The Oath Against Modernism: Template for Action https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/in...he-oath-against-modernism-template-for-action We’re wearing out Ezekiel’s Trumpet. “Son of man, speak to your people and tell them: ‘Suppose I bring the sword against a land, and the people of that land choose a man from among them, appointing him as their watchman, and he sees the sword coming against that land and blows his trumpet to warn the people. Then if anyone hears the sound of the trumpet but fails to heed the warning, and the sword comes and takes him away, his blood will be on his own head…” People who write about the crisis in the Church are saying the same thing; a lot of people are getting it at last. What we really need now is a plan of action. In the last few days and weeks we have started to see an authentically Catholic reaction from a small number of bishops. Today we hear that a bishop in Kansas has ordered all parishes to restore the prayer to St. Michael, that renowned instrument against the demonic, at the end of every Mass. This is some pretty exciting news for bishops. But it still leaves open the question of what laypeople themselves can do. Now that the Catholic remnant is alerted to the real nature of the danger, it is time we come up with some kind of plan. Things appear to have turned a corner in the general understanding of the scale and nature of the crisis, that more and more people are coming to see didn’t start with this pope. It’s arguable that the surge in public distrust of Pope Bergoglio and his agenda is late and based on the wrong priorities. The fury against him from Catholics comes from the same reason for the turn against him in the mainstream media. His collusion with the homosexual abuse scandals that is now being shown to go back to his days in Argentina are not, in reality, as serious as his relentless attacks on the Catholic Faith itself. But however it came about, and however late it might be, the sea-change against this pontificate has driven many to re-examine the Traditionalist argument – that Bergoglio is a product of the crisis, not its cause. It is starting, at last, to be widely acknowledged that this pontificate is nothing more than the inevitable result of the trajectory the Church has been on since 1965. Jorge Bergoglio, and the perversion of the priesthood he represents, is a product of post-conciliar compromises, the friendly accommodation and absorption of secularism, the accommodation with the World and the Flesh that became the institutional priority after Vatican II and has led to the devil getting a now-incontestable grip on the Church. In short, people are coming to understand that Jorge Bergoglio and his friends, are the symptom of the acute stage of the progressive disease, not the disease itself. But now that we are finally past the stage of having to convince people that the Traditionalist point of view was the correct one, a great many are asking, “What next?” A lot of the discussion has centered on highly technical theological and canonical issues; whether it is possible to depose a pope, or if a pope can depose himself, criteria for determining precisely what constitutes “formal” heresy… and on and on. As a friend put it a few days ago, “We’ve all had enough of Bellarmine this, Suarez that and Cajetan the other thing…” The simple fact is that to nearly everyone these questions are mostly academic. Interesting as far as they go, but for most of us mainly they are the internet equivalent of arguments over politics in the pub. The issuing of a formal correction or the convening of an ecumenical council, imperfect or otherwise, is beyond most of our powers. As ordinary people, we have to bring ourselves down to earth. I’m not a bishop or cardinal, and you probably aren’t either. So, what is genuinely within the purview of the laity to do, concretely? We’ve probably all had enough of the facile reminder, “Just pray the Rosary.” Since many, many people who squeeze their daily beads are in the same state of confusion as those who don’t, maybe we can try getting more specific. Fortunately, we’ve got a name for the disease, and a holy pope who provided the cure. It is at last being widely acknowledged that the Asteroid we’ve all been watching is Modernism, the same “synthesis of all heresies” that Pius X tried to stop at the opening of the 20th century. A Rome conference sponsored in June this year by the formerly stalwart “conservative” LifeSiteNews focused on the triumphant resurgence of Modernism since Vatican II, identifying it as the source of the crisis; more or less the core of the Traditionalist position. Reporting on the conference, Dianne Montagna wrote: “Imagine that the trials of the current pontificate, the machinations of the German bishops, and Fr. James Martin’s controversial statements on homosexuality were to end tomorrow. Perhaps for a time some would feel that Mordor had been destroyed and sunshine and freedom were restored to the Shire, but the current crisis in the Church would not be over. Why? Because controversial passages in Amoris Laetitia, the German Bishops’ intercommunion proposal, and Fr. James Martin’s watering down of the Church’s teaching on homosexuality are only symptoms of a deeper problem. Health will not be restored to Christ’s Mystical Body until these deeper problems are identified, addressed and healed.” Professor Roberto de Mattei and likeminded colleagues at that conference identified the source of the crisis as a resurgence of Modernism. With some slight modifications, it is in essence the same theological disease that Pius X fought so ferociously. Most Traditionalists understand this, but since this pontificate – and especially in the last three months – many who have never called themselves that are coming to the same realisation. Diane Montanga again: “According to the organizers of the June symposium, the rejection of the errors that have penetrated the Mystical Body of Christ, and the return, with God’s help, to complete Catholic truth believed and lived, are the necessary conditions for the Church’s renewal.” This "Paranoid Extremist" Was Right and Has Now Been Vindicated Completely St. Pius X, Pray For Us
