The two different options / time lines are absolutely and clearly outlined by Our Lady, and it is entirely obvious. We can see this from the "if" and "if not" used in the second secret, marked by me in bold. This is simple boolean logic. Timeline one If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; Timeline two if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. Promises regardless of timelines 1. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. 2. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, 3. and she shall be converted, 4. and a period of peace will be granted to the world. Clearly we entered timeline two. Also, I love this discussion. No offenses taken, please do not take any. I also believe that the consecration was done, but too late as well for many reasons. Which is #2 of the promises. And from that, we witnessed the period of peace and conversion, which are promises #3 and #4. The conversion and period of peace would have been greater in timeline one.
I should also add that the deadline for the requests of Our Lady to be "heeded" seems to have been before the second world war, which started in 1939. Because after this communism spread. But is also indicated by Our Lady in the second secret. So we can say that the chastisements began in 1939, and are still ongoing. The war is going to end: but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the Pontificate of Pope Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father.
Perhaps then our main divergence is in the chronological order of prophetic events... I maintain my position on this chronological order: 1st - consecration; 2nd - convertion; 3rd - peace. I maintain my position that there will be no conversion of Russia without a consecration exactly in accordance with what was requested by Heaven, in the same way that there will be no time of peace if Russia does not recognize the true faith through the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
In my opinion, the year 1960 seems to be the deadline for the consecration of Russia in order to avoid all the punishments predicted in Fátima. For several reasons: it was the date that Sr. Lúcia wrote on the two envelopes of the third secret of Fátima "by express order of Our Lady"; because it was the date mentioned by Sr. Lúcia in the interview with Fr. Agustin Fuentes; because it was the date on which the text of the secret would make the most sense; because it was the time when all the bishops of the world were gathered at the Second Vatican Council and all together could carry out the consecration of Russia. Envelope 1: Envelope 2:
There are a few questions which need to be asked based on your position IMO. 1. What are you basing your position for the sequential order on? Because if this is true, then the Immaculate Heart of Our Lady Triumphing should be the first thing to happen, because it is listed prior to the other 3 promises. Which would mean that her Triumph is not contingent on the consecration, conversion, or period of peace. As well, it says "and" between the 2nd and 3rd promises, as well as between the 3rd and 4th promises, not "then". Which is not indicative of a sequence. 2. If the initial consecration has not happened, and the latest date for Our Lady's requests to be heeded was in 1960 as you suggest, what makes you believe that a perfect conversion of Russia to the Catholic faith would happen, and that a perfect peace would happen there after? We failed to meet the deadline, so now we are in timeline 2 and only the promises take effect now. The promises are not contingent on the actions of church authorities or the laity after 1960. 3. If a perfect consecration were to happen, what makes you believe that this would set off the sequence of events? Because there are two parts to Our Lady's requests. One being the consecration by the church authorities, the other being the reparation by the faithful. If the faithful have not met the threshold for reparation and repentance, the consecration would not be enough.
This makes a lot of sense, at the same time it is obvious that the errors of Russia were already spreading around the world. Perhaps if the consecration was done in 1960, the last possible year, these errors would have reversed course. So it appears the chastisements began in 1939, but could have been reversed if the consecration and reparations were done by 1960.
1. Our Lady said that Her Immaculate Heart will triumph in the end, I didn't invent that. Once again, don't complicate what is simple and clear. In fact, when certain conditions are placed for something to triumph, it is normal that these conditions need to be met for that triumph to occur. The Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary should not be understood as something abstract and intangible that happens without it being widely perceived by Russia and humanity in general. This makes no sense, that is, the Triumph of the Immaculate of Mary, a prophecy accompanied by one of the greatest miracles in the history of Christianity, witnessed by tens of thousands of people, cannot be an imperceptible concept that lends itself to different opinions... Russia and the world will recognize this unequivocally, the Immaculate Heart of Mary will be venerated in churches alongside the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
2 I believe it will happen later - but this is just my opinion - when the consecration is carried out exactly as God asked for it and with the objective with which God asked for it. For example, the last consecration carried out by Francis, in addition to not being a consecration of Russia (but of Ukraine and Russia), does not explicitly mention the purpose of Russia's conversion. It will no longer be possible to avoid the chastisements (although I believe they may have been largely mitigated by the imperfect consecrations that took place before) and perhaps it will be the suffering caused by these chastisements thatl creates the perfect atmosphere among Christians to carry out this consecration of the country most responsible for these chastisements.
