecration of the nation by the Portuguese Prelates, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary; as proof of the graces that would have been granted to other nations, had they also consecrated themselves to Her.
Now, Most Holy Father, allow me to make one more request, which is but an ardent wish of my humble heart; that the feast in honour of the Immaculate Heart of Mary be extended throughout the whole world as one of the main feasts of the Holy Church.
With the deepest respect and reverence I ask for the Apostolic Blessing. May God protect Your Holiness.
Tuy, Spain, 2nd of December of 1940.
Maria Lucia de Jesus
Fatima Consecration – Chronology
History of the Consecration and Related Events
Has Russia Been Consecrated to Mary?
By Richard L. Russell, December 17, 2014
Russia today is vengefully returning to international politics after temporarily receding after the collapse of the Soviet empire. Moscow is lashing out with tenacious diplomatic and military support for the brutal regime in Syria that has butchered more than one hundred thousand Syrians to crush a civil war. Moscow too is militarily dismembering neighboring Ukraine by occupying Crimea and sponsoring an insurgency in the eastern part of the besieged country that had longed to integrate into Western civilization. Moscow’s aggression has cowed the United States and European states, while states closer to Russia’s borders fear that they will soon be politically, militarily, and economically coerced by President Vladimir Putin.
These rapidly unfolding and tragic events should jar the memories of faithful Catholics of the promise our Blessed Mother made at her apparitions in Fatima, Portugal at the turn of the last century. According to William Thomas Walsh’s beautiful book Our Lady of Fatima, the Blessed Mother told three children at Fatima on 13 July 1917: “I come to ask the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of reparation on the first Saturdays. If they listen to my requests, Russia will be converted and there will be peace. If not she will scatter her errors through the world, provoking wars and persecutions of the Church.” The series of Fatima apparitions concluded with the famous “dancing of the sun” on 13 October 1917, which was witnessed by tens of thousands of pilgrims.
Two of Fatima’s seers, Jacinta and Francisco, died in childhood, but Lucia lived a long life in anonymous seclusion. Lucia fled the public attention and controversy that surrounded the Fatima apparitions, the likes of which have been all too typical of authentic Marian apparitions throughout the two thousand years of Church history, for life as a cloistered nun.
The Fatima apparitions have been marked by a nearly one hundred year controversy over whether or not the Church has consecrated Russia to Mary’s Immaculate Heart as Our Lady requested. Sister Lucia, in a 1946 interview with author Walsh, “made it plain that Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of the world to her Immaculate Heart. What she demanded specifically was the consecration of Russia. She did not comment, of course, on the fact that Pope Pius XII had consecrated the world, not Russia, to the Immaculate Heart in 1942.”
Sister Lucia’s understanding of Fatima was enriched by a deep prayer life filled with private revelations. Our Lady appeared to Lucia often until she died on 13 February 2005 at the age of ninety-seven, report Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone with Giuseppe De Carli in their 2008 book The Last Secret of Fatima. As Lucia elaborated to Walsh, apparently drawing on a private revelation she had in 1927, “What Our Lady wants is that the Pope and all the bishops in the world shall consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart on one special day. If this is done, she will convert Russia and there will be peace. If it is not done, the errors of Russia will spread through every country in the world.”
Popes over the subsequent decades have consecrated the world writ large but not specifically Russia and not in unity with all the Church’s bishops of the world. Saint John Paul II in St. Peter’s Square on 25 March 1984, for example, consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. More recently, Pope Francis in October 2013 consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in front of some 150,000 pilgrims in Rome, according to the National Catholic Register.
Nevertheless, many observers argue that these consecrations of the world fulfilled the request of Our Lady of Fatima. Most notably one the Church’s highest officials, Cardinal Bertone, who served as both secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and later as the Vatican’s secretary of state, in The Last Secret of Fatima shared details of his 17 November 2001 interview of Sister Lucia in her convent. By Bertone’s account, Sister Lucia said, “the consecration Our Lady wished for was performed in 1984, and that is was accepted by Heaven.”
The Catholic Church no doubt has been reluctant to specifically consecrate Russia to avoid offending the Russian Orthodox Church. As Bertone and De Carli explain, “The consecration of Russia obviously posed a very tricky religio-political problem for Pope John Paul II. The pope, not wishing to offend the sensibilities of our ‘special brethren,’ the Orthodox, remained cautious. An explicit consecration would have been received by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, Alexi II, as a declaration of war.”
But would a Catholic consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary justifiably be seen by the Russian Orthodox Church as “an act of war”? If the Russian Orthodox Church consecrated the Roman Catholic Church to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, would Rome be offended? Or would Rome be justifiably grateful and extend its brotherly thanks to Moscow recognizing that in this gravely troubled world both east and west desperately need any and all help from our Blessed Mother. Moreover, we Catholics call ourselves members of the “universal” church. Why then should the universal church make a hard stop at Russia’s political borders? Do we fear a Russian Orthodox politically motivated backlash? Are we not told repeatedly to “fear not” in the Holy Bible? Catholics therefore should have no fear and ignore political borders, especially in this time of new evangelization, to do service for our Blessed Mother and the world.
