Monday, January 25, 2016

Will The Real Fatima Please Stand Up ?


 Years ago, there was a game show entitled To Tell The Truth. Three people would come out from behind the stage curtain, and the host would ask each in succession, "What is your name, please?" Each person would respond, "My name is John McCoy." The host would proceed to read a short biography of John McCoy, describing some fascinating aspect or accomplishment of his life. Each of the three contestants claimed to be John McCoy, but only one was the "real McCoy" (so to speak!). A panel of comedians or TV personalities would then ask each contestant some questions. After about 10 minutes of questioning they would attempt to guess who was the real McCoy. It would end when the host would ask, "Would the real John McCoy please stand up?"--and he would, ending the mystery.

 There are few subjects more hotly debated than the Church-approved apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima. The True Church (prior to Vatican II) declared the apparitions of the Mother of God to three small children in Fatima, Portugal, "worthy of belief." That being said, no Catholic is obliged to accept any private revelation as true. "Private revelation" is distinguished from "public revelation" (the Deposit of Faith) given by Christ to His One True Church and ended with the death of the last Apostle, St. John in 100 A.D. We are bound to accept the teachings of the Church regarding the Deposit of Faith.

 I have often stated that I will not allow (or perpetuate) rancor among Traditionalists regarding "the authentic message" of Fatima. I will attempt in this post to explain just why the apparition is so confusing and the subject of great controversy. I would like to first clarify my position: I believe that the apparition is real. If the Church declares it worthy of belief, that's good enough for me. It would be a sin to reject an approved revelation if the motive for the rejection is contempt for Church authority. I believe that there are several things we can safely take away from Fatima to make us better Traditionalists, such as the First Saturday devotions, wearing the Scapular, praying the Rosary with fervor, and the Fatima prayer to be recited at the end of each Rosary decade.In addition, we should make reparation for poor sinners and propagate devotion to the Most Immaculate Heart of Mary, while imploring the grace of Final Perseverance. I denounce the use of Fatima, or any other private revelation, as "proof" for any theological position not already approved by the Magisterium of the Church. We need to spend more time acquainting ourselves with authentic Church teaching, as expounded by the Church's own theologians prior to the Great Apostasy at Vatican II.

Background of the Apparition
The Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, appeared six times to three shepherd children near the town of Fatima, Portugal between May 13 and October 13, 1917. Appearing to the children, the Blessed Virgin told them that She had been sent by God with a message for every man, woman and child living in our century. Coming at a time when civilization was torn asunder by war and bloody violence, She promised that Heaven would grant peace to all the world if Her requests for prayer, reparation and consecration were heard and obeyed.

Our Lady of Fatima explained to the children that war is a punishment for sin and warned that God would further castigate the world for its disobedience to His Will by means of war, hunger and the persecution of the Church, the Holy Father and the Catholic Faithful. God's Mother prophesied that Russia would be God's chosen "instrument of chastisement," spreading the "errors" of atheism and materialism across the earth, fomenting wars, annihilating nations and persecuting the Faithful everywhere.

"If My requests are not granted, Russia will spread its errors throughout the world, raising up wars and persecutions against the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will suffer much and various nations will be annihilated." In all Her appearances at Fatima, the Blessed Mother repeatedly emphasized the necessity of praying the Rosary daily, of wearing the Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel and of performing acts of reparation and sacrifice. To prevent the terrible chastisement at the hands of Russia and to convert "that poor nation", Our Lady requested the solemn public Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart by the Pope and all the Catholic bishops of the world. She also asked that the Faithful practice a new devotion of reparation on the first Saturday of five consecutive months ("The Five First Saturdays").

The most important part of Our Lady's Message to the world is contained in what has come to be called the "Secret" which She confided to the three child seers in July 1917. The Secret actually consists of three parts, the first two of which have been publicly revealed. The first part of the Secret was a horrifying Vision of Hell "where the souls of poor sinners go" and contained an urgent plea from Our Lady for acts of prayer and sacrifice to save souls. The second part of the Secret specifically prophesied the outbreak of World War II and contained the Mother of God's solemn request for the Consecration of Russia as a condition for world peace. It also predicted the inevitable triumph of Her Immaculate Heart following Russia's consecration and the conversion "of that poor nation" to the Catholic Faith.

