Cardinal Ratzinger: We Have Not Published the Whole Third Secret of Fatima

Not to worry...of course I meant moi! never otherwise!!

 

Here you go: Click Here.

 

Mac,

To the best of any Fatima scholar's knowledge, Cardinal Ottaviani never spoke about the lines of text, only the single sheet of paper.

 

Cardinal Bertone disagrees with you....

Cardinal Bertone, during the same telecast on which Borelli relies, that Cardinal Ottaviani, who has read the Third Secret, also testified that the “sheet of paper” on which Lucia wrote the Secret contained only 25 lines, not the 62 lines of the four-page vision. When confronted with Ottaviani’s testimony on camera, Bertone stated: “To me, it was a little amazing that Cardinal Ottaviani had said categorically a sheet of 25 lines…”35 Categorically! Bertone not only does not deny the “Fatimist” documentation of this decisive testimony, he affirms that Ottaviani gave it categorically

 

Bertone was mistaken.

 

Kevin sez: "Bertone was mistaken"
Ah... Well ...There you are then!! That silly old fool, Cardinal Bertone has been given "What-For" by our Young & "Learned" Mr. Symonds, BA, MA Theology, ....... late of The People's Democrat Republic of Massachusetts and now residing in the land of the free ... home of the brave ... Texas .... Let me guess ... Austin ... Right!??

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

 

Anyway, a good interview with the straight forward Fr. Ronan Murphy where in the first part he mentions C. Bertone and just where he wished to place Fatima for current consumption.....that is, to relegate Fatima to history by his treatment and representation of the Third Secret. Since such treatment the faithful have been influenced to believe everything is done, leaving no further necessity to pray for the conversion of Russia, which as another Fatima expert has described as a "grave sin against the Faithful"!!

http://radiomaria.us/tag/russia/

 

Russia was Consecrated in 1984 and Sister Lucia confirmed this fact.

 

My issue is the arrogance of intellectuals. It's Always the same thing with intellectuals. I don't believe in Charlie, Medjagori and Garabandal. And yes Glenn.,.the Church has silence Conchita. And if she isn't silenced then let's put her in a speaking tour. But back to my rant. I have given my views more then once and every now and then...I poke the bull. But the arrogance of being right about something (and everyone else is wrong) is total lack of humility. Lack of humility is actually pride which in turn is from the DEVIL. Sometimes it good to say your peace and move on to fight another day. That is the difference between intellectual and spiritual posts.

Kev,
just some friendly advice...it's ok to disagree but pushing your view over and over is futile.

Brother al

 

No Richard.Russia was not consecrated in 1984.



These two facts are not in dispute...

1985: In Sol de Fatima, the Spanish publication of the Blue Army, Sister Lucia was asked if the Pope had fulfilled the request of Our Lady when he consecrated the world the previous year. Sister Lucia replied: “There was no participation of all the bishops, and there was no mention of Russia.” She was then asked, “So the consecration was not done as requested by Our Lady?” to which she replied: “No. Many bishops attached no importance to this act

1987: On July 20, 1987 Sister Lucia was interviewed quickly outside her convent while voting. She told journalist Enrique Romero that the Consecration of Russia has not been done as requested.






86 Having admitted Sister Lucia’s testimony in this regard, however, Borelli abruptly does an about-face and declares that “Since about the middle of 1989, however, Sister Lucia came to recognize the validity of the consecration that John Paul made on 25 March 1984.” But in support of what he himself calls “Lucia’s brusque change of position” which has “left the experts perplexed,” Borelli relies on then Archbishop Bertone’s citation in TMF of the roundly debunked “letter of the seer of 8 November 1989 in which she affirms categorically: ‘Yes, [the consecration] is done as Our Lady requested.”

 

Christopher Ferrara gives Bishop Venancio [1959] and Cardinal Ottaviani [1967] as the sources for his repeated claim about the 25 lines. Would you like to explain why you dismiss these sources?

(PS Thank you for the link to the Borelli article)

 

We can argue about whether the conversion of Russia is complete but it is a matter of public record that Sister Lucia did confirm that the 1984 Consecration was accepted by Heaven:

The following is taken from Documents on Fátima, from the Fátima Family Apostolate. In this book photographs of the original letters in Portuguese in Sr. Lucia's own hand can be found. [available from http://www.fatimafamily.org/]

Letters of Sr. Lucia Santos, OCD on the Consecration


Letter 1: To Sr. Mary of Bethlehem

J.+ M. Pax Christi

Dear Sister Mary of Bethlehem:

Received your letter and, although I have very little time at my disposal I will answer your question which is: Is the Consecration of the world, according to the request of Our Lady, made?

On Oct. 31, 1942, His Holiness Pius XII made the Consecration. I was asked if it was made as Our Lady requested. I answered "NO," because it was not made in union with all the bishops of the world.

Later, on May 13, 1967, His Holiness Paul VI made the Consecration. I was asked if it was made as Our Lady requested. I responded "NO," for the same reason, it was not made in union with all the bishops of the world.

On May 13, 1982, His Holiness John Paul II made the Consecration. I was asked if it was made. I responded "NO." It was not made in union with all the bishops of the world.

