Hermeneutic of Fatima: Let the tail (the SSPX) wag the dog (CDF)
#1
http://www.summorumpontificum.net/2011/0...x-wag.html

Monday, September 19, 2011
Hermeneutic of Fatima: Let the tail (the SSPX) wag the dog (CDF.)


From a September 23, 2009 post:

   
Quote:The developments in Vatican relations with both the SSPX and the Eastern Orthodox may best be understood neither through a "Hermeneutic of Continuity" nor a "Hermeneutic of Rupture," but through a Hermeneutic of Fatima:

       
Quote:If you were the pope, in the twilight of your career, a true son of VII, yet you could see the severe problems that have wracked the Church since VII, what would you do? If you had a deep seated fear that the Church would continue its moral decline if nothing is done, what would you do? If you truly believed the actions of the Vatican regarding Fatima were, at the time, honest and forthright, but now you had a real doubt that all was not as it seemed then, what would you do?

        You would look at the most important aspects of the Message of Fatima that may not have been addressed, and you would systematically work to undo the damage.

        1) Restore the TLM.

        2) Propose a reconsideration and reinterpretation of VII.

        3) Figure out a way to bring Russia back into the fold.

        How?

        1) Summorum Pontificum

        2) Lift the SSPX excommunications, and task them with addressing the problems of VII. Put them directly in contact with the CDF. Let the tail (the SSPX) wag the dog (CDF.) Then let the CDF wag the Church.

        3) Make real moves towards reuniting Eastern Orthodoxy, and use the Grace of that unity to fight the errors of post-Christian western decay.



    This may be the interpretive key to truly understanding the "Marshall Plan" of Pope Benedict XVI.

This "Hermeneutic of Fatima" continues apace, it seems.

In May, 2010, the Pope "reopened  the file on the Third Secret of Fatima," declaring:

   
Quote:Beyond this great vision of the suffering of the Pope, which we can in substance refer to John Paul II, are indicated future realities of the Church which are little by little developing and revealing themselves. Thus it is true that beyond the moment indicated in the vision, one speaks, one sees, the necessity of a passion of the Church that naturally is reflected in the person of the Pope; but the Pope is in the Church, and therefore the sufferings of the Church are announced…. As for the novelty that we can discover today in this message,  it is that attacks on the Pope and the Church do not come only from outside, but the sufferings of the Church come precisely from within the Church, from sins that exist in the Church. This has always been known, but today we see it in a really terrifying way: that the greatest persecution of the Church does not come from enemies outside, but arises from sin in the Church.

Now, see the post at Rorate-Caeli, Tectonic Shifts: For the Roman Curia, the end of the "super-Council" as well as the Missa in Latino post, Il contenuto del 'preambolo dottrinale' presentato alla FSSPX, Google Translation: The contents of the 'doctrinal Preamble' presented to the SSPX

And what about the more "apocalyptic" parts of Fatima that were either forgotten or never fully revealed? See our last post, For fourth anniversary of Summorum Pontificum, Pope draws attention to little known prophecies of Venerable Elena Aiello
Reply
#2
Very, very interesting. Read everything except the prophesies of Aiello. Can't wait to come back and read it.
Reply
#3
(09-19-2011, 02:26 AM)charlesh Wrote: Very, very interesting. Read everything except the prophesies of Aiello. Can't wait to come back and read it.

I'm reading it right now.  It looks like she prophesied the three days of darkness too.

‘CLOUDS WITH LIGHTNING FLASHES OF FIRE IN THE SKY AND A TEMPEST OF FIRE SHALL FALL UPON THE WORLD. THIS TERRIBLE SCOURGE, NEVER BEFORE SEEN IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY, WILL LAST SEVENTY HOURS. GODLESS PERSONS WILL BE CRUSHED AND WIPED OUT. MANY WILL BE LOST BECAUSE THEY REMAIN IN THEIR OBSTINACY OF SIN. THEN SHALL BE SEEN THE POWER OF LIGHT OVER THE POWER OF DARKNESS’.
Reply
#4
She also said John XXIII was a great and holy Pope. Was she right about that too?
Reply
#5
(09-19-2011, 03:58 AM)ggreg Wrote: She also said John XXIII was a great and holy Pope. Was she right about that to?

Were these comments explicitly part of a message from the Lord or Our Lady? I'll have to go back and check.

