It is interesting that there appears to be a form of encoded symbolism in Sacred Scripture that later leads to the understanding of dogmas when they are fully revealed. For example, the appearance of the three angels to Abraham at the Oak of Mamre can be seen as a prefiguration of the beatific vision of the Trinity. Christ being recognized in the breaking of the bread points to the Eucharist. The Ark of the Covenant seen in heaven in the Book of Revelation prefigures the dogma of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. Likewise, the Woman Clothed with the Sun in Revelation 12 prefigures the future dogma of Mary as Mediatrix of all graces, symbolized by the distribution of the rays of the sun. Revelation 11:19 “And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.”
I got Antonio Socci's book and I'm reading it, now. It is clear and easy to read and replete with information. Socci is obviously an orthodox Catholic and not ashamed to admit it. He seems a very intelligent, yet humble, journalist and is meticulous about remaining objective. He admits that he originally thought the Vatican had released the complete Third Secret in 2000, but gradually changed his mind, believing that there is, as the title of his book suggests, a 'Fourth Secret', which is more accurately described as a text of Our Lady's words to the children, which did not accompany the description of the Vision, which is what was released. Very impressive is his report of an interview of St John Paul II (later released as part of Crossing the Threshold of Hope from 1994), which indicated that the then Pope did not consider that the Third Secret had been fulfilled by that time, whereas the Vatican in 2000 tried to put the 'spin' on things that the Third Secret was really a reference to the attempted assassination of JPII in 1981...and thus safely in the past. Obviously, Socci at the time of writing this book had no idea of what was to come with the Bergoglio and Prevost papacies, but already he is hinting, around page 70, at the possibility of internal disharmony or negligence within the highest levels of The Church as being the hidden Secret. That's where I'm at, around a third of the way through. And no mention yet of Father Malachi!
Despite the fact that the apostasy foretold in the Third Secret is, in part, harmful to the faith, it is worth emphasizing that the very fact that a supernatural revelation foresees it constitutes, to a certain extent, proof that the Church is indeed a divine institution. This, in turn, undermines the atheist thesis that it is merely a multinational enterprise sustained by people’s fear. The Third Secret speaks openly of the negligence of the Church’s own pastors and, ultimately, of the Roman See, which can, in some measure, shake the principle of papal authority so often portrayed by atheists as nothing more than a structure of power and economic exploitation.
These are excellent points Luan. I hadn't thought of it in quite that way but it is comforting to remind ourselves that all of this has been foreseen and accounted for..
Yes, such a marvelous gift of intimate revelation! The two companions on the road to Emmaus? One tradition strongly suggests the second person was Mary, the wife of Cleopas, making them Jesus's aunt and uncle, according to this YouTube video, this Archdiocese article, and this Christianity.com article. Luke's Gospel names only Cleopas, but other biblical clues and early church tradition point to his wife as the other traveler. One day we'll know for sure! Such a precious journey and climax!
AI analysis of this pic (GROK3) Authentic 1990s photograph of Malachi Martin (left) assisting at Rama Coomaraswamy's ordination. Martin is wearing priestly/mon signor-style vestments with dark red accents, not cardinal's scarlet attire. The image provides no visual evidence that Martin was a bishop or cardinal. More details can be shared. Overall the analysis seems plausible IMHO, no hallucinations detected - something AI is prone to and can get things utterly wrong
Agree. I read some of his novels (Windswept house, last Pope) but more importantly: 3 Popes, seemingly not a novel. Surprised he "predicted" some of the deplorable developments quite accurately.
Why would Fr. Martin be wearing Monsignor garments if he was participating in an ordination ceremony? If the photo is authentic, it doesn't make sense. Only Bishops can peŕform ordination.
