FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: For those that follow the Fatima stuff closely: Is this good news?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
(10-27-2012, 11:55 AM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-27-2012, 05:11 AM)Walty Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-25-2012, 09:44 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-25-2012, 08:02 PM)Carthusian Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-25-2012, 07:35 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]but if Pope Benedict XVI orders it and they refuse tt co-operate it's on them and the Consecration is good.

Is this what Our Lady said?  She gave this caveat of dissenting bishops in her message? 

See, how it works is this.  The Pope must specifically mention the word Russia in the Consecration, otherwise the incantation is void.  But "all the bishops of the world" is a fluid term.  It could actually mean only the Bishop of Rome if all the other bishops refuse to do it.  In fact, Our Lady might accept the Consecration even if not done by the bishop of Rome, simply if Fr. Gruner wills it.  He wears a threadbare cassock you know.     :tiphat:

Sigh.

Come now, Walty.  You don't find it a bit odd that the word "Russia" must be specifically mentioned by the Pope in order for the Consecration to take but the stipulation that all the world's bishops participate is mutable and subject to a dozen different interpretations?  Why is "Russia" so particular and specific but "all the world's bishops" so vague, hmmmm? If the Grunerites were as generous in interpreting the "Russia" clause as they are in interpreting the "bishops" clause they would've accepted the Consecration years ago and we all would have moved along.  Of course, that wouldn't have been as profitable for certain fashion challenged clerics but it would've been much more spiritually healthy for the rest of us.

The second stipulation remains.  All Tim said (I think it was Tim) is that the pope could conceivably excommunicate every bishop unwilling to comply with the command to participate with the consecration.  That's not vagueness or wiggle room in the stipulation.  All the bishops of the Catholic Church must do the consecration.  That's still being claimed. But if Pope Benedict really thought he should get this done, and if he really met up with some hostility (and I'm sure he would, at least from some bishops), then this would be the only way to get it done.

The stipulation isn't changing.  It's just a speculation on how a pope would actually be able to get all his flock to submit.
It's not the Grunerites playing fast an loose. The Pope Commands them, and they disobey, if they do not do it. It's not Our Lady being liberal on this point. If you read Trial, Tribulation, and Triumph by Desmond Birch, he cites all of the Fathers who wrote a minor chastisement comes after the Apostasy and before the Apocalypse. In the older editions of the DR or the Challoner in Apocalypse 12 the red dragon and the one third of the stars refers to the heretical Bishops
leaving the Church. it could be this is caused by the order to Consecrate Russia with Il Papa. It is perhaps only the last 100 years with modernism that the Woman clothed with the Sun has become Our Lady, prior it was the Church and Israel, and a possible weak type for Our Lady by accomodation.

Being a conspiracy nut, I'd say the masons, modernists, homosexuals, and commies decided, knowing this was coming, to emphasize the weak type, to give them cover as "devoted" to Our Lady. It is common knowledge, and I remember hearing this from a Msgr., the party line was the New Mass was wanted because the priests didn't want the old ladies praying and rattling their rosaries in the first pews. This is the way disinformation works, take a few ounces of truth, the old ladies praying and rattling their rosaries, and then add the propaganda as it's logical conclusion.

In a final effort those priests, and Bishops, and Cardinals, strip the message of Fatima down to "say your rosary and offer up your lttle scrafices" and that's that. It's not. We were promised the communication from Heaven which Our Lady brought to Fatima. Again as a conspiracy nut I think when this is all over, the reason for this period of tribulation will be the ignoring of Our Lady's message and request, not Vatican II. It will be seen how everything which has gone wrong flows from not complying with that request even that of Vatican Council II.

tim
It seems to me that there's a simple way out of this whole thing, assuming the Pope is worried that consecrating Russia by name would cause an uproar.  He could consecrate every single country in the world by name.  There are about 170 countries or so.  He could start with Albania and say, "In union with the worlds bishops, today we are consecrating Albania to the Immaculate Heart of Mary" and continue with that same format right through Zimbabwe. It wouldn't take that long. That way he mentions Russia by name but doesn't single it out. It has the added advantage that consecrating each country specifically would actually have a positive spiritual effect.