(cont'd) As de Mattei explained, Modernism was defined by Pope St. Pius X to cover a set of “theological, philosophical, and exegetical errors” dating back into the 19th century. These he named and condemned in the encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis and the decree Lamentabili sane. The saintly pope then implemented certain disciplinary measures intended to root out what was at that time mainly a trend among academic priests. Although these measures appeared to be effective at first, Modernism re-emerged in the ‘30s and began its work infiltrating every institution of the Catholic world. And it’s great triumph was Vatican II. De Mattei describes it as a “synthesis of ancient errors such as Gnosticism, Pelagianism and Arianism.” The new version, Neo-modernism, in its emphasis on changing doctrine indirectly by changing practice, “has become a philosophy of life and pastoral action, even before being a doctrinal school.” Traditionalists like Professor de Mattei have known for a long time that this anti-Catholic ideology has become completely accepted – mainly through deliberate misrepresentation of the Faith – throughout the length and breadth of the Church, among clergy and laity, like a tasteless, odorless but deadly systemic poison introduced into a water supply. So, back to the question of what to do about it, as laymen with little power to change bishops or depose popes, perhaps we could usefully ask what the same saintly pope recommended as a remedy. Rather than dive into the complexities of theology, it might be more useful to examine another document from Pius X, a motu proprio issued in September 1910 called Sacrorum antistitum. This document is most famous for including the Oath Against Modernism, required of “all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries” of the Catholic Church until it was rescinded on 17 July 1967 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with the approval of Pope Paul VI. At the suggestion of a priest I know who has spent his priestly life combating Modernism, we can perhaps examine the Oath not with a mind to taking it formally ourselves, but to create a programme of action. As a template for re-examining the truths of the Catholic Faith that the Neo-Modernists want to have disappear. I would suggest that a first step in any battle plan must be accurate intelligence. We have to know very precisely what our enemies are doing. Simply, if the Oath was conceived as the main public instrument of combating this terrible illness, this deformation of Catholicism, it is obviously the place to start, to point the way to a cure. It is merely a distillation of Pope Pius X’s warning; Modernism subverts Catholicism by stealth, by modifying definitions of terms, by undermining the very notion of truth, but all the while retaining the terms themselves; by “reformulations” of doctrines and “updating of language.” Using the Oath as a guide, applying it clause by clause to what is being done by the Bergoglians now, it becomes a simple matter to see through their attempts at obfuscation. For instance, one of the most insistent calls by the Bergoglian revolutionaries at both Synods on the Family was for a “reformulation” of the Church’s teaching on homosexuality. We were told ad nauseam that the “doctrine isn’t being changed” but that there was a need to “reexamine the language” used to convey it. These are classic Modernist tropes, and they are refuted and warned against explicitly in the very opening passages of the Oath. I . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. As we see here, in its opening sentence, the rug is pulled out from under the revolutionaries currently ruling the Vatican. Since the sense, the nature, of an idea is conveyed by language, and theological formulations are by necessity extremely precise, and since these formulations convey truths – realities established more firmly than the laws of mathematics or physics – the attempt to “merely change the language” while claiming to retain the meaning is revealed for the poisoned snake oil that it is. Do we want to know in detailed and precise language what is wrong with the New Paradigm being forced onto the Church right now by the Bergoglians? Do we want to understand what is really going on, in language and terms we non-theologians and non-scholars can understand? Do we want to understand precisely how these very bad men are manipulating and distorting the Faith? A careful re-reading of the Oath is very revealing. St. Pius X immediately goes on to list the truths that not only must be absolutely held by all Catholics, but must be expressed and believed precisely in the same language and terminology as they always have, specifically with a mind to refute those commonly held “errors of this day”: And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:19), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated. Contrast this with Bergoglio’s repeated attacks on the very notion that the Faith can be known with certainty, or even on the desire for certainty: “If one has the answers to all the questions - that is the proof that God is not with him. It means that he is a false prophet using religion for himself. The great leaders of the people of God, like Moses, have always left room for doubt. You must leave room for the Lord, not for our certainties; we must be humble.”
