Living Fatima

Today the Church celebrates the feast of Our Lady of Fatima. On this date in 1917 the Blessed Virgin Mary made the first of what would be a series of appearances to three children in Fatima, Portugal, culminating in the miracle of the sun on October 13, 1917, which would be witnessed by tens of thousands of people.

One of the primary messages of our Blessed Mother to Lucia, Francisco, and Jacinta was that she wanted people to pray the Rosary daily and with great devotion. She especially called upon the faithful to pray for peace and for the conversion of sinners. If we follow her request, we can be confident that we will experience peace in our hearts, families, communities, and world, and that many people will turn their lives over to Christ.

On Sunday, May 25, 2008, fittingly on the feast of Corpus Christi, there is going to be a Eucharistic Family Rosary Crusade at Kauffman Stadium, home of major league baseball’s Kansas City Royals. Tens of thousands of people will gather, along with Bishop Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Missouri and Archbishop Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, to take part in this massive festival of adoration and prayer. For more information about this event, click here.

Most of our readers outside the greater Kansas City area obviously will not attend this Rosary rally. But today’s feast nonetheless reminds us of Our Lady’s desire that all of us build up the Church through our prayers and sacrifices, especially the Holy Rosary. It’s wonderful to be able to pray with over 50,000 people, as will happen next week in Kansas City, and as many did when the Pope was here in the United States last month. But all of us can pray the Rosary, whether at home or before the Blessed Sacrament, alone or with our family or prayer group.

Let us redouble our commitment to gaze upon the face of Jesus in the company of His loving mother, who always counsels us to do whatever He tells us.

23 responses

  1. I am grateful to Leon Suprenant for reminding us that today is the memorial of Our Lady of Fátima. We should also recall that Our Lady of Fátima requested that the Pope, together with all the bishops of the world, consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the sake of world peace.

    Some Catholics believe that the Blessed Mother’s request was adequately fulfilled by Pope John Paul II when he consecrated the world in 1984. To those Catholics I respectfully say the following: given the condition of the world since 1984 (consider, for example, the evils of legalized surgical and chemical abortion), prudence alone should counsel us to ask the Holy Father and the hierarchy to perform another consecration–a consecration that explicitly mentions Russia. Our veneration of the Mother of God should also lead us to ask and pray for another papal consecration. Petitioning the Vatican for this purpose is the right of Catholic laypersons according to section 907 of the new catechism.

    Similarly, those Catholics who, like Mother Angelica, do not believe that the complete text of the Third Secret of Fátima has been published have the right to ask the Holy See to release this text for the sake of the Church and the world.

    Keep and spread the Faith.

  2. To those Catholics such as Stephen O’Brien, I respectfully say, cut it out dude. Lucia said it was fullfilled on several occasions, have patience my friend. Why would she lie on several occasions. Everything falls into place once you just accept that the conversion was to allow Chrisitan worship, which is flourishing now in Russia. The “main” miracle is still to come. Lucia said we are in the third day of the week of Fatima, the third day out of seven being the post-consecration period. We still have four days left. Lucia was a witness to the consecration, so just chill out and trust In God’s plan with Mary, our beloved Mother.

  3. The Blessed Mother promised that, after the collegial consecration of Russia (not the world) to her Immaculate Heart, Russia would be “converted.” In this context, conversion does not mean freedom of worship for the schismatic Russian Orthodox Church. Conversion means an abandonment of schism and a return to the one true Church, i.e., the conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith.

    Keep and spread the Faith.

    Keep and spread the Faith.

