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

The messages of Fatima were delivered by the Virgin Mary, but they were ultimately sent by God Himself. I don't think they can or should be referred to as "obsessions" and if men in the Church kept a message from God away from the laity, I'm rightfully upset, regardless of those mens' excuses. There are souls that will be lost that God intended to save with this message.

 

I've been wondering, Joe, why would the Vatican bother issuing this statement and why now. There has been no shortage of allegations over the years about the truth being withheld. The latest allegations (I'm not suggesting that there's no truth to the allegations) could have been given the same treatment and eventually they would have been forgotten or lumped in with all the others. So why issue this statement now? Could it be that this controversy is a convenient diversion. There's no shortage of other issues that could do with some clarification or explanation from the Vatican. For example, issuing a denial couched in a statement that suggests either the priest or the journalist is lying draws attention away from Cardinal Kasper's push for the posthumous rehabilitation of Martin Luther and the Pope attending a celebration of the Reformation. I can think of one or two other matters that the Vatican will be glad to deflect attention from by issuing this statement.

 

Once again you may be onto something. My concern - or as others like to put it, my obsession- stems from Sr Lucia's revelation that Jesus wants full recognition and credit for victory to be given to His Blessed Mother in Her Triumph. I don't think this can attract full compliance without full disclosure from the Church. I don't actually think about this much at all. Perhaps I should. Meantime I just get on with what I can do.

 

I have to 'fess up here, Joe, that it was I who used the word obsession. It isn't fair to blame others for that. I could and should have used more moderate language, and I apologise for using that word.

 

No worries. Cheers.

 

It might be nice to ask the "Press Office" if any of them themselves have read the Third Secret so that what they issue rather willy nilly at times can be verified or do they just issue forth whatever is given by "he who must be obeyed"! We already know of the desire of C. Bertone to relegate Fatima to the past and those many other interviews and later apparitions of Sr. Lucia that speak to that refer to and better explain the control over the visionary by her higher authorities and her requested obedience.

 

Communiqué on articles regarding the “Third Secret of Fatima”, 21.05.2016

Vatican City, 21 May 2016 – Several articles have appeared recently, including declarations attributed to Professor Ingo Dollinger according to which Cardinal Ratzinger, after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (which took place in June 2000), had confided to him that the publication was not complete.

In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares “never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima”, clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter “are pure inventions, absolutely untrue”, and he confirms decisively that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”.

http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2016/05/21/160521b.html

 

Hi to you all,
I am new here. I hope to learn much and share also!
I think the whole secret was released in terms of the actual vision, but maybe the interpretation that Our Lady gave is the issue. I wonder if the Popes were of the opinion that they couldnt be sure the words were of supernatural origin. Its also interesting that the nuns in Coimbra released details of the other vision Sr Lucia had concerning the massive flooding from what seemed like a comet if I remeber correctly. Its in their biography of her. That vision seemed intimately linked to the third secret.

 

without getting too conspiratorial - the publication may be complete but is the secret? Are they saying that is all we are going to be told? The format seems more legal than Pontifical.

 

“the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”.

Just too neat for their purpose. Could as easily mean to put on notice those interested in pursuing things further that there WILL BE NO OTHER PUBLICATION on the subject.... so don't bother them again!

Well....Fr. Malachi Martin who did read the Third Secret would beg to differ. And another who will remain nameless who also read the Third Secret and sworn to secrecy on the exact details referred to Akita message for comparison to Third Secret.

Re: C. Ratzinger:

Only months after Bishop Ito approved the Akita apparitions, Cardinal Ratzinger was interviewed on November 11, 1984 by Jesusmagazine, a publication of the Pauline Sisters. Within this 1984 interview (titled "Here is Why the Faith is in Crisis"), published to millions in Italy, Cardinal Ratzinger acknowledged that he had read the Third Secret and that it speaks of "The dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian, and therefore the world, and also the importance of the last times." Cardinal Ratzinger said that the Third Secret had been suppressed since 1960 “to avoid confusing religious prophecy with sensationalism.” He also said, "But the things contained in this Third Secret correspond to what is announced in Scripture and are confirmed by many other Marian apparitions...." Howard Dee, former Philippine ambassador to the Vatican, stated that "Cardinal Ratzinger personally confirmed to me that these two messages, of Fatima and Akita, are essentially the same.” (Inside the Vatican magazine, 1998) Therefore, when Cardinal Ratzinger mentioned in his interview that the Third Secret corresponds to "other Marian apparitions," this reference includes the Akita apparitions. But in a subsequent publication of the same Ratzinger interview in the book The Ratzinger Report, this reference ("But the things contained in this Third Secret correspond to what is announced in Scripture and are confirmed by many other Marian apparitions....")was mysteriously deleted. Apparently, Cardinal Ratzinger had said too much.

 

Welcome Bill!

I need too read that book...sounds interesting.

 

I wouldn't mind reading it too. I wonder if there's a Kindle version.

 

I am sure this has been answered before, but does anyone here know if there is any truth to the claim that Our Lady of Fatima would be appearing at Fatima for a seventh time? Thanks.