(cont'd) Read the rest of the Oath and see how many of the Bergoglians’ standard tropes it refutes directly. Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Bergoglio has joined with thousands of other Neo-Modernist priests in outright denying the supernatural miracles of Christ. He produced a video in May, 2013, only a few weeks after his election, in which he denied the miraculous nature of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes. “Regarding the loaves and fishes, I would like to add a new perspective. They didn’t multiply, no, that’s not true. The loaves simply didn’t come to an end. Just like the flour and the oil of the widow that didn’t run out. When multiplication is spoken of, it might be confused with magic, no. No, no, the grandeur of God is so great, and the love he puts in our hearts, that if we wish, that which we have will not run out.” This has been a repeated theme. In another instance, he said that “God is not a magician who does things with a magic wand.” Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. In July 2016, Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, identified by the pope as the most authoritative interpreter of Amoris Laetitia, said that document’s volte face on giving Holy Communion to unrepentant adulterers is an “evolution” of doctrine, based on the needs of the times. “In this sphere of human realities, the Holy Father has fundamentally renewed the discourse of the Church – certainly along the lines of Evangelii gaudium, but also of Gaudium et spes, which presents doctrinal principles and reflections on human beings today that are in a continuous evolution. There is a profound openness to accept reality.” This Article Appeared In Our Print/E-Edition Weeks Ago. CLICK THE IMAGE TO SEE WHAT YOU'RE MISSING THIS WEEK: Once the principles of Modernism have been understood – which they can be merely by a careful examination of the Oath – all the machinations of the Bergoglians become clear, as if one has shone a searchlight on a nest of cockroaches. Use the Oath to educate yourself. I suggest this as step one in a plan for the laity. But since the principles of Modernism have been adopted by our entire civilisation, by interiorising the Oath, one can in a sense inoculate oneself against the aerosolized version of the disease. Read the rest and you will recognise many of the ideas that modern secularism takes for granted about religion; it is a figment of “blind sentiment”; its ideas are “philosophical figments,” the product of mere “human conscience”; religious ideas are never static, but can and must change constantly to keep up with human evolution; that things held as true by Catholics are contradicted in history, that faith and objective reality observed by historians and scientists are in opposition; that an educated Catholic must ignore what he knows in favour of his Faith: I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord. Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality - that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents. Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way. I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .
I disagree. The full 3rd secret was meant to be released to the public (as Sr Lucia said). Certainly. But are we to obey a bishop or pope who is going against the teachings of our faith as handed down by the apostles? So be it.
