The Third Secret of Fatima and Corruption in the Church.

Well I saw a lot of bad eggs(lame excuse of that word re bad egg) in my time which was quite unusual as I lived with them in a boarding school. Met Fr Fortune at a wedding in Wexford years later as local told me to keep away from him. He was power hungry and egoish, and full of politics. Never liked a bully when I see one like him. It takes a thump to stop a priest bully or verbal threats to ( to stop their tracks),one priest who broke the seal of Confessions re our sins. Never forgotten that wedding day when I heard stories which did shock me. Normally Im well used to it re all sorts of abuses from school but Fr fortune abuses went up another level.

I remember coming out from a wedding needing a stiff drink. Then I bumped into famous businessman Tony o reilly as I was quite surprised to see him quite depressed with a cigar and a glass of brandy beside a bentley chauffeured car.

What comes around re Church actions as they took no dissent from us. If we dissent as we get beaten up. That's how so much political power that they had that time as they ruled over politicians, garda who covered up ex alma mater school abuses cases with my own eyes. So rcc's their undoing got in return of what comes around hit them in the end re huge dissent and no pure unbridled power with lust in their hands.

If I were in position of power as I would imagine just saying OK but I would get ruthless with the church and let them collapse to knock out all their bad stuffings in order to start afresh with cleaner and better and smaller. That would be the only way in my view.

 

Nazi's were completely demonised than sinn fein. They were very deep into all sorts of occults.

Padraig here knows more about sinn fein than I do cis I live in the South. I don't think they are demonised. Every time I go up to the North back in 1970's as we almost get caught up in one rioting or another riot in other area but it only happened twice phew.

 

This was the earlier position of Abp Vigano.
It has since changed.

Matt Gaspers writes about it in this article:

 

I remember it was just about 1967! You are correct. Also, let us remember the message that was given to Pope Leo XIII, wherein he overheard Satan ask the Lord for permission to destroy the Church.
Emmett O’Regan has written an excellent treatise in this topic in his blog
Unveiling the Apocalypse, this past April.
We lose sight of the fact that the apostasy has been Biblically foretold.

 

The rot goes way back to the 19th century. Look at the warning of Our Lady of LaSalette. Sadly there were always sick depraved priests---but our current time 20th plus century seems to have sprouted a whole network of them.
Let me amend this. Scratch La Salette and let me make reference to Our Lady of Good Succes which is approved which speaks to the corruption of many priests in our time.

 

Archbishop Vigano was born in 1941. He is not young.

 

AED, the only part of the message of La Salette that is approved is this: it concerns working on Sunday, taking the Lord’s name in vain, and not going to Mass on Sundays. Our Lady said that the crops would rot.
The private message to Melanie was never approved.

 

Well, at least our leaders appear to be getting to grips with the financial corruption: https://twitter.com/EdwardPentin/status/1269007368077168640

Here's some background on the London property scandal (a reproduction of a CNA report): https://angelusnews.com/news/vatica...nancial-crime-offered-to-raze-parish-rectory/

Here's some more on it (I'm not familiar with the website which appears to be a secular source): https://www.tellerreport.com/news/2...till--gianluigi-torzi-arrested.SJ6N0mO3L.html

I wonder where this leaves Cardinal Becciu? He received his episcopal consecration from Cardinal Sodano. Archbishop Vigano said that Cardinal Becciu knew all about McCarrick's behaviour: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Angelo_Becciu

The love of money is the root of all evil. So far, we've had the resignation of a Pope (some might call it a coup) and trumped up charges against Cardinal Pell who had started to clean up the Vatican's financial mess. The cynic in me suspects that it all would have been brushed under the rug had Cardinal Pell not been cleared of the abuse charges against him. I suppose, too, that now it will be used as a distraction from the failure to address the question of how the likes of McCarrick gained so much power, who aided and abetted them and who are their proteges still in positions of influence in the Church.

 

I think we must be very careful about naming any member of the clergy or hierarchy some sort of savior on the front lines of the Church. We need to be careful of trying to make things come out the way we want them to come out. God is in charge here. It’s His Church.
If you think of rot in the Church, St Peter Damian faced it centuries ago.

 

Jason Fernando, there is no need to apologise. We can't complain about whatever is coming to us.