The last part of the Secret (often called the "Third Secret") was allegedly made public in 2000 by the Modernist Vatican. It was written down by Lucy Dos Santos, the last living Fatima seer who became a nun, in 1944 and has been in the possession of the Holy See since at least 1957. The other two seers said Our Lady told them they would die as children and go to Heaven. Both, indeed, died soon after the apparition (Jacinta and Francisco Marto). Sister Lucia (as Lucy Dos Santos was known) died at the age of 97 on February 13, 2005. Most informed sources who do not agree with Ratzinger's "Third Secret" of 2000, speculate that this portion of the Secret concerns chaos in the Catholic Church, predicting widespread apostasy and a loss of faith beginning in the seventh decade of the 20th Century. It should have been released, according to the BVM, in 1960. Roncalli (John XXIII) refused, saying, "it does not concern my pontificate." (Compiled from several sources, including fatima.org)

Fatima According to "Fr." Nicholas Gruner

Mr. Gruner (1942-2015) was an invalidly ordained Vatican II "priest" (1976) from the Diocese of Avellino, Italy. He has been derided at the "CEO of the Fatima Industry." Beginning in 1978, Gruner started publishing a magazine The Fatima Crusader, calling on John Paul II to make the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in union with all the bishops of the world. (This assumes JPII was really pope and there were real bishops with jurisdiction under him). 

 After the 1982 consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by JPII, Gruner claimed Russia need to be specifically mentioned, and all the bishops need to do it in union with the "pope." He often claimed to be "the only person spreading the true message of Fatima" against those who saw no need of a specific consecration of Russia. He would plead for money in each issue, to help him "spread the cause." There were always warnings of impending nuclear war if he was not successful. Once he actually wrote that you should let "Our Lady guide your hand to write the most generous check possible (!)" 

 Sedevacantism was not something he would even consider since the "pope" can't do anything if we don't have one, therefore all his pleas for donations, as well as his very raison d'etre would disappear. He soon became a proponent of the "recognize and resist" movement "offering" the Traditional Mass and calling Vatican II a "mistake." This "consecration of Russia" was his panacea for all the ills in the world and the Church. After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Gruner claimed that this was all a deception and the consecration had still not taken place. just about everyone, including his alleged "pope" were in on the conspiracy to hide the true message of Fatima. When Sr. Lucia was reported by the Modernist Vatican to have stated the consecration was completed in 1982, Gruner claimed the statement was a forgery. Pleas for money increased, as did predictions of nuclear war from a Communist Russia that really hadn't changed and was waiting to strike the West.  He was suspended by the Vatican II sect for failing to return to his diocese, and he unsuccessfully appealed. He was later incardinated into Archdiocese of Hyderabad, but remained suspended. He claimed that he was never validly suspended. 

 Towards the end of his life, he associated himself with Fr. Michael Jarecki, a notorious Fenneyite priest associated with the Vatican II sect St. Benedict Center, who died at age 95 in 2012. In 2014, he appeared in NYC to promote the totally discredited "apparitions" at Bayside, Queens. Gruner died of a heart attack on April 29, 2015.

The Imposter Sr. Lucia Conspiracy Theory

Next, we have the "Two Lucys" theory. This reminds me of the "crooked ears" conspiracy theory of the false Bayside apparitions. According to the "seer" of Bayside, Paul VI was a true pope who was drugged and held prisoner in the Vatican. Then he was replaced by an imposter who underwent plastic surgery to look like Montini. However, the enemies of the Church made one mistake; if you look at pictures of Montini just before and after his election, the ears (after his election as "pope") are crooked and don't line up right with his nose as in the earlier pictures due to an imperfection in the plastic surgery! (I won't even comment on THAT one!)

 The Sr. Lucia theory is similar. Prior to 1960, Sr. Lucia was "replaced" by an impostor so she could not tell "the True Message of Fatima" to the world. Exactly who are the nefarious people that performed this "switch" is never really clear, although one would gather it was done by some enemy of the Church inside the  Vatican.  (All the makings of a great Malachi Martin novel). A "recognize and resist" website, traditioninaction.org, shows pictures of Sr. Lucia ("Sr. Lucy I" --or the real nun, and "Sr. Lucy II"--or the impostor). Here is the "evidence:"

 Sister Lucy I stands in a collected way, her hands in a discrete gesture. Her posture and demeanor are quite composed, as befitting a religious woman. 