  4. We can believe Nick’s words and chill, or we can agree with Pope John Paul II:
    Exhibit 1:
    March 27, 1984 – The Italian Catholic bishops’ newspaper Avvenire reports that the Holy Father, on March 25 at 4:00 in the afternoon, three hours after he consecrated the world, prays at St. Peter’s, asking Our Lady to bless “those peoples for whom You Yourself are ***awaiting our act of consecration*** and entrusting,” and thus admits that the Consecration of Russia remains unfulfilled.
    Exhibit 2:
    L’Osservatore Romano: “Enlighten especially the peoples of which, you yourself are ***awaiting our consecration*** and confiding.”
    Exhibit 3:
    September 1985 – In an interview in Sol de Fatima magazine (a publication of friends of the Spanish Blue Army), Sister Lucy affirms that the Consecration of Russia still has not been done because, yet again, Russia was not the clear object of the 1984 consecration and the world’s episcopate did not participate.

    The Pope admitted that the Consecration was not done and Sr. Lucia ***said*** the same thing in an interview. After this, Sr. Lucia is forbidden to talk to anyone, a sentence never lifted. In 1989 we are presented with I believe (2) type written letters signed by the 80 yr. old Sr. Lucia saying the consecration was done.

    For me, I’m going with what the Pope said and what Sr. Lucia said.
    Yours in Christ,
    James DePrisco

  5. It is a fact that such notable figures as Sr. Lucia herself, repeatedly; Archbishop Kondrusiewiz, former Archbishop of Moscow; Fr. Robert J. Fox who has written so much on Fatima and received a personal letter from Sr. Lucia acknowledging that the Consecration was done on March 25, 1984; and Cardinal Bertone in his book on Sr. Lucia –not to mention many others such as Fr. Joseph Fessio who worked with German-speaking Russians in Siberia –have all testified to the Collegial consecration having been done.The Bishop of Fatima Alberto Cosme do Amaral wrote on May 13, 1990 that “Everything leads us to think that the Consecration done by Our Lady is done. We should not trouble the Holy Father any more.” His successor at Fatima, Bishop Serafim S. Ferreira e Silva stated in June 1995, “On March 25, 1984, Pope John Paul II made the Consecration of the World, and expressly of Russia, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.” As to Fr. Nicholas Gruner who has denied that the Collegial Consecration had been done, Sr. Lucia herself spoke to Cardinal Padiyara and other visiting Indian Bishops in 1992: “Tell Father [Gruner] that he must humble himself to accept that the consecration had been made and that he is asking too much…He should change his apostolate and it can become a great means of spreading the message of Fatima.” It should be noted that the Consecration of Russia is not a magical act with instanteous results to be expected, but the spectacular collapse of the Iron Curtain in 1989 is evidence of the efficacy of the Consecration. As to Russia becoming Catholic, certain ecumenical steps toward Russian Orthodox Reunion with the Catholic Church appear promising. We should all pray for a Catholic Russia.However, usage of the term “schismatic Russian Orthodox Church” is not helpful as giving needless offense to many Orthodox who are in good faith, seek Reunion, and harbor no grievances against the Papacy.
    It would be best to use the language of Vatican II regarding our “separated Eastern brethren”. In my three books dealing with Eastern Orthodoxy’s claim to be the true Church and its objections to Catholic doctrines, the non-pejorative language of “separated Eastern Churches” or “dissident Eastern Churches” is observed.
    -James Likoudis [WWW.CREDOBUFFALO.COM]

  6. Mr. Likoudis,
    Notably absent from your list of evidence is Pope John Paul II. I have given (2) documented newspaper articles from the 1984 time period that quote him acknowledging that Russia was still awaiting to be consecrated. Furthermore, Sr. Lucy, in an interview, said that the consecration was not accomplished. All of the sources you site claim Sr. Lucia said such and such (for at that time, she had been silenced). And we have typed letters she signed. Now either Sr. Lucia (in her eighties) got confused, or was told the consecration was done and parroted what she was told. Both of us have to claim that Sr. Lucia was erroneous at some time. You have to claim she was wrong in 1985, and I claim (if she really did make the statements) that she was wrong in 1989. The typed letter episode is also very suspicious. In any case, I believe the Pope, the consecration was not done.

