Pope Francis to consecrate world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary…

Pope Francis to consecrate world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary…

Pope Francis to consecrate world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary...

Image of Our Lady of Fatima will be taken to Marian Day at the request of the Pope in October, at the Vatican, Pope Francisco consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

What is going on? Where did this craze come from to consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, when Our Lord has made clear that he wishes RUSSIA to be consecrated – by name. What is going on?

Click on photo to read announcement from Fatima shrine.

Comments (90)

  • Marcantonio Colonna

    Is it not better idea to do the whole world and not just one country?

    August 13, 2013 at 7:53 pm
  • Theresa Rose

    Marcantonio Colonna,

    No, it is a better idea to consecrate the whole world instead of Russia.

    When Our Lady appeared to the three children at Fatima in July 1917, she told them that she wanted Russia (in particular) to be Consecrated to her Immaculate Heart. But, she would appear at a later date for that request to be implemented by the Pope and all the Bishops on the same day.

    Why Russia? In October/November 1917, the Communist revolution happened, with the setup of an atheistic government and society. She told the children that communistic errors would spread throughout the world if the Consecration were not done as she had asked. If, the Consecration was carried out, Russia would be converted and a period of peace would happen.

    Our Lady appeared to Sister Lucia (the eldest of the 3 children at Fatima), now a nun of the Order of Saint Dorothy in Tuy, Spain 1929, to say that the time had now come for the Consecration.

    The Consecration of Russia has never been carried out, Russia has never been converted and returned to the Catholic Faith and her errors have spread throughout the world.

    Pope John Paul II Consecrated the World to Her Immaculate Heart I cannot remember though if it were 1982 or 1984, but after the attempted assassination of this Pope.

    For whatever reasons the Popes from that time to this have failed Our Lady and her requests. Perhaps this link might help you.


    August 13, 2013 at 8:34 pm
    • Marcantonio Colonna

      OK, thankyou for the answer and the link. I did not know these things. You help me to understand the topic more.

      August 13, 2013 at 8:44 pm
    • Marcantonio Colonna

      Once more my thanks, i will read with care!

      August 13, 2013 at 9:08 pm
  • Eileenanne

    Is Russia still posing the threat it was in 1917? Maybe the window of opportunity for the Consecration requested at Fatima has now passed and a Consecration of the world is more appropriate.

    August 14, 2013 at 9:20 am
    • Miles Immaculatae

      I don’t think we should question the Blessed Virgin’s geopolitical insight.

      The potential consecration wasn’t an opportunity, it remains a necessity. It hasn’t been done. Our Lady didn’t give us a choice.

      The Virgin said consecrate Russia in the proper manner or their would be horrific consequences. She wouldn’t be joking around.

      Who are we to amend her words because we have judged the current geopolitical situation to be different to how she explained? That is pride. And it’s not worth the risk. If you don’t believe Russia needs to be consecrated then why not do it anyway, just to be safe?

      Perhaps Russia is not a threat anymore (that is far from the truth). But God wants us to be perfectly obedient to Our Lady’s request so that the restoration of the Church (and World) can be attributed as a triumph of Her Immaculate Heart. We know the triumph will not come unless Russia is consecrated. Otherwise, how will we know it is Our Lady’s triumph?

      August 14, 2013 at 12:18 pm
    • Thurifer

      Russia was not a threat in 1917. It was a backwards country which still had peasants. The communists didn’t win the civil war there until 1922.

      Russia is certainly still a threat today, not just with nuclear weapons, but also with the sheer outright immorality there. So many abortions there…

      August 14, 2013 at 6:21 pm
      • Eileenanne

        Our Lady surely knew that Russia was about to become a threat, and maybe that is why she asked for the Consecration. I am suggesting that maybe the chance has been missed.
        What about China’s one child policy? Millions of abortions there surely?

        August 14, 2013 at 9:36 pm
  • Miles Immaculatae

    A consecration of the World didn’t work last time, so is it really going to work this time?

    What is a ‘consecration to the Immaculate Heart’? It is the same as enrolling something in the Brown Scapular.

    When we are enrolled and put on the Scapular, it is the ‘sacrament’ of our personal consecration to the Immaculate Heart.. This is why Our Lady was so insistent on the Brown Scapular at Fatima.

    Our Lady wants us to put a brown scapular on Russia. She wants Russia to have it’s brown scapular.

    August 14, 2013 at 12:25 pm
  • Petrus

    This is quite something. How successive popes can think they know better than Our Lady is beyond me.

    Are the bishops of the world to join the pope in consecrating the world?

    August 14, 2013 at 4:01 pm
    • Eileenanne

      The most puzzling thing is that Pope Pius XI who declared the apparitions worthy of belief in 1930 failed to carry out the Consecration. He of all popes surely had the greatest responsibility for the task. Did he ever make any statement as to his reasons?

      August 15, 2013 at 8:41 am
      • Petrus


        Interesting question.

        Not sure about Pope Pius XI having most responsibility. Remember, Our Lady knew the Consecration would late. I’d say every pope since 1917 has been culpable, with the exception of JP I.

        August 15, 2013 at 8:46 am
      • Margaret Mary


        This is a very good explanation of why Russia must be named. I hope it answers your questions. Personally, I think the things, such as China’s one world policy, might never have happened if Our Lady had been obeyed.


        August 15, 2013 at 3:27 pm
  • editor

    I was spoilt for choice, not knowing whether to post the following article on this thread or the World Youth Day thread so decided to post it on both. For the record:

    Is This For Real?

    by Christopher A. Ferrara
    August 1, 2013

    Item: The mass media were delighted to report that immediately after the papal Mass on Copacabana beach during the just-completed papal trip to Brazil, thousands of women stripped down to their bikinis and plunged into the ocean for a post-Mass frolic in the surf. The reporter whose commentary is linked to above described the Mass as “a great beach party” for three million people.

    Item: The day before the papal Mass on the beach, during a “liturgical” rehearsal, several hundred bishops made fools of themselves by attempting to twirl about and wave their arms in time to rock music, led by an obnoxious lay cheerleader who bellowed at them through a microphone as if he were conducting an episcopal aerobics class.

    Item: Upon his return to Rome from Brazil, Pope Francis went to a famed Marian altar at Saint Mary Major and left upon it as gifts, not flowers or a religious relic, but a World Youth Day souvenir beach ball and sports jersey. The beach ball kept rolling off the altar, so the Pope used the sports shirt to hold it in place.