 

Why such a radical change in his viewpoint between September 2019 and the November of the same year? I grant that the shock of this syncretism with Islam might have caused him to so radically make this u-turn, but without a clear explication of the exact passages in Nostra aetate and Dignitatis humanae which are the justification for this error, I think it imprudent to condemn them. The documents might be overly vague and ambiguously aspirational, but this would simply imply that they ought to have been interpreted in light of previous teaching. If they have been exploited to justify this scandal, it is the fault of the interpreters rather than the documents themselves, unless the latter can be shown to explicitly encourage this kind of heresy. I say this not to criticise Abp Vigano, a man whom I have great respect for and also have the trust due to one who has become acutely aware of his own eternal destiny. I make this point because I have no wish to see a scapegoating of what was merely a sub-par and greatly over-valued Council, blown up by the novelty of an immediate-responding and hysterically clamorous international media. In this, Vatican II is not unlike most previous Councils, many of which had to be revisited and repaired. Unfortunately, we might not be in a position to conduct such repairs for a very long time. However, blaming Vatican II for our problems seems no more justified than blaming early Councils of The Church for failing to define the Trinity with sufficient precision as being the cause of the Arian heresy. The modern heresies, no less than the Arian one, have their roots in infernal wickedness of many men in positions of clerical power. I doubt it would have mattered what the Vatican II documents said, there were too many heretics in too many influential positions at the same time-they were going to twist things to their own ends no matter what. We saw how Soviet propaganda could influence most of world opinion to believe that Pope Pius XII, the greatest saviour of Jews in Second World War Europe by orders of magnitude, was a facilitator of Hitler's Final Solution. That is how easy it is to twist the Truth. In that vein, it seems inevitable Rome was replete with Soviet agents, learned in the arts of propaganda at the time of the Council. All were probably instructed to divert everything to what seems to have been a premeditated, consistent narrative.

 

Excellent post. I remember that prayers were recited at Mass for years by people in the pews, for the success of the Council. It was not for lack of prayer, then.

 

Well said.

 

I remember that too. Also God permitted it and its aftermath. Dreadful as it has been it is ultimately a purification. Perhaps it had to be in order to clean out the dry rot that had gone deep. The modernists had infected the Church even before St Pius X. And we know what damage Theillard did and is still doing.
It reminds me of carpenter ants. They can be eating away for years at the structure of a house undetected. And then suddenly in a storm the porch collapses and the terrible damage is manifest.

 

Yes, true, amen

 

HH, when you should get the chance, please listen to a particular segment of the podcast I link here:
https://taylormarshall.com/2019/05/256-infiltration-pope-francis-rewound-150-years-alta-vendita-la-salette-podcast.html
Go from 21:19 to 29:50. Very interesting and speaks to your comment.

I agree with the opinion of Dr. Taylor Marshall on this. That opinion was further supported personally for me when I spent time in LaSalette the end of last year. Too much of a modernist flavor for me. They presented the abbreviated messages in a truncated manner and were pretty darn bland about it. I left there just knowing that couldn’t be all that Our Lady had to say. After that, when I was reading Dr. Marshall’s book, it clinched the deal for me.

Here’s a photo I took on the early morning while sitting on a hill which looks down towards the place of the apparitions. I will say that there was a moment when I was outside alone and the silence I experienced was so profound and thick, I literally felt as though God had plunged me into it. That silence was a gentle pressure that hugged my very being. Glorious! View attachment 12891

 

It puzzles me that there are still so many who defend Vatican II and its documents and put the blame for the crisis purely on the interpretation or "spirit of the council".
It is not only Abp Vigano who has stopped being deceived by this strategy and now has the courage to boldly speak out against Vatican II.
Bp Athanasius Schneider has also done the same since late last year.

The Assisi inter-religious gatherings, the Abu Dhabi statement, the Abrahamic 'prayer house' and yes, even the Pachamama worship, all have, at their roots, the gravely erroneous document of Nostra Aetate.

What a shame it is that we now have at least 2 prelates who dare to speak out openly against Vatican II, its documents and liturgical destruction, but they are not being given the credit/ honour they deserve.
God has raised up these good men to preach the Truth.
We will realise this if we but open our hearts and eyes.

There is of course, a direct relationship between the unrevealed Third Secret of Fatima to the Conciliar Cancer that has afflicted the Catholic Church.