    As far as the Russian Orthodox Church, they are schismatic, and have since become heretics in their teaching on divorce.

    Meanwhile the cold war is heating up again with Russia flying bombers with nukes into NATO airspace. No Peace and No Conversion. Open your eyes.

    Yours in Christ,
    James DePrisco

  7. James Likoudis (hi, Jim!) and James DePrisco, I’m delighted that you’re contributing to this critically important discussion.

    I’d be very grateful to James Likoudis for sources for documenting (1) the letter that Father Fox reports as having been sent to him by Sister Lucia and (2) the oral statement that Cardinal Padiyara attributed to Sister Lucia. Can you please give us Web links and references to books and articles?

    That our separated brothers and sisters in the Russian Orthodox Church are in schism is a matter of Catholic doctrine (CCC 817, 2089). It’s not necessary to use the word “schism” on every possible occasion–tact and diplomacy will often counsel us to use alternate terms–but the employment of this word corresponds to the truth. When Vatican II urges us to practice Catholic principles of ecumenism in the hope of helping non-Catholics find their way back to the one true Church, the council tells us: “It is, of course, essential that doctrine be clearly presented in its entirety. Nothing is so foreign to the spirit of ecumenism as a false conciliatory approach which harms the purity of Catholic doctrine and obscures its assured genuine meaning” (Unitatis redintegratio 11).

  8. To Messrs: James DePrisco and Stephen O’Brien (Hi Steve!)”
    My goodness, if the two Bishops of Fatima do not know if the Collegial Consecration was done, who does? Certainly not those who deny the fact and engage in endless quibbling and quarreling.
    James DePrisco engages in special pleading with his “quotes” since the full context of those newspaper reports are not given. It is to question the veracity of Pope John Paul II himself for it was he who ordered publication of the document “Message of Fatima” issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith –which clearly declares that “the Holy Father in spiritual union with the Bishops of the world, who had been ‘convoked’ beforehand, entrusted all men and women and all peoples to the Immaculate Heart of Mary” on 25 May, 1984…Sister Lucia personally affirmed that this solemn and universal consecration corresponded to what Our Lady wished (“Sim, esta feita, tal como Nossa Senhora a pediu, desde o dia 25 de Marco de 1984″;”Yes, it has been done just as Our Lady asked, on 25 March 1984″.-Leter of 8 November 1989). Hence any further discussion or request is without basis.”) The affirmation in this official document (L’Osservatore Romano-English ed., 28 June, 2000) of the occurrence of the Collegial Consecration which assuredly included Russia (though at the time there was no Russia, only the Union of Soviet Republics) involves the veracity of not only Pope John Paul II, but also of then-Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone of the Congregation who interviewed Sr. Lucia in the name of the Pope, and Cardinal Ratzinger who wrote the Commentary on the “Third Secret” published in the same issue of L’Osservatore Romano.
    In an article in “North Country Catholic”(August 19, 1992)American Bishop Stanislaus J.Brzana of Ogdensburg for his part confirmed
    the Collegial Consecration of Russia having taken place on March 25, 1984, and quoted Bishop Constantine Luna, international president of tghe World Apostolate of Fatima, as declaring in hte latter part of 1989: “The Holy Father is disturbed by the many letters being written demanding a consecration of Russia. The work
    in the ‘Fatima Crusader’ by Father Nicholas Gruner is creating worldwide confusion. Pope Pius XII made a consecration of Russia; Pope Paul VI repeated the consecration when he went to Fatima in 1967 for the 50th Anniversary, Pope John Paul II repeated the consecration in 1982 during his visit to Fatima and again when Our Lady’s statue was brought from Fatima to St. Peter’s Square in Rome in 1984.” (SOUL magazine, Jan-Feb.1990, p.29). Bishop Brzana went on to affirm: “While this last consecration does not explicitly mention Russia, it is clear that Russia is especially included. Furthermore, the consecration refers to the 1952 explicit Consecration of Russia by Pope Pius XII (SOUL, May-June 1990, p. 12)…I urge the good and sincere people who are interested in the Fatima Consecration to accept what I have stated in this article. I also remind them thsat it is not necessary to plead for something that has already been done.”
    As to Letters received by Fr. Robert J.Fox from St. Lucia, you can read his article “The Consecration of Russia Is Accomplished” in SOUL magazine, Jan-Feb. 1992. For interesting information concerning Cardinal Padiyara and Indian Bishops, readers are referred to the FATIMA FAMILY MESSENGER, 1994. A Letter of Sr. Lucia to Fr. Robert J. Fox (July 3,1990) affirming the Collegial Consecration for the conversion of Russia on March 25, 1984 in union with all the bishops of the world can be read in his “Fatima Family Messenger”, Oct.-Dec. 1990.
    In conclusion, I would suggest that no private individual or writer or journalist has greater credibility than the issue of L’Osservatore Romano of June 28, 2000 presenting the documenation “The Message of Fatima” by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (whose contents and theological import is noted above).Detractors of the Collegial Consecration having been accomplished are not serving the good of the Catholic Church.
    -James Likoudis (WWWW.CREDOBUFFALO.COM)

