Choose style:

Author Topic: Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate  (Read 2581 times)

winoblue1

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Gender: Male
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #20 on: April 06, 2007, 02:13:am »
The pope is not a magician and he does not have 'super powers.' Outside of the very narrowly defined rules for infallibility he is not different than any other man, so to say that he can consecrate something without mentioning what that something is - is frankly ridiculous.

Sister Lucy said, and this is well documented, that the consecration has yet to be done as Our Lady requested.

I think that if you accept what Sister Lucy says about the apparition, you have to also accept what she says subsequent to it.

Also, one should use simple common sense -- to ask for a thing, you need to mention that thing.


Traditional Catholic seeking holiness.... seeking

Tradglad

  • Member
  • Posts: 896
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #21 on: April 06, 2007, 02:18:am »

Well before Pope Benedict meets with the Russian Orthodox..thats the first thing on the agenda..what a seen that would be,Orthodox and Catholics consecrating together!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yup, B-16 tells Alexy I..the First thing I gotta do before we have lunch is consecrate this country it to Our Lady!

I don't care to belong to a club that  
accepts people like me as members.  
- Groucho Marx


batteddy

  • Guest
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #22 on: April 06, 2007, 02:27:am »
Quote
so to say that he can consecrate something without mentioning what that something is - is frankly ridiculous.

The Pope makes cardinals "in pectore"...explain that.

Quote
I think that if you accept what Sister Lucy says about the apparition, you have to also accept what she says subsequent to it.

No. She could have reported what Our Lady said accurately, but then totally be wrong in interpretting later events.

Now, if she had said that Our Lady had appeared again and claimed Mary said it was not sufficient...then yes, I agree you would probably have to accept both reports or accept neither.

But it doesnt really matter what Sister Lucy allegedly said didn't fullfill the request. If she had no new information or extra information about what Our Lady intended to ask, beyond what Lucy already reported to her bishop, her interpretation is good as any. She didn't hear unacceptance of the consecration from from Our Lady directly. And a seer she has no particular authority to interpret the apparition...again, that interpretive power belongs to the Church's magisterium.

But, I really doubt Sister Lucy said that stuff anyway.

Quote
Also, one should use simple common sense -- to ask for a thing, you need to mention that thing.

Not if it is understood what you are talking about, and especially if you are talking to someone like God who surely DOES know what you are talking about.

Quo_Vadis_Petre

  • Red Comet
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,691
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #23 on: April 06, 2007, 02:36:am »
Quote from: batteddy
Quote
so to say that he can consecrate something without mentioning what that something is - is frankly ridiculous.

The Pope makes cardinals "in pectore"...explain that.

They are NOT cardinals until the publications of the names. From the Catholic Encyclopedia article:

Quote
Formerly the dignity of cardinal was acquired only after public proclamation and reception of the hat and ring. At present any form of publication suffices (Pius V, 29 Jan., 1571; Greg. XV, "Decet", 12 March, 1621, in "Bullarium Romanum", XII, 663 sq.). Creation of cardinals in petto is therefore without effect, unless there follows publication of the names. A testamentary publication does not suffice. Pius IX announced (15 March, 1875) a creation of cardinals in petto with publication of their names in his testament, but this creation never went into effect. From the reign of Martin V, i.e. from the end of the Western Schism, during which there were many cardinals created by the contending popes, it became customary for the pope to create cardinals without declaring their names (creati et reservati in pectore), the Italian equivalent for which is in petto. The publication of the names may, in given circumstances, be made at a much later date. Only, at whatever time such publication takes place, the cardinals so created rank in seniority according to the date of their original announcement as reserved in petto, and precede all those created after that time (P. A. Kirsch, "Die Reservatio in petto bei der Kardinalscreation", in "Archiv. f. kath. Kirchenrecht", LXXXI, 421 sqq.; K. Eubel, "Zur Kardinalsernennung des Dominicus Capranica", in "Röm. Quartalschrift", XVII, 273 sqq.).
"In our time more than ever before, the greatest asset of the evil-disposed is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigour of Satan's reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics."   -St. Pius X

"If the Church were not divine, this Council [the Second Vatican Council] would have buried Her."   -Cardinal Giuseppe Siri

St. Peter Arbues, pray for us.