The pose of Sister Lucy II as a young nun is in many senses different. She rests her face on her hand as if she were in a classroom listening to a lecture. Her somewhat artificial air catches one’s attention. Her wrists are deliberately showing, as well as a small bit of her hair at the top and side of the habit, more in keeping with the manner of a progressivist nun, clashing with the extreme discretion of Sister Lucy I. 

Sister Lucy II’s glasses are very modern in style for a nun of the 1950s. One can certainly say that it reflects a person sensitive to the appeals of fashion. Again, an attitude foreign to Sister Lucy I. 

These are the comparisons I would like to offer to my reader. My conclusion is simple: the face, the features, the gestures, and the spirit of the two Sister Lucys are dissimilar. It would seem, then, that we are looking at two different persons. 

The rest of the "evidence" is no more convincing.  What is the real ("true") message of Fatima according to this group? " ...it is a description that certainly matches the reality we are witnessing today: the radical changes that were installed in the Church by Vatican Council II and were universally spread in the last 45 years." Yet, they believe these men are still "popes" and "bishops" with authority!

Portugal Will Always Preserve the Dogma of The Faith

OK, this alleged prophesy by the Blessed Mother, is really up for grabs. Portugal legalized abortion in 2007 and sodomite "marriage" in 2010. The Vatican II sect flourishes there. In what sense have they "preserve[d] the dogma of the Faith"? Some of my readers commented that this might refer to a Portuguese man becoming a true pope to end the sedevacante period of apostasy in which we all live. It's possible. What about the alleged prophesy at Fatima that "entire nations will be annihilated"? Gruner talked about (always imminent)  nuclear war. Others said it was constructive disappearance through the European Union.

 Also confusing is the message that "In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph... and a period of peace will be given to the world." How, exactly, does this fit in with what we know about the Great Apostasy, the Antichrist, etc.? There will be peace and then the end- times will come at a future date?  You cannot start to change what we know from Church teaching because of some private revelation. These statements are too subject to varying interpretations and qualifications.

Ratzinger's Lies

On June 26, 2000, then "Cardinal" Ratzinger, later to become "Pope" Benedict XVI, released the alleged Third Secret of Fatima. It said in pertinent part:

 After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!’. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it’ a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father’. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels, each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God

There is plenty wrong.  Witnesses attest to the fact that the Fatima apparitions were exterior, physically sensible apparitions. The Miracle of the Sun was witnessed by over 100,000 people and reported in major newspapers. The commentary insists that the Fatima apparitions were merely interior visions to the three children. There is no discussion as to why, in the critical year of 1960, the secret was not to be released.

 My spiritual father, the late, great Father Gommar A. DePauw, a peritus (theological "expert") at Vatican II, was "leaked" an alleged copy of the Third Secret. It was only supposed to have been seen by Cardinal Ottaviani and John XXIII. Other high ranking officials claimed to have seen it, but no one knows for sure. Father was not sure if it was authentic, but he believed that it was for reasons he did not share with me. He claimed it told about the complete collapse of the established Church, which would be reduced to a handful of Faithful Catholics refusing novelty and dedicated to Tradition. It seemed to happen before his eyes from 1962-1965 as he was there at the Council and formed the Catholic Traditionalist Movement in 1964! He also rejected Ratzinger's alleged "secret"--saying "Thanks, but no thanks!" He wasn't falling for it.

 So what is the "true message" of Fatima? As I have demonstrated, there are many conflicting views on many aspects. That's why we must concentrate on Catholic teaching, expose the Modernist Counterfeit "Catholicism" of the Vatican II sect, and refuse to argue over private revelations. In due time, Our Lord will make known what Fatima was all about, and the truth will be told.





42 comments:

  1. So the profile disparity of one lucy with a long projecting chin vs a flat chin are shoddy evidence to you? You believe human jaw bones morph from year to year? You realize that you sound just like one of those ignorant people who try to downplay the obvious controlled demolition of WTC7 as a nutty conspiracy theory. Give me a break.

    ReplyDelete
  2. sorry, I didn't mean to come across like a rude jerk, but there is just no way anyone can examine the photos of that profile and come away thinking it is a kooky conspiracy theory. They are not profiles of the same individual.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I understand that people have very strong feelings about this apparition, and this is why we should refrain from quarreling over it.

      However, you have the right to feel as you do. In defense of my position, I see two major problems, one deals with the alleged plot, the other with the photos.