 

on the third secret...for your discernment.

Very interesting!

 

When I searched the web to see if I could find anything about the book that Bill Simpson referred to in his post, I came across this: http://www.pastorinhos.com/_wp/wp-content/uploads/MemoriasI_en.pdf

In Sr. Lucia's account of the first apparition on page 176, she quotes Our Lady:
“I have come to ask you to come here for six months in succession,
on the 13th day, at this same hour. Later on, I will tell you
who I am and what I want. Afterwards, I will return here yet a seventh
time.”

According to a footnote at the bottom of the page: This “seventh time”, refers to the 16th of June, 1921, on the eve of Lucia’s departure to Vilar de Oporto. It was an apparition with a personal message for Lucia, which, therefore, was not revealed.

 

I'm a little surprised to see only limited comments on the Vatican communique at http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2016/05/21/160521b.html that conflicts so totally with what a named journalist reports on http://www.onepeterfive.com/on-fatima-story-pope-emeritus-benedict-xvi-breaks-silence/

Unlike the 'onepeterfive' report, the Vatican statement is anonymous and only 'quotes' the Pope emeritus in a slightly unclear way. For example:

In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares “never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima”

Ok, the anonymous statement specifically quotes Benedict here but, of course, Benedict may no longer remember the discussion that Fr Dollinger insists took place.

clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter “are pure inventions, absolutely untrue”

This is a much less clear statement. The statement MAY be quoting Benedict but, equally, they could be the thoughts or words of the person or persons who wrote the communique.

and he confirms decisively that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”.

As has already been pointed out, this might only mean that nothing further is going to be published.


All this is why I much prefer direct communication favoured by Pope Francis who allows himself to be asked difficult questions and answers them head on. The type of anonymous 'announcement' such as this one about Fatima raises more questions than answers.

 

Google Translate version. It seems the Vatican press release was refuted by Fr. Dollinger:

https://www.lastampa.it/2016/05/23/...nde-a-bxvi-3u8wtEBIJAyy2HccMwv2JK/pagina.html
Fatima forever. Dollinger answers BXVI
If you thought that the saga of the Third Secret and its appurtenances were closed and sealed by the statement from the Vatican press office with the statements attributed to Pope Ratzinger, well, you were wrong.



Immediately from the US site OnePeterFive that had rekindled the age-old question - Third Secret all, not completely, or some adjoining not made known - responded to by return of post.



In short, the last chapter was this: a German professor of theology, Ingo Dollinger, long-date friend of Joseph Ratzinger, said by telephone, and in German in Maike Hickson that Ratzinger had told him, long ago, that not everything the Third Secret was published. The details can be found HERE them. Saturday, May 21 The Vatican press office published a communiqué among other things, said: "In this regard, the retired Pope Benedict XVI announces" that he had never talked to prof. Dollinger about Fatima ', clearly states that the utterances attributed to Professor Dollinger on this issue "are pure inventions, absolutely untrue" and definitely confirms "the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is full' '.



The statement was dissected in all its nuances to OnePeterFive (and probably a number of other sites that specialize in Fatima). But the term "invention" has provoked an indignant reaction.



"Maike Hickson, who personally called Father Dollinger, attests to the truth of what is reported by the conversation ... .Also Dr. Hickson this morning telephoned Father Dollinger, with the news of the Vatican statement, and on that occasion he emphatically and clearly it confirmed its previous observations. In other words, he confirmed his version of events. "

(Dr. Maike Hickson, who personally called Fr. Dollinger, attests to the truth of what she recounted from That conversation. Inasmuch as the Vatican statement Accuses her of "attributing" Which statements are "inventions" to Fr. Dollinger, it is false . She did not imagine the conversation she had with Fr. Dollinger, she reported it, and I stand by her testimony with full confidence in her integrity, both as a journalist and as a faithful daughter of the Church. Further, this morning Dr. Hickson telephoned Father Dollinger with the news of the Vatican statement, and at that time he again confirmed to her and emphatically Clearly His previous remarks. In other words, he stood by His story).

Word against word, and any "missing" documents, if they have not disappeared over the years, found in the Sacred Palaces.



So, even if there had been some sleight of hand over the decades, I do not think we'll ever know. Especially if any "revelation" concern the Church, Council etc. etc. Besides the contents of Sister Lucia room it is under lock and key; and even from there it seems to me that there are not expected sensational discoveries. At least in our time.



The saga was allowed to continue ad infinitum. Not, however, forget that in spite of what anyone thinks anticlerical, the Church does not like private revelations, even if accompanied by extraordinary phenomena such as Fatima. Pius XI when he received letters that announced otherworldly revelations, commented, more or less: "Well!They say they are His Vicar. If you have something to say, I could lighthouse to know me ... ". And the secretary of a "fatimista" as Pope Saint John Paul II once told us, in relation to the Third Secret: "The problem is to understand what Our Lady said, and what he told Sister Lucia." We look forward to the next episode ....