Quo_Vadis_Petre

  • Red Comet
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,691
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #24 on: April 06, 2007, 02:39:am »
Quote from: batteddy
No. She could have reported what Our Lady said accurately, but then totally be wrong in interpretting later events.

Now, if she had said that Our Lady had appeared again and claimed Mary said it was not sufficient...then yes, I agree you would probably have to accept both reports or accept neither.

But it doesnt really matter what Sister Lucy allegedly said didn't fullfill the request. If she had no new information or extra information about what Our Lady intended to ask, beyond what Lucy already reported to her bishop, her interpretation is good as any. She didn't hear unacceptance of the consecration from from Our Lady directly. And a seer she has no particular authority to interpret the apparition...again, that interpretive power belongs to the Church's magisterium.

But, I really doubt Sister Lucy said that stuff anyway.

Is it so hard to believe that Our Lady gave Sister Lucy the requirements for the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart? Sister Lucy did in 1982 for the Papal Nuncio. Would Our Lady be so slipshod as to not telling Sister Lucy how to know if the Consecration was done correctly?

And again, all we see are your prejudiced opinions.
"In our time more than ever before, the greatest asset of the evil-disposed is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigour of Satan's reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics."   -St. Pius X

"If the Church were not divine, this Council [the Second Vatican Council] would have buried Her."   -Cardinal Giuseppe Siri

St. Peter Arbues, pray for us.


winoblue1

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Gender: Male
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #25 on: April 06, 2007, 04:43:am »
I just want to clear something up here,,,, firstly Appeal to Authority is a legitimate way of arguing, it is only a fallacy if you use an authority that is unrelated or not credible in the area being discussed.

Appeals to authority are made all the time, because we don't have first hand knowledge of most of what we claim to know.

So in this case, you would need to read what the pope's and 'experts' in the area have to say and use your common sense to determine what's what.


Traditional Catholic seeking holiness.... seeking

batteddy

  • Guest
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #26 on: April 06, 2007, 01:50:pm »
Did you even read the article you quoted?

Cardinals created in pectore ARE cardinals from the day the Pope creates them in pectore, they just don't get the dignity of cardinal until their names are published. Duh. If no one knows who they are, they can't vote, wear the insignia, etc until their names are published. Therefore, until they are named, it effects nothing objectively, because nothing changes. But they are a cardinal in the eyes of God and the Pope, even if they cannot take up the dignity canonically unless officially named. But their creation does happen on the earlier day, and is merely revealed later.

batteddy

  • Guest
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #27 on: April 06, 2007, 01:56:pm »
Quote
Is it so hard to believe that Our Lady gave Sister Lucy the requirements for the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart?

No. I believe it. And I believe these "requirements" are public knowledge. BUT I do not believe Lucy had any additional knowledge about the requirements for the consecration, besides what she already told the bishop in her testimony and what is publically known.

Quote
Would Our Lady be so slipshod as to not telling Sister Lucy how to know if the Consecration was done correctly?

That is already making the assumption that the consecration could be done "incorrectly." Mary was very clear, the Pope and Bishops were to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart. Nothing more, no legalities, no technicalities, no minutiae. If they did it, they did it. Nothing could be wrong with such a consecration, as they were free to consecrate however they chose. It was consecrated by the very fact of their intending it to be consecrated.


Quo_Vadis_Petre

  • Red Comet
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,691
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #28 on: April 06, 2007, 02:04:pm »
Quote from: batteddy
Quote
Is it so hard to believe that Our Lady gave Sister Lucy the requirements for the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart?

No. I believe it. And I believe these "requirements" are public knowledge. BUT I do not believe Lucy had any additional knowledge about the requirements for the consecration, besides what she already told the bishop in her testimony and what is publically known.

Quote
Would Our Lady be so slipshod as to not telling Sister Lucy how to know if the Consecration was done correctly?

That is already making the assumption that the consecration could be done "incorrectly." Mary was very clear, the Pope and Bishops were to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart. Nothing more, no legalities, no technicalities, no minutiae. If they did it, they did it. Nothing could be wrong with such a consecration, as they were free to consecrate however they chose. It was consecrated by the very fact of their intending it to be consecrated.