Francis and the Third Secret of Fatima https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/in...m/4141-francis-and-the-third-secret-of-fatima With events in the Church pointing more and more to the fulfilment of the Third Secret of Fatima, it is interesting to note that in Archbishop Vigano’s 11-page testimony of August 22 wherein the pope and 32 high-ranking Church officials were implicated in the sexual-abuse of minors, the archbishop cited the crux of the Third Secret, saying: “The corruption has reached the very top of the Church's hierarchy” This calls to mind the now famous statement of Cardinal Mario Ciappi, who read the Third Secret and who was personal papal theologian to Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II. In a personal communication to a professor Baumgartner of Salzburg, Ciappi said: “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top” Among those who have read and commented on the Third Secret, we find this common thread in that it concerned the great apostasy of the last times and how the satanic infiltration of heresy would occur at the very highest levels of the Church and filter down to the man in the pew. None less than the pope himself let out with a historic S.O.S. concerning this latter day apostasy when, on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of Our Lady’s last apparition at Fatima, he said: “The tail of the devil is functioning in the disintegration of the Catholic World. The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of the faith, is spreading throughout the world and into the highest levels within the Church.” (Pope Paul VI, October 13, 1977) What the pope was giving us was the gist of the Third Secret of Fatima, namely, that Satan would subvert the Church’s ruling body and then use this fallen hierarchy to precipitate the misguidance and destruction of the Church we are seeing today. Note that it was exactly 60 years after Fatima that Pope Paul gave us what we can safely call the heart of the Third Secret—the long-awaited Secret that was supposed to be released by 1960, but never was. According to Sr. Lucy of Fatima, it was the expressed wish of the Blessed Virgin that the Secret be released by 1960. Before his election to the papacy as Pius XII, Eugene Cardinal Pacelli in 1931 made a highly prophetic statement in response to the Fatima Third Secret. “I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a Divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy…. I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the true Faith of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past. A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God.” Hence, we can understand the significance of 1960 as the appointed year for disclosing the Third Secret, since it was only two years later that they would convene the Second Vatican Council, setting into motion this insidious departure from tradition that would leave the Holy City “half in ruins.” Our Lady was attempting to avert this disaster to the Church. What we have seen since the Council is a new epoch of denial where the Church has lost confidence in Tradition while seeking ecumenical unity with man. This is what Cardinal Pacelli apparently meant when he said that the Church “will be tempted to believe that man has become God.” (continues...)
A Bad Council More than once it has surfaced that the Third Secret of Fatima spoke of “a bad council and a bad Mass.” This was reported by the Fatima Crusader in May 2009 and again by One Peter Five in May 2016. According to both reports, it wasn't long after the supposed publication of the Third Secret by the Vatican in June 2000 that Cardinal Ratzinger [now Benedict XVI] told his good friend Fr. Ingo Dollinger—a long-time friend and spiritual child of St. Padre Pio—that there is still part of the Third Secret that they have not published. “There is more than what we published,” Ratzinger said. He went on to tell Fr. Dollinger that the unpublished part of the Third Secret speaks of “a bad council and a bad Mass” that was to come. (One Peter Five, May 15, 2016) Consider now the prediction of the nineteenth century Freemason Canon Roca, who said that “the liturgy of the Roman Church will shortly undergo a transformation at an ecumenical council … to deprive the Church of its supernatural character.” This certainly seems to gel with the prediction of “a bad council and a bad Mass.” Among the instructions that accompanied this “bad council” was the September 26, 1964, Instruction on the Liturgy, Inter Oecumenici, which outlined the new ruling for the Mass and sanctuary. Section 91 says: The main altar should preferably be freestanding, to permit walking around it and celebration facing the people. This unprecedented change was calculated to bring about a shift of focus where the emphasis is on the community. This was the essential part of “the suicide of altering the Faith in Her liturgy” that Cardinal Pacelli (later Pius XII) dreadfully prophesied after being presented with the Third Secret. Unfortunately, many lash-out, arguing that the gates of hell can never harm the Church this way, but this argument holds no water. When Christ said that the gates of hell would never prevail against his Church he was tipping us off to the fact that the infernal gates would wage battle against his Church, but he assured us at the same time that the enemy would never succeed in eliminating the Church altogether. From the scriptures we know that most of the Church would fall into apostasy in the end, leaving only a