The Russian Orthodox Church, moreover, often acts more as a political instrument for President Putin than as an ethical check on his power. It appears not to be rendering onto the Russian Caesar what is his, but instead seems to be doing Putin’s bidding as an extension of Russia state power. Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Kirill once famously likened Putin’s reign to “a miracle of God” and the Orthodox Church has financially benefited from close ties to political-economic oligarchy that controls Russia to build or restore about 25,000 churches in the past 25 years, according to Reuters reporter Gabriela Baczynska.
Despite his intentions, Cardinal Bertone’s book has not settled the stirring and persistent controversy as to whether or not Our Lady of Fatima’s consecration request has been fulfilled. Indeed, the long running controversy in the ears of Church laymen often has an annoying “he said, she said” ring to it with those saying the promise has been fulfilled trading barbs against those who say it has not.
Instead of chasing down that rabbit hole, perhaps a more constructive and informative contribution to the debate would take a step back and ask central and critically important questions. Does Russia today look and act like it has been converted as Our Lady of Fatima promised would be the case if it were consecrated to her? Or one might put the same question into more theological terms. Do we see the spiritual “fruits” of Russia’s conversion?
The answer to both of these questions is a resounding no. After the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union without the resort to war, hopes were raised that the various consecrations of the world to Mary’s Immaculate Heart were starting to bear spiritual “fruits.” But these hopes have been dashed as Russia rested, recouped, and returned with a new version of its militant nationalism to wreak havoc at home and abroad.
Russia’s alleged return to Christianity after atheistic communist days, like so much of what is Russia, is a Potemkin village. Expert Pew polling shows that there has been an upswing in affiliation with the Russian Orthodox Church as the share of Russian adults identifying themselves as Orthodox increased from 31 percent to 72 percent between 1991 and 2008. Despite the increase in religious identification, no more than about one in ten Russians say they attend religious services at least once per month. One out of ten Russians going to church once a month is hardly the massive surge in religious conversion as one might expect from Our Lady’s Fatima promise.
Russia’s demographic crisis that includes the breakdown of nuclear families and widespread abortion also shows it has not been converted. As political economist Nicholas Eberstadt assesses in the Foreign Affairs magazine, “The country’s population is shrinking, its morality levels are nothing short of catastrophic, and its human resources appear to be dangerously eroding. Indeed, the troubles caused by Russia’s population trends—in health, education, family formation, and other spheres—represent a previously unprecedented phenomenon for an urbanized, literate society not at war.” Jonathan V. Last in his book What to Expect When No One’s Expecting paints a grim picture of Russia’s demographic disaster with Russia having the world’s highest divorce rate and abortion so rampant that 13 abortions are performed in Russia today for every 10 live births.
Russia’s massive use of propaganda for political power shows that it has not been converted. Peter Pomerantsev writes in The Atlantic, “On Russian ‘news’ broadcasts, the borders between fact and fiction have become utterly blurred. Russian current-affairs programs feature apparent actors posing as refugees from eastern Ukraine, crying for the cameras about invented threats from imagined fascists gangs.” Pomerantsev perceptively concludes that “The point of this new propaganda is not to persuade anyone, but to keep the viewer hooked and distracted—to disrupt Western narratives rather than to provide a counter-narrative.” The internationally respected Freedom House rates Russia’s press as “not free” and judges that Putin’s government penalizes journalists for not conforming to its increasingly strict definition of acceptable views and is expanding its control over broadcast and print media.
Russia’s military buildup despite its decaying society shows that it has not been converted. Professor Nikolas Gvosdev judges in the pages of The National Interest magazine that a distinguishing characteristic of Putin has been his commitment to revitalizing Russia’s military. If Putin’s conventional weapons buildup was not bad enough, he also is modernizing Russian nuclear weapons while American nuclear forces languish. As reported in Foreign Policy magazine, Russia has tested a ground-launched cruise missile in violation of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty signed by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987.
Russia’s use of military power to disembowel Ukraine shows that it has not been converted. Astute Russia watcher and journalist Anne Applebaum ably catalogues for the Washington Post Russia’s invasion of eastern Ukraine following its takeover of Crimea earlier this year. Russia sent mercenaries and security service operatives to hide Moscow’s hand to attack police stations and government offices to delegitimize Ukraine’s government. Then the Russians dispatched heavier weapons such as machine guns, artillery, and eventually tanks, armed personnel carriers, and anti-aircraft weapons the likes of which undoubtedly shot down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 and murdered 298 civilians, mostly Europeans. Despite Russian inflicted death and destruction, Europeans and Americans are too fearful of Russia to call the Ukraine crisis what it is: a real and new war in Europe.
A review of Russia’s internal politics, social and spiritual decay, and ruthless foreign and defense policies strikingly shows that the Church has not fulfilled its half of the promise made by Our Lady of Fatima. The Blessed Mother never has, and never will, mislead her son’s Church. If she promises, she delivers true to her word. If we members of the Church had fulfilled our duties and responsibilities, Russia today would be a far different country and the security of many nations would not be imperiled by Russian aggression as it is today. Pope Francis acts boldly as he has done by convening the extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the family. We might hope and pray that our holy father—who displays an intimate bond with Our Lady—would someday flex his inspiring courage and faith to convene a synod on the Fatima apparitions. With the perilous state of the world and the Church, we cannot afford to lose any more years handwringing and failing to courageously seize Our Lady of Fatima’s promise of peace.