Her remarks about Pope John XXXIII were probably her personal opinion (and nobody has infallibility in their personal opinions, even canonized saints, and what we know about Pope John XXXIII is known only in hindsight, it simply was not known by the general public back then.).
Reply
#6
I remember his election and in places like Chicago he was very much loved. He was an Italian country priest. In Chicago we had the Servites that were in many Italo-American neighborhoods. It was an extension of being victorious in WWII and being immigrants from Italy. We were on the rise in America and movie stars like Sophia Loren, and Gina Lollobrigida, and Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra blurred together. No one expected what would happen, at all !

I'm seeing the same things as Kopp. Though I see it culminating in the Consecration, most likely by Pope Benedict XVI. The SSPX will be the ones that push for a return to Tradition and leave Pope Benedict to work the other side of this equation. The conservatives in the Church need to be prepared for this. If tomorrow the Pope said he wanted all the Bishops to consecrate Russia in unison with him, they'd schism and go with the Progressives. If prepared they'll get on board. Bishop Fellay with the rosary crusades knows it's the answer even though he has never said it out loud. This is bigger than the SSPX or the Documents of Vatican II. This is exactly why there are the Leonine prayers after the Low Mass. We are in a War, and Lucifer is doing a bang up job.

tim
Reply
#7
(09-19-2011, 11:10 AM)timoose Wrote: I'm seeing the same things as Kopp. Though I see it culminating in the Consecration, most likely by Pope Benedict XVI. The SSPX will be the ones that push for a return to Tradition and leave Pope Benedict to work the other side of this equation. The conservatives in the Church need to be prepared for this...

On the other hand, I do believe the Pope is still a faithful son of VII, and has one foot in each camp, and is unwilling or unable (due to political wrangling, and the ever-present menace that is the office of the Vatican Secretariat of State) to admit the Consecration still needs to be accomplished.

That's why I think he is trying so hard to make an end run around the conciliar Church. A head on assault would lead to open schism, the concrete reality of which he may fear more than the more ephemeral risks associated with these prophecies, which may or may not materialize and whose timing is known the God alone.

Don't forget the mental gymnastics they used not to release the full Third Secret of Fatima in 2000:

Quote:But there’s more to that: the same Cardinal Bertone, on the TV program Porta a Porta of May 31, 2007, has shown on television the envelopes containing the Third Secret of Fatima, and on 2 (TWO!) of those envelopes there was a sentence written by Sister Lucy, read by the Cardinal himself, in which the date of 1960 was attributed to “an explicit order by Our Lady”!! And he showed it on television!!! But then if Sister Lucy, as Cardinal Bertone says to us on page 92 of his book, told him that the date of 1960 was the Sister’s decision, that Our Lady didn’t tell her anything about it, then why did Sister Lucy write on the envelope that the date of 1960 was coming from an “explicit order by Our Lady”? It would be an evident and blatant lie! If the Vatican version is right, Archbishop Capovilla is a liar and a forger, many priests like Father Alonso and Father Bianchi have also told lies regarding what was said by Sister Lucy. Additionally, the same Sister Lucy would have written a falsehood on the very envelope containing the Third Secret! Thus, according to the official version, even Sister Lucy is a Liar!

Would not this be an extremely grave accusation? This whole story of “I cannot think that they lied because it would be too serious” simply does not go anywhere. Actually, if we’re coherent, it goes to even worse consequences.

I like to think that no one has told a lie, but used mental reservations instead: “We have published everything there is in the Third Secret, everything that is contained in this specific message from Heaven, because what we have not published, we deemed not to be supernaturally authentic, so we have discarded it as a mere fabrication of Sister Lucy”! Moreover, those thoughts were written at the end of the Second Secret.

In fact, during the press conference of June 26, 2000, someone asked Mons. Bertone if the phrase, cut short by the “etc.”, about the orthodoxy in Portugal pertained to the Second or to the Third Secret. Mons. Bertone answered this way “Well, it is hard to say, I think it pertained to the second one.”

If, therefore, they consider that phrase, which we know is the beginning of the words of the Third Secret, to be part of the Second Secret, then they must have considered the other unpublished words as pertaining to the Second Secret too. Therefore, the Third Secret has been entirely published, for them, in as much as what they have not published is not the true Third Secret, coming from Heaven, but just thoughts of Sister Lucy on the Second Secret, and not on the Third!!! We should then ask a question to them: You say you’ve published the Third Secret in its entirety. Then, what about the Second Secret? Did you publish the Second Secret entirely too? Including any attachments or thoughts by Sister Lucy on it? Are there any “reflections” of Sister Lucy, as they have been considered, on the Second or Third Secret which are yet to be published? It is maybe in this sense that, without saying a formal lie, they are able to say “it is all”. It is probably a difficult and narrow mental reservation, a reticence. It is not a lie then, and this would explain a certain nervousness from them.

If he was a party to those mental gymnastics, Pope BXVI must know how wrong it was to acquiesce to the Vatican Secretariat of State at the time in their subterfuge, must have a terribly painful conscience, and is desperate to make it right. According to a talk by Bishop Williamson:

Quote:Now comes Pope Benedict XVI. We know from a quotation of Cardinal Ratzinger, now the Pope, that he had, shortly before becoming Pope, two regrets. He said, we know this from an Austrian bishop, a colleague of Cardinal Ratzinger. [According to] this bishop, Cardinal Ratzinger said, “I regret two things: One is Fatima.” Meaning, what Cardinal Ratzinger did in 2001, regarding Fatima. At that time, in effect, the Cardinal played an important part in attempting to bury Fatima. Let's say in 2003, maybe in 2004, he regretted what he had done...or regretted what he had had to do. The Cardinal said, “My hand was forced,” meaning that the Cardinal had been told to bury Fatima. Have no fear. Fatima will rise from the dead!

But, the second thing that the Cardinal regretted was the failure of his negotiations with the Society in 1988. You may remember that, in 1988, on May 5th, the Cardinal succeeded in making the Archbishop sign a protocol of agreement, but then in the night of May 5th and May 6th, as the proverb, “The night brought counsel.” So, on May 6th, the Archbishop took back his signature. He said to the Cardinal, “The time has not yet come for us to be able to work together.” He said, “You wish to dethrone Christ in society, and we to enthrone Christ in society.” What is called a head on clash! Yet, the Cardinal regretted that he had not been able to bring the Society into the Church, and that is, God knows, that the Cardinal was sincere in his regrets. Very possibly, the Cardinal sees the Society as a valuable element in the Church, an element which needs to be inside the official Church and not outside.


Unfortunately, no matter how hard the Pope tries to make an end run around the conciliar Church, and works in a human fashion, even with the office of Pope behind his work, his efforts ultimately will fail if he is unwilling to do the Consecration as requested (and probably if he is unwilling to fully reveal what was supposed to be revealed in 1960.)
Reply
#8
Kopp, I;m pretty much aware of all of this. Try this. If the SSPX gains jurisdiction they will be in the Progressive's laser sites from the very first second.  This would be like in football a sweep play with a trap block. He'd suck in the progressives and the SSPX playing tackle would close the hole left by the guard pulling, which would be Pope Benedict's plan. His remarks on the plane concerning Fatima are revealing. I'm sure he isn't a "Trad" so called but he sees the problems and is loathe to admit it was the Council's complete fault. That would mean he sees the Consecration of Russia as the only answer left, and it is causing, his wiggling on it, his conscience grief. 

tim
Reply
#9
(09-19-2011, 12:12 PM)timoose Wrote: His remarks on the plane concerning Fatima are revealing. I'm sure he isn't a "Trad" so called but he sees the problems and is loathe to admit it was the Council's complete fault. That would mean he sees the Consecration of Russia as the only answer left, and it is causing, his wiggling on it, his conscience grief. 

Agreed. Good summary.
Reply
#10
The French King got a similar deal from the Sacred Heart.  In hindsight we know the ruling French Monarch had 100 years to perform a public consecration of France and the Sacred Heart would join France in a perpetual alliance.  The King could act autonomously.  Time ran out on the French Kings and the Third Estate seized power 100 years to the day the original offer was made (1689-1789).

At Fatima, Our Lady of the Rosary stipulated that all of the Bishops had to join the Pope in a consecration of Russia.  This is an interesting addition because the Holy Father cannot act alone.  Things in the Church have degraded to such an extent, that I wonder how it would ever be possible to get all of the Bishops to act.

The answer may be the predicted annihilation of many nations (and Bishops).
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)