remnant to meet with Christ at his Second Coming, but what we didn’t know until modern times was that the Church through the misdirection of a historic council would become the enemy stronghold wherewith to advance this apostasy. Needless to say, the powers of darkness are waging their final battle against the Church as several popes and saints warned would happen. St. Paul himself tells us that “in the last days, shall come dangerous times.” (2 Timothy 3:1)... “For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine.” (4:3) The Church is truly in the grips of the worst crisis of its history, a crisis in which every member of the Church is being tried for his valor and strength. (Apoc. 3:10) It is a test to see if we will remain allegiant to the rule of tradition or flow with the new order of change that has ensued since the Council. Diabolical Disorientation The Third Secret was about how the devil would succeed in sowing disobedience into the Church through obedience. The church today indeed is being guided by temptation under the illusion of divine guidance because the dark powers are using hierarchical rank to mislead the faithful into error, so great is the “diabolical disorientation” wrought by these “spirits of wickedness in the high places.” (Eph. 6:12) The recent canonization of Pope Paul VI only adds to the disorientation, since Francis is simply using this as a political tool to try to “canonize” the post-conciliar “reform” which Catholics today erroneously attribute to Pope Paul VI. The canonization is also a skillful means of warding off conservative backlash in the face of the pope’s move earlier this year to reexamine Humane Vitae. The pope in 2016 had even contradicted Pope Paul’s condemnation of artificial contraception, saying that “avoiding pregnancy [via contraception] is not an absolute evil.” https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/v...apal-commission-exists-to-do-historical-revie Barque on the Verge of Capsizing It was for good reason that His Holiness Benedict XVI said on July 15, 2017 that the Church “is on the verge of capsizing.” His Eminence Cardinal Burke echoed a similar note last year when he said: “Perhaps we have arrived at the end times.” (Catholic Herald, Nov. 30, 2017) Burke’s words are certainly warranted. Since 2013, the Vatican has repeatedly invited pro-abortion advocates to come and speak to the Church about their vision of a "depopulated" world and in June 2017 the Vatican committed the treason of conferring a pontifical honor on abortion activist Lilianne Ploumen. (Lepanto Institute, Jan 12, 2018) With this type of collusion, it shouldn’t surprise us that members of the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life are conceding to arguments that "some" abortions are morally acceptable, while religious communities are "celebrating" homosexuality. It is no secret that the Vatican in spring 2017 was home to a cocaine-fueled gay sex-orgy that had to be busted by Vatican police. Vatican gay orgy: 12 facts you need to know What are we to expect when Pope Francis has appointed a number of gay sympathizers to key positions in the Church and Vatican? Francis even told a practicing homosexual in May 2018 that he should accept his gay-orientation on the grounds that “God made you that way” (USA Today, May 21, 2018), so what else can we expect? “By their fruits you shall know them.” (Matt. 7:30) One ray of hope is that under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI could still disclose the Third Secret of Fatima before his death, since this would confirm to all that the post-conciliar "reform" wasn’t the work of God after all. This would vindicate restorationists and motivate the Church Militant to come forward with more vigor to fight these changes. Is this likely to happen? Alas, no; in my opinion it is rather unlikely. But with God nothing is impossible. So why not pray for just such an eleventh-hour reprieve? In the meantime, we follow St. Paul's remedy to withstand the “operation of error” of the last times: Stand fast, and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. (2 Thess. 2:14) (some of the emphasis is mine)
I caught the end of a Women of Grace programme on EWTN today. They were promoting a book about the Rosary and I think the guest had co-written the book with one of the Women of Grace presenters. The guest whose name I missed referred to a very holy woman who had received a vision or locution from Our Lord saying that He wanted the Pope to consecrate the whole world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. I think the guest was saying that Our Lord want the world's consecration because Russia had already spread her errors. I didn't catch enough of the programme to figure out when the holy woman (who may have been Italian) received that message from Heaven or when and how she had conveyed the message to the Pope. I'm curious to know whether anyone else on the forum saw that programme and might be able to fill in the parts I missed. Even the name of the holy woman would be helpful.
You don't mean this do you? Did WOG switch over from a TV show to a radio broadcast? They don't appear to be posting any of their TV shows on EWTN on Youtube anymore.
No. It was definitely a TV programme on EWTN channel. Here's the book they were discussing: https://shop.womenofgrace.com/product/2019/books Johnnette's guest must have been Thomas K. Sullivan. I only caught a snippet of the programme so I suppose that the mention of Fatima was part of a broader discussion about the Rosary.