      As to the "plot":
      1. What happened to the real Sr. Lucy? Was she killed, or maybe locked up in the closet somewhere as per the Bayside apparitions' claims about Giovanni Montini (Paul VI).

      2. Satan is an intelligent, although totally evil, fallen angel. If these people were doing his work to silence her, why would they pick someone to replace her who would be seen as an obvious fraud?

      As to the pictures, your claim that human jaw bones don't morph is factually incorrect. They do. I checked with a medical expert, and she gave me some pertinent citations.

      First, the picture of the "Two Lucys" are decades apart--one in her approximate 20s, the other in her approximate 50s.

      Second, according to the medical journal,Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2012 Aug; 36(4): 753–760, in an article entitled "Changes in the Facial Skeleton With Aging: Implications and Clinical Applications in Facial Rejuvenation" by Drs. Bryan Mendelson and Chin-Ho Wong,

      "The following specific changes occur with growth: increasing protrusion of the glabella; expansion of the supraorbital ridges; lateral translation of the orbits; increase in the depth and lateral expansion of the cheeks; increase in length, width, and vertical dimensions of the nose; and increase in vertical height in the occlusal region associated with INCREASED CHIN PROMINENCE. Enlow’s findings formed the basis for the widely accepted teaching that craniofacial growth is one of continuous expansion throughout life." (Emphasis mine)

      In the good doctor's professional opinion, the two pictures could indeed be of the same woman.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. My friend, I will never agree with you or the doctors that those two photos could possibly be the same person. You do not have to be a doctor to figure this one out. Sorry. I've been on this earth for many decades and can tell you that people do not grow new chins between their 20s and 50s.

      Delete
    3. You certainly have the right to believe as you do. However, I think it's foolish to disregard established medical facts published in peer reviewed journals. In the absence of solid evidence to the contrary, people do (some more than others) have increased chin prominence with age. Ask any plastic surgeon, and they will tell you the same. We can agree to disagree agreeably. For me to accept the "Two Lucy" Theory, you have to do better in explaining the background questions I asked above, and offer more than "differing chins."

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. First did you actually look at the disparity of those chin profiles? When you were in grade school, did you not make profiles of your face and give them to your mom and dad? Most people I know did. They remained the same profile through the years, with the exception of larger features. But larger doesn't mean altered. You can't grow a new chin or nose. They remain the same in their shape throughout our lives. That is why people recognize adults even when they haven't seen them in decades. We still maintain our genetic features. New chins are not part of the genetic code. While it may be foolish to disregard medical facts, it is not foolish to disagree with them. Ask all the people who travel to Italy to cure their cancer using baking soda at the hands of Dr. Tullio Simoncini. I myself have cured multiple basel cell carcinomas using black salve and at times lavender oil. The medical professional laughed when I told them what I was going to do. As far as explaining the background questions I suspect you don't want to hear my answers but here goes. Fatima was a Vatican hoax all along. The original Lucy in the early photos died (probably due to disease). she was replaced because 1. Fatima is huge business and 2. the modern Church needed it to support the V2 revolution. I say it is foolish to disregard common sense in lieu of so-called professionals. But that is just me.

      Delete
    5. You certainly make an interesting case! I still disagree, but in the spirit of not "slugging it out" over private revelations, I will not take this any further. In this, "to each his own."

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  3. Thank you Thank you Thank you!
    Fatima has overshadowed the deposit of faith and sacred tradition for 3 decades.Its time to learn and practice the one,holy,apostolic,catholic,faith.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, indeed! Let's concentrate on what Our Lord's One True Church officially teaches.
      ---Introibo

      Delete
  4. Whatever happened to Lucy?

    But what has been done with the fatimaindustry supports the heresiarchs, supports ecumenism and reinvents the Miracle of the sun daily to suit an ecumenical cause.

    Bishop Dolan of Saint Gertrude the Great in West Chester once said that the promises from Our Lady given to the children on the Cova da Iria had a used by date. In other words, if the warning is not heeded thus and thus will occur...

    Well it did occur.

    The half-hearted and false pursual of a post-VII heirarchy to consecrate a post Ussr Russia against an antagonistic modernism is passed the 'use-by' date (especially since Roncalli and Montini etc. Supported communism to the great pains of Catholic priests - something the last true Pope Pius XII rightly 'pontificated' against.