This article (which, BTW, was written by a person hardly a "conspiracy theorist") will destroy your argument:

Has Russia Been Consecrated?

 

by Peter Miller

 

The ongoing controversy over heaven's request

 

In 1917, as a bloody World War raged across Europe and a revolution loomed in Russia, the Mother of God came to Fatima to deliver a message. She spoke of heaven, hell and the sins of man which were being punished by means of war. She prophesized future events including the end of the first World War and the start of the second. She also spoke of the nation of Russia:

 

"You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. ... I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia. ... 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."

 

Twelve years later (June 13, 1929), this request came to the only surviving Fatima seer, Sister Lucy, at Tuy:

 

"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."

 

Far from a mere "private revelation", the message of Fatima contained a prophesies and instructions for the Pope, the Church and the entire world. This message was verified by a predicted miracle occurring on October 13, 1917 witnessed by 70,000 people including reporters, skeptics and atheists.1

 

Requirements and results of Russia's consecration

 

Sister Lucy delivered these instructions to the Pope and has specifically detailed the requirements for and consequences of the consecration requested by God through Our Lady:

 
  1. Russia must be specifically mentioned as the object of consecration;
  2. The Pope must be joined with the world bishops in a public ceremony.
 

A "consecration" is an act by which a thing is separated from the common or profane and declared for sacred use. Whether it be for a chalice, altar, new church or bishop, a consecration is always specific. When a bishop needs to consecrate a new church, he does not consecrate every building in his diocese because it is not specific and does not single out the object of consecration.

 

The first promise associated with Russia's consecration is Russia's conversion. Conversion is the abandonment of atheism, paganism, heresy or schism and the acceptance of the Catholic Faith and the Church established by Christ.

 

The second promise is a period of peace. For Catholics (and heaven), "peace" does not refer to border agreements and disarmament treaties between nations, but the Reign of Christ the King over every man and nation. It will not only mean the end of conventional warfare but the end of all assaults upon God's laws fought by abortionists, pornographers, fornicators, communists, etc..

 

The "almost consecrations"

 

There have been a number of gestures that have come close to fulfilling the requests of the Queen of Heaven. In 1952, Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia without the participation of the world's bishops. On May 13, 1982, Pope John Paul II consecrated the world without the world's bishops. On March 25, 1984 at the Vatican, Pope John Paul II consecrated the world with some of the world's bishops.

 

Obviously, none of these gestures fulfilled heaven's requests as reinforced repeatedly by Sister Lucy. In 1982, after Pope John Paul's first almost consecration, she repeated what she had said since at least 1946 that Russia needed to be mentioned and the bishops of the world needed to participate.2 Prior to the 1984 consecration, Lucy read the Holy Father's prepared text and remarked to Maria Eugenia Pestana that:

 

"This act of consecration cannot be decisive because Russia does not appear in it as the sole object of the consecration."

 

In a 1985 interview, Sister Lucy was asked if the Pope fulfilled the request of Our Lady when he consecrated the world in 1984. Sister Lucy replied:

 

"There was no participation of all the bishops, and there was no mention of Russia."

 

She was then asked, "So the consecration was not done as requested by Our Lady?" to which she replied:

 

"No. Many bishops attached no importance to this act." 3

 

Again on July 20, 1987, Sister Lucy told Enrique Romero in an interview that the consecration of Russia has not been done as requested. Our Holy Father seems to agree. At the end of the consecration formula, he added an impromptu prayer for those whose consecration Mary is still awaiting.

 

"Enlighten especially the peoples of which You Yourself are awaiting our consecration and confiding." 4

 

Interestingly, this was the only addition to a text that had been finalized and set for months. It has also been omitted from some news accounts covering the consecration. This statement would not make sense if the consecration of the world (and everyone in it) was already just completed. Who else was left and who else would heaven be particularly "awaiting" consecration? The only possible answer is the nation specifically requested: Russia.

 

Fatima revisionism

 

After the "almost consecrations", the Catholic faithful were in the same position as they'd been for years — praying, sacrificing and petitioning for Russia's consecration. Sister Lucy had repeatedly and explicitly stated the "almost consecrations" were not sufficient and Our Holy Father had echoed this sentiment.