    Is this for real? What has become of Holy Church? Sister Lucia provided the answer in two words: “diabolical disorientation.” No, it is not that the Pope and the bishops are literal agents of the devil. Rather, as predicted in the Third Secret — the part we have yet to see, but to which former Pope Benedict clearly alluded on May 13, 2010 — the devil has provoked unprecedented confusion in the Church since the Second Vatican Council, and this has led to a loss of the sense of what the Church really is: the spotless Bride of Christ, who is in the world but never of it.

    It was not any “Fatimite,” but Pope Paul VI, who declared in 1972 that “the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God: there is doubt, uncertainty, problems, unrest. Doubt has entered our consciences, and it has entered through the windows which were meant to have been opened to the light. This state of uncertainty reigns even in the Church…. We will confide Our thoughts to you: there has been interference from an adverse power: his name is the devil…” (Paul VI, Insegnamenti, Ed. Vaticana, Vol. X, 1972, p. 707.)

    It is no use blinding ourselves to reality: we are indeed witnessing what Paul VI himself saw after his “reforms” were introduced: diabolical interference in the life of the Church, the consequent decline of the Church since Vatican II, and thus the decline of the world at large along with her.

    This is what the Third Secret foretells; and the culmination of that dire prophecy is what former Pope Benedict described three years ago: “future realities of the Church, which are little by little developing and revealing themselves.” Little by little developing and revealing themselves — not consigned to the past, as Cardinal Bertone would have us believe.

    And the worst is yet to come — unless the Pope finally does what the Virgin of Fatima requested of him and the bishops. But while ecclesial follies of the past fifty years go on and on, Russia still awaits her consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. See Fatima website

    August 14, 2013 at 7:01 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    Our Lord told Sr. Lucia that He wanted His whole Church to recognize the consecration as a Triumph of the Immaculate Heart. Her triumph IS the Pope consecrating Russia, so getting him to do it is the battle. It has to be merited.
    God wants Russia to be Catholic. When Russia is converted they will be faithful Catholics. Russians will have all the same beliefs as Editor or Athanasius. Hehe. But it’s true.

    August 14, 2013 at 7:05 pm
  • Theresa Rose

    7 Popes have failed Our Lady by not Consecrating Russia to Her Immaculate Heart.

    Despite Pope Pius XII who must have received word from Sister Lucia one way or another about Consecrating Russia. In 1942 he Consecrated the world instead, though Our Lord allowed WWII to end sooner than what might have be the case. He again repeated the Consecration of the world, BUT in neither occasion was Russia even mentioned.

    An obstacle to the Consecration was the Metz Pact of 1962, otherwise known as the Moscow/Vatican Agreement was signed. In which communism was not to be criticised/denounced in any way. A sad turn of events that Vatican II throughout its course between 1962 – 1965 communism was not denounced as the evil thing it was. Contrary to what Popes had done up to this point in time. Read this link.


    Pope John Paul II Consecrated the world – Was it 1982 or 1984. Not what Our Lady requested.
    And of course Sister Lucia was more or less silenced from about 1962 until her death. Certainly there must have been those in the Vatican who did not want the Third Secret to become public knowledge. Did it suit them not to have Russia Consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? If so, Why? For what purpose?

    To abandon the request of Our Lady? When the King of France did see that this country be Consecrated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, 100 years to the day the French Revolution began and the then King of France was executed a few short months later.

    To abandon Our Lady and her request can only be done to our peril. How many souls will be lost to hell because a blind and blunt refusal.

    August 14, 2013 at 9:38 pm
    • 3littleshepherds

      The Pope and Bishops probably won’t consecrate Russia because to do so goes against the religious liberty, ecumenism, and collegiality of Vatican II (and the “Spirit” of Vatican II).
      To publicly request the conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith “offends”against Religious Liberty, to Consecrate to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is unecumenical, and for the Pope to order the Bishops to do these things goes against collegiality, especially when the Bishops don’t want to do it.
      So either the Popes admit that these new ideas that came out of the council are displeasing to God or else they continue to stubbornly defend them. They can’t have it both ways. So they ignore Our Lady’s full request and call Asissi encounters for world peace!
      It won’t work. A time will come when the Pope will throw away all the false ideas and place all of his faith in the Immaculate Heart. There won’t be any human respect left in him.

      August 14, 2013 at 10:38 pm
  • Marcantonio Colonna

    The pope did place a ball and sport shirt on the altar of the chapel salus populi romani in the santa maria maggiore basilica. The chapel is very beuatiful and this madonna much loved in rome. Happy feast to all! We had a civil holiday too today!!

    August 15, 2013 at 3:46 pm
    • Athanasius

      Marcantonio Colonna, salve!

      Yes, The borghesi chapel is one of my favourites in Roma. It was at the altar of the Salus Populi Romano that Fr. Pacelli (later Pope Pius XII) celebrated his first Mass. I was really quite scandalised when Pope Francis placed a beach ball and T-shirt on top it.

      Italy, I have to tell you, is my second home. Hanno un grande giorno della festa. I hope I got that right. Ciao!

      August 15, 2013 at 7:27 pm
      • Marcantonio Colonna

        Salve, athanasius, i see you speak some italian and love this country, bravo, mi fa veramente piacere! La Santa Vergine del popolo romano ti colmi delle sue piu’ belle benedizioni! La prossima volta che vado alla basilica, diro’ una preghiera per tutti voi, amici del blog. Ciao!! God bless you everyone…

        August 15, 2013 at 9:27 pm
      • Athanasius

        Marcantonio Colonna,

        Grazie Mille il mio amico, le vostre preghiere sono molto apprezzati.

        Mi dispiace, il mio italiano non è molto buona!

        Yes, I love Italy very much. I have been there so many times I can’t count. I think every Catholic must feel a close affinity with Italy given that Rome is the heart of our holy religion and the country itself is steeped in Catholic history.


        August 15, 2013 at 11:16 pm
  • Caesar Imperator

    Once again the pope is insulting Our Lady by not obeying the command of God the Father to consecrate Russia alone by name in public. Not Russia as part of the world, but Russia apart from the world. This mockery could bring God’s wrath and not blessing… but it does show to all catholics that our evil bishops and disobedient popes are slowly admitting that Fatima is real and the Fatima clock has not stopped.