    While there may be moaners against the loss of Catholicism in the corrupted Sees warned of, they are too content with what the world makes of them to consider conversion; Heaven.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting article! I agree with viterbo, that the request was more along the lines of, "Consecrate Russia to my Immaculate Heart. If this isn't done, Russia will spread her errors, etc." Since Russia wasn't consecrated and she has indeed spread her errors throughout the world, it's obviously too late to fulfill Our Lady's request at Fatima.

    Well, we can certainly fulfill her request to do penance, say the rosary and so on.

    There are several features of the apparitions that strike me as strange. The prophecy that the dogma of the Faith would always be preserved in Portugal is probably the strangest. That has apparently not happened. I was hoping you would comment a little more on that.

    In any case, prophecies are not meant to be given so much weight. St. Vincent Ferrer prophesied that the world would end very shortly in his lifetime, and it's been around for about 600 years since then. This is explained by saying that the prophecy was conditional, meaning that if people didn't repent the world would end. But they did repent, fortunately.

    It's frightening to see a private revelation take the place of the Magisterium, which sadly is the case for so many people with the Fatima apparitions.

    ReplyDelete
  6. God sends private revelations not to instruct the faithful in new doctrines but to edify them and encourage them in charity and devotion. Therefore, no one can hope to understand Our Lady's message at Fatima without first having a firm foundation in the Catholic Faith. Anyone who would make this revelation a substitute for the Faith is by that very fact leading people astray.

    Other than the Vatican's obvious fake, I don't know a single putative Third Secret that doesn't foretell of some enormous global tribulation. Let us grant that any one of them is true. Then nobody who is ignorant of the faith or lukewarm in its practice will be prepared for the test ahead. On the other hand, let us grant that none of them are authentic; in that case, there is still a tribulation for which ignorance and lukewarmness would leave one unprepared: the hour of death. Is there anything more that we really need to know about the matter?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well put Daniel! I agree with you completely. As we near Lent, we should meditate on the Four Last Things, Death, Judgement, Heaven, and Hell.
      ---Introibo

      Delete
  7. I agree with an earlier comment: "we can certainly fulfill her request to do penance, say the rosary and so on...." Also, Fatima in my very humble opinion is supposed to remind us about how important it is to stand fast in the True Faith. The message is just that: the message. It is not Dogma nor should we hold it up as such; otherwise, we risk offending Our Lord by throwing His gift to us back at Him. That gift is the True Faith! This should make us pause and reflect at the Love Our Lord has for us!

    Thank you again for another interesting, insightful and important article.

    May Christ Our Lord continue to Bless you and your loved ones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you my friend! Be assured of my prayers.
      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. Very insightful. Thank you.
    Would you kindly answer a question which I ask with all due respect?
    If the late, great Father Gommar A. DePauw (and he was indeed great from what I have read) was your spiritual director, and he believed these VII popes to be true popes, then why do you not accept them to be true as he did? Did he ever tell you that he did not think they were the real popes?
    I have read a letter in which he addresses Pope Paul VI as "Your Holliness."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Father did not WANT to believe it for many years. He tried to reconcile the errors he rejected while still holding on to the "pope" hoping he would "come to his senses."

      After the 1999 Joint Declaration was signed by JPII, basically saying that the Lutherans were not heretics and joining their error, Fr. DePauw never again referred to him as "pope" calling him simply "John Paul" or more frequently, "the man in white at the Vatican." He did NOT insert his name in the Canon of the Mass from at least that date. When I asked him about sedevacantism, he would politely change the topic. It is my belief that he had adopted the position, but couldn't bear to speak it. To see what happened to his beloved Church broke his heart.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. What you have said about Fr. Gomar de Pauw is amazing to me.
      I have recently heard that Fr. Villa may have thought the same, although he never publically spoke of sedevacantism either.
      Thank you for answering my questions.
      God bless you.

      Delete
    3. I know someone who went to Fr. de Pauw's chapel, and she said that before Mass began he would say, "Welcome to Ave Maria Chapel where one can avoid heresy on the left and schism on the right."
      I interpreted the schism on the right he was avoiding was "sedevacantism."
      Do you remember that saying of his, as well? If so, how would you interpret what he meant for "schism on the right"?

      Delete
    4. Fr. Would say that from time to time, not before every Mass. The reference to "schism on the right" was to Archbishop Lefebvre, whom Father did not like as he refused to support him in 1964. When Lefebvre came out of retirement in 1970 to found the SSPX, he acted as if Bishop Kurz (who was the Bishop-Moderator of Fr. DePauw's Catholic Traditionalist Movement since 1966) didn't exist, and he was the first bishop to publicly denounce V2.