The Facts Prove: Russia Has NOT Been Consecrated
By Christopher Ferrara
TAKEN FROM THE WINTER, 2006 ISSUE OF THE FATIMA CRUSADER
As I come before you today, I confess to being no little intimidated because I’m addressing not only priests, which is serious enough, as well as my fellow members of the laity, but successors of the Apostles.
My burden, however, is lightened by the knowledge that I am not here to give anyone spiritual advice. I am here to convey certain facts—–to make the factual case that the Consecration of Russia has never been done and to demonstrate what the consequences of that failure are, and will be, for all of us.
Answer to An Objection
Let me begin with an objection raised by one member of the episcopacy a couple of days ago. It’s a fair objection and it needs to be addressed in some detail. And the objection is this: We know what Our Lady said at Fatima, Portugal to the three seers on July 13, 1917. But, how are we to know that Our Lady did in fact come here to Tuy, Spain in 1929, to request the Consecration of Russia? The distinction is drawn between Fatima I, so to speak, and Fatima II. We know Fatima I happened, but how do we know Fatima II happened? It’s a fair question, but the answer is completely obvious.
The key to the answer is this: Fatima I tells us about the Consecration of Russia and assures us that Our Lady will come to ask for it. Let me quote from the Message of Fatima as published on the Vatican’s own web site and reproduced in the Vatican’s own booklet commenting on the Third Secret in June of 2000:
“To prevent this (meaning the calamities that would befall the world) I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on the first Saturdays. If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted and there will be peace. If not, she will spread her errors throughout the world causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred. The Holy Father will have much to suffer. Various nations will be annihilated. In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me and she shall be converted and a period of peace will be granted to the world.”
The Vatican itself recognizes that as part of the integral text of the authentic Fatima apparition of July 13, 1917 Our Lady said She would come to ask for the Consecration of Russia. And so She must have done so, for the Mother of God does not make false promises.
So, to suggest that Our Lady never came here to Tuy, that the Mother of God missed Her appointment and forgot about the very purpose of the Fatima apparitions is to cast doubt on the entire apparition from beginning to end, which not even the Vatican is willing to do, despite the existence of anti-Fatima elements within the Vatican apparatus. So that’s the answer to the objection.
And, of course, the Mother of God would not choose a lying witness, so that if Sister Lucy recounted that Our Lady came to Tuy in 1929, it must be the case that she is telling the truth. Otherwise, again, the very Message the Vatican publishes to the world as authentic would be meaningless and a
Sister Lucy’s Unwavering Testimony
Now, Sister Lucy made it plain again and again that what Our Lady called for is the Consecration of Russia, not the world. She herself emphasized that distinction—–not once, but many times. Let’s talk about some of those occasions.
In 1946, she said: “Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of the world to Her Immaculate Heart. What She demanded specifically was the Consecration of Russia.” And the source for that is Professor William Thomas Walsh’s Our Lady of Fatima on page 226. Walsh was one of the most eminent Catholic historians in the Western world and his book must be considered an authoritative source.
That’s not all Sister Lucy said in Walsh’s book. She further declared: “What Our Lady wants is that the Pope and all the bishops in the world shall consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart on one special day. If this is done She will convert Russia and there will be peace.” You will find that in Our Lady of Fatima, the same historical text, on page 226.
Sister Lucy did not stop there. In 1949 she insisted: “No, not the world, Russia, Russia.” Here she was correcting one Father Thomas McGlynn, and the source for that is Vision of Fatima [by Fr. McGlynn], page 80. Notice that here she rebuked a priest. This is an obedient, cloistered nun who felt compelled to rebuke and correct a priest by emphasizing that Our Lady had asked for the Consecration of Russia, not the world.
And again in 1952, the Virgin Mary had said to Sister Lucy: “Make it known to the Holy Father that I am always awaiting the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart. Without the Consecration of Russia, Russia will not be able to convert nor will the world have peace.” And the sources cited: Il Pellegrinaggio Della Meraviglie, published in Rome 1960, page 440.
Our Lady of Fatima Only Asked For . . .
Here is a particularly crucial example. In 1982, L’Osservatore Romano reported that in 1978, Sister Lucy was asked this critical question by Father Umberto, her confidant: “Has Our Lady ever spoken to you about the consecration of the world to Her Immaculate Heart?” That’s the question that lies at the heart of this whole controversy about the 1984 consecration ceremony and the 1982 consecration ceremony.
And what was Sister Lucy’s answer to this critical question?
Here it is: “No, Father Umberto, never. At the Cova da Iria in 1917, Our Lady promised, ‘I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia.’ “And that was reported in L’Osservatore Romano, May 12, 1982—–that’s L’Osservatore Romano, the Pope’s own newspaper.
The thing that had to be clarified was something Sister Lucy had written to the Holy Father, Pius XII. Sister Lucy advised Father Umberto as follows: “In reply to your question, I will clarify. Our Lady of Fatima, in Her request, only referred to the Consecration of Russia.” Let me emphasize, “only referred to the Consecration of Russia.”
We Must Understand Sister Lucy’s Obedience
Yet, in her letter to Pius XII, Sister Lucy had referred also to a consecration of the world with explicit mention of Russia. Why did she do that? In her handwritten note to Father Umberto, also published in L’Osservatore Romano, she gave this explanation: “In the letter I wrote to the Holy Father on the instruction of my confessor, I asked for the consecration of the world with explicit mention of Russia.” But on the paragraph above she states, “Our Lady of Fatima, in Her request referred only to the Consecration of Russia.”