 

The problems started years later when certain Vatican officials started claiming that the consecration had been done in 1984. Wait a minute. What about the requirements for consecration set forth by Sister Lucy and restated as recently as 1987? According to the revisionists, she had changed her mind. In a typed letter dated November 8, 1989, Sister Lucy supposedly reversed her position and said the 1984 consecration was sufficient.

 

There are a number of problems with this letter and reasons to question its authenticity — least of which is the fact that after a lifetime of hand-written letters, it's hard to believe she suddenly started using a word processor. This letter also contains factual errors that Sister Lucy would not have made and a signature that that does not match her handwriting. Numerous objections to the authenticity of the letter have gone unanswered. An easy way to clear this up would be asking Sister Lucy to clarify her supposed statements or verify the contents of the letter, but such a thing has never happened. In fact, Sister Lucy is still to this day bound to silence on the subject of Fatima — a silence that can only be released by Cardinal Ratzinger. What are they afraid of her saying?

 

On June 26, 2000, at the Vatican press conference concerning the Third Secret, Msgr. Bertone declared that

 

"Any further discussion or request [for the Consecration] is without basis"

 

As proof of this, they refer to this questionable decade-old letter rather than ask Sister Lucy herself who was available to answer questions regarding the consecration.

 

Several organizations have taken up the Fatima Revisionist cause in which Russia was consecrated seventeen years ago, including the EWTN network and the Blue Army. Fr. Nicholas Gruner's International Fatima Rosary Crusade has maintained the obvious problems with the new version of Fatima and reminded people that the consecration of Russia can't be avoided with revisionist propaganda. The more he spreads his message, the more he is hunted and persecuted by Vatican officials who would rather exile him than engage in debate over the merits of his claim. So much for the value of "dialogue"

 

Fatima vs. Ostpolitik

 

Why has it been so difficult to do what Our Lady asked? If there is so much controversy, why doesn't the pope (along with the bishops) consecrate Russia "again" to end the argument? It certainly would be more honorable than the persecution and humiliation of those spreading Our Lady's original message. The reason that won't happen is the same reason the consecration was never done in the first place: Russia cannot be singled out as an object of consecration because it is at odds with the Vatican policy of Ostpolitik.

 

Since the "Pact of Metz" proceeding Vatican II, the Vatican Secretary of State has taken a compromising approach towards Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church and communism. The pact was an agreement between Cardinal Tisserant and the Russian Orthodox Church that there would be no conciliar condemnation of communism if the Russian Orthodox would send two "observers" to the council (this agreement was attested to by Msgr. Roche, personal secretary to Cardinal Tisserant). Given the strong condemnations of communism from previous Popes and the horrendous holocaust being carried out on the Russian citizens, it will always be a blemish on this "pastoral" council that it failed to address the greatest evil of the age.

 

The policy of Ostpolitik continues to this day, as evidenced by the royal treatment allotted to Mikhail Gorbachev the the signing of the Balamand Statement which agrees not to seek converts among the Russian Orthodox. This "ecumenical" policy has received many critics including one loyal Catholic with first-hand experience:

 

"...Joseph Terelya...spent 23 years in Soviet labor camps and prisons for committing the 'crime' of remaining a Ukrainian Catholic instead of entering the Russian Orthodox Church controlled by the KGB. Mr. Terelya rightly objected to Cardinal Casaroli attending celebrations staged by the Kremlin to commemorate '1,000 years of Christianity in Russia' in 1988, when it was the Kremlin which persecuted Ukranian Catholics by violently annexing the Ukraine, executing or imprisoning all their priests and bishops and forcing them to join the schismatic Orthodox Church. Mr. Terelya noted that Cardinal Casaroli was legitimating the Communist persecution of Catholics by going to the Kremlin to celebrate 'the Millenium of Christianity,' which is rightly celebrated in the Ukraine, not in the godless Kremlin, which persecuted the Ukraine. He further noted that Cardinal Casaroli's presence in the Kremlin gave credence to the lie that the Ukraine belonged to Russia." 5

 

In fact, as confirmed by a Cardinal described as "one of the Pope's closest advisors", Russia was purposely not mentioned in the 1982 or 1984 consecration formulas so as not to offend Russians or single them out.6 Even if one disregards the traditional definition of consecration and Sister Lucy's instructions, the fact that Russia was purposely not mentioned so as not to single them out as the object of consecration should demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that the requested consecration has not been properly performed.