Dolours, I looked it up also. I think that it was called "Women of Grace - Fatima and You: How the Battle Will Be Won Pt. 3". I checked if it will air again soon but I did not see it scheduled although pt. 4 will be on tomorrow at 11am ET and pt. 5 will be on Friday also at 11am ET. I think that it might be on at 11:30am for you. http://www.ewtn.com/multimedia/schedules.asp?sat=UKE Maybe they will discuss what you are looking for again tomorrow or on Friday, it's worth a try. Edited to add: I also noticed that this particular series aired for the first time in October of 2017. In addition, Colin Donovan will be on parts 4 and 5 so maybe he was on part 3 also. I am hardly an expert on Fatima. For me there is so much information that I can not keep it all straight but I think that the following has been posted in the past which may be what you heard today, December 1940 - Sr. Lucia writes letter to Pius XII, saying that Our Lord Himself requests the Pope to "consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, with a special mention for Russia, and order that all the Bishops of the world do the same in union with Your Holiness."4 https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/FatimaConsecration.htm This may be one of those things about Fatima which is highly debated, I honestly can't remember.
I just clicked on the video and forwarded to see what was on the show: About 46min 49secs a woman rings in to ask what to do about her local priest who was having (sexual) relationships with women!! The answer from the host was extraordinary! Well worth listening to her answer. What a great show!
Dolours, I hope that you watched part 5 today. I just watched it and it is very good. The co-host of this series is Colin Donovan who wrote the information contained in the following link https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/FatimaConsecration.htm . There is always something new to learn about Our Lady of Fatima and the various apparitions related to it. I had a feeling that you weren't referring to Sister Lucia. The mystic I now believe that you were referring to is Blessed Alexandrina Maria da Costa. I found the following link which you may find helpful. https://ocistec-purgatory.weebly.co...mary--blessed-alexandrina-maria-da-costa.html . It contains the following, In 1935, Jesus asks Alexandrina the consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary: «Tell your spiritual Father that as a proof of the love that you dedicate to My Blessed Mother, every year I want it to be done an Act of Consecration of the world [...]» (Letter to Father Mariano Pinho; 01/08/1935) Our Lord gave the order to obtain from the Pope the consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. In 1935, Jesus asks for the Consecration of the World to the Immaculate Heart of Mary: Tell them to say to your spiritual Father who, in proof of the love that you dedicate to My Most Holy Mother, I want an Act of Consecration of the whole world done every year on one of her holydays chosen by you: Assumption, purification, or the Annunciation, asking this Virgin without stain of sin to embarrass and confuse the unclean, so they back away and don’t offend Me. I ask you in the same way I asked Saint Margaret Mary for the world to be consecrated to My Divine Heart, so that it will be consecrated to Her with a solemn holyday.» The first request dates from July 31, 1935, and Alexandrina, who was already a voluntary victim of the Eucharist, offered herself as well as "victim for the consecration of the world to our little Mother in Heaven." Our Lord having urged her to obtain this consecration for more than a year, finally her spiritual director, Fr. Mariano Pinho, S.J., transmitted this request for the consecration of the world on September 11, 1936, to His Holiness Pope Pius XI by the intermediary of his Secretary of State, Cardinal Pacelli. The Holy See then ordered the Apostolic Nunciature of Lisbon to initiate an inquiry into the matter. On July 11, 1937, the Provincial of the Jesuits wrote to the Nuncio, relating to him the conclusion of the investigation: http://www.alexandrinadebalasar.com/index.php?cod_lang=2&cod_menu_raiz=10&cod_menu=129 I also found the following link which contains a few links related to this seer. https://forums.catholic.com/t/the-first-six-thursdays-devotion/388077 . I have not read very much about her yet but maybe someone on MOG is more familiar with Blessed Alexandrina Maria da Costa and can therefore offer some additional information about this seer. This was a very good find imho, thank you.
