FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Consecration of Russia
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
(12-21-2009, 11:57 AM)In nomine Patris Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2009, 10:15 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]From what I understand, the consecration of "the world" to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, by Pope John Paul II and the bishops of the world on March 25, 1984, was not exactly what Our Lady asked for - but that, according to Sr. Lucia, it was accepted by Our Lady nonetheless. If you read the Old Testament and Moses' bartering with God, you know that God is not above negotiation.

After the 1984 consecration, the Soviet Union toppled in that country and people were free to worship again. No, that's not the same as "conversion" to the Catholic Faith. However, if the Russian Orthodox church comes into full communion with Rome (and I have a strong feeling it's going to happen in my lifetime), Fr. Gruner and others are going to have to seriously reconsider their positions.

- Lisa

I see a problem with your statement. Our Lady also said after it was done, there would be a period of peace given to the world. I dont see that now, not at all. And our priest (Traditional) said it would be given rapidly. 1984 till now is 25 years. So, respectfully, I must say this is not true.

It depends on your definition of peace. At the moment we're not in a World War, as we were when Our Lady appeared in 1917 and again just before World War II. Further, I'm not expecting a Utopia.. not until the Lord comes. And, respectfully, 25 years is a drop in the bucket in God's time. Did Our Lady say a period of peace would come rapidly? or immediately? Did she give a timeline? Even many of the early Christians thought the Lord would return in their lifetime. They were mistaken. You could be mistaken. So could I.

Fatima is private revelation accepted by church authorities. Without their approval we would not be discussing it today. And so we have only the church authorities to guide us.

- Lisa
The only criteria I use in judging the Consecration of Russia is her promise of Russia's conversion. At this point there is no indication whatsoever of Russia converting. If you remember this message was before Vatican II, so it did not mean glasnost or peristroika, or even the wall coming down, it meant conversion to Catholicism. The period of peace would follow that and have less persecution than what is currently going on.

This for me is simple. It ain't happened yet. I'm waiting since I was a kid for the third secret, I was promised it would be revealed in 1960. I was in eighth grade and very impressionable. A kid with that much innocence can smell cover-up from 6000 miles away. We thought Bl. Pope John XXIII was calling the council to let the Cardinals know and then decide how to proceed. From my perspective of that long ago day this event was the beginning of the troubles. Because we sensed if this can be a changed, in that we were not going to get  the secret, then what else???  Some one here posted a graph of Sunday Mass attendance in the USA and it clearly showed that the fall off  began in 1960, two years before the Vatican II Council. The only large event which preceded Vatican II, was the failure to release the secret as promised and the Consecration of Russia.

If my friend, Laszlo, does not want to read the book. I'll let anyone else who wants to read it borrow it. I also have Antonio Socci's book, but someone is reading it right now.
tim
(12-21-2009, 11:36 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]Of course it doesn't. But my "feeling" doesn't come out of nowhere, but is based on recent news; namely the election of a new Patriarch and improvements in relations between Russia and Rome.

Do you have slightest idea how much effort and work it would take for them to return to the Catholic Church??? The amount of alterations that probably would have to be made to their ceremonies on account of the numerous heresies that have probably crept in over a thousand years would be trying enough, but imagine all the things they would have to renounce and all the things they would have to accept.

Portraying some sort of a movement back to the Church - on the basis of improved political and false ecuemenical relations is downright dishonest. They are heretics and schismatics, just because they shake hands and smile in public doesnt mean the entire Russian Orthodox are going to kneel and repent of their schism.......as if the Vatican would allow them anyway.

(12-21-2009, 11:36 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]A question for you: IF the Russian church returns to full union with Rome, will that amount to the "conversion" Our Lady spoke of - in your opinion?

Our Lady spoke of the NATION of Russia converting, not the schismatic Russian orthodox. Our Lady doesnt waste words or decevie us in ambiguity. She spoke of RUSSIA converting she spoke of nation of people, not just the orthodox, but the many other religions that are there aswell. The Russian state will be Catholic, its people will be Catholic, or at the least VAST majority therof. There are 20 million Muslims in Russia after all. The armed forces in Russia are about a third muslim. So there is going to have to be conversion there too.

Clearly Russia is not converted, harp about timeframe as much as you want, but its fairly clear things are getting much worse in Russia and not  better. Even in an official capacity the communist supporters are growing. Russia is modernizing and expanding its military and Russian society is about as corrupt as a society can be. We dont need to speak about the unspeakable things that go in Russian cities do we?