  9. Please look at this EWTN Web page, which shows us the texts of letters that Sister Lucia purportedly sent to Father Robert J. Fox and Sister Mary of Bethlehem to confirm that Pope John Paul II had fulfilled the requirements for the collegial consecration of Russia:

    Is it or is it not the case that Pope Paul VI made no attempt to consecrate either the world or Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary at Fátima in 1967? I’ve been unable to find any text for a 1967 papal consecration on the Vatican’s Web site.

    If Paul VI performed no consecration in that year, then the letter that Sister Lucia is alleged to have sent to Sister Mary of Bethlehem to confirm the validity of the 1984 consecration is a forgery. Why? Because the author of that letter mentions a 1967 consecration at Fátima. But Sister Lucia, who was with Paul VI at Fátima in 1967, had to know that no such ceremony had been performed on that date–if, indeed, there was no such ceremony.

    If the letter addressed to Sister Mary of Bethlehem is a forgery, then this gives rise to the suspicion that the letter addressed to Father Fox is also fraudulent.

    The above problems are only some of the obstacles that prevent many Catholics from accepting the contention that the 1984 consecration fulfilled the conditions laid down by Our Lady of Fátima for the collegial consecration of Russia (not the entire world) to her Immaculate Heart.

  10. One can only deplore the “hermeutics of suspicion” that continues to be expressed concerning the Collegial Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary accomplished on May 25, 1984. It is important here to recall that allegations of lying and deception and forgeries regarding the Collegial Consecration and questioning the veracity of publication of the “Third Secret” by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith–have been the stock-in -trade of those who have opposed the 2nd Vatican Council and sought to place in opposition the Fatima Message and the teachings of Vatican II. This campaign of opposition characterizing especially the work of Fr. Gruner amd the French Abbe De Nantes has resulted in confusing many good Catholics.The October-December 1990 issue of “Fatima Family Messenger” has Fr. Robert J. Fox’s important article: “It is Time to respond to the ‘Crusader’ and Fr. Gruner.”
    The same issue contains the striking testimony of the Bishop of Leira-Fatima which can not be ignored regarding the Collegial Consecration having taken place on May 25, 1984. Referring to that event, the Bishop declared: “Later,when I thanked the Holy Father for making the consecration of the world, he added ‘and of Russia’.”
    There is no valid reason to doubt the judgments contained in “The Message of Fatima” published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on June 26, 2000, and published by order of Pope John Paul II.