    August 15, 2013 at 5:04 pm
    • crofterlady

      Do you not think it’s a bit harsh to call our bishops “evil”? They are negligent towards their duties but I believe that’s because of a diabolical smokescreen which is blinding them rather than intentional negligence.

      August 15, 2013 at 5:21 pm
      • Miles Immaculatae

        I know it sounds harsh, but philosphically speaking, if a bishop isn’t doing his job properly, as much as he is a bishop, he is ‘evil’.

        Of course, even ‘good’ bishops make mistakes. However, the average concilliarist bishop these days commits errors that are more than just little imperfections.

        August 15, 2013 at 5:31 pm
  • Caesar Imperator

    It is correct to say that today’s bishops are evil. Millions of educated Catholic Christians now know that Russia has not been Consecrated. Most of the bishops know too. They have the personal mobile phone numbers of hundreds of cardinals and nuncios. They can easily get this done. They do not. So this means one thing: they are deliberately blocking it. For geopolitical reasons. For masonic reasons. For homosexual reasons. For paedophile reasons. They are evil.

    August 15, 2013 at 6:00 pm
    • Athanasius

      Caesar Imperator,

      I share your frustration with the Pope and the Bishops, believe me, but it is going too far to accuse them unilaterally of willful evil.

      You probably hit the nail on the head with the geopolitical part, especially with false ecumenism which is a Masonic doctrine. But I think their beguilement with that has more to do with the “diabolical disorientation” than with any deliberate intention to serve Lucifer. Also, this has nothing whatever to do with homosexuality and paedophilia, which involves only a relatively small number of bishops, priests and religious in the universal Church despite media attempts to make it look like a clerical plague.

      It just so happens that a petition is circulating throughout the Church at the moment which lists the signatures of 6 million Catholics, of which 500 are Cardinals and Bishops, asking the Pope to define the 5th Marian dogma of Our Lady (Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate). Additionally, the bishops of the Philippines consecrated their country to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart on June 8th this year. These are very positive signs that devotion to the Blessed Mother is on the increase in the Church, particularly in the hierarchy, with notable exceptions of course.

      Ecumenism remains the main stumbling block to the papal/episcopal consecration of Russia; that’s the obstacle Satan has placed in the way of humble obedience to God. To that extent, I suppose “evil” is the right word to use for this refusal to obey. But I wouldn’t call it was willful, even though it is a terrible manifestation of human pride.

      August 15, 2013 at 7:05 pm
    • cbucket

      “They are evil”

      It is going back a few years but does anybody remember an SSPX priest who used to say Mass at “St. Joseph and St Padarn” in London called Father Beecroft (RIP). I have fond memories of his sermons and that was a phrase he used to use quite often when referring to enemies of Christ and his Church (with special emphasis on the e; eeeeeeevil). 🙂

      August 16, 2013 at 11:58 am
      • editor


        It’s one thing to call the generic enemies of Christ and His Church “evil” and quite another (forbidden) thing to call any identifiable individual “evil” . I would hope that your priest explained the difference but I’ve discovered that most priests do not think like teachers; they do not realise the necessity of making clear what they mean. All too often they credit congregations with more common sense (not to mention Catholic sense and – again – not to mention intelligence) than they merit.

        August 16, 2013 at 12:06 pm
  • Caesar Imperator


    Thank you for your attentiveness and well-crafted post. However, I have been 15 years trying to get this Consecration of Russia done by means of tens of thousands of emails to priests. All by myself. I feel like a stooge. Today, Ireland was consecrated to the Immaculate Heart by all the bishops at Knock Shrine. The bishops of Lebanon also consecrated their nation. Now the Pope is doing a consecration. They are worried. They know something. I know something too: nuclear war is coming from Russia especially with the spread of homosexuality and perversion of every type. Yet they refuse to do anything that goes against the powers of this world. So they must be secret friends with those powers – in lodges and occult settings. Hence the paedophilia which has ritual value in those settings. They sell adulterous ‘annulments’. They exaggerate the Pope’s infallibility beyond the correct limits. they throw their weight around with this unnecessary word ‘magisterium’ and disrespect the People of God as a rightful research body that can teach and correct the Pope. They are not disoriented darlings. They are evil.

    August 15, 2013 at 9:00 pm
    • editor

      Caesar Imperator

      You surely must know that we are not permitted to judge the soul of any person – not even negligent bishops.

      The world is immersed in evil and the Pope and Bishops are continuing to consecrate anything and everything to the Immaculate Heart except Russia, so they sure do “know something” as you put it, and it is appalling beyond words that they think they know better than Our Lady (“she’ll be just as happy if we consecrate Ireland, Italy, Poland, the world, whatever”…) but we cannot see into their hearts and souls and thus we cannot make any definitive judgment on them at all. That is an absolute given.

      All we can do is point to their objective duty and note/publish the fact that they are not doing their duty. We can warn them of the likely eternal consequences of their negligence and disobedience but the judgment of the extent of their culpability and whether or not they are “evil” – i.e. malicious – in their souls, that is for God to judge. St Thomas Aquinas defines “evil” as “falling short of the good we can expect” so in that sense we might (academically) describe the episcopate as “evil” but not in the sense of being malicious – that we cannot possibly know, whatever we may privately think.

      You talk about “feeling like a stooge” because of all the emails you’ve sent out over 15 years to priests about the consecration – hence your understandable frustration. But hat does not give you the right to play God by making definitive judgments on anyone else’s soul.

      I’m not given to doling out spiritual advice but, as Groucho Marx said when he pointed out to a very ugly woman that he never forgot a face, in your case I’ll be glad to make an exception. Brace yourself…

      Offer up all of that wonderful effort over 15 years, begging Our Lady for special graces for Pope Francis to do the right thing and consecrate Russia as a matter of urgency. That is more likely to hasten the great day of the Russian Consecration than name-calling the bishops. Leave that to me!

      August 15, 2013 at 10:57 pm
    • Athanasius

      Caesar Imperator,

      I have to say, it’s very difficult to argue with what you say. There is no doubt that the bishops have failed greatly in their duty. My only fear is that we as lay Catholics do not allow the fact to turn us bitter against those who are in authority over us. It is one thing to highlight the failings of these bishops, not to mention the public scandals, but we have to draw the line at harsh judgment. God will judge them in due course and that will be a very strict scrutiny indeed. For our part, there is nothing more fatal to the soul than bitter zeal, even if it is provoked. We must try to hang on to charity regardless of the provocation, and we all know very well how we have been provoked these past fifty years.