 

The explanations as to why the consecration of Russia became the consecration of "the world" range from the silly to the offensive. "Sister Lucy may have misunderstood the request," "Our Lady wouldn't have asked for Russia's consecration when the whole world needed it," "The collegial consecration of Russia is not possible," "I'm sure Our Lady is satisfied with the consecration of the world," "It is good enough, if not better that what was requested."

 

As long as Catholics are taking upon themselves the liberty of judging heaven's intent, I'll add my own: "I'm sure Our Lady is not amused by the repeated attempts to avoid doing what Our Lord requested! 'Thy will be done' does not carry an exception when His will is politically inconvenient." Is it not providential that the one nation Our Lady requested be publicly consecrated by name is the one nation that the Vatican is least willing to risk offending? Could it not be heaven's condemnation of Ostpolitik to issue a command that runs contrary to and undermines that policy?

 

Is Russia converting?

 

Continuing to humor the revisionists, if the consecration of Russia was completed in 1984, the conversion of Russia and period of peace in the world should have followed. Since obviously neither of those things have happened, the revisionists offer one of two ridiculous explanations:

 
  1. Our Lady never said how long after the consecration the conversion and period of peace will be and it is happening very gradually;
  2. "Conversion" does not necessarily mean conversion to the Catholic Church and could mean either the fall of communism or the conversion to Russian Orthodoxy.
 

When Sister Lucy asked Our Lady why Russia needed specifically to be consecrated, She responded that since Russia was heaven's chosen means of chastisement, Our Lord wanted the nation's conversion to be seen as an act of heaven. In a world consumed by naturalism, such an occurrence would surely be seen as miraculous.

 

While it is true that Our Lady never gave a detailed timeline for the promised conversion and period of peace, there's no way she would have us wait decades before they happened. If this were the case, it would almost eliminate the recognition of heaven's hand in the conversion and defeat the entire point of it being seen as a miraculous "act of heaven". If two events are separated by almost twenty years (or what's looking to be much, much longer), who would be convinced that the former caused the latter or that there was any correlation whatsoever?

 

Compare the current "conversion" of Russia with that of Mexico following Our Lady of Guadalupe's visit in 1531. Within nine years, nine million people (almost the entire nation) were converted to Catholicism. If we are witnessing the gradual conversion of Russia, there's a good possibility that we'll be waiting centuries rather than decades, if it will take place at all. Since 1984, Vatican bureaucrats have agreed not to seek conversions of the Russian Orthodox and the Russian government has outlawed the Catholic Church proselytizing (seeking conversions) in their nation. If Russia ever was converting, the government has outlawed any further progress and the Church has "given up" anyway.

 

Regarding what Our Lady meant when she said "conversion", there should be no debate. Through the history of the Church, conversion has always meant the shedding of errors and the faithful embracing of Christ's Church. This definition is so deeply rooted in Catholic Tradition that the very word "conversion" is no longer mentionable in our current ecumenical culture, except in disgust.

 

Those who claim that the conversion of Russia was witnessed by the "fall" of communism are bordering on blasphemy. Some go so far as to attribute significant events in the break-up of the Soviet Union to Our Lady due to the proximity of these events to various Marian feast days. Our Lady did not appear at Fatima with a message of chastisement and eternal hellfire just to offer prophesies about political designations. Again, "peace" is not heaven's code word for democracy but the Social Kingship of Christ.

 

It has also been claimed that the promised conversion meant the conversion to the schismatic Russian Orthodox Church.

 

"Of course Russia would not convert to Roman Catholicism. Their culture is rooted in Russian Orthodoxy and any conversion would need to be to that Church [sic]. The Vatican has been making progress in reconciliation with the Russia Orthodox."

 

 

While less preposterous than a "conversion" away from communism, this claim still lacks merit for several reasons. Until the onset of recent ecumenical confusion (which happened long after 1917), the Russian Orthodox were regarded by all in the Church as in need of conversion. Our Lady came with a message of Catholic doctrine for the world as a whole but primarily for the Catholic Pope and the Catholic Church. She spoke of purgatory, the papacy, the rosary and Her Immaculate Heart — all distinctly Catholic. She did not appear in Kiev with instructions for the Russian Orthodox patriarch in Moscow.