  11. Mr. Likoudis,
    Readers of this blog will note (2) things in your reply. First, you still don’t have any quote from Pope JP II where he claims to have done the consecration. Don’t bother looking, it doesn’t exist since he never made that claim. Second, you are trying to brush off the incredible evidence I have provided showing that Pope JP II prayed for those people “of which you (Mary) yourself are *** awaiting *** our consecration”. Context doesn’t matter much with these quotes, it is self evident that Pope JP II did not fulfill the request. As a side note, I agree that the consecration of the world to Mary’s Immaculate Heart had great benefits and probably prevented a nuclear war. But, it is only a delay. Since that time, Russia and China (the red dragon) have increased in strength while the U.S. is collapsing. Russia has not converted and we have no peace.

    If the readers of this blog want to check context, here is what I found with about 30 seconds of Google: “However, in the Blue Army’s Spanish magazine, Sol de Fatima, in the September 1985 issue, Sister Lúcia said that the ceremony did not fulfill the Virgin’s request, as there was no specific mention of Russia, and “many bishops attached no importance to it”. This proves my contention that BOTH Mr. Likoudis and I have to claim that Sr. Lucia’s communications were either fraudulent or in error at some time. I claim that Sr. Lucia was correct in 1985. Mr. Likoudis claims that dubious sources from around 1989 were correct, after Sr. Lucia was silenced.

    As far as L’Osservatore Romano, the issue was March 26, 1984. Here is a link to a reproduction of the newspaper: Here is the Italian quote of the Pope’s prayer, including sentences before and after: “Madre della Chiesa! Illumina il Popolo de Dio sulle vie della fede, della speranza e della carita! *** Illumina specialmente i popoli de cui tu aspetti la nostra consacrazione e il nostro affidamento. *** Aiutaci a vivere nella verita della consacrazione de Cristo per l’intera famiglia umana del mondo contemporaneo. ” As readers of this blog can see, your “context” argument is worthless. First he prayed for the People of God to illuminate us on Faith, Hope and Charity. Then he prays that she especially illuminate those people who she is awaiting his consecration. Since he just consecrated the whole world to Mary, it is plain as day that he is admitting Mary still awaits the consecration of Russia.

    Finally, it is interesting that you won’t call the Russian Orthodox schismatics and heretics, but you quickly call brother Catholics “detractors” for exercising our rights affirmed in Vat. II. As far as “not serving the good of the Catholic Church”, I wonder what you would have done when 75% of the Bishops were preaching Arianism. Do you believe that St. Athanasius was a detractor?

  12. James DePrisco writes: “As a side note, I agree that the consecration of the world to Mary’s Immaculate Heart had great benefits and probably prevented a nuclear war. But, it is only a delay.”

    It’s quite possible that all the previous papal consecrations of the world and Russia, as defective as they were in view of the instructions that the Blessed Mother conveyed to Sister Lucia, were beneficial to a limited extent. But that does not mean that we can disregard instructions that come from the Mother of God.

    Again, even if a Catholic believes that the consecration was fulfilled in 1984, he or she should agree that prudence alone ought to lead us to implore the Pope to perform another consecration–a consecration done by the Pope and all the bishops of the world at the same time and with the explicit mention of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and Russia.

    Because the stakes are so high, this explicit consecration ought to be done on the principle of “just in case.” It would do no harm, and it would do much good in the sense of promoting devotion to the Mother of God and defending the one true Faith.

    I say this to Jim Likoudis with great respect: Jim, what if you’re wrong about this? Please think of the consequences of a mistake in this connection! Please think of the warning that “various nations will be annihilated”!

    Keep and spread the Faith.

  13. Dear Friends,

    The only authentic interpreter of any private revelation addressed to the Church is the local diocesan bishop, for his diocese, and the Pope for the universal Church. Sister Lucia was only the messenger, not the official interpreter of the message, as she herself was well aware.

    If Pope John Paul II mentioned Russia, but didn’t include Russia in the published text of the Consecration (for political reasons), who would know? The Pope is not answerable to us for what he does. I believe the Pope did say he was renewing in a collegial manner the consecrations made personally by Popes Paul VI and Pius XII, which were specifically of Russia.