Now, what does that tell us? It tells us, once again, that Our Lady of Fatima referred only to the Consecration of Russia. But, it tells us something else that is going to be very significant for understanding what happened with Sister Lucy before her death: Sister Lucy is obedient. She took a special vow of obedience. Her confessor suggested that she add to what Our Lady requested, and she obediently did so. But she stressed, nevertheless, that Our Lady had not referred to that, but only to the Consecration of Russia.
The Alleged Consecrations of 1982, 1984
Now, what does this mean for the consecration ceremonies that were conducted in 1982 and 1984? What does Sister Lucy have to say about those ceremonies? Well, based on what we’ve seen so far, you able to guess the answer to that question. What she said is that they did not comply with Our Lady’s requests.
First of all, the 1982 ceremony. On March 19, 1983, long after that ceremony was done, Sister Lucy
spoke to the Papal Nuncio, Archbishop Portalupi, a Dr. Lacerda and Father Messias Coelho.
These are witnesses of unimpeachable integrity, first and foremost, the Papal Nuncio. And here is what she said to this group of witnesses: “In the act of offering of May 13, 1982, Russia did not appear as being the object of the consecration.” And so she went on to say: “The Consecration of Russia has not been done as Our Lady had demanded it. I was not able to say it because I did not have the permission of the Holy See.”
That’s significant for two reasons. It tells us once again that Our Lady never said anything about a consecration of the world, but it also tells us once again that Sister Lucy is obedient to her superiors. She did not reveal what she knew to be true because she had not been given permission to reveal it, but, once given that permission, she frankly stated that the 1982 ceremony did not comply with Our Lady of Fatima’s request.
What about the 1984 ceremony, in which once again, Russia was not mentioned and very few of the bishops, if any, participated? Here is what Sister said about the 1984 ceremony to her old friend, Eugenia Pestana, two days before that ceremony took place: “That consecration cannot have a decisive character.” It would not do the trick. It might have some benefits, but it will not have a decisive character. That is, it will not produce the benefits that Our Lady of Fatima promised if the Consecration of Russia were done as She had specified.
Let’s go ahead with something else Sister Lucy said. In September 1985, eighteen months after the 1984 consecration, Sister Lucy was asked this question: “Has he, (meaning John Paul II) not, therefore, done what was requested at Tuy?” Here is her answer: “There was no participation of all the bishops and there was no mention of Russia.”
The questioner was persistent, so he asked another question: “So, the consecration was not done as requested by Our Lady?” Consider what this questioner is asking Sister Lucy to do. An obedient, cloistered nun is being asked to say that the Pope had not done what some very prestigious people were saying he had done. And while Sister Lucy is obedient, she’s also completely and utterly honest. She is the messenger of Our Lady of Fatima. And so here is her answer to the question: “No. Many bishops attached no importance to this act.”
But how could Sister Lucy have said otherwise? Let’s apply our common sense to this. In order to consecrate something you really do have to mention it. And so what we are being asked to believe is that Russia was mentioned in a ceremony that makes no mention of Russia. It’s that absurd—–and Sister Lucy was not going to accept that absurdity.
What John Paul II Actually Said
Now, we hear it said again and again that Pope John Paul II felt that he had done the consecration. He’s alleged to have said this privately. I don’t know what he said privately. Frankly, I don’t care what he said privately. I do know what he said publicly.
Here’s what John Paul II said concerning the 1982 ceremony, six days afterward. And I’m quoting: “I tried to do everything possible in the concrete circumstances to emphasize the collegial unity of the bishop of Rome, with all his brothers in the episcopal ministry and service in the world.” That’s the Pope’s very diplomatic way of saying the bishops really did not participate with him. He tried to do all that he could in the concrete circumstances.
But what about the 1984 ceremony? Here we have a couple of very interesting statements by the Pope. We have, first of all, the March 27, 1984 edition of L’Osservatore Romano.
. . . [there were] some key words that Pope John Paul II spontaneously added to the consecration ceremony as he was conducting it. After he had recited the consecration formula he added these words: “Illumine (Enlighten) especially those peoples of which You await our consecration and entrustment.”
Now, why would the Pope say that Our Lady is awaiting the consecration of “those peoples” when he had just pronounced the words that some claim are a consecration of Russia—–that never mentions
But the Pope made his thinking perfectly clear several hours later, as reported in Avvenire, the bishops’ newspaper for the Italian Bishops Conference in Italy. He said before 10,000 witnesses inside St. Peter’s: “We wish to choose this Sunday, the third Sunday of Lent 1984, still within the Holy Year of Redemption for the act of entrusting and consecration of the world of the great human family, of all peoples, especially those who have a very great need of this consecration and entrustment. Of those peoples for whom You, Yourself, are awaiting our act of consecration and entrusting.”
Why would the Pope say several hours after he had consecrated the world that Our Lady was awaiting the act of the Consecration of Russia? Answer: He hadn’t done it. Russia? Why would he add these words spontaneously to the text? One might quibble. One might say this is just a verbal artifact, that his meaning is not clear, that the translation might not be faithful, and so forth.
Why Did Pope John Paul Not Do It?
