I noticed a couple of posts saying they do not remember the Bishops of the World were asked to join with Saint John Paul in making the Consecration to Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1984. We had an Irish Parish Priest at the time in the south west of England who interestingly enough was ok with contraceptives and who did not see the point of us joining with the Pope in making the Consecration. I remember that Priest telling us from the Pulpit that he did not see the point of the Consecration; but that he was doing it in obedience to the then Bishop. He told us the Pope had asked all the Bishops in the world to join with him in making the Consecration to Immaculate Heart of Mary. And our Bishop had asked all the Priests to join in at Parish level. My mother RIP was alive at the time and I asked her if they had done the Consecration in the south east where she lived and she said not. The conclusion I came to was some Bishops had joined with Holy Father and some had not. There was no internet in those days, so we only knew what was going on if we got told by the Priest. And we did in the parish we attended at that time. I was taken by Padraigs comment that Priests who supported contraception might not be interested in the Consecration. Well Padraig, you are bang on target with that in the case of our Parish Priest at that time. No one seems to remember Pope Pius XII made at least one Consecration to Immaculate Heart of Mary in his Pontificate. And I did hear that Saint John Paul secretly Consecrated Russia to Immaculate Heart of Mary on one of his visits to Poland. I heard he had gone to a place close to the border with Russia and made the Consecration in secret after he was told it could not be done publicly in Rome. I understand there was some sort of political problem among those at the Vatican who deal with foreign countries.
With all of the complexities of various Church pronouncements over the years it begs the question as to just why Church authorities, all through the years, could not simply realize the grave importance of answering the definitive request of our Lady of Fatima (even when the Church authorities had approved it)...."to prevent THIS.....I will come to ask for the Consecration of Russia"!!!! It was placed right in the Church's own hands for action to stop what was spelled out for the future. Now, if the Church accepted this particular intervention into the world by God for the sake of the whole world....as early as 1930 (approval)....and complied, how much the world would have been spared over all of these decades of horror in so many ways! And now the same authorities quibble in their understanding of the necessity of now FURTHER interventions via our Mother....now with graver warnings going beyond man made destruction/wars and rumors of wars/spread of Communism et al....with new startling warnings of "fire falling from the skies"; "Second sun" with its sighting as the announcement of major natural destruction of the world and its populations....as punishment in justice of how far the degradation has gone. While the Church "apologizes" for its part in certain grave sins; not speaking out, etc.; where is the acknowledgements of the grave sins against the faithful for ignoring God's own orders given via His Mother since God always waits for His Church to comply first in such orders?? No wonder it has to be purified down to its most basic intended simplicity....itself to become as a child in order to enter what is promised in the the Divine Will....
...itself to become as a child in order to enter what is promised in the the Divine Will.... Love it.
Mary's request for Russia's consecration came through Sr. Lucia so the only person that can confirm it was done is her. Mark Mallett's post regarding this includes........ At first, both Sr. Lucia and John Paul II were not certain that the consecration met Heaven’s requirements. However, Sr. Lucia later confirmed in personal hand-written letters that the Consecration was in fact accepted. 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. —letter to Sr. Mary of Bethlehem, Coimbra, August 29, 1989 And in a letter to Fr. Robert J. Fox, she said: 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, July 3, 1990, Sister Lucia She affirmed this again in an interview that was both audio and video-taped with his Eminence, Ricardo Cardinal Vidal in 1993. So saying she didn't acknowledge it was accepted is more conspiracy than fact. As MM speculates a delayed and imperfect consecration, although accepted would no doubt mean a slow and imperfect change to the era of peace. The massive changes in Russia post consecration can't be denied. I believe he is correct. It's a great read whether you agree or not...https://www.markmallett.com/blog/russia-our-refuge/
The operative word in JPII's efforts' results (which included being told at the exact time NOT to mention Russia by name in what Fr. Amorth personally witnessed as the "politicians'" surrounding this Pope ordered at the time when the Pope asked 3 times if he could) that operative word being "accepted"! Not "completed". And thus, as history has shown....graces were given as in previous attempts by previous Popes' incomplete offerings....but NOT what was offered by the Mother when making God's specific request to the Church. Fr. Fox has been an oracle but not the anointed one.
Thank you for the compliment Dolours, Sorry my first post may not have been specific enough. Just to clarify: Fr. Martin could have been used by the Church without "officially" reinstating him. This could be either as an exorcist or in some other fashion. Many people are not aware of this fact but an exorcist does not need to be a priest. A layman could be given the job. The main factor is that he must be given faculties by the Bishop (or Pope I believe). Now normally laymen (or secularized priests) are not chosen as exorcists anymore, but that does not mean it never happens. Also you are right in pointing out here that people are not "static" all of their lives. We are dynamic and change. It is entirely possible Fr. Martin was much more enthusiastic in the lead up to Vatican II and hopeful for the council to effect positive changes. After all he only asked to leave the Jesuits in 1965, the year that Vatican II concluded. I am not saying this was his opinion, I do not know, but it is possible. There were many prelates who could not see the danger until well after the council started or even after it finished. As you mentioned Pope Benedict was a liberal theologian at the time of the council. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for example, who later founded the very traditional SSPX signed the documents of Vatican II after it finished. It wasn't until the council was over that the danger of what was happening in the Church became more apparent.