3. This is also true, Our Lady's request had two parts, one intended for the Holy Father and the bishops and the other for the faithful. Perhaps the popes never obtained the necessary grace to blindly obey what was asked of them by Heaven because the faithful also did not respond sufficiently to what was asked of them either... Normally in periods of great suffering, people turn more to God. I don't know how they will respond in the future, but it seems clear to me that humanity is about to experience great suffering. Wasn't it Pope JPii who said something like the Church will be renewed again by blood?
Excuse me for interupting this interesting discussion. My interest in the Fatima phenomenon was somewhat sidelined after I learned about the two Sr. Lucys theory. So I resolved to come back to it when I have more time to research the whole thing more thoroughly. However, in learning about the 2 Sr. Lucys I seem to remember some discussion about this 1960 date. Someone was arguing that Sr. Lucy had said that Our Lady didn't specify the date of 1960 but that Sr. Lucy put the date 1960 because she thought that the contents of the letter would be more obvious or understandable by this date. But this writing on the envelope - "by the express order of Our Lady" seems to prove that Our Lady Herself ordered it to be revealed in 1960. This is a big deal because if it was Our Lady then Pope John XXIII contravened Her instructions. What do the readable portions of envelopes say in English in their entirety?
Original in Portuguese: Por expressa ordem de Nossa Senhora, este envelope só pode ser aberto em 1960 por Sua Excelência o Senhor Cardeal Patriarca de Lisboa ou por Sua Excelência Reverendíssima o Senhor Bispo de Leiria. Translated into English: By express order of Our Lady, this envelope can only be opened in 1960 by His Excellency the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon or His Excellency the Bishop of Leiria. Nowhere does it say that it should be made public in 1960 or any other date.
You are correct, the Triumph does happen in the end. Yet it is listed first in the promises. Another indicator that the way events unfold is not necessarily in the order listed. Also, I outlined above in a simple way Our Lady's message. IMO you are complicating it and say that I am complicating it because I do not agree with your assertions. The point I make about the use of "and" instead of "then" between the 2nd, 3rd and 4th promises is valid. Our Lady places no conditions on the promises. She states directly and clearly that these 4 promises are going to happen, no where does she say they are contingent on anything. The only things that were conditional, according to Our Lady, were the two timelines. One happens "if" we heeded her requests, the other "if not". Since we are now in the second timeline, the promises will take hold, and thank God for that. Because if it were contingent on our actions we would fail again. I never once said that the TOTIHOM is something abstract or intangible. I believe "in the end" is a double entendre. That the TOTIHOM happens after Jesus comes. But also the last of the three promises happen in the end times. Clearly after Jesus comes Truth of everything, including Our Lady, will be widely perceived by Russia and humanity. Agreed, I never said otherwise. This is in relation to a quote from Sr. Lucia of Jesus in 1936. Which is prior to both 1939 and 1960. Which indicates it was contingent on the fulfillment of the requests of Our Lady at that time. “I want My whole Church to acknowledge that Consecration [of Russia] as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, so that later on it will put the Devotion to My Mother’s Immaculate Heart beside the Devotion to My Sacred Heart.” (Our Lord to Sister Lucia, May 1936) https://fatima.org/news-views/the-feast-of-the-most-sacred-heart-of-jesus-and-the-message-of-fatima/ This quote of Jesus is not absolute prophecy but contingent prophecy. Because Jesus says "I want My whole Church to acknowledge" not "My whole Church will acknowledge". It can still be fulfilled, but not until the TOTIHOM.