The next question is: Why would the Pope refrain from mentioning Russia in the consecration ceremony that is supposed to have Russia as its object? We have the answer to that question from a highly placed Vatican source: “Rome fears that the Russian Orthodox might regard it as an offense if Rome were to make specific mention of Russia in such a prayer, as if Russia especially is in need of help when the whole world, including the post-Christian West faces profound problems.”
This was reported in Inside the Vatican, November 2000 as the statement of one of “the Pope’s closest advisors.” It was, in fact Cardinal Tomko. This, then, is the advice the Pope was given. But Our Lady did not come to tell us that Russia is not especially in need of help. She came to tell us that Russia is
And so Our Lady of Fatima was overruled by the demands of Vatican diplomacy and ecumenism. That may sound harsh, but that in fact is what Cardinal Tomko was saying here. And that is why the Pope was referring—–in the previous statements I’ve mentioned especially in need of help! —–to human weakness, human possibilities, he did what he could in the concrete circumstances, and so forth. And what are the concrete circumstances? Diplomacy, ecumenism, and the advice of his advisors.
What are the Consequences?
What are the consequences of a failure to do as Heaven requested through the Virgin Mother of God? Obviously, one consequence has been that Russia has not converted. We have heard varying explanations from the apologists for the 1984 and the 1982 ceremonies. They want to talk about all kinds of conversions in Russia, except the one that Our Lady had in view, which was the conversion of Russia to the Holy Catholic religion. There has been no religious conversion in Russia. But neither has there been a moral conversion. Nor a political conversion, nor a “conversion to peace.” Let’s look at these “alternate” conversions of Russia proposed by the apologists for the consecration of Russia without mention of Russia.
No Religious Conversion
First of all, we have, seen no signs of any kind of religious conversion in Russia. In fact, if you look at the headlines in secular news sources, you see, not a conversion of Russia to Roman Catholicism, but a persecution of the Catholic Church under the regime of Vladimir Putin.
These, I repeat, are secular news headlines. The first of these is: “In Russia: ‘Liquidating’ Churches.” The secular news is talking about the liquidation of churches in Russia. And this was in the Washington Post, November 14, 2000. The article discusses the 1997 law “on freedom of conscience”—–the Stalinist notion of freedom of conscience. This law, and I’m quoting from the article, “restricts the rights, powers and privileges of smaller or newer, or foreign religious communities” —–and one of those is the Roman Catholic Church—–“while giving special status to Russia’s ‘traditional’ religions—–primarily Russian Orthodoxy, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism. It also creates an onerous and intrusive registration process.” Hardly the conversion of Russia to Roman Catholicism.
Let’s look at the next headline: “Russian Bishop Expelled”.
The article states: “A Catholic bishop has been expelled from Russia. The action, coming soon after the refusal to review/renew the visa of a Catholic priest serving near Moscow, seems to signal a Russian government crackdown on the Catholic Church.”
The expelled bishop was Jerzy Mazur, the Bishop of Siberia, where the majority of Russian Catholics still reside. He was expelled because as he himself put it, he was considered a “danger to the Russian Federation.” Why? He was never told why. (FIDES/ CWNews.com April 20, 2002.)
Here is our next headline: “Russia: Previously Unpublished Case Brings Number of Expelled Catholics to Seven”. This is an article in the Keston news service, (September 17, 2002) talking about the expulsion of seven non-Russian Catholic clerics. Seven doesn’t seem like a large number until you consider the fact that the Catholic apparatus in Russia is minuscule. These seven expulsions basically gutted the Catholic apparatus in Russia in terms of the non-Russian born priests.
In addition to the Bishop of Siberia, Bishop Mazur, there were also expelled: Father Stefano Caprio, Father Jaroslaw Wisniewski, Father Stanislav Krajnak, and Father Eduard Mackiewicz.
The article states: “In February of last year, another foreign Catholic priest, who had been working in Russia, Polish citizen Father Stanislaw Opiela was similarly refused an entry visa.” Fr. Opiela was the secretary of the Russian bishops’ conference. Keston news service goes on to say that a Catholic monk, Brother Bruno, was also expelled, although he had been working in Russia from 1992 to 2002. That brings the total to seven.
Keston notes that “Bruno had been informed by the Russian security services in March that he had not been granted an entry visa because he was deemed a danger to the Russian Federation.” Remember the Russian security services? They’re still at work. They simply have a different name. They used to be the KGB, now they’re the FSB.
Does anyone see a conversion of Russia in this development?
Here is our next headline: “Religious Liberty in Russia Is in Serious Danger.” That’s the so-called “mainstream” National Catholic Register (April 28 —–May 5, 2002) reporting this—–a newspaper that might be inclined to say “Why worry about this Consecration of Russia business?” In this article Archbishop Kondrusiewicz, who is the Apostolic Administrator of the Catholic Church in Russia states: “Catholics in Russia ask themselves: What will happen next? Are the constitutional guarantees valid also for them, including liberty of conscience and of the right to have their own pastors, which comprises inviting them from abroad, not forgetting that for 81 years the Catholic Church was deprived of the right of forming and ordaining its own priests?”
And the Archbishop goes on to say: “The expulsion of a Catholic bishop”—–meaning Bishop Masur —–“who has not violated any law, surpasses all imaginable limits of civilized relations between the State and the Church.”