Fr. Rama Coomaraswamy ON THE VALIDITY OF MY ORDINATION "It is virtually impossible for Bishop Gaston Lopez to have skipped a page at the time of my ordination – especially as there were several bishops and priests present. Every detail of the ordination rite was in fact followed.." From the previous post: ..this group of men (present at the ordination) believed that Fr. Martin was actually Cardinal Martin. Fr. Rama Coomaraswamy in the above mentioned excerpt: wouldn't he have mentioned a Cardinal? The photo under discussion has been taken at this (first) ordination, obviously Fr MM has been present wearing white rochet (lace-trimmed) over it for the ceremony. The ordination itself was performed by the bishop in full liturgical clothes. My personal view: I'd be happy for a bishop MM or higher, just trying to get the evidence right.
Totally agree, sorry if my post seems like it is being short with you. Not my intention. I don't know the whole story but there were allegedly two ordinations. IIRC, supposedly hands were not placed on Fr. Rama's head for his first ordination. So a second ordination took place with MM. But it looks like a Bishop was there also for the second ordination.
Happy New Year to you Pax Prima Please be assured Not at any time has there been any reaction anywhere near to the one you mentioned. Quite on the contrary: your post prompted me to have another look and finally read Fr. Rama Coomaraswamy's own statement in full, see above. Ultimately you have been crucial to get nearer to the truth. Thank you.
Socci finally mentioned Fr Malachi's contribution concerning the Third Secret, mentioning an interview that he did with Art Bell in '98. He does not dismiss what he said, but considers that there is little concrete supportive evidence for Fr Malachi's access to the secret, although what he said seems to be broadly in line with other descriptions of the concealed part. Socci is very conscientious and a stickler for confirmative and supportive evidence. I consider him quite a good 'detective' and I think he makes a very good case that only part of the Third Secret was revealed in 2000, because there were two components to it, the one that was revealed, describing the vision that was given by Our Lady and the other of a statement by Her, beginning with a comment that 'In Portugal the Dogma of the Faith will be preserved' followed by an 'etc', which is all that we certainly know of. I'm beginning to think that this implies that there will be countries in the Church in which the Dogma will not be preserved. With our knowledge of events since Socci wrote the book, this makes me think of Synodality, with some national synods apostasising. In general, the suspicion is of a terrible Secret, describing wholesale apostasy in The Church, but beginning from the very top downwards and also accompanied by apocalyptic predictions, but the latter do not seem to be the reason for the continued concealment of this second part of The Secret. This apostasy seems to be happening before our very eyes, God help us. I highly recommend this book.
Thanks for updating us on this. I never read the book, but got a synopsis on it and read parts of the interviews. Where I came to the same conclusion, largely in part to what Socci "discovered". The Lord works in mysterious ways. I think that MM never read the vision but did read the "terrible secret".
Reading further, Socci really lambasts John XXIII, and Paul VI for dismissing the Third Secret and hiding it from the Faithful and the world. He is less critical of JPII and Benedict XVI, who seemed to have tried to hint at the real message, but were probably constrained by the actions and words of their predecessors. Of course, Francis made little or no mention, as far as I am aware, of a Message from Our Lady that She wished published 66 years ago and I have no feeling that Leo is going to oblige. In the case of the latter two, it could be that they were whom we were to be warned against!
I think I've already written about Saint Leopold Bogdan Mandić here. People may not know that much about him, but he was even more popular in Italy than Padre Pio, during the war 150,000 people came to his funeral in Padua in 1942. In the end, when Pope Francis declared a Jubilee of Mercy, their bodies were exhibited in Rome, i.e. the Vatican, in 2016, perfectly preserved. To make no further ado, he was known for similar gifts as Padre Pio. What I remember is that in 2018 I came across a conservative website, there was a letter from Saint Leopold Bogdan Mandić to the USA, to a friend, and there it was mentioned something like that the USA would lose its faith. Or be careful not to lose your faith... When you look at the West, I would say that the USA is among the most religious countries in the West, but now that I look at the full message of Fatima, it makes sense. It is possible that in the USA the dogma of faith will not be preserved in the future.
The only part we know of the the dictated Third Secret Message to the children from Our Lady is the first sentence, "In Portugal the Faith will always be preserved etc". What was revealed in 2000 was only a description of the vision shown to the children. The actual message from Our Lady, which consists of about twenty more lines (the 'etc') has still not been revealed.