      There was bad blood between the Fr.DePauw and Abp. Lefebvre for the rest of their lives.
      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. You could ignore my last few questions as I am now reading Richard Cuneo's statement on the 6 month anniversary of the death of Father De Pauw from the CATHOLIC TRADITIONALIST MOVEMENT website.
      My questions are answered on this website. Thank you for directing my attention to it and Fr. de Pauw.
      Thank you for your time and for answering my questions.
      You have been blessed to have known Fr. DePauw.
      May God continue to bless you.

      Delete
    6. Your words have had deep impact on my thoughts today.

      Continuing my questions about Fr. DePauw, if you do not mind:

      I have been pondering your words about Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr. DePauw. If these two could not reconcile their differences and the confusion of "the times," surely we lay people could never conclusively do so.
      Surely, this confusion and apostasy IS our punishment or at least a large part of it.
      Please comment on that if you would.

      Also, above one of your commentators said,
      "Bishop Dolan of Saint Gertrude the Great in West Chester once said that the promises from Our Lady given to the children on the Cova da Iria had a used by date. In other words, if the warning is not heeded thus and thus will occur...

      Well it did occur."

      Do you agree with this?
      If so, are we presently in "the chastisement" or will there be another physical one along with the spiritual one we are presently in?

      Would Fr. DePauw agree with the above commentator's statement?

      Thank you.

      Delete
    7. As to your first query,

      Remember the words of Our Lord in St. Matthew 26:31,"Then Jesus said to them: All you shall be scandalized in me this night. For it is written: I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be dispersed." In my opinion, (and that's all it is, an opinion)I believe that the confusion comes "hand in glove" with sedevacantism. Let's face it; without a pope, how do questions get decisively settled? There will be some confusion as "the Shepard has been struck."

      The Vatican II sect has more confusion WITH a "pope"! How is that possible? Just like the false Anglican sect, the Vatican II sect has a "high church" (FSSP-type), a 'broad church" ('conservative' EWTN types) and a "low church" (the rest of them where anything goes, and they want "priestesses" etc.)

      You also have the SSPX pseudo-Traditionalists, who want to join Modernist Rome, yet have not formally done so.

      I think we are in a better position to try and see our way through, because the pioneers, like Fr. DePauw and Bp. Kurz, were too close to a unique event. Father saw more clearly as time wore on. Is the confusion part of the punishment? I would say so.

      As to your second query, I agree we are being Chastised, but I don't know if this is "the end-times" or not. We must always be prepared lest we are caught unaware, when the Lord returns "as a thief in the night." I don't know what Fr. DePauw would say for certain, but I'm reasonably sure he'd be in agreement with me.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  9. Continuing from above.....
    The sedevacantist position has excellent points, but this is a stumbling block for me. The "saints" around back (Padre Pio, Fr.Gomar DePauw, Fr. Luigi Villa)all looked at these "visible popes" as true popes, so I believe that we should follow their holy lead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As to this point, please remember that even great saints are not infallible. We must follow the evidence where it leads. Fr. DePauw would agree on that point, even if the truth hurt---which it did.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I concur,you were extremely blessed to have Fr.DePauw as your spiritual director,priest,and friend.He seemed like a very fascinating,interesting,well rounded,intelligent,catholic priest.If a miracle happens and the V2 sect implodes,he should be referred to as Blessed Gommar DePauw.

      Delete
    3. I agree! My prayers are with you my friend.
      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. When it comes to matters conducive to maintaining the faith, I suppose I can only be thankful to report that I have always been much more interested in philosophy than private revelations. It may sound like sacrilege to say it out loud, but I've never paid much attention to Fatima at all.

    I agree with our host that the "evidence" for the Two Sisters Lucy is risible, and I'm embarrassed to see Traditional Catholics attempting to build on such a flimsy foundation. However, the matter of Sr. Lucy's apparent acceptance of the Novus Ordo Sect despite having been a visionary of the BVM herself, remains curious, and I think that is what really drives the Two Sisters theory.