I do not think the Bishops even needed to travel to Rome for the consecration. It simply needed to be done by all of the Bishops of the world on the same day. Also several people have mentioned that it would be almost impossible to get all of the Bishops to agree to this. I believe it was Fr. Gruner who had the simple answer to this. He said the Pope has the power to order them to do it under pain of loss of office (possibly even excommunication). If any did not hold the ceremony they would be stripped of their position by that act of disobedience to the Pontiff and thus their refusal wouldn't matter because they would no longer be a Bishop of the Church. One thing I like about Pope Francis is that he is reasserting the power of the Papal office. A Pope is a King and Christ's Vicar on Earth. A Pope is not a tyrant and cannot command sinful things, but he would be well within his rights to order a religious consecration to be held by all of the Bishops and they would be bound to obey. This is his right and this is their duty. God would not ask for something that is impossible. In fact my personal belief is that one of the reasons Our Lady asked for the consecration to be done by the Pope with all of the Bishops is because God wanted to show the power of the Papal office and that the Bishops are not free to do as they choose. I think somewhere Sister Lucy said that it would become more and more difficult for the consecration to be done as time went by. It is possible that this was because it would appear as though the Papal power to order this had diminished as more and more Bishops gained a false "independence".
I while back I made a prediction on MOG that I sensed that Pope Benedict will be the "Bishop in white" from the Fatima prophecy as follows: “After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!'. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it' a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father'. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God. “ I say this, because of particular message within the book God Speaks Will You Listen www.godspeakswillyoulisten.org on Pope Benedict. His mission has not been completed. It reads as follows: 10/17/07 "Please read the last part of Apocalypse 12:4. It states: And the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered: that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. Now, my people read Apocalypse 12:5: And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod. And her son was taken up to God and to his throne. My church is to rule the nations spiritually through my vicar, the Pope. These verses are literally being fulfilled before your eyes. Pope Benedict XVI is the man child elected through the power of the Holy Spirit to rule with a rod of iron. My son, the Pope is my instrument being used to purify my church. His recent proclamations and decisions are setting my church on the narrow road to heaven. Once his mission is accomplished, he will be taken home to be with his Lord and Master. Then, my people you will see the fulfillment of Daniel 12:11: And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days and Apocalypse 12:6: And the woman ( or my church) fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, that they should feed her, a thousand two hundred sixty days. My people, prepare yourself for persecution, martyrdom, and fleeing to my refuges. Once Satan has been cast down from heaven, read what will take place. My word states in Apocalypse 12:13: And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman who brought forth the man child.
I just don't know what to think...mostly because I have lost faith in the truthfulness of those running the Vatican. It is so full of ungodly, currupt men. I do not trust them. I'm not saying it didn't happen...I'm just saying I'm skeptical because of their history. But thank you for providing this...pieces of the puzzle..
Yes, and I have had discussions with those very involved in the Divine Mercy Devotion from the beginning who state now that everything will change after the Warning. The Warning will straighten out a lot of mistakes made by the Church authorities, esp. those mistakes in contradiction to what Heaven had ordered and depended upon the Church to act upon. That delay, or disobedience, has effected everything. Everyone will see the Truth and what must be done to make reparation for the errors of the past. People themselves then will expect the Bishops to do what must be done.....and then as our Lady had said...."it (Consecration) will be done but it will be late....and (only) THEN (can) there will be the Era of Peace". I believe that all of the Bishops were ordered to be involved because the Father desires to have the Mother to be recognized in this time to be the one who has been the instrument for this new era of her Immaculate Heart, giving her the honor deserved through her continuous Fiat. And so all of her priest sons must be the first ones to demonstrate this great mystery before the faithful and they are led by their individual Bishops. The Church must show its solidarity as a body to the world this intention of the Father before the unbelievers come to the same belief and conclusion since she is to be held on high by the entire world and recognized for her blessedness.
I believe the topic of there being a false Sister Lucia has been discussed before on this forum. There is no way that the Sister Lucia who 'confirmed that the consecration was accepted' could have been the same Sister Lucia who was the Fatima visionary. View attachment 6246 More images and discussion at this link: http://traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/g12htArt2_TwoSisterLucys.htm
I wonder why they never released the video?... Evaristo claims that the second interview was audio and video-taped in the presence of himself and eight other witnesses who allegedly attended, including a Cardinal. The alleged audio and video tapes have not, however, been made available to the public. Evaristo further claims that this second interview was conducted on one hours notice to the Mother Prioress of the Convent, after the Cardinal (His Eminence Ricardo Cardinal Vidal of Cebu, Philippines) spontaneously decided that a group of nine people, including Evaristo, should jump into cars and pay Sister Lucy a visit late at night with a video camera and a tape recorder! We are told that this hastily assembled crowd and its equipment was admitted into a cloistered convent at 10:30 p.m. to interview an 86-year-old nun who would normally be asleep at that hour.http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr57/cr57pg03.asp
Looks like the same person to me. People do change when they get older. http://www.businessinsider.com/then-and-now-pictures-of-marriages-that-lasted-a-lifetime-2012-6?IR=T
Those pictures actually only help to confirm that the 2 Sister Lucias were totally different people. If one looks closely at the individual features of the married couples in that article linked to above, it is clear that the shapes of noses, distance between the noses and lips, shapes of their smiles, shapes and heights of their chins etc etc always remain the same over the years. A person cannot look totally different if there has been no injury or plastic surgery.
There was no requirement for parishes to take part in the 1984 Consecration, Bishops were required (I believe) to make the Consecration in their own cathedrals. I attended the Consecration in Nottingham Cathedral, UK but there was absolutely no publicity about it in the parishes before it occurred. I only discovered that it was happening when I read an article in The Times on the morning of the day of the Consecration, no member of my family had heard anything about it either. The article stated that many (a majority?) of the English bishops objected to something that they deemed to arise from a questionable claim of apparitions and at least one described the Consecration as 'superstition'. Russia was not mentioned by name and I believe it to be highly probable that many bishops did not take part or did so with the same reservations confided by some of the English bishops to The Times reporter, a notoriously progressive Catholic called Clifford Longley.
