Speculation on the 3rd Secret of Fatima
#61
(05-11-2012, 09:23 AM)DrBombay Wrote: What this means is, unless you've actually seen the supposed "real" secret yourself, you have no idea what it says.  Because it's a secret, you see?

If you've ever played the game "Twenty Questions," you'll know you can figure secrets out without ever having been explicitly told. Investigators do that all the time.
(05-10-2012, 10:43 PM)mikemac Wrote: Why do you think Pope Leo XIII who composed the Prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel prescribed to say it after Low Mass.

Fr. Cekada has summarized the salient points in his article, "Russia and the Leonine Prayers." http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=16&catname=1 Here's a relevant excerpt.
Fr. A. Cekada Wrote:The problems with the story connecting the in­stitu­tion of the St. Michael prayer and a sup­posed vision of Leo XIII may be summarized as follows:

      • Writings which promote the story give no ref­er­ences to sources.
      • The various accounts contradict each other as to where the vision supposedly took place — after Mass at the foot of the altar, or in a conference with cardinals.
      • The various accounts are inconsistent about the date of the vision.
      • The dates the accounts give for the al­leged vi­sion (1880, 1884 and 1888) do not corre­spond with the date when the St. Michael prayer was actually instituted (1886).
      • There appears to be no corroboration for the story in a con­temporary account which one would expect to have men­tioned the event, had it indeed taken place.

      These considerations all tend to support the con­clu­sion Father Bers arrived at in the 1930s: “that the ‘vision’ had been invented in later times for some rea­son,” and that the story was simply feed­ing upon itself.

Just like every other -ism, traditionalism has its propaganda. It's important to always double-check your facts and sources to avoid showing yourself up as a fool when talking to non-traditionalists. People already believe Catholics are gullible believers in fables. If on top of that they catch you telling one, it doesn't do any service to the cause.
Reply
#62
The 100 years thing is useless unless we know when it started.

Maybe it starts in 2415

Maybe it started 50 years before Pope Leo had the vision and he saw it in the half time break while Satan and the Devils were sucking on oranges.

Besides that Prayer to defend us in this day of battle was ineffective.  Catholics said it for years and Vatican II still happened.  Millions lost their faith.  Obama was elected due to the Catholic vote.

A President who supported partial birth abortion no less.

We need a flood.
Reply
#63
The thread is about what the other part of the 3rd Secret may be, not Pope Leo's vision which is something else.
Reply
#64
(05-10-2012, 09:11 PM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: Also perhaps also a date was mentioned since Blessed John 23rd knew it was not for his time.
  The opposite is true.  Pope John XXIII knew it was for his time.  The envelope said 1960.  This statement from Pope John XXIII leads me to believe the secret mentions the wicked Council.  Pope John wanted it, so he was rationalizing.  What Pope Pius XII conveyed (letting the cat out of the bag) that there is a warning about the suicide of altering the Faith and the Liturgy show the probability that Vat. II is warned about.

So Pope John XXIII believes he sees miraculous lights and has a locution to call the Council (just imagine the modern Charismatic wackos we see today).  He's all gung ho for it.  He opens the secret since it is 1960.  It predicts a wicked Council will alter the Faith and Liturgy leading to ruin and maybe even the coming of anti-Christ.  So he puts it back in the envelope and says: "This isn't for our time".

James02, you are quite right.
The Pope John KNEW well that the 3rd Secret was for his time since witnesses said he turned livid  when he read it. The problem is that  he had already started the council's engine and he had not enough courage to rescint.
Reply
#65
(05-10-2012, 09:12 PM)mikemac Wrote:
(05-10-2012, 08:42 PM)salus Wrote: Do you think Pope Benedict will do the consecration of Russia and reveal part 2 of the 3rd secret of Fatima or is Fatima finished as far as the papacy is concerned since A.D. 2000?