(12-21-2009, 12:36 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]It depends on your definition of peace. At the moment we're not in a World War, as we were when Our Lady appeared in 1917 and again just before World War II. Further, I'm not expecting a Utopia.. not until the Lord comes. And, respectfully, 25 years is a drop in the bucket in God's time. Did Our Lady say a period of peace would come rapidly? or immediately? Did she give a timeline? Even many of the early Christians thought the Lord would return in their lifetime. They were mistaken. You could be mistaken. So could I.

Peace very clearly is the kingship of Christ. That is the only true peace that could ever exist. There is no peace anywhere in the world now. It s important to have a Catholic outlook on the world, rather than a secular one, which only looks at wars and killing eachother as the definition of not having peace.

As for timeline, heres a good quote from John Salza:

For example, after Pius XII performed his partial consecrations in 1942 and 1952, World War II ended, but the Korean War began. Similarly, after Paul VI performed his partial consecration in 1964, the Korean war ended, but the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Vietnam war (both instigated by Russia) began. After John Paul II performed his partial consecration in 1984, the Soviet Union collapsed, but the world is more dangerous than ever before.


Clearly the effects of consecrations are immediate and do not take lifetimes or even 25 years. Clearly.

Read the book StrictCatholicGirl, it will do you a lot of good and I mean that in the nicest possible way and in all charity.

(12-21-2009, 02:52 PM)tradmaverick Wrote: [ -> ]Read the book StrictCatholicGirl, it will do you a lot of good and I mean that in the nicest possible way and in all charity.

And it is taken in charity. Alright. I'll read the book.
Thank you StrictCatholicGirl,
Youre very humble.

You put me to shame.

My apologies for any bad tone I had in making any of the above points.
(12-21-2009, 12:36 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2009, 11:57 AM)In nomine Patris Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2009, 10:15 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]From what I understand, the consecration of "the world" to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, by Pope John Paul II and the bishops of the world on March 25, 1984, was not exactly what Our Lady asked for - but that, according to Sr. Lucia, it was accepted by Our Lady nonetheless. If you read the Old Testament and Moses' bartering with God, you know that God is not above negotiation.

After the 1984 consecration, the Soviet Union toppled in that country and people were free to worship again. No, that's not the same as "conversion" to the Catholic Faith. However, if the Russian Orthodox church comes into full communion with Rome (and I have a strong feeling it's going to happen in my lifetime), Fr. Gruner and others are going to have to seriously reconsider their positions.

- Lisa



I see a problem with your statement. Our Lady also said after it was done, there would be a period of peace given to the world. I dont see that now, not at all. And our priest (Traditional) said it would be given rapidly. 1984 till now is 25 years. So, respectfully, I must say this is not true.

It depends on your definition of peace. At the moment we're not in a World War, as we were when Our Lady appeared in 1917 and again just before World War II. Further, I'm not expecting a Utopia.. not until the Lord comes. And, respectfully, 25 years is a drop in the bucket in God's time. Did Our Lady say a period of peace would come rapidly? or immediately? Did she give a timeline? Even many of the early Christians thought the Lord would return in their lifetime. They were mistaken. You could be mistaken. So could I.

Fatima is private revelation accepted by church authorities. Without their approval we would not be discussing it today. And so we have only the church authorities to guide us.

- Lisa

Per the children at La Salette, the peace will extend to the entire world.  While they gave dates that have come and gone, Our Lady did tell them that the dates could be pushed back a little.

You can see the actual secrets at the link.  The translation is not as exact as I would have done it.  For example, "contree" in French does not equate to "country" in English, although it could.  http://veritas-catholic.blogspot.com/200...crets.html
Quote: A question for you: IF the Russian church returns to full union with Rome, will that amount to the "conversion" Our Lady spoke of - in your opinion?

- Lisa

First, Pope JP II admitted he did not perform the consecration.  But we will ignore that for a second.

Yes, if the Russian "Church" reunited with Rome, that would be big.  At that point I would reconsider.  But you would have to wait a few years and observe.  For if the Russians "Church" became Catholic, and if only 5% of the population practiced their religion, while 95% were just atheists, it would be hard to describe that as a conversion.