Thank you, Carol, for ferreting out that information. It reassures me that mind mind wasn't playing tricks on me. I was out all day today and didn't get to watch the programme. I'll read those links, hopefully tomorrow, when I'm not too tired to take in the information. Without reading them I know that it was Blessed Alexandrina they were referring to on the on the snippet of the programme that I saw. I'm in awe of your ability to gather information from so many sources. The Lord has surely blessed you with an organised mind.
Dolours, Thank you, that's very nice of you. Often, I wish that my mind was a little better organized. I made a small error in my post, EWTN showed part 4 today and tomorrow is part 5. I will be watching that one also. I wish that I had the whole series but I recorded today's episode and I will be recording tomorrow's episode too. I also noticed that Colin Donovan briefly mentioned Blessed Alexandrina Maria da Costa in that first link that I posted to you, this is something I have read many times in the past but I never realized that this seer was given a similar request as the Fatima seer(s). I find it very interesting that in 1935 Our Lord told her that he wanted the world consecrated every year on one of the Blessed Mother's holydays and finally on March 25, 1984, the Annunciation, Pope Saint John Paul II consecrated the world to her Immaculate Heart and this is the consecration which Sister Lucia stated was accepted by Heaven but it wasn't done annually after that. I also remember some members stating that it should be done annually and I know that Cardinal Burke was suggesting that it be done again. It just seems strange that none of the popes followed this seer's instructions that the consecration of the world should be done annually and Pope Saint John Paul II was the only pope to consecrate the world to Her Immaculate Heart on a proper day as requested through this seer. I wonder if Sister Lucia was told that consecration should be done on one of Our Lady's holydays also.
The request of our Lord to Sr Lucia at Fatima was for the pope, in union with all the bishops of the world, to consecrate Russia, not the world, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Fr Gabriel Amorth said that Pope JPII failed to consecrate Russia in 1984 even though he had wanted to. “There was no such consecration then,” he [Father Amorth] says. “I witnessed the act. I was in St. Peter’s Square that Sunday afternoon, very close to the Pope; so close, I could almost touch him.” Pressed by Zavala as to why he so forcefully believes that the consecration was not done, Fr. Amorth replied: “Very simple: John Paul II wanted to mention Russia expressly, but in the end he did not.” Fr. Amorth said further: “I have no doubt that the consecration did not occur on the terms required by the Virgin. And the Sr Lucia that said it was accepted by Heaven was the fake Sr Lucia. Faked Photo of Paul VI and Sister Lucy Published In Official Sources. Why Fake a Photo of an Event that "Actually Happened"? August 2018 (from the website of RadTrad Thomist) Original Photo of "the Meeting" between Paul VI and "Sister Lucy" found! TV Camera Stands Next to Paul VI. "Sister Lucy" Cut and Pasted In. 1)Original and 2) Faked Photograph of a meeting of Paul VI with "Sister Lucy."
Sg, Well, this discussion is more about Blessed Alexandrina Maria da Costa than it is about Sister Lucia and I realize that there is a lot of controversy over the details of the consecrations made and requested in conjunction with the Fatima seers but I don't believe that there was a fake Sister Lucia. I'm not sure what those photos prove or where they came from. This discussion is related to the idea that since the Consecration of Russia was not made by the pope soon after 1929 when it was requested by Our Lady to Sister Lucia it does make sense that Our Lord would have asked for the consecration of the world since the errors of Russia may have already spread throughout the world. It is purported that Our Lord made this request to Blessed Alexandrina Maria da Costa in 1938 and to Sister Lucia in 1940. https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/FatimaConsecration.htm#Pius12