Just a small clarification that perhaps I didn't express my interpretation of Sr. Lucia's manuscript well. I interpret three of Our Lady's promises that I mentioned above in a sequential line and I imagine them happening immediately, almost simultaneously (but I admit that I could be wrong and some future facts could make me change my opinion, as has already happened in relation to other issues on the matter of Fatima prophecies). However I don't understand the promise of the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in that sequential line of interpretation I mentioned above. From my objective reading in Portuguese, what I understand from the narrative of the text is that Our Lady announces the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary that will take place at the end of the problems she describes before and then the three promises that follow are the summary description of what this triumph will be (or how it will happen). That's how I read it... If I'm reading it wrong, I apologize for doing so publicly here.
With all due respect, InVeritatem, have you noticed that none of these conspiracists of the "2 Lucias" theory belong to the family of the visionary of Fátima, to her group of friends, acquaintances, they did not live in Portugal while Sr. Lucia lived there (or both sisters...), they didn't go to the Carmelo in Coimbra then, not even close to the country, they don't speak Portuguese and they know very little about the country and its culture? Portugal is a small enough country to make this theory have no sense. Coimbra's Carmel is less than an hour away from Fátima, it's not quite like going from Miami to San Francisco. Sister Lúcia had a huge family living in the region, she even had a niece who also became a nun (she has also passed away). And no one noticed anything! It took someone from the other side of the Atlantic to discover from there something so obvious....
This is the thing, what does "In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph." mean? For me there is a clear break once Our Lady states this. Because she is going from speaking about the possible chastisement directly to the 4 promises. Whether or not the consecration/reparations were accepted. Whether or not the chastisement happened. These 4 things were going to happen. The period of peace and the conversion would likely have been very different between the two timelines. But either way they were going to happen. Now the bizarre thing to me with this, is that the peace was going to be temporary regardless of whether or not the consecration/reparation was accepted. This hardly sounds like a Triumph. Triumph means victory, not temporary victory. Which likely indicates this period of peace was a part of God's plan. "In the end" suggests finality as well, completion. The end of what exactly? The completion of what? So I believe that it refers to the end times. In the end, as in once satan and his ilk are thrown into the pit, the TOTIHOM happens. I believe it is the fulfillment of Genesis 3:15. Unless there is another "end" to consider.
There is another end to consider. Her triumph is for the end of an era, not the end of the world. I feel the triumph is also about the unification of all Christian Churches.
This is a possibility I have considered. Personally, I lean more towards the end times for several reasons. The first is I believe we are seeing a lot of end times prophecy come to pass. The messages of other seers have conflated a new heaven and earth with a new era, which is a reference to revelation 21:1. Also, SJPII, PBXVI & Sr. Lucia all believed the messages had to do with the end times. St. Faustina believed the Divine Mercy related to the end times. We also have the prophecy of the Mother of Blessed Carlos Acutis who said all prophecy would be fulfilled once he is canonized, which relates to Daniel 9:24. Some people believe that there is a 1000 year era of peace that comes after tribulation, like on count down to the kingdom. But this is a form of premillennialism. The Catholic church holds to Amillennialism. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/the-rapture-question/
I can't interpret it that way, sorry... Within this question there are actually two, for those trying to interpret all of this. 1. What does "in the end" mean? That is when. 2. What does “my Immaculate Heart will triumph” mean? What the Immaculate Heart of Mary really is and how it can triumph. I confess that I have spent a lot more time thinking about the second, about its meaning, than the first.
Ok I get it. So Our Lady ordered the letter to be opened in 1960 but not that its contents be revealed. I think the later Sr. Lucy said that it was up to the Pope or Cardinals to decide on whether the contents were to be revealed. Out of interest what is the translation of the text on envelope number 2?