    But suppose the Pope, in studying all the research on Fatima — as he did while recuperating from his gunshot wound — decided that it was no longer enough to consecrate Russia because, as Our Lady warned, it was now “late” and the errors of Russia had already spread all over the world (the consecration of Russia was to prevent what had now occurred). So, suppose the Pope judged that a consecration of the whole world was now necessary (and who can deny that it was?). Who has the authority from God to judge that the Pope’s interpretation of the message is in error? Nobody!

    Now, Our Lady didn’t promise that Russia would not be a political or military adversary to the USA. She promised that Russia would be converted — and not to capitalism.

    The World Apostolate of Fatima (the Blue Army) has been working in Russia for several years. We see a tremendous upsurge of the Faith there and growing friendship between Catholics and Orthodox. In Kazan the Muslim mayor has just erected a beautiful Catholic Church (the first in Kazan) to receive the Pilgrim Virgin of Russia (the Odessa Pilgrim Virgin Statue) which the Blue Army has held in trust since it was blessed by Pope Paul VI in the late 1960′s.

    At the entrance to Red Square there is now an Icon of the Madonna and Child that Russians stop to venerate as the enter the Square.

    In the 1970′s the Blue Army ransomed the Icon of Kazan, the holiest Icon in Russia, and held it in trust until 1994 when they gave it to the Pope to return to the Russian Orthodox. If not for the Blue Army it would have been sold to a private collector who planned to remove the precious gems and sell them separately. The Orthodox were astounded when they learned that Roman Catholics from the USA had raised several million dollars to rescue their miraculous Icon and then kept it safe until it could safely be returned to them.

    This providential act literally melted the hearts of the Russian Orthodox and has greatly smoothed the path to reunion with the Catholic Church. (The annual pilgrimage to Kazan by the Blue Army is greeted with friendship and enthusiasm by the local Orthodox community, led by their bishop.) It’s just a matter of time now. As Jim pointed out, Our Lady never suggested the Conversion of Russia would be instantaneous and Lucia said the fulfillment of the message of Fatima was only mid-week at the time of the Consecration.

    But the real point is being totally missed. Our Lady said that reparation for sin is absolutely necessary for lasting peace and an end to war, not “magical” consecrations, and she specified the First Saturdays Devotion as the way to do this. The fear of nuclear war with Russia is behind us; the danger of nuclear attacks on our cities by Muslim terrorists is very real. Who makes the First Saturdays anymore?


    Bill Sockey, Vice President
    World Apostolate of Fatima

  14. Bill, thanks for the great comment. I was hoping someone more knowledgable than I would step in with the message of Fatima–reparation. I heard a wonderful talk Mercy Sunday at the recent Institute on Religious Life Conference. The title was “Being instruments of God’s Mercy and Healing.” Jerry Coniker, who knows a little about consecration to Mary, spoke on reparation and its perceptible impact on the world. Very challenging message.

  15. If we can’t rely on Sister Lucia to convey to us accurately the wishes of Our Lady of Fátima as far as the requirements for the consecration of Russia (not the world) are concerned, then we can’t rely on anything that Sister Lucia told us regarding the Marian apparitions that she was privileged to experience. In that case, the entire message of Fátima is destroyed, and Mr. Sockey is out of an apostolate.

    Gentlemen, this is not merely an academic question that we can debate at our leisure. Think of the lives, both here and hereafter, that may be threatened. Those who adamantly insist, in the face of so much evidence, that the consecration has already occurred should ask themselves whether they wish to share responsibility for the grievous losses that their stance may incur. Again, what if you are wrong? Err on the side of safety!