This is the conversion of Russia? A government that has surpassed all imaginable limits of civilized relations between the State and the Church? don’t think so. So much for the conversion of Russia to Roman Catholicism, which is what Our Lady called for. But some say, in their desperation: “At least there’s been a conversion back to Russian Orthodoxy in Russia!” It isn’t so. Let’s look at the next headline, “Russian Orthodox Church Failing to Reach Youth”.
This headline tells us that the Russian Orthodox Church is failing to reach the youth of that country. The article states that 94 percent of Russians aged 18 to 29 do not go to church. There is no conversion to Russian Orthodoxy in Russia. (Zenit, December 22, 2002)
But let’s examine this claim that Our Lady came to convert Russia to Russian Orthodoxy. It’s utterly preposterous. The Message of Fatima is all about the Immaculate Heart of Mary, about the worldwide confirmation and affirmation of probably the most specifically Catholic dogma of all: the Immaculate Conception. The Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart was to be seen by the world, when Russia has converted, as a sign of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart, a dogma that the Orthodox Church does not recognize. And besides, in 1917, when the Fatima apparitions occurred, Russia was already an Orthodox country.
The notion that Our Lady of Fatima is Our Lady of the Orthodox is offensive to the Catholic religion and an insult to the Mother of God and Her Divine Son. Our Lady did not come to Fatima to offend the Catholic religion, but to confirm it gloriously with the triumph of Her Immaculate Heart.
No Moral Conversion
Now some say that at least we have seen a moral conversion in Russia since the 1984 ceremony, and that this is the sign that the 1984 ceremony corresponds to Our Lady’s request. We are told there has been a moral revolution in Russia. Communism has fallen. Just look at the transformation of that country, they tell us.
What about this claim? Well, the basic sign of a moral people is that they are fruitful and multiply in keeping with God’s commandment to Adam and Eve. The people are not fruitful and they are not multiplying in Russia. And once again, the secular news sources tell us that. Headline: “Russia’s population is set to decline from 143,000,000 today to 111,000,000 in 2050.”
Why? Ask Matt Rosenberg, not a Catholic journalist, reporting at “about. com” May 31, 2006: “The primary causes of Russia’s population decrease in loss of about 700,000 to 800,000 citizens each year are: a high death rate, low birth rate, high rate of abortions and a low level of immigration.” He goes on to say, “the primary causes of Russia’s population decrease are alcohol-related deaths, which are very high in Russia. Russian life expectancy is low. The life of Russian men: 59 years, the average life expectancy. Russia’s total fertility rate is low, at about 1.3 births per woman.” In Russia, says Mr. Rosenberg, there are 13 abortions for every 10 live births. That’s a holocaust, going on right now in Russia. So, as a result, Russia’s population will be cut in half by the end of the century.
Who said that? President Putin said that, as reported in Moscow News June 20, 2006.
There’s the graph.
By 2100, the Russian population of 143,000,000 will be down to 71,500,000—–if the world has not been destroyed by then.
No Political Conversion
What about a political conversion in Russia? At least we’re told there’s been a political conversion. There’s been a transformation. Communism has fallen. Now we have democracy in Russia. No, we don’t. And, once again, the secular news sources give us the facts—–and they have no agenda that’s pro-Fatima, I can assure you. Let’s look at the headlines once again: “Russian Parliament Gives Final Approval to Putin’s Bill on Governors”.
This was reported in Moscow News March 12, 2004. This is an interesting little scheme that Vladimir Putin has devised. The Russian Parliament passed the bill that gives him the power to appoint governors instead of popular elections of governors. He nominates the governors and then the local legislators approve them. And what happens if the local legislators don’t approve the governors that Mr. Putin chooses? He gives them another chance. If they don’t approve of the governor he has chosen, he can simply dissolve the legislature in that locality and replace it with a new legislature that will give him the governor that he wants. Or he can take a shortcut and simply appoint the governor against the wishes of the local legislature.
Quite simply, Vladimir Putin is the dictator of Russia today. And secular news outlets—–on and on, in headline after headline—–confirm that.
To take another example, Putin is now using legislation enacted by the Duma, which essentially is his puppet, that allows the central government to scrutinize the activity of all foreign and domestic charities. The central government has the authority, basically, to abolish any charity that Mr. Putin doesn’t like. Who told us this? The New York Times, November 25, 2005. Even the secular news can see that Putin is no democrat.
Russian authorities, just like the old days, have halted the broadcasts of Voice of America and Radio Free Europe. Bye-bye. “After Putin became president,” Moscow News tells us, “on July 17, 2006, the country’s major TV channels, the most important media because of their audience reach, were brought under State control or shut down.”
Putin Muzzles All Opposition
Hello, Catholic world. Putin is muzzling any voice of opposition in so-called democratic Russia. The same article goes on to say that “State-controlled or friendly businesses have been buying up newspapers and radio stations.” They’re all owned by Vladimir Putin’s state-controlled or state-friendly businesses. “And outside of Moscow and St. Petersburg,” the article goes on to say, “media outlets routinely come under the sway of local governors who”—–wouldn’t you know it—–“are appointed by Mr. Putin. Most of them are loyal to the Kremlin.” I would say that all of them are.