I'm still hoping and praying for a proper consecration of Russia.  Some think it will be either a proper consecration of Russia or the three days of darkness.  Either, or.  I'm not looking forward to the three days of darkness.  But I am looking forward to a proper consecration.  It's purpose is to save souls.  Personally I don't care if the 3rd secret is ever revealed as long as we see a proper consecration of Russia in time to save souls.  For the last two years Father Gruner has said that Pope Benedict seems to have a different outlook on Fatima.  Two years ago Pope Benedict implied that Fatima is not finished, what ever that means.  

Yes, the Consecration properly done would solve a lot of crucial problems the Church and the civil societies currently are meeting. Our Lady said that a period of peace will be granted and that Russia will convert. Sr Lucia added that this will be a "miracle of conversion". In my opinion, these words don't imply only a conversion of the Orthodoxs to the catholic Faith, but also a fall of all the masonic / marxist / communist / leftist ideologies that are now poisoning the west countries societies.
Reply
#66
(05-11-2012, 11:37 AM)maso Wrote:
(05-10-2012, 09:11 PM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: Also perhaps also a date was mentioned since Blessed John 23rd knew it was not for his time.
  The opposite is true.  Pope John XXIII knew it was for his time.  The envelope said 1960.  This statement from Pope John XXIII leads me to believe the secret mentions the wicked Council.  Pope John wanted it, so he was rationalizing.  What Pope Pius XII conveyed (letting the cat out of the bag) that there is a warning about the suicide of altering the Faith and the Liturgy show the probability that Vat. II is warned about.

So Pope John XXIII believes he sees miraculous lights and has a locution to call the Council (just imagine the modern Charismatic wackos we see today).  He's all gung ho for it.  He opens the secret since it is 1960.  It predicts a wicked Council will alter the Faith and Liturgy leading to ruin and maybe even the coming of anti-Christ.  So he puts it back in the envelope and says: "This isn't for our time".

James02, you are quite right.
The Pope John KNEW well that the 3rd Secret was for his time since witnesses said he turned livid  when he read it. The problem is that  he had already started the council's engine and he had not enough courage to rescint.

Do you honestly believe that upon becoming Pope John XXIII did not immediately read that Secret?  Come Come now.  Really?  Would you have read it?

He didn't rescind VII because he did not believe in the Little Shepherds of Fatima or the "Prophets of Doom" as he degradingly called them.  Modernism was already a condemned heresy.  John XXIII fostered it.

He wanted the Church to modernise.  He thought it would be good for the Church to bend to the world and make it more acceptable.  He was a friend of man, not of God.  A humanist through and through.
Reply
#67
It was the whole world. After the end of WWII, and digging out Europe started back to normal. There was euphoria at the coming new age without another world war. Pope John XXIII reflected that pervasive mood. He was not immune, and his biographers paint him as a country priest, long on pastoral care, and short on smarts.

tim
Reply
#68
(05-11-2012, 08:37 AM)DrBombay Wrote:
(05-10-2012, 09:45 PM)Jesusbrea Wrote:
(05-10-2012, 09:12 PM)DrBombay Wrote: Oh, and by the way.  Leo XIII never had a vision of Satan and 100 years or anything of the kind.  It's an urban legend. Just try to find a primary source.  Not a secondary source, a PRIMARY.  You can't.  It doesn't exist. Because the story is concocted by loons with an agenda most likely.

Yeah, talk about conspiracy theories.

There are witnesses accounts like those of Fr. Domenico Pechenino or Cdl. Rocca

PRIMARY source documents.  Throwing out names is not a PRIMARY source.   :tiphat:

Father Amorth transcribed the original article from Ephemerides Liturgicae, written by a direct witness.

Yeah, I know it's not primary, buy hey, we don't doubt the Gospels, even though the originals are missing. Why would the vision be false?
Reply
#69
ggreg, I'll address Mr Ferrera's book.  He was obviously hard-up for some cash.  What better way to drum up some cash then to sell books that stir up traditionalists.  Wait, that can't happen because "traditionalist" writers are beyond reproach unlike the Holy Father  :LOL:
Reply
#70
I know what the 3rd secret really is ...

its about St Vincent Ferrer talking to St Bernard who had a vision of St Whosawhatsit who confirmed that only 2 people are going to heaven in the 21st century  :LOL:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)