 

Schism is a sin and the Immaculate Queen of Heaven is not a Schismatic. She would not have offered the build-up of a schismatic church as a recognizable sign from heaven.

 

In 1917, Russia was already significantly Russian Orthodox so the claim that it would be converted was understood by no one to mean a "conversion" to its current condition. Our Lady even went so far as to request special reparation (First Saturday devotion) for those who offend her Immaculate Conception — a dogma rejected by the Russian Orthodox. Conversion means today what it meant in 1917 and meant in ancient Rome. Attempts to strip this word of its true meaning have failed and must continue to do so.

 

The hell that is Russia

 

Despite the claims of ignorant optimists, today's Russia is not converting and is far, far worse than it was in 1917 (and even 1984). Although 54 percent of Russians are baptized Russian Orthodox, those practicing their faith are less than 1/10th of 1 percent. Since the "fall" of communism, Russian society has been suffering through a diabolical spiral of crime, corruption, prostitution and abortion.

 

"In a recent interview in the Catholic World Report, Fr. Daniel Maurer of the Canons Regular of Jesus the Lord (CJD) spoke about the Russia he has seen during the last eight years he has spent in Vladivostok in the Russian Far East. According to the personal missionary experience of Fr. Maurer, more than 75 years of Communist repression and a godless society have not only thoroughly eradicated the Catholic presence from Russia, but also left despair, poverty, an amoral populace, and religious indifference. With no incentive to be honest or to improve one's condition in life, the result has been literally 'the killing of the spirit of the Russians,' said Fr. Maurer.

 

"What appeared after Communism changed its face? According to Fr. Maurer, the disaster continued unabated: general hopelessness, a damaged sense of morals, and a lot of poverty (during the financial crisis of 1998 when the bottom fell out from the ruble, people lost everything they had — for probably the third time since perestroika in the late 1980's). In a society where the faith was practically destroyed, morality continued to sink to new lows. Abortions still abound, suicides have increased, and there are many more cases of sexually transmitted diseases. The same Russian who meets you on the street and genially offers directions and hospitality has no scruples about stealing your pocketbook. (There are bars on every window and doors with five locks everywhere). ... It was and is a real hell on earth, a breeding bed for despair.

 

"Statistically, the average Russian woman will have eight abortions in her childbearing years, stated Fr. Mauer, although he believes the actual number is more like 12 abortions per woman (and he has spoken to women who have had as many as 25 abortions). The reasons for these horrendous figures? Since other contraception methods have not been introduced or are not trusted, abortion is the cheapest way to limit the family size. Abortions are free, and births are not (the average cost of a birth is $20, a month's salary for the average earner)." 7

 

 

The former Soviet Union still poses a threat of war to the world. Changing a name does nothing but accomplish marketing and public relations objectives — the same reason the KGB has needed to change its name five times over the past eighty years. Just because Russians no longer call themselves "communists" doesn't mean they are harmless. No one should retain the myth of a new, peaceful Russia, especially after the Robert Hanssen spy case which woke many people up to the reality of current Russian policies.

 

Reliable sources maintain that Russia is still gearing up for war with the United States even after the "fall" of communism. Col. Stanislav Lunev, the highest-ranking military spy ever to defect from Russia, has repeatedly stated on NewsMax.com, CNN and even CBS Nightly News last Monday that Russia has not curtailed its military operations and has ready-to-detonate suitcase-sized nuclear weapons planted in American soil. He further claimed first-hand knowledge of Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda group acquiring tactical nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union.8

 

Responding to Russian President Vladimir Putin's 11/7 Barbara Walters interview (in which he called reports of Russian military technology falling into the hands of terrorists "fables" 9), Israeli Cabinet minister Ephraim Sneh said he was certain:

 

"...the central support for the Iranian nuclear project is provided by Russia. ... Iran stands in first place as a sponsor of terrorism." 10

 

Whatever you want to call the situation in Russia, you can not by any means claim it represents the triumph of Our Lady's Immaculate Heart.

 

Why Russia's consecration is so important

 

Despite the obvious fact that God instructed the pope to do it, why is this act of consecration so important? History gives us one such example of ignoring almost identical instructions.

