Exactly, as well, we have had numerous apparitions of Our Lady since then which have further developed the message of Fatima. The running theme is that chastisements are coming, but they can be mitigated or stopped by means of repentance, fasting, consecration and prayer. I would suggest that the over-arching theme of the messages from Marian apparitioners of today imply that the chastisements are here and are going to get worse. That the call to repentance, fasting, consecration and fasting have grown greater. Yes many of them are likely false, but even removing the ones which appear to be false, they still hold this general consensus. Also, there appear to be more apparitions today than ever before. Which to me implies that either there is a lot of mental illness, or that these times are very serious. The eternity of many souls appears to be at stake.
I was 12 years old in 1960. By 1963 I had become a Catholic and a couple of my friends told me that the Fatima Secret had not yet been released. I had no idea then what that was.
Freemasons are capable of all sorts of atrocities. How can we not believe that they are infiltrated even in our own Church. Just look at our Church today. Freemasons are everywhere. Maybe even in this forum. It is quite possible that Sister Lucia was switched. The Fatima secret was so important. It should not have been kept a secret. The 1960’s became a tumultuous time in the world. I blame the Freemasons.
Is it true that Sister Lúcia wanted to speak to Paul VI during their joint visit to Fatima in 1967, but he refused?
As I said previously. I do believe there were 2 Sr. Lucy's and I hope the truth comes out some day soon. For me, the differences are so pronounced that there is no question in my mind that there were two different Sr. Lucy's. I don't need facial recognition technology or forensic experts to tell me this, although it is pleasing that what I know to be true due to my God-given visual acuity and discernment is confirmed by such sources. The eyes are completely different. The area above the upper lip is completely different. There is some similarity in the noses but they are discernably different. The shape of the mouths are different. Leaving aside the teeth which are completely different because total extraction could explain this - however, one might expect some even mediocre attempt by the dentist to give the replacement dentures a semblance of the original tooth shapes and sizes. There is a huge difference in chin protruberance and in my opinion this could not be fully explained by changes in the mandible bone due to total extraction. The mandible bone itself, in contrast to decaying or weakening (after tooth loss), is actually strengthened in the 'later' Sr. Lucy. Quite apart from all that the overall face shape and bone structure is different between the two. Finally, the skin tone or colour is different, the later Sr. Lucy having much paler skin. In my mind there is no doubt that there were 2 different Sr. Lucy's. What I do not doubt is that it implicates many people, including several post-conciliar Popes and it makes it very difficult to construct a narrative as to how a replacement was accomplished. And it is not nice to have to contemplate and promote such views, with the danger of comitting the sin of slander, detraction and possibly worse. We see now that the Fatima Centre has acknowledged that, in addition to there being fake texts attributed to Sr. Lucy, the identity of the person who was photgraphed in public with Popes etc. was most likely different to the original Sr. Lucy. However, the Fatima Centre are putting forward a theory that the later Sr. Lucy existed side by side with the original hidden Sr. Lucy - that is in contrast to Dr. Chojnowski (of Sister Lucy Truth channel) who is prepared to have an open mind on all scenarios. I have 2 Books on Fatima neither of which I have read in depth. These are 1. FATIMA in Lucia's Own Words and 2. A Pathway Under the Gaze of Mary (recommended to me by forum member Lumena). However, the restrainer which has discouraged me from delving into these 2 books is that the photo on the cover of both books is that of the woman whom I cannot accept to be the real Sr. Lucy. I agree with AED and others that we know the well documented messages of Fatima and that we should strive to live the messages - that the rest is a distraction. However, I do believe that the truth about Sr. Lucy, the consecrations, the seriousness of the messages, whether modernist interpretations have been infiltrated by means of deception etc. are all very important too. However, this is just my view and everyone else's view holds just as much weight. It would be very prideful for me to believe that I am not subject to error.
I will need to look up the details but as far as I remember, Pope St. Paul VI declined to talk with her. However, the crowd seeing Sr. Lucia retreat insisted that she be admitted to the entourage of the Pope and he then relented and admitted her. However, she had already been informed to remain silent, not being able to say to him that which she wished to say to him. My problem now is whether to believe anything written concerning these later years in this book.
What do you all think of Father Kramer who was co-head of the Fatima Center for many years and whose books are scholarly? He has a lot to say about the 3rd secret of Fatima including the fact that the text of the 3rd secret has not been released. More importantly the Blessed Mother wanted it publicly published by 1960. If there is something the Blessed Mother wanted us all to know that has been kept from us, what should we make of that?
Just read what the Vatican is doing. C’mon! We have a true leftist movement. https://stream.org/abortion-funding-charities-sponsor-vaticans-climate-change-summit-underway-now/
Sadly, the three worst governors in the country identify as Catholics. All three have caused chaos in their states. Prayers for their conversion, and continued prayers for Pope Francis.
Yes, I agree, Fr. Kramer has correctly stated the Third Secret has not been published in its entirety.
Well said. I would guess posters on this thread are pretty much evenly split on the subject. I personally think the evidence for a replacement is irrefutable but what do I know. But as I believe AED, HH and other posters wiser than me pointed out our or anybody’s salvation does not hinge on this. Not that the subject is devoid of significance. But it’s not essential. The discussion has been and I’m sure will continue to be respectful, informative and enlightening (but what else would we expect on our little forum). After all we’re all on the same side: God’s.
video time stamp 20:02: "In Portugal the dogma of the faith would always be preserved," -- the video says that Sister Lucia was only referring to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, hmmm....