      It’s so easy now for us to lose the place, seeing the treachery at the highest levels. I often think of today’s betrayal as similar to what Our Lord suffered at the time of his Passion and death, when Peter denied Him and all the Disciples but one abandoned Him. Our Saviour did not speak harshly of them, as He would have been quite entitled to do. Rather, He bore with them and prayed for them until grace touched their hearts and they returned to Him.

      No matter how bad it gets, Our Lord is in charge of His Church and He will put a stop to it when the time comes. Our Lady has assured us that the Pope and the bishops will make the consecration of Russia, but added that it will be late!

      Whether that delay results in a Russian invasion of Europe, or whether it results in a divine chastisement of the nations directly from heaven, is uncertain and not nearly as terrible as the loss of millions of souls, particularly consecrated souls, for all eternity, which is exactly what the punishment of the Third Secret reveals in all its horror and what post-conciliar reform has been achieving now for several decades.

      August 15, 2013 at 10:57 pm
    • spiritustempore

      Caesar Imperator

      I’m not sure that ALL of the bishops are evil, but agree that there are many who do or permit evil.

      I do agree that the consecrations are likely indicators that the Church is worried. Something is admittedly afoot, otherwise Russia wouldn’t be doing this:-


      MOSCOW, July 28 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s task force created in the Mediterranean Sea should be an effective tool of the country’s foreign policy, an ex-navy chief said on Sunday.

      Russia began setting up a naval task force in the Mediterranean in March, sending several warships from the Pacific Fleet to the region for the first time in decades, including the destroyer Admiral Panteleyev, the Peresvet and the Admiral Nevelsky amphibious warfare ships, the Pechenga tanker and the salvage/rescue tug Fotiy Krylov.

      Warships from Russia’s Northern, Baltic and Black Sea Fleets are also currently staying in the Mediterranean on a rotating basis. Navy Commander Admiral Viktor Chirkov said in May the Mediterranean task force may be enlarged to include nuclear submarines.


      MOSCOW, June 1 (RIA Novosti) – The Russian Armed Forces will hold some 500 military drills at various levels this summer, the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement on Saturday.

      “The exercises will be focused on the organization of joint operation of forces, on real cooperation between the ground, air and naval forces and therefore up to 500 military drills of various levels are scheduled to be held,” the ministry said.
      The ministry also said that some 20 international military exercises were scheduled to be held by the end of this year, including large-scale joint strategic military exercises with Belarus Zapad-2013.

      Starting in February this year, the Russian Armed Forces began practicing surprise alert exercises, with the most recent held this week at the Ashuluk firing range in southern Russia.


      USPENSKOYE (Sakhalin Region), July 16 (RIA Novosti) – Russian President Vladimir Putin oversaw military maneuvers in the country’s Far East on Tuesday as part of the largest snap check of combat readiness of the Russian military in the post-Soviet period.

      The exercise, in which about 160,000 servicemen, 5,000 tanks and armored vehicles, 130 aircraft and 70 Pacific Fleet warships have taken part, is the latest in a series of random combat-readiness checks that began in February.

      The Defense Ministry has said snap checks are to be conducted on a regular basis to ensure constant combat readiness.

      August 15, 2013 at 11:25 pm
      • editor


        I would clarify your comment about Bishops and evil by saying that they (it seems the majority if not all) certainly do permit and apparently condone evil – e.g. by their silence or mere lip service on the immoral legislation passed in Ireland recently (abortion) and Westminster (same-sex marriage) and thus they are definitely complicit, through their cowardice (if not their apostasy) in the introduction of these evil laws. Ditto the objective guilt of those who either committed or covered up cases of clerical child abuse. That much seems crystal clear. What we are categorically not permitted to argue is that any are personally “evil”. That they are guilty of evil action or inaction is one thing, but the “whole package”? That is for God to judge – as I’m sure you’ll agree.

        Many thanks for that very interesting report about Russia’s military activity on grounds of foreign defence policy. Interesting, is to say the least!

        I hope all those who regard Russia as no longer a threat, take note.

        August 16, 2013 at 3:57 pm
      • spiritustempore


        I think it’s quite clear that there are bishops who have given themselves over to evil, quite wholeheartedly. Those who entered the sacred priesthood, simply to attack and destroy Christ’s Church from within spring to mind.

        Those who guarded the gates of the seminaries to ensure that good, holy candidates didn’t get in, and who used those seminaries as little more than brothels and indoctrination camps.

        It goes far beyond passively permitting and condoning evil in some cases – as is obvious from Abp Nichols double dealing with the Vatican over the Soho Masses, now upgraded to a better church in Mayfair with more frequent Masses……or from Cardinal Keith O’Brien’s conduct with his consecrated homosexual harem.

        Do I say that these men and others like them are evil? Not entirely and not irredeemably. And I do believe in miracles.

        August 16, 2013 at 6:41 pm
      • editor


        I do not deny for a second that bishops have done, can do, are doing evil things. I thought I had made that quite clear. Perhaps I should have given + Nichols as an example of a bishop who is DOING evil through promoting the Soho Masses and Archbishop Tartaglia who is DOING evil by permitting false teaching to be spread through the sale of dissident publication in his archdiocese to name but one issue, covered in the current newsletter. Cardinal O’Brien’s evil behaviour is, as you say, another classic example.

        But, since I cannot see into his heart and soul, I cannot say that any of these bishops is an evil person. You appear, in your final sentence to be in agreement with that.

        I’ve never found it a difficult distinction to make (doing and facilitating evil as opposed to identifying an individual as evil) but if I’m missing something, please put me right.

        I’m not denying that any or all of the above named (and other) bishops is evil. I’m just saying that we are not permitted to make that definitive judgment – for the very reason you give, that nobody is beyond redemption.

        Just to be clear, then, are you saying that we ARE we permitted (by Christ) to identify an individual person as “evil” in this world, as distinct from having the freedom and even the duty to judge, as evil, their (evil) actions?

        August 16, 2013 at 8:15 pm
      • spiritustempore


        I don’t think that I’ve said that we are permitted to definitively judge another human being as entirely evil.

        I do think that we are permitted to look at the words and actions of others and see that they are giving themselves wholeheartedly over to evil.

        We can always hope for final repentance and redemption, but that does not make them good people in the meantime.