The fact that he hasn't chosen such an obvious means to accomplish the goal indicates to me:  1) He believes the previous Consecrations sufficed; and/or 2) He doesn't feel it's that important; and/or 3) He's refusing to act in his capacity as Vicar of Christ based on dictates from a private revelation.  Perhaps he's wrong, but he's also human and liable to make mistakes.  :shrug:
Doc, that's a good solution naming each. Fr. Gruner and his elves (hehehe) try very hard to attribute this to "mental reservation" thus skirting the accusations of the Popes as liars or any other thing. The only one that comes close to accusing them is Father Kramer.

tim
But I think that the point is to name Russia alone because of a special mission God has for her. There needs to be, as I understand, a clear indication that Russia in singularly being consecrated as a special instrument of divine grace. The common theory is that Russia once consecrated is the instrument used to bring about the great restoration and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart.
I remember hearing this from a Msgr., the party line was the New Mass was wanted because the priests didn't want the old ladies praying and rattling their rosaries in the first pews. This is the way disinformation works, take a few ounces of truth, the old ladies praying and rattling their rosaries, and then add the propaganda as it's logical conclusion.

[/quote]

That's ludicrous: If they didn't want to see the old ladies praying the rosaries during the masses, the Vatican could easily rule on the issue, and the priests to emphasize during their homilies.
(10-27-2012, 02:06 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]But I think that the point is to name Russia alone because of a special mission God has for her. There needs to be, as I understand, a clear indication that Russia in singularly being consecrated as a special instrument of divine grace. The common theory is that Russia once consecrated is the instrument used to bring about the great restoration and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart.

That's reading an awful lot into it.
(10-27-2012, 12:50 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]It seems to me that there's a simple way out of this whole thing, assuming the Pope is worried that consecrating Russia by name would cause an uproar.  He could consecrate every single country in the world by name.  There are about 170 countries or so.  He could start with Albania and say, "In union with the worlds bishops, today we are consecrating Albania to the Immaculate Heart of Mary" and continue with that same format right through Zimbabwe. It wouldn't take that long. That way he mentions Russia by name but doesn't single it out. It has the added advantage that consecrating each country specifically would actually have a positive spiritual effect.

The fact that he hasn't chosen such an obvious means to accomplish the goal indicates to me:  1) He believes the previous Consecrations sufficed; and/or 2) He doesn't feel it's that important; and/or 3) He's refusing to act in his capacity as Vicar of Christ based on dictates from a private revelation.  Perhaps he's wrong, but he's also human and liable to make mistakes.  :shrug:

3 is only possible if Fatima is not of God as He doesn't change his mind.  Consecrating every country would be extremely time-consuming and, while technically alright, may not be in-keeping with the spirit of the command.  Consecrating every country would give the indication that there's nothing special about Russia which requires it be consecrated (which may, of course, be a reason for the Consecration in the first place).

I think 1 and/or 2 are most likely.
Quote: The common theory is that Russia once consecrated is the instrument used to bring about the great restoration and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart.

This matches the St. John Bosco vision.  Russia invades and conquers to Paris, where it raises a black flag.  It converts, raises a white flag, then defends the Faith and restores Christendom.

It is also interesting and prophetic to call for the conversion of Russia, which was known as the USSR for some time.

As far as the requirement, the requirement stands and is prophetic.  Those who would refuse are going to be the worst apostates.  They will be excommunicated.  Another interpretation is that the Church is reduced to a rump organization that flees into the wilderness via the aid of the Great Eagle, so getting the remaining handful of bishops to consecrate Russia will not be difficult.

With regards to the Pope's refusal, I have my own opinion, and this is not the "official" Fatima message, though it doesn't conflict with it.  But you must give some weight to it since it comes from Nostro Jameus.

We know that JP II understood that he had to consecrate Russia by name, which is evidenced in the prayer he said.  So why didn't he do it?  We know from what +Fellay said that Pope Benedict was going to do a deal the SSPX could accept, but that this was pulled at the last minute by the Schoenborn faction.  We know that the TLM was cancelled in the National Shrine for no reason, except a direct order from Wuerl, and past practice and Wuerl being a bumbler strongly suggest that he wsa ordered to do this from the Vatican.  So my belief is that the Pope is blackmailed.  And that Satanic forces will fight tooth and nail to prevent the consecration.  People who tried to spill the beans on the homosexual molestation satanic ring ended up ritualistically murdered.  Again this is not official "Fatima", so disagree with me if you want.  I believe it fits and makes sense.
(10-27-2012, 02:10 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-27-2012, 02:06 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]But I think that the point is to name Russia alone because of a special mission God has for her. There needs to be, as I understand, a clear indication that Russia in singularly being consecrated as a special instrument of divine grace. The common theory is that Russia once consecrated is the instrument used to bring about the great restoration and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart.

That's reading an awful lot into it.

This is the most accurate reading. To Consecrate means to set singly aside for Holy Purposes. This is the real message everyone with today's lucy goosey english misses.

James I agree the Vatican is full of agents of Satan of many stripes and they will not let go.

tim
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8