Then this same Supreme Pontiff, John Paul II wrote to all the bishops of the world asking them to unite with him. He sent for the statute of Our Lady of Fátima -- the one from the little Chapel to be taken to Rome and on March 25, 1984 - publicly - with the bishops who wanted to unite with His Holiness, made the Consecration as Our Lady requested. They then asked me if it was made as Our Lady requested, and I said, "YES." Now it was made.

Why this urgency of God that this Consecration should be made in union with all the bishops of the world? Because this Consecration is a call for unity of all Christians - The Mystical Body of Christ - whose head is the Pope, the one, true representative of Christ on earth to whom the Lord confided the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and on this union depends the faith in the world and the charity which is the bond that must unite all of us in Christ, as that which He wants, and as He asked the Father: "As You, O Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You have sent Me. . . I in them, and You in Me; that they be made perfect in one, and the world may know that You have sent Me and have loved them as You have loved Me" (John 17:21-23).

As we see of the union depends the faith and the charity that must be the bond of our union in Christ, whose true representative on earth is the Pope.

A hug to your mother and my greetings to the rest of the family in union with prayers.

Coimbra, August 29,1989

Sr. Lucia


[Commentary: Those who say Sr. Lucia mentions only the "world" above but not "Russia" and was therefore not writing of the Collegial Consecration requested by heaven are not being realistic. They should refer to all the articles in the special issue on the Collegial Consecration in the Fátima Family Apostolate's "Fátima Family Messenger" (Oct.-Nov.-Dec. 1989). Fr. Messias Coelho, theologian and editor of the Portuguese journal "Mesagem de Fátima," answered the objection effectively from the philosophical and theological aspect. Sister Lucia, out of respect for the Pope, spoke of it the way our Holy Father did, using the word "world, " which included Russia. In the letter the Pope sent to the world's bishops, the Holy Father clarified that it was to renew both the consecration of the world (1942) and Russia (1952). This time he did so in union with the bishops.]

Letter 2: To Fr. Robert Fox

J.+ M.

Pax Christi

Rev . do Sr. P. Robert J. Fox

Recebi a sua carta e venho responder á sua pergunta: "Se a Consagração feita por João Paulo II, em 25 de Março de 1984, em união com todos os Bispos do mundo, cumpriu as codições para a coversão da Russia, segundo o pedido de Nossa Senhora em Tuy a 13 de Junho de 1929."? Sim, cumpriu, e desde aí, eu tenho dito que está feita.

E digo que não é nenhuma outra pessoa que responde por mim, sou eu quem recebe a correspondência, abre as cartas e responde.

Em união de orações

Coimbra, 3-VII-l99O

Irmã Lúcia

(signature)



TRANSLATION:

J.+ M.

The Peace of Christ



Rev. Father Robert J. Fox

I come to answer your question, "If the consecration made by Pope John Paul II on March 25, 1984 in union with all the bishops of the world, accomplished the conditions for the consecration of Russia according to the request of Our Lady in Tuy on June 13 of 1929?" Yes, it was accomplished, and since then I have said that it was made.

And I say that no other person responds for me, it is I who receive and open all letters and respond to them.

Coimbra, 3 July 1990

Sister Lucia

https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/Fatima1984.htm
​

 

Ferrara did not check his sources (neither did Bertone, for that matter). It is as simple as that. I mean this with all due respect to both persons.

 

To the person who accused me of attempting "to push my opinion:"

I am aware of a distinction between responding to questions and statements against me from "pushing" my opinion.

Moreover, I am truly sorry that people seem to have the wrong idea about me. Let me be clear: I was here to discuss with fellow and like-minded people on all things private revelation. I work intimately in this field and it is my hope that my background in it would be a positive contribution.

I shall no longer engage on this forum, though I shall keep my account open just in case.

May the Lord give you His Peace!
-Kevin J. Symonds

 

Sorry, but my decision is made. How I have been treated is utterly deplorable.

 

Is it me or are people just wacky. Brother al is strange and I know it. All of us are a little wacky but soft skinned righteous people are a trip. I just wonder, if we as Catholics are like this...the world is in big trouble. I didn't want Kev to leave. Makes me feel bad but he did have a little pompous attitude...or maybe its my arrogant side coming out.

Mr. Kevin J. Symonds this place (MOG) is pretty special. But you have to treat it like a extended family with lots of interesting/wierd aunts and uncles. There will always be that one uncle that is there, that just likes to push your buttons for the fun of it. But what we (all) do have in common... is deep faith. So if you leave, may you excel in your journey. And if you stay...enjoy the ride. You might (very well) learn something from that crazy aunt or uncle.

Your friend
Brother al

 

It seems Kevin's posts on the Charlie Johnston thread, at least, are still deleted. Perhaps they were not restored, or someone else re-deleted them?

I think those who continued to use "Kev," called Kevin a "prefect" and talked about his arrogance need to know that they sound like high-school bullies. Kevin cited facts and the teachings of the Church. I don't recall him threatening to shoot anyone in the a**, unlike some old-timers here.

I am sorry to see another theologian go. What is it about the forum these days that drives educated people away?

And let me mention the now-locked thread: I am sorry Charlie Johnston didn't weigh in. As everyone noted, he is perfectly capable of responding on his own.

 

Sorry I did call him Kev...maybe not charitable. And I did call him a tad arrogant. Sorry

Next time I will try to control myself.

fallen saint