        August 16, 2013 at 8:32 pm
      • editor

        And since I’ve never said that we could not judge actions and words, I don’t see what the problem is! Peace perfect peace appears to have broken out all around us!

        August 16, 2013 at 8:42 pm
      • Josephine


        I’m surprised you agree with this statement from spiritustempore:

        “I do think that we are permitted to look at the words and actions of others and see that they are giving themselves wholeheartedly over to evil.”

        Can we really tell if someone has “given themselves wholeheartedly to evil”?

        How can we know that?

        August 16, 2013 at 9:13 pm
      • spiritustempore


        I think that we can look at a man’s attitudes and demeanour; his actions and their fruits over time and say that he is wholeheartedly giving himself over to evil.

        That’s not to say that such a man IS evil – simply that he does evil and visibly commits wholeheartedly to doing it in word and deed.

        He may or may not repent before his final judgment. Whether he does or not, we may or may not know.

        To quote Fr Malachi Martin:-

        Suddenly it became inarguable that now, during this papacy, the Roman Catholic organization carried a permanent presence, of clerics who worshipped Satan and liked it of bishops and priests who sodomized boys and each other
        of nuns who performed the “Black Rites” of Wicca, and who lived in lesbian relationships,
        … every day, including Sundays and Holy Days, acts of heresy and blasphemy and outrage and indifference were committed and permitted at holy Altars by men who had been called to be priests.

        Sacrilegious actions and rites were not only performed on Christ’s Altars, but had the connivance or at least the tacit permission of certain Cardinals, archbishops, and bishops… In total number they were a minority – anything from one to ten percent of Church personnel. But of that minority, many occupied astoundingly high positions or rank.

        August 16, 2013 at 10:41 pm
      • editor


        You know, I sometimes feel like the original echo.

        Here we go again.

        My position on the subject of judging is well documented, in many editions of our newsletter and on this blog.

        You quote spiritustempore’s words about being permitted to look at words and actions and “see that (the bishops) are giving themselves wholeheartedly over to evil.”

        I wouldn’t have chosen those words. It is a tad ambiguous to explain my position which,I repeat, is as follows…

        I believe that the majority (if not all) of the bishops, certainly here in Scotland, have lost the Catholic Faith and once the Faith goes, the morals quickly follows. Hence, as I said over and over again at the time, the fall of Cardinal O’Brien did not come as any great surprise to me and those who have been reading our newsletter for the past fourteen years. I didn’t know the details, of course, but I said more than once over the years, that there has to be something gravely wrong in the personal life of any bishop who permits the Faith to be attacked and undermined as our bishops permit it to be attacked and undermined. Cardinal O’Brien didn’t once get in touch to contradict me. We now know why.

        However, in light of the Fatima apparitions, I believe their state to be one of spiritual blindness more than a conscious “giving themselves over to evil.” Our Lady warned of a “diabolical disorientation” which sits more readily with “blindness” than wilful evil.

        Gradually, perhaps, through their weak faith and even total loss of belief in Catholic doctrine, they have become spiritually blind and may not only not realise the evil they are perpetrating, whether by action or omission, but they may even believe that they are doing good – e.g. by providing “gay” Masses, undermining priestly celibacy etc. That, without a doubt, is “disorientation” In bishops, it becomes “diabolical disorientation”.

        This, however, does not change the fact that the bishops are going to be held to account for their negligence. On the contrary, they are very much culpable for their failure to live up to their high episcopal office. There can be no doubt that the graces of their office are available to them – but if they refuse that grace, as manifestly appears to be the case, then they will have a terrible price to pay at their judgment, if not in this world.

        In summary: I don’t feel qualified to claim that the bishops have “given themselves over to evil” except in the sense that I think spiritustempore actually means, which is that they have clearly embraced the evil of Modernism…Which brings us full circle to the diabolical disorientation prophesied at Fatima, a disorientation markedly evident in our bishops, almost to a man, certainly in the UK – a disorientation engineered from Hell.

        Am I a muddying the waters, or what? Well, a girl’s gotta have a bit of fun now and then…

        August 16, 2013 at 10:59 pm
      • spiritustempore

        ..and here I come to muddy them some more 🙂

        There are clerics and bishops who have never been Catholic, whose driving motivation is the subversion and destruction of the tenets of the faith and whose problems are due to a little more than spiritual blindness.

        Bella Dodd is an excellent source for further information on those……Randy Engel and ‘The Rite of Sodomy’ is another.

        August 17, 2013 at 12:09 am
      • editor

        No reply button at spiritustempore post below mine, so here is my reply to your post of 17 August at 12.09…

        I laughed out loud when I read your reply to me because I realised as soon as I’d posted mine, that I’d omitted my usual clarification about the bishops losing the faith – which is: “if ever they had it”. I guessed you would pick that up, although I’ve made that point more times than Billy Graham said “Jesus saves”.

        There is no muddied water in what I am saying which is…

        We can generalise that there is evil in the world, and in the episcopate. What we cannot do is say “Spiritustempore is evil. Archbishop Nichols is evil. Pope Francis is evil.”

        All of that may be true. But it is not for me to make that judgment. I have said loads of times that if the bishops continue in the way they are doing, failing in their bounden duty, they are risking eternal damnation. Pretty strong stuff, but still allows for their repentance and redemption.

        Indeed, your point about the infiltration of Communists into the episcopacy (Bella Dodd’s revelations) underlines my point for we do not know the names of individuals – or if we do, I’ve never heard them. Hence, we cannot even say Bishop X is a Communist infiltrator, so obviously he does not hold to the Catholic Faith at all. We cannot even say that. We can only generalise about our faithless bishops. And that’s fun!

        I honestly don’t think I can be any clearer on this.

        Tell me I’m clear – someone, anyone!

        August 17, 2013 at 9:04 am
  • Athanasius

    Our Lady spoke of “the errors of Russia” spreading throughout the world as the punishment of the Third Secret. The most successful of these to be exported to all nations has been Communism. Every Western nation, the U.S. included, has succumbed to atheistic Communism disguised under the new title of “Socialist democracy.”

    Our once-Christian nations are now completely Godless, as well as morally and financially bankrupt, just as Pope Pius XI predicted in Divini Redemptoris in 1937. The result is the loss of immortal souls on a scale that no nuclear war, no matter how devastating, could ever match for tragedy.