    The focus must be on Russia, for the Blessed Mother told us that her requests are aimed at preventing that nation from spreading her errors throughout the world. Among those errors are
    (1) schismatic and heretical separation from the one true Church, (2) the explicitly or implicitly atheistic state that refuses to acknowledge the kingship of Christ in accordance with the Church’s authentic social doctrine, and (3) the horror of legalized abortion (legalized by the Soviet state on November 18, 1920).

  16. Mr. O’Brien, with all due respect, your statement is not logical. If the message of Fatima is addressed to the Catholic Church, and to the Pope in particular, then the Pope is the highest authority on earth to interpret what it means. Not only that, but the Bishop of Fatima and the Pope are the only authorities on earth who can decide whether or not the message is authentic in the first place! That is Catholic doctrine.

    I say again: Sister Lucia was only the messenger from Our Lady to the Holy Father. You have it backwards: if we can’t rely on the Pope to authentically interpret a private revelation to the whole Church then we can’t rely on anything contained in the alleged apparition.

    Furthermore, there is nothing in the message of Fatima authorizing lay people to harass the Pope about making the consecration of Russia. The message was to the Pope, not to us. Our Lady’s message to us was to make reparation for sin so that God’s grace could rescue us from impending wars and persecutions.

    And finally, Russia has already spread her errors all over the world. It is too late to prevent that. Our Lady didn’t ask for the consecration of Russia to reverse the errors, but to prevent them. We failed. We lay people failed because we failed to promote the First Saturdays Devotion and to make enough reparation for sin so that the Pope and bishops would receive the grace to make the consecration of Russia before her errors were spread.

    Russia is no longer the moral threat to our country and the world that it was under Communism. The moral threat is now from our own countrymen, not Russia. We have a new threat in international Islamic terrorism. We need to get serious about making the First Saturdays and other acts of reparation before it is too late (again).

    Somehow it always seems easier to blame the Pope for not doing what Our Lady asked him to do than to do what Our Lady asked us to do. Think about that!

    – Bill

  17. Bill, even though the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, he is not on the level of the Mother of God.

    That the Pope, through human weakness–a reality fully compatible with his primacy and doctrinal infallibility–is capable of misinterpreting or failing to implement a prophetic message delivered to the world by the Blessed Mother in a private revelation is reflected in Sister Lucia’s report of what Christ disclosed to her at Rianjo in August 1931:

    “Make it known to My ministers that given they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My request, that they will follow him into misfortune.”

    The above quotation refers to the failure of King Louis XVI to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus in accordance with the private revelation given to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque. Louis XVI was executed by French revolutionaries in 1793.

    For information on the Rianjo warning, detailed in an August 29, 1931, letter from Sister Lucia to her bishop, please see The Whole Truth About Fatima, by Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité (Buffalo: Immaculate Heart Publications, 1989), volume 2, pages 543-551.

    I have reservations about the use of the phrase “Islamic terrorism.” Though it is not the true religion, Islam has no intrinsic, doctrinal connection with terrorism, and to use a phrase that may be interpreted as implying such a connection contradicts the spirit of the Church’s teaching on Islam in Vatican II’s Nostra aetate. How would you feel about hearing the Inquisition called “Catholic terrorism”? Besides, we won’t be able to spread the Faith to our Muslim brothers and sisters if we allow them to think that we hate them.

  18. Mr. Sockey,
    First off everyone agrees that we need to make reparation for sins. That is not the issue.

    Second, the issue of whether Fatima is authentic has been settled. You are begging the question and making a straw man. Rome has spoken, and God also with the miracle of the sun.

    Third, no one has said that the Pope doesn’t have authority. Another straw man.

    The issue is whether the Pope has consecrated Russia or not, and has nothing to do with interpretation. I have presented credible evidence that he did not consecrate Russia, he didn’t consider it consecrated, and I used his own words. By the way, Mr. Likoudis provided us the official Vatican publication which contains Pope JP II’s call to Mary to enlighten the people whose consecration she is awaiting. Here’s the link:
    So we no longer have to try to translate the Italian newspaper article. Also, Pope JP II repeated this prayer three hours later. So when you say that only the Pope can decide (not necessarily true), we respond, yes he did decide, he indicated it has not been done. I have provided the documention, now from the Vatican itself!