 

The quote from the Pope em. in the Fatima crusader article cited by 1Peter5 in German:
"Wirklich gebt das der etwas"
For me as a German and reader of Benedikt' works since 4 decades:
it does not make any sense as it stands and would be the first non sense sentence I ever heard or read of Benedikt.
I cannot comment on other aspects.

Dr M Hickson is a German, so well aware of the above issues.

 

Suppose everyone has seen this latest article on the topic:

Fatima: the prophecy, the envelope, the missing words, and the denial of Ratzinger

http://www.lastampa.it/2016/05/23/v...-ratzinger-LWrA1Q2PqlLkv37zqn3xxH/pagina.html

 

This thread wont be going away anytime soon.

Things are only going to heat up....

Interview: Vatican Expert Marco Tosatti on Fatima
Image source)

Editor’s Note: Marco Tosatti, Italian journalist and Vatican expert, wrote in Italy’s La Stampa concerning Dr. Maike Hickson’s recent article on Fr. Ingo Dollinger, Cardinal Ratzinger, and the Third Secret of Fatima. Dr. Hickson then reached out to Tosatti — himself an author of a book about Fatima — who agreed to the following interview.http://www.onepeterfive.com/interview-vatican-expert-marco-tosatti-on-fatima/

Maike Hickson (MH): You have written already in 2002 a book on the Third Secret of Fatima, entitled Il Segreto Non Svelato (“The Unrevealed Secret”). The title itself indicates that you had already then come to the conclusion that the full Third Secret of Fatima was not published in June of 2000. Is this true? Do you believe that the text that was actually published in 2000 is an authentic part of the Third Secret of Fatima, and if yes, why?

Marco Tosatti (MT): Yes. I think that what we have read is authentic; it seems to remind us that Sister Lucy in person acknowledged the authenticity of the pages we have seen. And precisely from what we have seen we can still have some doubts.

MH: What are the main reasons why you came to the conclusion that the full Third Secret has not yet been revealed?

MT: In the document we have seen, at a certain point the narration stops with an “et cetera.” First, it seems strange to me that the Virgin would use these words. And then we have never seen the part of the Secret to which the “et cetera” is related.

Then there is the problem of the envelopes; it would be too long to enter in this issue now, but there are problems either with the measure of the envelopes sent from Portugal to Rome, and then with the envelope on which Pope John XXIII wrote his personal comment on the Secret, after having read it.

And then there is a conversation had by a scholar, Solideo Paolini, with Archbishop Capovilla, who was the personal secretary of Pope John XXIII. Solideo Paolini declared:

“I met Archbishop Loris Francesco Capovilla on July 5th 2006 in Sotto il Monte [name of a town]at his house. Since this very first meeting, during our private conversation, he made me implicitly but unequivocally understand something about the existence of two texts, or at least about certain things not being revealed regarding the Third Secret. When I asked him the question [about the Secret], he literally answered: ‘No, look, since it was officially revealed, I must abide by what was declared in the official documents, even if I may know something more.’ And at that point, when he said those words ‘even if I may know something more,’ he smiled ironically. Since I was there, I was able to see from his gestures that it was clear: there is something more than what was revealed during the Holy Year 2000 [by the Vatican]. But what Archbishop Capovilla said to me during a phone call was an even more dead giveaway. When he sent me his answers [by mail to questions I had sent to him], I called him on the phone, and he gave me the answer to a question of mine which literally was: ‘So, Your Excellency, as regards the two dates in which Pope Paul VI (would have) read the Third Secret, March 27th 1965 and June 27th 1963, which are confirmed by different sources, are they both correct because, in fact, there exist two texts regarding the Third Secret?’ I asked him this point-blank. He remained silent for a moment, thinking about it, and then he said to me, literally: ‘Precisely so (Per l’appunto)’. This is the most explicit confirmation that anyone could give.”

These words seemed to me a confirmation of what I had written in my book.

MH: You yourself reported recently on my own report about Father Ingo Dollinger who claims that then-Cardinal Ratzinger told him that he did not publish the whole secret. Would you have any possible explanation as to why they did not publish the full text? Could there be some kind of mental reservation involved?

MT: I will tell you what the personal secretary of Saint John Paul II [Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz] told me once, when I asked about Fatima. He answered: “The problem is to understand what the Virgin said, and what Sister Lucy said.” My personal opinion is that all the problems related to Fatima, the Popes, the Vatican are centered on this question. Did Sister Lucy add, even involuntarily, something to the message? And what? I think that is the element which has made so many people in the Church wary about the global phenomenon.

MH: Do you yourself consider it important still for us Catholics today to find out the full truth about the Third Secret?

MT: Yes, of course. When you have a revelation supported by such facts….

MH: What is your own finding about the possible content of that part of the Third Secret that is still unpublished?

MT: Really, I have no idea.

MH: Do you have any idea of how we could achieve that Rome finally releases the full secret?

MT: I think that, as far as the Holy See is concerned, the problem is closed. I do not expect in my lifetime to see anything more on the part of the Vatican.