Posted on 02/15/2005 4:02:38 PM PST by NYer
VATICAN CITY, FEB. 14, 2005 (Zenit.org).- 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."
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."
I could post an entire page of quotes from people who claimed to know what was in the secret. Cardinal Oddi said lots about the Third Secret-most of it speculative. Did he read it? I've read claims that not even Pius XII read it.
On another occasion, Oddi had this to say about the third secret:
At this point let me advance a hypothesis: that the Third Secret of Fatima pre-announces something terrible the Church has done, naturally without meaning to. That because of mistaken interpretations, disobedience, or something similar, the Church has passed through a moment that was too difficult. Nevertheless the secret says that by the year 1960, in spite of the best intentions, the church would have done something whose consequences were very painful, with a tremendous decline in religious practice. And that later, following a great suffering, the Faith would return. Yes, this may be the content of the secret. But if this were true, the fulfillment of the secret has already been observed, for the crisis in the Church is visible to all. And the most alert souls recognized it years ago". Reference
It sounds like pure speculation on his part, to me.
As a rule of thumb regarding the Third Secret, those who knew, didn't talk and those who talked didn't know.
"if you don't shut up and listen to your churchmen - who of course are above all reproach - you're a bad Catholic in a tinfoil suit."
I would think you knew that! (gross sarcasm - forgive me!)
I would say that the revelation of a Pope being shot and killed would be sufficient for precisely that course of action.
Can you imagine what sort of disturbance and disquiet this would create among the faithful? Not to mention the circus it would cause in the secular world? For an officially approved apparition to predict that a future Pope would die violently would lead to all sorts of commotion in the Church and distract from its mission. "Is it today?", "Is this Pope the one?" would have been questions which spawned entire industries not unlike the JFK saga.
The Church is not "into" predicting the future. At least not in the sense that a revelation such as this foretells. It tells us that Jesus will return, that each of us will face our own particular judgement but the future violent death of a Pope is not something which we need to know for our own salvation.
There are probably other reasons which one could think of, but I think it's a stretch to infer from the long secrecy that there must be something really juicy being hidden and to further infer from this that the published version must therefore, be false.
Does Cardinal Ratzinger know?
--
"Cardinal Ratzinger, have you read what is called the Third Secret of Fatima: i.e., the one that Sister Lucia had sent to Pope John XXIII and which the latter did not wish to make known and consigned to the Vatican archives?"
(In reply, Cardinal Ratzinger said)
"Yes, I have read it,"
(which frank response provoked a further question)
"Why has it not been revealed?"
(To this the Cardinal gave the following most instructive reply)
"Because, according to the judgement of the Popes, it adds nothing (literally 'nothing different') to what a Christian must know concerning what derives from Revelation: i.e., a radical call for conversion; the absolute importance of history; the dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian, and therefore of the world. And then the importance of the 'novissimi' (the last events at the end of time). If it is not made public - at least for the time being - it is in order to prevent religious prophecy from being mistaken for a quest for the sensational (literally: 'for sensationalism'). But the things contained in this 'Third Secret' correspond to what has been announced in Scripture and has been said again and again in many other Marian apparations, first of all that of Fatima in what is already known of what its message contains. Conversion and penitence are the essential conditions for 'salvation'."
--November 11, 1984 issue of Jesus magazine
Says who?
No.
The form of words is mine. And I'll plead guilty to a charge of exaggeration with the "any day" remark.
However, the idea the the non-SSPX Church is in an advanced stage of a disease which will eventually prove terminal is pushed relentlessly on this forum. By you amongst others.
They confirm nicely what I said to another poster in #43.
Although it won't be forthcoming, I would love to hear an solid explanation from our Church on this, as opposed to some weak article from the Zenit apologists.
On one hand they tell us (officially) that the Mother of our Lord and Savior appeared at Fatima to 3 children, on the other they tell us that they were forced to directly disobey her because of an ambiguous vision of a man in white being assaulted with bullets and arrows.
She really never could, could she?