As a result of all this “democracy” in Russia, there has been a ratings change on the state of liberty in Russia from an outfit called Freedom House. Reporting in 2005, Freedom House stated that Russia’s political rights rating had declined from 5 to 6, and its status from “partly free” to “not free” due to—–and I emphasize this—–“the virtual elimination of influential political opposition parties within the country and the further concentration of executive power.”
There’s no longer any political opposition to Mr. Putin in Russia. And as Freedom House goes on to say: “During 2004, President Vladimir Putin took further steps toward the consolidation of executive authority by increasing pressure on opposing political parties and civil society, strengthening State control over national broadcast media, pursuing politically driven prosecutions of independent business leaders and academics.”
Freedom House further notes that “the government also announced constitutional changes”—–which I’ve just mentioned—–“that will make governors appointed rather than elected officials”. And there’s something else he has in the works. He plans to take over, as the article says, “direct control of the hiring and dismissal of judges.” And furthermore, Russians, Freedom House concludes, “cannot change their government democratically, particularly in light of the State’s far-reaching control of broadcast media and the growing harassment of opposition parties and their financial backers.”
Finally we find this article in the The New York Times (May 9, 2006) talking about Dick Cheney as the pot and Putin as the kettle, saying in its text: “Vladimir Putin has indeed reversed the democratizing courses that were set clumsily and incompletely by Boris Yeltsin”—–who, of course, wasn’t going to democratize Russia either—–“and he is using Russia’s vast reservoirs of oil and gas as tools of intimidation and blackmail.”
Now, let me stop right here. I am no fan of “democracy.” If Vladimir Putin wanted to anoint himself the Catholic king of Russia tomorrow and would recognize, as King St. Louis did, the principle of subsidiarity, and if the Russian people embraced their new Catholic king in a state of conversion to the Faith, I’d be overjoyed.
I am not suggesting that Russia has not converted if it does not become a democracy. What I am saying is that even by the world’s standards, Russia has not converted because Russia has not become even a democracy.
So, where does that leave us? It leaves us with no conversion of any kind in Russia. No religious conversion, no moral conversion, no political conversion.
Russia Prepares For War
But what about the last desperate argument of the defenders of the 1982 and 1984 consecration ceremonies? They tell us that Russia has “converted to peace.” Why, her weapons of war have been beaten into plowshares and a new era of peace is upon us. So say Father Fox and a few others who are willfully blind to reality.
Yet again, the secular news sources tell us that it simply isn’t so. There has been no conversion to peace in Russia.
We have, instead, a conversion to more efficient warfare. And that begins with the Sino-Russian Alliance that has arisen since “the fall of Communism.”
News Max Sunday, January 13, 2002, tells us that Mr. Putin approved a ground-breaking treaty with China. Under this treaty, we have the practical formalization of the military alliance between Moscow and Beijing. The article notes that the Chinese strategic ballistic missile forces “over the next 15 years will range from 75 to 100 warheads deployed primarily against the United States.”
And Russia is providing military assistance to Red China at this very moment. In fact, the two powers held a massive joint drill to display their alliance to the world. The headline: “China, Russia Hold Joint Military Exercises.” National Public Radio, morning edition August 18, 2005. And this is what National Public Radio has to say: “Russian and Chinese forces began 8 days of joint military exercises, including 10,000 troops. Moscow and Beijing say they are training to counter terrorism, extremism and separatism.” The only problem was, they were deploying, in mock fashion, long-range ballistic weapons. They’re going to launch ICBM’s against domestic terrorists, we’re asked to believe. “But, the long-range weaponry involved,” says NPR, “suggests a broader agenda.” Indeed it does.
And what is that broader agenda? What about these weapons? Here is another headline. This one from Associated Press: “Putin Touts Russia’s Missile Capabilities.” The article, dated January 31, 2006, reports that “President Putin boasted Tuesday that Russia has missiles capable of penetrating any missile defense system. They have tested missile systems that no one in the world has.” Quoting Mr. Putin at a press conference, the article goes on to state: “These missile systems are hypersonic and capable of changing their flight plans.”
Under the Fatima Curse
A conversion to peace in Russia? Utter nonsense. And I’m told, by the way, that North Korea tested a nuclear device this morning (October 9, 2006). There hasn’t been a conversion of any kind in Russia since 1984. None whatsoever. And I ask you: “Is this the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary?” Or is it rather something that you could call the Fatima curse, the scourge of Fatima’s Message unheeded?
What does God do when He sends a prophet to ask a certain thing of His subjects and they fail to obey the prophet of God? He chastises them for their disobedience to the prophet. We see this throughout salvation history. What does that mean for us today?
Well, let me pick up on a theme that Edwin Faust was exploring. This is suggested to me by his remarks. We in the West especially have an illusion of continuity about our way of life. We like our gadgets, our amusements, our whole way of life, and we think that it will go on forever. We are like the Romans of decadent Rome, of whom St. Paul said: “They sat down to eat and rose up to play.” We take it for granted that the sun will rise, that the planets will stay in their orbits, that civilization will not be destroyed by some calamity. But the truth of it is, everything around us is maintained in existence as part of a continuing Divine miracle, and the wrath of God will upset that divinely appointed order of things, from time to time as it did during the Flood. And as it will again, if the Message of Fatima is not heeded.
Let us consider the message of Our Lady of Akita, given in Japan in 1973. Cardinal Ratzinger has personally affirmed to the Ambassador of the Philippines, Howard Dee, that the Message of Fatima and the Message of Akita are “essentially the same.”