    I have no doubt that God will punish this world very soon, there are many prophecies that confirm such an intervention as a sudden and catastrophic global event. Yet, the loss of one soul for all eternity is much worse in God’s eyes than the destruction of the entire universe.

    August 16, 2013 at 12:44 pm
  • Athanasius

    I forgot to say that with the governments of the world now in God’s face with their Satanic pride, pushing through laws that are iniquitous, doing everything they can to eradicate Christianity and the Christian family from the planet, we may reasonably conclude that evil has reached its zenith in our time. “God,” says Sacred Scripture, “will not be mocked.” He is infinitely merciful and patient with poor sinners, but He is also infinitely just and He will not permit His creatures (mere dust) to so determinedly play the part of Lucifer without incurring the same punishment as that fallen angel. A change of heart and repentance is always possible on the part of humanity, but I don’t see the remotest sign of that anywhere, not even in those liberal Churchmen who are today saturated in the Masonic spirit.

    August 16, 2013 at 12:56 pm
  • Caesar Imperator

    Thank you Editor, Spiritus Tempore and Athanasius.

    Pope Francis is involved in 3 consecrations this year.

    He asked Cardinal Polycarpo and all the Portuguese bishops to consecrate his Papacy
    to the Immaculate Heart. This was done at the Fatima Shrine on May 13, 2013.

    Then Francis the Pope and Benedict XVI the Pope Emeritus consecrated the Vatican
    to St. Michael the Archangel. This was done in July.

    Next in October.

    It is entirely possible to email every single diocesan priest in England, Scotland and Wales with appropriate links to, say, Catholic Truth or http://www.fatima.org.
    Maybe Pope Francis is preparing the ground… or else he is deceptively trying to split ‘Fatimists as they see us…. Let us see.

    August 16, 2013 at 1:10 pm
  • Athanasius

    Caesar Imperator,

    I have just sent a personal letter to Pope Francis concerning Our Lady’s precise request for a consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart. I’m not sure if the Pope will personally receive, much less read, the letter of a nobody, but at least I’ve done my duty.

    I don’t see the point of writing to diocesan priests about this, most of them probably know nothing of the real Fatima message and secret. Besides, it’s the bishops we must try to persuade, since it was to the Pope and the bishops that Our Lady made her request. If we, the faithful, can know all there is to know about Fatima by research, then the priests and bishops should also know. Indifference, I’m afraid, is at the root of much clerical ignorance today.

    August 16, 2013 at 2:21 pm
    • 3littleshepherds

      What do you think the big global thing that scares everyone into repentance is? Some say a nuclear explosion, some revolution and fighting in each country that won’t end, some say Europe will be invaded, or huge natural disasters. And then there are the one’s from heaven like the three days of darkness, Our Lord’s Cross lighting up the world, and the miracle of The sun. Also, Malachi Martin’s third secret horrible, awful supernatural you-can’t-even-guess chastisement.

      August 16, 2013 at 6:25 pm
  • spiritustempore


    Impossible to know, but the following will probably feature somewhere in it all:-

    – Israel taking out Iran’s nuclear facility (see recent comments from Netanyahu)

    – America’s ongoing funding and encouragement of revolution in the Middle East

    – Russia going for Israel and US interests in the Middle East (see recent comments from Putin)

    – China – either directly, or hiding behind N. Korea – going for Japan

    – A major economic shock

    – Earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and serious flooding

    Reading current news reports, it seems that we might not have all that far to go….

    August 16, 2013 at 6:49 pm
  • Athanasius


    I think it would be wrong for us to speculate on how God might chastise, we’d probably get it wrong anyway. No one knows the mind of God, so we’re better to stick to our prayers and ask God to spare the world through Our Lord’s precious blood. If the Pope and the bishops make the consecration of Russia, then grace will fall on the world rather than wrath and we’ll see those “beautiful things” Pope Pius XI spoke of. If not, then we may have to endure terrible sufferings before proud man finally falls on his knees and asks pardon and mercy.

    August 16, 2013 at 6:56 pm
    • 3littleshepherds

      Don’t we know the mind of God through Fatima? I mean there’s a lot of possible chastisements foretold, like the possible annihilation of various nations.
      Some people know the Third Secret and they don’t (or didn’t) have to speculate. If one believes Malachi Martin the Third Secret predicts that an alliance is building the opposite of the Kingdom of God which is not going to last, so he said. He also said there was going to be a reckoning.

      I do think it’s bad judgement to come up with a specific date like “World War III will start next June”. hehe.

      August 16, 2013 at 7:42 pm
  • Margaret Mary

    I agree it’s best not to speculate although it’s hard not to looking at the chaos in the world

    Is it a hopeful sign that Russia is refusing to legalise homosexuality? It seems out of kilter with everything else going on there, abortion is rife and porn, so why are they holding out against homosexuality, I wonder?

    August 16, 2013 at 7:33 pm
  • Magdalene

    None of us can possibly know what will bring the world to repentance. Speculating about the Chastisement used to terrify me until, after much prayer, I came to trust completely in God and a calmness descended. I truly believe that He knows what he is doing and will act in His good time for the benefit of humanity. I am comforted by the words of Padre Pio – ‘Pray, Hope and Don’t Worry’.

    August 16, 2013 at 9:48 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    Doesn’t Our Lady of Fatima warn us of specific chastisements to keep us from complacency? Anyway I do think the chastisement will come inorder to bring souls to repentance so that Our Lady will have her Triumph. I agree with Athanasius when he says it will be a sudden and catastrophic global event (prophecies being his source). But the world is not going to be blown up, Our Lady is going to save the world.

    August 16, 2013 at 11:03 pm
  • Magdalene

    Having a deep, abiding Faith is not the same as being complacent. We must always remain alert but put our total trust in God.

    August 16, 2013 at 11:31 pm
  • Prionsais

    Even if the world did suffer a catastrophe, how many would look at it as a sign from Heaven?
    The miracle of the sun was dismissed as an optical illusion or mass hysteria.

    August 17, 2013 at 12:11 am
    • spiritustempore


      Probably around the same number of people that will be saved.

      Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life, and few there are that find it!”

      August 17, 2013 at 12:18 am
      • Prionsais


        August 17, 2013 at 11:38 am
  • 3littleshepherds

    I didn’t mean you were complacent. In fact your trust in Providence is rare, I would think. But many many souls are not repenting, are not doing penance nor praying at all. And people have told me (all men) that reading about the Chastisement does them good.