The form of words is mine. And I'll plead guilty to a charge of exaggeration with the "any day" remark. However, the idea the the non-SSPX Church is in an advanced stage of a disease which will eventually prove terminal is pushed relentlessly on this forum. By you amongst others.
The "conciliar" Church is in an advanced stage of auto-demolition. That's Paul VI, not 'trads". Ratzinger himself just recently apologized for his part in the "ruins" we are standing in regarding Liturgy. Trads just see the same obvious reality in front of them. Your construction of "non-SSPX" and this imposed triumphalism that you are attributing to the SSPX is a pure fabrication on your part. It's reminiscent of pro-abortionists calling pro lifers. "anti-choice".
All you have to do is actually hear Bishop Williamson online or on tape giving sermons and interviews about the status of the Church and the role and function of the SSPX in the context of today. "By no means am I saying that all are Angels inside the society and all are devils outside the society." You will never hear anything from the SSPX regarding their "ruling supreme". In fact, if you actually knew what you were talking about you'd hear a lot of things that you'd find surprising about the reverence for the heirarchy and the SSPX knowing the limits of what they can accomplish during this time. I used to think and believe like you do. Then, I actually did my homework.
Pretty much what I said in my post to you.
"The Church is not "into" predicting the future."
Then perhaps you should try reading Matthew 24.
And the Book Of Revelations.
Or perhaps those of the prophets Amos, Daniel, Jeremiah, Isaias, Joel,Abdias, Jonas, Michaes, Nahum, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachi........
any of those dudes sound familiar? The Church recognizes them and reveres them as prophets of the Lord. And.......they predict the future.
Instead of a literal interpretation, how about the dilution of Christianity and the destruction of the Church enabled by forces from within working with those from without?
Talk about things the Church wouldn't want to admit...
I don't care what Williamson says and I don't care what you say. It's just so much chin music.
I look at actions.
When you act in a manner which defies the Pope and which subborns his ministry to your own personal judgement as to what constitutes Catholicism, that is triumphalism.
Unless I have completely misread 2-3 years worth of posts on this forum, then my original comment stands and I will restate it.
It is the thesis of a significant number of posters here (including you) that true Catholicism is found only, within the confines of SSPX. Further, this will become clear to all when the Church united to the Pope further deteriorates in membership and practice to the point where only SSPX is left standing as the bastion of the true faith.
Don't jerk me around with all this "you're making it up" garbage.
I've read plenty of Williamson's opinions, by the way. Are you on board with him when he says the Japanese were not the ones behind Pearl Harbor and 9/11 was not the work of al-Qaeda? According to your bishop, the government knows who did these things but won't tell us.
Just as a public service for the lurkers here, so we know exactly how tight that tin-foil is wrapped around your noggin.
I believe it was you who brought up the subject of the SSPX - which is grossly off topic. We are not discussing this here. But it would seem to be a great way to destroy a thread.
What we are talking about on this thread is Third Secret of Fatima - and the text released by the Vatican in 2000, which purported to be so.
...At least not in the sense that a revelation such as this foretells. It tells us that Jesus will return, that each of us will face our own particular judgement
I acknowledge that the Church does make some statements about the future. Scripture and the prophets foretell the coming of the Messiah, punishment for sin, judgement, the need for repentance. They call people back to God, consistent with the salvific mission of the Church.
The threat of future punishment for present, unrepented transgressions has always been a part of the Church's mission.
This is not what is meant by "foretelling the future."
Almost all those who subscribe to the theory of Vatican malfeasance with regard to the Third Secret, are either members of, or sympathizers with this group. Further, this fits a consistent pattern of contestation of everything emanating from the Vatican. It is not grossly off topic.
We are not discussing this here. But it would seem to be a great way to destroy a thread.
Oh dear.
Here you all are constructing this investigative masterpiece on Vatican hanky-panky( the 150th this month) and I barge in.
I do apologize.
Did I "destroy" this beautiful example of critical thought?
Good.
No, you didn't. You haven't even come close.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.