What did Our Lady of Akita say? On October 13, 1973, the very anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, She said: “. . . if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one
will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead.”
Our Lady said this in Japan, which has had the experience of fire raining down from the heavens—–a most appropriate place for Our Lady to warn of that calamity. And what does the published portion of the Third Secret show us? It shows us destroying flames issuing forth from the hands of an avenging Angel. We don’t have the text of what Our Lady said about that vision, but the vision itself clearly suggests what our fate will be.
The Facts, The Choice, The Consequences
So, I came here today to give you some of the facts. And the facts are overwhelmingly in favor of the proposition that Our Lady asked for the Consecration of Russia, not the world, and that Russia has simply not been consecrated. And now we are facing what Our Lady of Fatima warned us would be the consequences for failing to do as She requested, the suffering of the Church and the annihilation of various nations.
The opponents of the case I have made today don’t have any facts. They don’t have a case at all. What they have is a mindless appeal to authority. “The Pope has said that Russia was consecrated, and that’s the end of the matter” they assure us. But the Pope never said that, as I have shown you. “A consecration of the world is just as good as a Consecration of Russia”, they insist, without any evidence to support that ridiculous contention. You can’t consecrate Russia without mentioning Russia.
Those who say the Consecration of Russia was done in 1982 and 1984 haven’t a leg to stand on. And if they came before you today they could not defend their position against the facts as I have presented them to you. And as I stand here today, time is running out for the doing of what must be done.
Only the Bishops Can Stop the Chastisement
To you among this audience who are descendants of the Apostles themselves—–of St. James, whose sacred remains you saw at Santiago—–I can only say that you have it within your power—–and only you, in union with the Pope—–to avert the catastrophe that Our Lady warned would be the consequence of failing to heed Her requests. That is why we held this Conference. I am hoping, I am praying, I am begging each of you to go back to your diocese and light a fire that will spread throughout the Catholic world for the Consecration of Russia in the manner that the Mother of God requested. Thank you.
[The 2006 World Bishops Conference in Tuy, Spain, October 6, 2006]
Italian Magazine publishes alleged text of True Third Secret of Fatima
The July/August 2013 issue of Chiesa Viva [“Living Church”] magazine is dedicated to what it claims is the true Third Secret of Fatima. It features Dr. Franco Adessa’s article “The Third Secret of Fatima: A Testimony.” According to Adessa, the now-deceased Fr. Luigi Villa, who reportedly had a mandate from Pope Pius XII to uncover and expose Freemasonry in the Catholic Church and to defend her from it, knew from Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani (d. 1979) that the text published in the German magazine Neues Europa [“New Europe”] in 1963, though not itself the Third Secret, contained all of the sentences of the real Third Secret*. Before his death in 2012, Fr. Villa allegedly communicated to Dr. Adessa what these sentences from the Neues Europa text were that make up the real Third Secret. Adessa has now compiled them into one text and presents it in the July/August 2013 issue of Chiesa Viva. His article explains also the necessary background and publishes also the text from Neues Europa as it appeared in 1963 in Germany.
To download the July/August 2013 issue of Chiesa Viva in full color, click the download link below:
Novus Ordo Watch does not claim or deny that this text is the authentic Third Secret of Fatima. We are withholding all opinion or judgment concerning it and are merely providing this document as information for those who are interested in this topic.
*Third Secret of Fatima Released in “Code” by Cardinal Ottovianni (sic) in 1963
April 8, 2015
A Text appears ‘mystically’ in 1994: Is THIS the Real Third Secret of Fatima?
No Friend of Fatima: Unspinning Christopher Ferrara’s Defense of Benedict XVI
“Pope” Francis and Our Lady of Fatima
Book: The Fourth Secret of Fatima by Antonio Socci
Book: The Secret Still Hidden by Christopher Ferrara
Book: The Whole Truth About Fatima, Vol. 3: The Third Secret (1942-60)
NORMS REGARDING THE MANNER OF PROCEEDING IN THE DISCERNMENT OF PRESUMED APPARITIONS OR REVELATIONS
PAUL VI/CDF FEBRUARY 25, 1978 & DECEMBER 14, 2011 http://ephesians-511.net/docs/NORMS_REGARDING_THE_MANNER_OF_PROCEEDING_IN_THE_DISCERNMENT_OF_PRESUMED_APPARITIONS_OR_REVELATIONS.doc
NORMS REGARDING THE MANNER OF PROCEEDING IN THE DISCERNMENT OF PRESUMED APPARITIONS OR REVELATIONS 02
CDF MAY 29, 2012 http://ephesians-511.net/docs/NORMS_REGARDING_THE_MANNER_OF_PROCEEDING_IN_THE_DISCERNMENT_OF_PRESUMED_APPARITIONS_OR_REVELATIONS_02.doc
THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA
CDF, JUNE 26, 2000
PRIVATE REVELATION-RULES FOR DISCERNMENT OF PHENOMENA-FR FELIX BOURDIER
OUR LADY OF FATIMA AND THE BROWN SCAPULAR
ARATI IN THE LITURGY-INDIAN OR HINDU
See page 10 above
THE THIRD SECRET OF FATIMA-DR FRANCO ADESSA
Leave a Reply