Carol, I do not want to hijack the discussion, but there is an error in the statement about what Sr Lucia actually said, and in all good conscience I have to state the truth. With all due respect Carol, it is not about what makes sense, but only about our Lady's and our Lord's actual requests. OUR LADY OF FATIMA http://www.catholictradition.org/Mary/fatima17.htm FATIMA: What Our Lady Wants Is the Consecration of "Russia" Time and again sister Lucy explained, "Our Lady of Fatima did NOT ask for the consecration of the world, but the Consecration of RUSSIA." Following are testimonies of various personal interviews with Sister Lucy over many years where she repeats the same point again and again: In Our Lady of Fatima (1947), pg. 226; Professor William Thomas Walsh reports: "Lucy made it plain that Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of the world to Her Immaculate Heart. What She demanded specifically was the consecration of Russia." In the book, Vision of Fatima, 1949, page 80; Father Thomas McGlynn reports that Sister Lucy was emphatic at correcting consecration of the world to read consecration of Russia. "No!," Sister Lucy said. "Not the world! Russia, Russia!" In the book Il Pellegrinaggio Della Meraviglie, published under the auspices of the Italian Episcopate (Rome 1960, page 440) a little-known revelation of Our Lady of Fatima to Sister Lucy is recounted. The Virgin Mary appeared to Sister Lucy in May, 1952 and said: "Make it known to the Holy Father that I am always awaiting the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart. Without the Consecration, Russia will not be able to convert, nor will the world have peace." Father Umberto Maria Pasquale, S.D.B., had known Sister Lucy since 1939. Up to 1982, he had received 157 letters from her. On May 12, 1982, Father Umberto wrote in L'Osservatore Romano (the Pope's own newspaper) that Our Lady of Fatima never asked for the consecration of the world but only of Russia. On August 5, 1978, he asked her in person, "Has Our Lady ever spoken to you about the consecration of the world to Her Immaculate Heart? And Sister Lucy replied, "NO, Father Umberto, NEVER! At the Cova da Iria in 1917, Our Lady promised: 'I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia . . .' " Father Umberto, wanting a written reply to his question, then wrote Sister Lucy a letter. On April 13, 1980, Sister Lucy wrote back: "In replying to your question, I will clarify: Our Lady of Fatima, in Her request, only referred to the Consecration of Russia . . ." Father Manuel Rocha, a native of Portugal, was the assigned translator for Professor Walsh for the interview noted above. He reports a detail that makes it even more clear that all of us are at risk if the Consecration of Russia is not done in time. To continue what Mr. Walsh reported above, we quote: "But she (Sister Lucy) said more than once, and with deliberate emphasis: 'What Our Lady wants is that the Pope and all the bishops in the world shall Consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart on one special day. If this is done, She will convert Russia and there will be peace. If it is not done, the errors of Russia will spread through every country in the world.'" (Professor Walsh) "Does this mean, in your opinion, that every country, without exception, will be overcome by Communism?" (Sister Lucy) "YES!" (Our Lady of Fatima, 1947, page 226) Father Rocha testified that Mr. Walsh wanted to be positive about the answer of Sister Lucy and repeated the question adding, "and does that mean the United States of America too?" Sister Lucy again answered, "YES!" (This is reported in the book The Wonders She Performs, 1986, page 160.) Why Jesus Wants the Consecration of RUSSIA Sister Lucy asked Jesus why He would not convert Russia except through the specific Consecration of Russia. Jesus replied: "Because I want My whole Church to recognize that Consecration as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, so that later on My Church will extend the devotion to the Immaculate Heart and place this devotion beside devotion to My Sacred Heart." The only way to convert Russia is for the Pope and the bishops, on the same day, at the same time, to solemnly and publicly, together pronounce the act of Consecration of specifically Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Only then, will the world have Peace. The alternative of not obeying the command of the Queen of Heaven is "various nations will be annihilated" and the enslavement of the surviving nations. "Without the Consecration, Russia will not be able to convert, nor will the world have peace." Reprints available from The Fatima Center In U.S.A.----17000 State Route 30, Constable, NY 12926 In Canada----452 Kraft Road, Fort Erie, ON L2A 4M7 Call toll-free: 1-800-263-8160 Fax: 1-905-871-3646 LF173 www.fatima.org E-mail us at info@fatima.org
I continue to maintain that there was a fake Sr Lucia who replaced the real seer. At the RadTrad Thomist website, there are some updates on an ongoing investigation into this deception. What I posted was from one of those updates. The 2 photos already show that the Vatican was involved in a deception about the 3rd secret of Fatima. There are other photos that have also been shown to have been doctored/ photoshopped. One can google the website and see. When the investigation is completed and the results published, I will post on our forum.