I totally believe what Fr Ingo Dollinger said was personally told to him by Cardinal Ratzinger not long after the June 2000 publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith).
“There is more than what we published,.....the unpublished part of the Secret speaks about “a bad council and a bad Mass” that was to come in the near future (the secret was of course, meant to have been released in 1960 according to Our Lady's explicit instruction; so this definitely refers to the Vatican II council).

+

 

I am very wary of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. If we start rejecting Councils out of hand, we firstly risk lending credibility to the error of those conciliarists who grant excessive importance and authority to Church Councils. Laying all the blame on Vatican II is to distract ourselves from the primary causes. There is strong evidence that satan has been given a clear run in this world for the past century. He undoubtedly would have been present at VII, but his influence has been far more obvious in the increasing grip that the modernist faction has gained in the administration of The Church, something quite independent of the Council and which had actually begun long before it-had it not, there would have been noone around to contend with the moderates and conservatives.

Secondly, and most importantly, we must avoid becoming protestants in going too far in the rejection of the acts of The Church. It is Christ's Church. Vatican II was a legitimate gathering of the only successors of the Apostles. To condemn VII runs the risk of condemning Christ's one and only Church. Certainly, there were mistakes. Nothing new about that. Councils are primarily human-run phenomena, which is why they have never been given the status of Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium. The Council in question only had the status of a pastoral one, entirely devoid of doctrine, so it is wholly undeserving of the stature controversy is lending it. Like the decade in which it took place, it is long out-dated. We must avoid giving oxygen to the heretics who treat this very minor council (exaggerated and inflated by a media that treated it like a world cup) as practically as important and revolutionary an event as the Incarnation. The best thing to do is to laugh at these people. The devil doesn't like being laughed at, I've heard. I believe this fallen angel has a particular revulsion for people like G.K. Chesterton. Lewis' 'Screwtape Letters' went down badly with him, too. And the latter wasn't even a Catholic.

There is another grave risk in taking the step of rejecting this Council of the Catholic Church out of hand. I fear far worse is going to happen in The Church and possibly in our lifetimes. If Christ's Church, His Body on Earth, is going to suffer the same fate as Himself and is about to be Crucified, it is possible that it will be inflicted with the most vile humiliations. Those modernists, in powerful positions even in the time of St Pius X, may gain such control of Christ's Church that we will see such abominations as sodomitically 'married' bishops and cardinals, priestesses, idol worship and goodness knows what else (although it is hard to conceive of anything worse-perhaps the sacramentalisation of abortion). This might even reach the office of the pope. It is difficult even to write of these things, but we are not very far from them as we stand. The big question for each one of us is what we do in the face of the actualisation of such events. If we are in the habit of condemning such relative trifles as Vatican II, how can we refrain from condemning such a Catholic Church? But this latter is what we must not do. Whatever poison the masonic modernists inflict upon the Body of Christ, She will still remain His one and only Church on Earth. If we condemn The Church in this instance, we will cast ourselves adrift. It would be humanly understandable, but to do this we would become protestants. In such circumstances, we will have to find ways to somehow remain in The Church, believing in Her, while utterly rejecting the satanic, evil spirit that will have gained control. On a much lesser scale, we ought not to reject this minor Council of the sixties, imperfect as was some of the human input, while utterly rejecting the 'spirit' of it as falsely interpreted by the aforementioned satanic, moderno-masonic faction, now becoming ever bolder.

I admit these matters are very difficult, but I just say again, beware of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

We cannot say for certain that God has raised up any particular individual. He raised Himself up-that is a certainty and all we need to know. I remember once reading that a great betrayal and error of The Church could come from the conservative side, although for the life of me I can't remember the source, but it has stuck with me. The devil is of the angelic realm, indeed he was the very top angel before he got too big for his boots. No human being could be up to his ruses and guile. Can we rule out that the devil might get his teeth into even the most orthodox Catholic, even without their being aware? I'm not saying this has happened to Archbishop Vigano, but great and holy bishop as he is, I'm not about to lend him the status of Prophet and follow him away from The Church, no matter the terrible shape of the latter.

 

Just looking at that picture alone gives me a a longing to visit La Sallette

 

Great post. Orthodox Catholics have got to be careful for wasn't it said even the elect would be deceived? This often comes into my head from time to time. None of us are above that.
Much prayer and discernment needed for the times ahead.