    Now for the ramifications. You mention Russia spreading her errors. You leave out the wars and the annihilation of countries. Perhaps you don’t know much about Fatima and that is why you left that part out. Let’s face it, with the number of abortions we have, and the homosexuals running around, all of us at this forum will agree we won’t be surprised if the U.S. gets blasted as a chastisement. Our only hope now is for the Pope to consecrate Russia with all of the bishops of the world, the rosary, and the reparations.

    Finally, no one says that Fatima authorizes us to harass the Pope (by the way, what harassment are you talking about?). We say that Vat. II authorizes us to express our concerns, and even says we have a duty to make our voices heard. Another straw man.

    Yours in Christ,
    James DePrisco

  19. Dear Mr. O’Brien and Mr. DiPrisco, In discussions within the family we are permitted to use language we wouldn’t use in public. The Irish Republican Army could be said to have practiced “Catholic” terrorism, in the sense that they were Catholics and used their religion as a pretext for their terrorism. That is the sense in which I used the expression “Islamic terrorism.”

    I already agreed that the consecration was made too late to prevent the errors of Russia from spreading around the world, causing wars and the annihilation of nations (Fatima authorities disagree whether the annihilation was in the future or under the Soviet Union and Red China). There is no present credible evidence that the USA is in danger of annihilation from Russia. But we are clearly in danger of further attacks from Muslim terrorists.

    But let’s keep to the subject. To say that the Vicar of Christ “is not on the level of the Mother of God” suggests a serious misunderstanding of Catholic doctrine. On earth, in the Catholic Church, the Pope is the supreme authority in doctrine and discipline, and in this respect the Vicar of Christ is in fact superior to the Mother of God. To deny this is to express popular piety at odds with sound doctrine.

    I have to emphasize again, since you seem to have missed the point, that the Pope is not only the supreme authority on the authenticity of the Fatima message; but he — not Sister Lucia or anyone else — is also the supreme authority on what it means. He is therefore the supreme authority on what is required to fulfill Our Lady’s request that Russia be consecrated to her Immaculate Heart.

    Pope John Paul II was fully informed about the message of Fatima when he made the consecration of the world, in union with all the Catholic bishops, in 1984. You are therefore suggesting that the Pope was irresponsible or worse in failing to make the consecration as you think it needed to be made. You are also suggesting that you know the message of Fatima better than the Pope.

    Your position seems to be that the Pope knew about the need to consecrate Russia, but intentionally refused to do so. This leads you to believe in a conspiracy to fake Sister Lucia’s letter to Fr. Robert Fox and other statements declaring that the consecration had been made.

    The claim that the consecration of Russia could not be effective unless Russia was specifically named in the consecration prayer is an interpretation, not part of the Fatima message. If the Pope judged that consecrating the whole world would satisfy the need to consecrate Russia, since Russia is included in the whole world, no Catholic can credibly contradict him.

    So this discussion turns on whether the Pope is the supreme authority in the Church to interpret and act on messages from heaven, or whether that authority rests with someone else, maybe private interpretation or something.

    If we believe the Pope acted irresponsibly, we are free to try to persuade others of this unlikely possibility. But we shouldn’t be surprised if not many Catholics agree with us.

    Unfortunately, you have decided that Our Lady’s request for the consecration of Russia was not fulfilled, regardless of what the Pope, Sister Lucia or anybody else thinks about it, and therefore you are closed to any argument that doesn’t support your position. This is the same approach taken by the evolutionists to dismiss intelligent design: they turn their personal conviction into a fundamental principle.

    Our time would be better spent working to make widespread reparation for the sins our our nation against the Immaculate Heart of Mary so as to prevent the divine retribution we are risking because of our sins.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *