Speculation on the 3rd Secret of Fatima
#21
Sister Lucia sat by smiling when JP2 and the future B16 told their lies about the secret of Fatima.

She was there in Rome with them to endorse their cover-up in June 2000.

Was that her fault?  Probably not.  Was she old and capable of being manipulated.  Probably.

Nevertheless she must have known that the consecration of Russia had not been done, since you cannot consecrate something without mentioning it by name and she must have also know that the secret was not realease in 1960 as Our Lady Requested.  She was relatively young when that happened and when the new mass came in.  She must have been aware of the increase of problems within the Church and her countrymen loosing their faith.  She must have been aware of Portuguese people ceasing to believe in Hell.  A Hell which she saw (presumably for a good reason).

I'm not blaming her.  I am saying however that she is flawed and human like everyone else and some parts of the Fatima messaage might be exagerrated, made up or embellished.
Reply
#22
(05-10-2012, 03:08 PM)ggreg Wrote: Nevertheless she must have known that the consecration of Russia had not been done, since you cannot consecrate something without mentioning it by name

Perhaps it was an "implicit" consecration.

If there's implicit faith, then why not implicit consecrations too?
Reply
#23
(05-10-2012, 08:17 AM)Don Quixote Wrote:
(05-10-2012, 08:08 AM)Tim Wrote: The date is most likely 1917, or 1929. The first is the time Our Lady mentions the Consecration, and the second is when Our Lord warned of the consequences for the Clerics. I'm inclined for the end date as 2017 because of my age, and continuing feeling I've had that I'll be allowed to be a  witness to it, whichever is the outcome.

tim

Just rambling thoughts


1917 - Fatima
        - Balfour Declaration
        - British take Jerusalem
        - WWI ends
        - Russian Rev. begins

2017 - Downfall of the A.C.
        - Triumph of the Immaculate Heart
        - Peter the Roman and the Great King begin

Yeah WW1 didn't end until 1918.  But the downfall of the antichrist is something that needs to be looked at.  This could jive with the 100 years that Jesus gave Satan to try to destroy the Church that Pope Leo XIII had the vision of, 1917 to 2017.  Who was it again Don Quixote that wrote of the first downfall of the antichrist upon the coming of the last Pope and the Great Monarch?  It didn't make sense to me when I first heard of it but now I'd like to read what she had to say. 
Reply
#24
First, we should avoid speculation on this if it is at the expense of learning the Faith more deeply.  For me, my current focus is 1) Liturgical Year 2) learning Latin 3) reading the great commentaries (Catena Aurea, the saintly Lapidis (sp ?) commentary, etc.)

We don't date set like the Protestant heretics are wont to do. We know the story and we need not let it consume us, since we are living it anyway.
Reply
#25
I'm still not sure what A.C stands for ?
Reply
#26
(05-10-2012, 03:27 PM)mikemac Wrote:
(05-10-2012, 08:17 AM)Don Quixote Wrote:
(05-10-2012, 08:08 AM)Tim Wrote: The date is most likely 1917, or 1929. The first is the time Our Lady mentions the Consecration, and the second is when Our Lord warned of the consequences for the Clerics. I'm inclined for the end date as 2017 because of my age, and continuing feeling I've had that I'll be allowed to be a  witness to it, whichever is the outcome.

tim

Just rambling thoughts


1917 - Fatima
        - Balfour Declaration
        - British take Jerusalem
        - WWI ends
        - Russian Rev. begins

2017 - Downfall of the A.C.
        - Triumph of the Immaculate Heart
        - Peter the Roman and the Great King begin

Yeah WW1 didn't end until 1918.  But the downfall of the antichrist is something that needs to be looked at.  This could jive with the 100 years that Jesus gave Satan to try to destroy the Church that Pope Leo XIII had the vision of, 1917 to 2017.  Who was it again Don Quixote that wrote of the first downfall of the antichrist upon the coming of the last Pope and the Great Monarch?  It didn't make sense to me when I first heard of it but now I'd like to read what she had to say. 
Hi M.M., Perhaps the Breton stigmatist?

CrusaderKing thanks for the correction and addition of future Pope Pius XII as Archbishop in 1917.
I should have added Saint Maximilian Kolbe began the Militia of the Immaculate in Rome in 1917.  Plus, he witnessed the satanists protest outside the Vatican walls. Banners of St. Michael under the feet of you know who. The point is 1917 was a pivotal year and perhaps 2017 will be too, who knows.

Blessed Pok. I rashly added anti-christ as the A.C. - perhaps i should have let that one alone.
 Kingtheoden thanks for the reminder.
Reply
#27
State in Life.

There are practical considerations.  First, I focus more on economic theory.  Fatima and prophecies confirm what I'm seeing.  However, we might go another hundred years.  But the economy will blow sky high before hand.  I don't let it consume me.  I've seen people go off the deep end with Mejegoria (I refuse to spell it right).  And there are people who go off into the woods with a 3 year supply of food, only to come back after p*ssing away 3 years of living.

But there are practical considerations.  Like trying to live away from big cities.  You don't have to compromise anything, and in many ways you'll see an improvement in life.

Suppose I get an offer for $300K working in Chicago?  I wouldn't take it because of my economic concerns.  Suppose you are just starting out?  Well, getting training to allow you to live in a rural setting (even semi-rural) isn't a hardship.  Learning some skills you COULD use in a black market is not much sacrifice.

Or you can not care.  And if we get a depression like we did in 1930 (it can't happen in the USA!!!), with no anti-Christ or WWIII, and you are living in a big city, you'll get a quick education on life without easy access to food.  A young man without kids will get by.  If you have kids, then it becomes a big concern.
Reply
#28
Ggreg,
You must know that Sr Lucy claimed during 5 years that the Consecration had not been properly done by JPII. Suddenly she changed her mind in 1989. What happened  then? The late Abbé de Nantes said that she was ORDERED by the Vatican to say that the Consecration had been accepted by Heavens. He was personnally  told by Mgr Do Amaral, the local bishop of Fatima, that he himself had conveyed that silly order to Sr Lucy, What is the life of a carmelite nun if not a life of obedience? She had no other choice but to comply and her spiritual advisor probably pushed in that way.
Reply
#29
Speculation about what happened to Sr. Lucia when she was in her eighties and nineties is fruitless.  We know what she said in 1984.  She was perhaps in her seventies then.  The Secret Still Hidden has some analysis, backed with citations, on Sr. Lucia's testimony for those who are curious.
Reply
#30
Thanks D.Q.  :LOL:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)