    As far as the Secret itself is concerned, the indisputably authentic parts of it certainly agree with subsequent developments in world history, so we can probably surmise that the unreleased third portion does so as well, and probably foretells a mass apostasy. But we cannot be entirely certain of that; and since it is immaterial to the discharge of our present duties, it doesn't really matter. But to those who compounded the scandal they caused by not only bringing about the destruction of the institutional Church but concealing Our Lady's warning as well, their damnation will be all the worse.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I have read some of the 'fatima revelations' were written down in 1942 and Sister Lucy as a child told her parents 'an angel visited me and my 2 friends' just 2 years begone the 'fatima revelation.'
    I stay away from fatima it's very troubling once one looks it the history.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It is I again ----- the Fr. DePauw "admirer."
    I have a few more thoughts.
    The article entitled "The Two Sister Lucys: Photos and Facts" by Marian Horvat on the Tradition and Action site was the proverbial "slap in the face" for me to force me out of my "Novus Ordo" stupor. I was born in 1962 and had never been to a Latin Mass (other than 1 funeral) prior to 5 years ago. The disparities between the 2 Lucys in that TIA article are so profound that it forced me to begin to understand that this "problem" in the Church that I was beginning to notice was much bigger and more widespread that I had originally thought.
    Because God graced you with having had Fr. DePauw so close to you, you perhaps cannot understand the difficulty that one who has been raised in the NuChurch has in coming out of that "stupor." The poison is so pervasive that Our Good God is using any tactic He wills to to call His loved ones back to His True Church. The photos and evaluations in that article were one of the significant tools He used for me. The photos are drastically different for me. Maybe you don't see them because you never HAD to see them. But they are there ---- Big and Bad! (I do not say this argumentatively, only passionately.

    Also, since you mentioned Bayside, I wanted tell you a thought that I recently had after coming to better understand the True Church. Having grown up in PA, not too far from Bayside, my family saw some of the "kooks" (followers of Bayside) show up at our Sunday NO "mass." This one woman always wore a hat (ie: covered her head) and would never give the sign of peace at the "appropriate" time. She would instead put her head down and pray and not turn to offer her hand. She looked a lot like a "traditionalist" (aka true Catholic). I more recently learned that Bayside is not far from Fr. DePauw's Ave Maria chapel. What are the chances that this kooky Bayside false apparition site that (to the uninformed) makes traditionalists look kooky would be so close to the Ave Maria chapel? It appears to me that God allowed Satan to "set up shop" "right next to" the only true Latin Mass in the entire USA.
    All for His greater glory, of course.
    Amazing, God's ways.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am born n raised novus ordo.Went to my first valid holy sacrifice of the Mass July/August 2014.Held the sedevacantist position for 3 full years prior to this Holy Mass.
      My point to this is the evil poison in the novus ordo is blatant and obvious.
      In general,my generation (myself included) doesn't know their faith and most could care less.Sports,career,possessions and assets take priority over their lack of faith.

      Delete
    2. Congratulations upon your conversion to the One True Church! Deo gratias!
      Your comment about the loss of Faith is so very sad---and so very true.
      You're in my prayers. God bless you abundantly.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  13. What do you know, if anything, about John Haffert who did more than anyone (other than William Thomas Walsh who wrote the first Fatima book published in the USA) to promote Fatima?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know of John Haffert. I would need to do research on him.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  14. Interesting article. Somewhat relevant is the change in the Fatima Prayer that occured after 1941. The part of the prayer that was originally translated into English as “relieve the souls in Purgatory, especially those most abandoned” was changed to “lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of thy mercy.” I posted about this in a thread on Te Deum Forum:
    http://tedeum.boards.net/thread/741/fatima-prayer-original-interpretation
    - Caillin

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most interesting Caillin! Thank you for commenting.
      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I've never heard this before,thanks for telling us.
      Also,I apologize for saying anything negative about Fatima.In the past it irritated me that people treated Fatima with more urgency than sacred scripture and sacred tradition.My pride would dismiss Fatima and something negative would come out of my mouth.I need to be more respectful and honest.

      Delete
  15. Nothing can convince me that a woman who saw Our Lady and loved her could accept the Vatican II aberrations and the new "mass" as the supposed later Sister Lucy did. I think she was in ill health and perhaps the doctor was not called in time...and a potential threat to their planned council was removed. Would people have been so accepting of Vatican II and the new "mass" had the Fatima visionary spoken against it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The zionist freemasons wouldn't have allowed her to speak out against every heretical change since 1951.
      I agree with you,something isn't right about Sister Lucy post 1960.
      Communists are also very adept in brainwashing techniques.

      Delete