In summary, the return of the Russian "church" is necessary, but not sufficient.  But such a return would be a big step in the right direction.
glgas Wrote:My basic principle is:  Russia is the Russians, only they can consecrate Russia.
That is incorrect. Our Lady specifically stated that the Holy Father, in union with the bishops, must consecrate Russia. There is no theological reason that only Russians have the authority to consecrate themselves. The Holy Father is the Vicar of Christ, and as such is the highest authority on Earth. He has the authority to consecrate any nation he so chooses. The Blessed Mother confirms this at Fatima.

glgas Wrote:As a message of out Lady the topic come up in 1917 and in 1942. In both case Germany was the key, which as country would be able to change the Communist Rule in Russia, and allow freedom to the Russian people to consecrate themselves.
Nowhere does Germany even come up in the message of Fatima. There is no reference to it. Germany isn't even relevant, much less a key.

glgas Wrote:So the meaning of the message in that times was: make quick and just peace with Germany, and help them to overthrow the Communism in Russia for the sake of the Western world.
You're thinking in terms of geopolitics. Our Lady was offering spiritual means to resolve our century's conflicts, not material or political means. That is probably why she appeared to 3 young children and not 3 politicians.

The meaning of the message is to do what she says, for the people to stop sinning, and for the hierarchy to consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart, so that the "errors of Russia" do not spread throughout the world. These errors have to do with the rank materialism found in Marxism. These errors have spread everywhere, even into the highest ranks of the Church. The errors of Vatican II and the subsequent withdrawal of faith from the Church--the rejection of the supernatural and the turning to a materialistic outlook on the world--are a manifestation of these "errors of Russia." Our Lady was warning just as much of apostasy within the bosom of the Church, as conflagrations among nations and natural disasters.

glgas Wrote:To suppose that the Magisterium is lying is unacceptable for me.
Individual churchman do not make up the Magisterium. Individual churchman can become heretics, lose the faith, lie, and make a mess of things. The Magisterium cannot lie, but individual Cardinals and Bishops can. To make the proper distinction, look into the meaning of "Magisterium."
(12-21-2009, 10:15 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]From what I understand, the consecration of "the world" to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, by Pope John Paul II and the bishops of the world on March 25, 1984, was not exactly what Our Lady asked for - but that, according to Sr. Lucia, it was accepted by Our Lady nonetheless.

The problem is, Sr. Lucia never said that. Cardinal Bertone and others most likely lied and said she did.  In a 1985 interview with Sol de Fatima magazine she said the consecration failed. She told the same to reporter Enrico Romero in 1987.  Fr. Martin said in 1989 she told a cardinal that it had failed.  Then in the same year, her order received an order from the Vatican to start saying the consecration had been completed; that was confirmed by Father Coelho.  Forged letters have also been published in Lucia's name; the evidence is on Fr. Gruner's website.  And why did JPII after the consecration refer to the consecration as one the Blessed Virgin was "still awaiting"?

And there's more evidence, too. A man named Carlos Evaristo interviewed Lucia with a Portuguese-speaking priest present. After the interview he eventually published a pamphlet in which he quoted Sr. Lucia as saying the consecration had been accepted.  After the pamphlet was published,  the priest made a statement saying that Evaristo was a liar.  And then afterwards, Evaristo more or less admitted to it, saying he had a bad memory. 
(12-21-2009, 12:36 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2009, 11:57 AM)In nomine Patris Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2009, 10:15 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]From what I understand, the consecration of "the world" to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, by Pope John Paul II and the bishops of the world on March 25, 1984, was not exactly what Our Lady asked for - but that, according to Sr. Lucia, it was accepted by Our Lady nonetheless. If you read the Old Testament and Moses' bartering with God, you know that God is not above negotiation.

After the 1984 consecration, the Soviet Union toppled in that country and people were free to worship again. No, that's not the same as "conversion" to the Catholic Faith. However, if the Russian Orthodox church comes into full communion with Rome (and I have a strong feeling it's going to happen in my lifetime), Fr. Gruner and others are going to have to seriously reconsider their positions.

- Lisa

I see a problem with your statement. Our Lady also said after it was done, there would be a period of peace given to the world. I dont see that now, not at all. And our priest (Traditional) said it would be given rapidly. 1984 till now is 25 years. So, respectfully, I must say this is not true.

It depends on your definition of peace. At the moment we're not in a World War, as we were when Our Lady appeared in 1917 and again just before World War II. Further, I'm not expecting a Utopia.. not until the Lord comes. And, respectfully, 25 years is a drop in the bucket in God's time. Did Our Lady say a period of peace would come rapidly? or immediately? Did she give a timeline? Even many of the early Christians thought the Lord would return in their lifetime. They were mistaken. You could be mistaken. So could I.

Fatima is private revelation accepted by church authorities. Without their approval we would not be discussing it today. And so we have only the church authorities to guide us.

- Lisa





NO NO NO NO NO . Its very specific. Its not "lets make a deal", and Fr said peace would follow very quickly, not 25 years. NO NO NO!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5