 

Our Lord appeared to St. Margaret Mary in France in 17th century. After revealing the promises of and establishing devotion to the Sacred Heart, He requested the King of France publicly consecrate France to His Sacred Heart. She gave the message to King Louis XIV who took no action. The request was also ignored by his next two predecessors and one hundred years to the day later, as the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror raged, King Louis XVI was beheaded and the French monarchy overthrown.

 

The parallel is an important one and cannot be overlooked. In fact, in 1931 Our Lord gave Sister Lucy the warning:

 

"Make it known to My ministers, given that they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My command, they will follow him into misfortune." 11

 

 

"Misfortune" is putting it mildly. Like the Vatican today, the French monarchy was influenced by political considerations and the infestation of modern philosophy. With the ultimate price having been paid in France and the looming threat of much worse consequences on the horizon, we hope and pray Our Lord's ministers will not follow the King's example.

 

This issue is of the gravest importance. The fate of the world is at stake. Our Lady also told Sister Lucy that only She can help us. This is not one of several viable plans for world peace, it is the only way. Peace can only be accomplished through this means. If not:

 

"The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated."

 

In human terms, the annihilation of nations is about as grave as it gets. As we see the increase in terrorism, wars, religious indifference and abortion, it is becoming more and more necessary to comply with Our Lady's requests. In 1957, Sister Lucy said to Father Fuentes:

 

"Many times the Blessed Virgin Mary told me and my cousins, Jacinta and Francisco, that Russia is the instrument of chastisement chosen by Heaven to punish the whole world (for its sins) if we do not beforehand obtain the conversion of that poor nation"

 

The longer we disregard Her message and replace it with more modern ideas reflecting the "spirit of the times", the worse off we're going to be. We've survived two gruesome wars that were used to punish a world of sinners in the early part of this century, during a time when no civilized country even considered legalizing abortion. What is in store for a present society, infinitely worse, in which not even the Church is willing to comply with heaven's commands?

 

Foot notes:

 

1 There is also compelling evidence that Our Lady's appearance of Fatima was foretold in bible and other approved apparitions.
2 L'Osservatore Romano (1982)
3 Sol de Fatima (Sept., 1985)
4 Avvenire (Mar. 27, 1984)
5 Fr. P. Kramer, C. Ferrara, R. Fioretti, M. Sedore, C. Graham — Letter to Cardinal Hoyos (May 16, 2001)
6 Inside the Vatican (Nov. 30, 2000)
7 M.T. Horvat, Ph.D. — "The Myth of a Converted Russia Exposed"
8 CBS Nightly News (Nov. 6, 2001)
9 ABCNEWS.com, "Interview With Russia's President Putin" (Nov. 7, 2001)
10 Washington Post, "Israel Calls Iran 'Biggest Threat'" (Nov. 7, 2001)
11 Father Alonso — "Fatima Ante la Esfinge" (1979)

 

"In our time more than ever before, the greatest asset of the evil-disposed is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigour of Satan's reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics."   -St. Pius X

"If the Church were not divine, this Council [the Second Vatican Council] would have buried Her."   -Cardinal Giuseppe Siri

St. Peter Arbues, pray for us.

Quo_Vadis_Petre

  • Red Comet
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,691
Sodono to become Fatima's papal legate
« Reply #29 on: April 06, 2007, 02:07:pm »
Quote from: batteddy
Did you even read the article you quoted?

Cardinals created in pectore ARE cardinals from the day the Pope creates them in pectore, they just don't get the dignity of cardinal until their names are published. Duh. If no one knows who they are, they can't vote, wear the insignia, etc until their names are published. Therefore, until they are named, it effects nothing objectively, because nothing changes. But they are a cardinal in the eyes of God and the Pope, even if they cannot take up the dignity canonically unless officially named. But their creation does happen on the earlier day, and is merely revealed later.

It still is different from what Our Lady requested. Apples and oranges.
"In our time more than ever before, the greatest asset of the evil-disposed is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigour of Satan's reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics."   -St. Pius X

"If the Church were not divine, this Council [the Second Vatican Council] would have buried Her."   -Cardinal Giuseppe Siri

St. Peter Arbues, pray for us.