    August 17, 2013 at 12:25 am
    • 3littleshepherds

      I should say that the chastisement is scary to me too but also exciting for want of a better word. I like strategy and although we can’t foresee God’s Providence and are usually wrong about it, in this case He has given us a lot of “clues”.

      August 17, 2013 at 12:51 am
  • Thurifer

    Didn’t Pope John XXIII faint when he read the Third Secret?

    August 17, 2013 at 3:39 am
    • Athanasius

      I’ve never heard that said before, Thurifer. I don’t think that actually happened.

      August 17, 2013 at 1:04 pm
      • spiritustempore

        I’m not sure whether John XXIII fainted when he read the Third Secret or not. The information seems to have come from an interview Fr Malachi Martin gave to Art Bell.


        Art Bell: All right, here we go. Just a couple of things I want to quickly read, one from a friend in Australia, Father who says, “I had a Jesuit priest tell me more of the Third Secret of Fatima years ago, in Perth. He said among other things, the last pope would be under control of Satan. Pope John fainted, thinking it might be him. We were interrupted before I could hear the rest.” Any comment on that?

        Fr. Martin: Yes. It sounds as if they were reading or being told the text of the Third Secret.

        Art Bell: Oh my!

        Fr. Martin: It sounds like it, but it is sufficiently vague to make one hesitate. It sounds like it.

        August 17, 2013 at 1:42 pm
    • chardom

      that’s cause it was the bill for the last supper + interest

      August 17, 2013 at 1:12 pm
      • spiritustempore

        I wish that there was a ‘like’ button for posts….

        August 17, 2013 at 1:30 pm
    • editor

      Nope. He just put it back saying it was not for our times. Talk about famous last words.

      August 17, 2013 at 1:41 pm
  • Crouchback

    I think that the Society of St Pius X bishops should send a message to the Pope that they will consecrate the World at the same time as the Pope.

    OK it’s not Russia yet, but at least the Pope would know that ” two or three” would be supporting him…..I was present when a late Scottish prelate consecrated the world in 1984……he looked bored with the whole thing……not long after there was Chernobyl….!!!

    So even bored bishops can have an effect

    Has the Pope asked that the worlds bishops join in the consecration…??

    should we be contacting the bishops to see what arrangements they are putting in place for this consecration….??

    August 17, 2013 at 7:36 am
    • Athanasius


      It would be wrong for the SSPX to send any message to the Pope that undermines the request of Our Lady of Fatima. Her instructions were quite clear on what consecration she requires, namely Russia. Nothing less than humble obedience to that request is acceptable to heaven (Sister Lucy) and should not therefore be encouraged.

      August 17, 2013 at 1:03 pm
      • Crouchback


        I get your point, but everyone would know that this consecration wouldn’t be what Our Lady asked for at Fatima…..and the SSPX bishops would be acting within their “remit” by joining in ….AND….reminding everyone from the Pope down that the real consecration is yet to be done

        Win – Win for the SSPX as far as I would be concerned.

        August 18, 2013 at 7:21 am
  • spiritustempore


    There’s no reply button under your post, so sorry that I’ll have to reply here.

    I’m really not sure why the point about evil continues to be an issue:

    We can generalise that there is evil in the world, and in the episcopate. What we cannot do is say “Spiritustempore is evil. Archbishop Nichols is evil. Pope Francis is evil.”

    Nowhere have I said that we should say that this or that individual is evil, although it’s obvious, in general terms, that evil individuals exist within the structures of the Church. As you write, we cannot know who they are.

    I have said that some give themselves over wholeheartedly to doing evil (not being) evil. If you consider – as we are taught – that modernism is the synthesis of all heresies and a great evil, then it is perfectly reasonable to assume that a bishop who wholeheartedly devotes his career to ‘inflicting wounds upon the face of Christ’, as Pope Benedict puts it, is equally wholeheartedly committing himself to doing evil, from an objective standpoint.

    That is not to make a subjective judgment on the final state of his soul or to definitively judge the person evil and therefore damned. It is to say that he does evil and that if he does not amend his ways and truly repent, he is going to hell and taking rather a lot of souls along with him.

    Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves

    August 17, 2013 at 9:34 am
    • editor


      I’m really not sure why the point about evil continues to be an issue…

      It’s not an issue. I’ve said from the outset what you have said above. I am therefore still puzzled as to why it was an issue in the first place! All the words that you have boldened in your final (I hope!) post on the subject above, I have been saying, not just on this thread, but for fourteen years in our newsletter!

      Let the subject of “evil” therefore, rest in peace – at least for now!

      August 17, 2013 at 1:42 pm
      • spiritustempore

        With all due respect, dear Editor, you seem to be the one taking issue with my posts?

        August 17, 2013 at 1:43 pm
      • editor


        I think I merely sought to clarify on occasion to ensure that readers knew that you meant what I presumed you really did mean, as stated clearly in your latest post above – that is all! It has taken a while to get to where we are, although I was absolutely sure that you meant the same thing as I was saying (i.e. that the Church teaches.)

        Hence my puzzlement when you continued to apparently “correct” me when, all along, as is evident now, you were, indeed, saying the same thing. I am always surprised when, in clarifying something, a blogger insists “I didn’t SAY this or that” – precisely, I think, why the matter required clarification, in case it is wrongly interpreted thus.

        Anyway, all, as I say, is well that (I hope!) ends well.

        August 17, 2013 at 1:45 pm
      • spiritustempore


        I think it was already quite clear at 8.32pm last night, re-reading the posts.

        August 17, 2013 at 2:08 pm
      • editor

        Then, not having time to re-read the posts I will take your word for it, and thank you for pointing that out. I apologise – absolutely without reservation – for my unnecessary clarifications. No offence intended or malice aforethought, I assure you.

        August 17, 2013 at 3:14 pm
      • Josephine

        I’ve just replied to spiritustempore, to say it was me who continued the posting after 8.32, so if any apology was due it would be from me.

        August 17, 2013 at 3:26 pm
      • Josephine

        Actually, the Editor accepted your answer at 8.32 last night. I was not so clear and I asked editor to clarify her position because she accepted your comment about the bishops giving themselves wholeheartedly over to evil and that was ambiguous to me. – Editor answered me (and I “got it”) and then you posted again. So it’s me you should blame for the posts after 8.32. last night but I wanted to be absolutely sure of what the Editor was saying.

        August 17, 2013 at 3:25 pm
  • Prionsais

    I wonder at times if the consecration of Russia is now too little too late. In these days of political correctness the Catholic Church would probably be laughed at. There are a few countries now who are upsides with Russia in doing evil, Britain, Israel and America to name only a very few. The only way I can see the consecration happening without rocking the boat is for the Pope along with the world’s bishops consecrating a number of countries by naming them, God only knows, they need it, and slipping Russia in somewhere near the middle. Our Blessed Lady permitting of course.
    That way, wee Vladimir might not lose the rag

    August 17, 2013 at 11:54 am
    • Athanasius


      Our Lady was quite specific about the method of consecration she requires – Russia was to be named as the sole object of the act so that the world could see afterwards that it was by this singular act that Russia was being converted. Any other kind of consecration, such as mentioning Russia among other nations, would be an ambiguous act borne of human respect and would not therefore be acceptable to God.

      Such an act, when it finally comes, will not be too little too late. Our Lady has already said that the Pope and bishops will consecrate Russia but that “it will be late.” Any suffering the world may have to undergo in the meantime, and I think great suffering is yet to come, will be the result of the Pope and the bishops delaying the inevitable. That suffering will cease upon fulfillment of Our Lady’s request, Russia will suddenly convert, the world will experience a time of true peace and great holiness will abound once more in the Church. We have Our Lady’s word on that. I just wish those in authority in the Church would accept Our Lady’s word with humility and grant her request instead of following their own inclinations and pandering to human respect.

      August 17, 2013 at 12:52 pm
  • Prionsais


    Thanks for that. I just wonder though if we will still have a presence in Scotland when that (late)
    time comes. I can just imagine the hue and cry when a pope finally announces his intentions.
    Getting their own house in order will be a popular cry. The longer the consecration is held back the more difficult it will become. I just can’t understand why successive popes, knowing the seriousness of the situation, have done absolutely nothing other than tip-toe around the issue, especially when they know how many innocents may suffer.

    August 17, 2013 at 1:33 pm
    • Athanasius


      I think Fr. E. Dhanis might have something to do with that tip-toeing you refer to. His flawed and insulting theory more or less became the prominent one in Rome because it suited the ecumenical programme. This was the theory that Sister Lucy had made up the Third Secret and the consecration request from aspects her pious childhood, accidentally of course! In other words, God allowed Sister Lucy to mess around with heaven’s message. How’s that for audacity? Yet, they stick by it and by Vatican II reform. The devil is very clever at presenting good as evil and evil as good. That’s the “diabolical disorientation.”

      As for the hierarchy in Scotland, it will continue to oversee the ecumenical rot of the Faith in this country, I fear, just like so many other liberal hierarchies in so many other countries. If they can’t see the Satanic ruse, then they can’t apply the heavenly remedy.

      August 17, 2013 at 3:37 pm
      • Josephine

        “If they can’t see the Satanic ruse, then they can’t apply the heavenly remedy.”

        That’s it. I couldn’t agree more.

        August 17, 2013 at 3:40 pm
      • Prionsais


        Again, thanks for your comments. I often wonder if a few months of “sabbaticals” in the big bad world away from the comfort of their palaces would smarten their ideas up a bit. They all seem to me to be living in a fairy (no pun intended) tale world with their sermons written by someone like Hans Christian Anderson.

        August 17, 2013 at 7:38 pm
      • Athanasius


        Their sermons would be less damaging if they were written by Hans Christian Anderson. Sadly, I think most of them are penned by Hans Kung!

        The problem today is that none of them actually do live in palaces, which buildings once represented the dignity of the Episcopal office. The problem is precisely that too many bishops now spend too much time socialising in the big bad world and it’s secularising their spirituality.

        August 17, 2013 at 8:45 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    So if the devil’s gameplan is to eventually get one of his own on the Chair of Peter how far can he do this and still have someone who has jurisdiction? Does he always have to stick to liberal Popes? If a Cardinal is a freemason of the highest degrees and is elected is he excommunicated or would he have jurisdiction?

    August 17, 2013 at 4:40 pm
    • Athanasius


      This is a really complicated subject, not subject to the scrutiny of subjects, if you catch my drift.

      In questions of this magnitude, I think we always have to distinguish between the individual and the office. Is it possible that a Pope could excommunicate himself and yet still function as Pope? For me, it’s the same as asking if the Masses and Sacraments can be validly offered by a priest who is in a state of mortal sin. We know they can because the office of the priesthood is unaffected by the worthiness or otherwise of individual priests, so I would venture to suggest that the same rule applies to individual Popes.

      August 17, 2013 at 5:07 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        I get your drift.
        I would also say it would be a doggone mess if a really bad one kept his jurisdiction. Especially if he believed in consecrations, if you get my drift.
        Well, Our Lady will triumph so all’s well.

        August 17, 2013 at 5:29 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    Here is part of a letter that Sr. Lucia wrote around 1950. It’s from “The Whole Truth About Fatima” volume III, page 309.
    “Our Heavenly Mother loves the Russian people and I love them also; uniting myself to the secret designs of Her Immaculate Heart, I ardently desire their return to the right road which leads to Heaven. I know that the Russian people are great, generous and cultured, that they are capable of walking on the paths of justice, truth and good.”
    No sooner had I seen the kindness of the Mother of God in their regard than I began to look on them as brothers, and I wish nothing more than their salvation.”

    August 17, 2013 at 11:47 pm
  • Theresa Rose

    That Our Lady requested that Russia be Consecrated to her Immaculate Heart when she appeared to the three children at Fatima. In 1929 She appeared to Sister Lucia in her convent at Tuy, saying the time had come for the Pope and Bishops Consecrate Russia. A five minute prayer that is all that it would take.

    If not Russia would spread her errors throughtout the world. So far as has been said this Consecration has not been done. Our Lady did also say that it would be done, but it would be late.

    Many Rosaries are needed to be said in order for Our Lady’s request to be carried out. Just think of the Miracles that happened because many people prayed the Rosary. Here are one or two examples:-

    The Battle of Lepanto 1571 – where the Muslims forces were defeated saving Catholic Europe.

    Rosary protects Jesuit Priests from the atom bomb at Hiroshima 1945.

    Rosary Crusade frees Austria from communist rule 1955.

    And read this link:


    August 18, 2013 at 9:46 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: