1 January, 2014 – SSPX Launch Rosary Crusade

1 January, 2014 – SSPX Launch Rosary Crusade


As the crisis in the Church worsens, Bishop Fellay, SSPX, asks the faithful to offer as many rosaries as possible Click on the image of Our Lady to read more – and then tell us if you think it’s a good idea to count the number of rosaries we offer in order to participate in a “crusade”.  Some Catholics have mocked the idea – what do you think?

Comments (54)

  • Petrus

    What other option do we have to save the Church and the world? The Holy Rosary is the only means we have. We should never forget the power of the Rosary. Remember, Sister Lucy said:

    “The Most Holy Virgin in these last times in which we live has given a new efficacy to the recitation of the Rosary to such an extent that there is no problem, no matter how difficult it is, wheter temporal or above all spiritual, in the personal life of each one of us, of our families…that cannot be solved by the Rosary. There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we cannot resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary.”

    Its power is only surpassed by the Mass. Sister Lucy said in 1970:

    “Because the prayers of the Rosary (15 decades) and “The Beads” (5 decades) are, after the Sacred Liturgy of the Eucharist, what unites us the most to God through the richness of the prayers which compose it, all coming from Heaven, dictated by the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. ”

    We should also remember the promises of the Rosary given to St Dominic by Our Lady:

    Whoever shall faithfully serve me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall receive powerful graces.
    2. I promise my special protection and the greatest graces to all those who shall recite the Rosary.
    3. The Rosary shall be a powerful armor against hell, it will destroy vice, decrease sin, and defeat heresies
    4. It will cause virtue and good works to flourish; it will obtain for souls the abundant mercy of God; it will withdraw the hearts of people from the love of the world and its vanities, and will lift them to the desire of eternal things. Oh, that souls would sanctify themselves by this means.
    5. The soul which recommends itself to me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall not perish.
    6. Whoever shall recite the Rosary devoutly, applying himself to the consideration of its Sacred Mysteries shall never be conquered by misfortune. God will not chastise him in His justice, he shall not perish by an unprovided death; if he be just, he shall remain in the grace of God, and become worthy of eternal life.
    7. Whoever shall have a true devotion for the Rosary shall not die without the Sacraments of the Church.
    8. Those who are faithful to recite the Rosary shall have during their life and at their death the light of God and the plentitude of His graces; at the moment of death they shall participate in the merits of the Saints in Paradise.
    9. I shall deliver from purgatory those who have been devoted to the Rosary.
    10. The faithful children of the Rosary shall merit a high degree of glory in Heaven.
    11. You shall obtain all you ask of me by the recitation of the Rosary.
    12. All those who propagate the Holy Rosary shall be aided by me in their necessities.
    13. I have obtained from my Divine Son that all the advocates of the Rosary shall have for intercessors the entire celestial court during their life and at the hour of death
    14. All who recite the Rosary are my children, and brothers and sisters of my only Son, Jesus Christ.
    15. Devotion of my Rosary is a great sign of predestination.

    So, it is only fitting that the SSPX has called for this Rosary crusade. Since the election of the new Pope the crisis in the Church has escalated. The only way out is the Consecration of Russia.
    We know that the consecration will be late. Perhaps this is because we are too lukewarm in praying the Rosary and keeping the First Five Saturdays? Hopefully, the forthcoming Rosary Crusade will go some way to making reparation.

    January 2, 2014 at 11:13 am
  • editor


    An excellent comment although I have to take issue with your concluding paragraph.

    I’ve noticed that certain alleged Fatima apostolates have taken to explaining away the failure of successive popes to consecrate Russia, by blaming the laity for not praying enough rosaries and enrolling in the Brown Scapular etc.

    Now, that may be the case, who knows, but there’s nothing in the Fatima revelations to suggest that the consecration of Russia would be conditional on the zeal of the faithful.

    I understand why people are saying that – as a means of exhorting us to pray more etc. But it is being used in certain quarters to let the popes off the hook. Our Lady told Sr Lucia to let it be known that “the Holy Father” should consecrate Russia and thereafter would follow a period of peace in the world. There was no mention of this happening when sufficient rosaries had been offered or when the laity were all enrolled in the Brown Scapular.

    So, don’t get mad at me 🙂 but I’m not convinced that the consecration is late because of the lukewarmness of the Catholic population. The consecration hasn’t been done due to a combination of weak-to-no faith in the upper hierarchy, and the crackpot elevation of diplomacy to the highest virtue. Appeasing the Russians is more important than obeying Our Lady.

    January 2, 2014 at 12:01 pm
    • Thurifer

      If anything, perhaps it was the popes themselves who were not zealous enough for the consecration of Russia. Pope Benedict XV, Pius XI, Pius XII all were traditional popes and so really it appears to be their fault that it has not happened.

      January 3, 2014 at 2:56 am
  • Petrus


    Thanks for that. I’m sure I had read something about Sr Lucy saying that if we were all more fervent then we might hasten the Consecration. Maybe I’ve jut read an individual’s commentary. I will go and investigate. Many thanks again.

    Me, mad at you? You gotta be kidding!

    January 2, 2014 at 12:05 pm
  • Petrus


    This article from The Angelus seems to suggest that the Consecration will happen when the devotion to the Immaculate Heart spreads.


    I’m especially drawn to this paragraph:

    “The consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart was asked by Our Lady on June 13, 1929, at Tuy. During the apparitions of Fatima, on July 13, 1917, she had announced that she would come again and ask for it: “I will come to ask the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart…” In 1930 Our Lord reminded Lucy about the request of His Mother. The very consecration of Russia and its resulting conversion were submitted to conditions. One of them, the most important, is the recognition, promulgation, and practice of the devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”

    Now, doesn’t this suggest that by faithfully practising the devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, we may hasten the Consecration of Russia?

    January 2, 2014 at 12:21 pm
    • editor


      I’ve no time right now to study the article but I’m guessing that the “condition” is an interpretation of the author. I don’t recall Our Lady saying that “the Holy Father will consecrate Russia but it will be late due to the lukewarmness of the faithful”.

      That’s what I mean. I know there are plenty of commentators who have added that gloss, but I don’t recall hearing this “condition” until recently.

      January 2, 2014 at 1:18 pm
      • Josephine

        But IMHO it makes sense that the more we spread devotion to the Immaculate Heart, and the more rosaries prayed, the more likely we’ll get the consecration of Russia?

        January 2, 2014 at 1:20 pm
      • Petrus

        Yes, you are probably right. It’s an interesting point though. I’d like to hear what others think about this.

        January 2, 2014 at 2:06 pm
  • awkwardcustomer

    But the consecration of Russia has been done already. Says who? The Conciliar Church, that’s who.

    Seriously though, what will persuade Pope Francis and the entire Conciliar hierarchy to admit that they have been lying to the faithful and to the world by claiming that the consecration has been done and that Fatima has been fulfilled? Because for the consecration of Russia to be carried out, it will be necessary for the Pope to admit, a) that it hasn’t been done, and b) that previous popes were lying when they claimed that Fatima was fulfilled.

    A Rosary Crusade might achieve this admission and anything is possible for Our Lady. I, unfortunately have my doubts. Which is why I believe that only a gigantic shock in the form of a devastating war or societal collapse, including the physical devastation of the Church, will create enough desperation to force the remaining hierarchy to push for the consecration of Russia, probably as a last resort when all else has failed.

    Then we will see the period of peace promised by Our Lady of Fatima, during which time the forces antagonistic to the Church will lick their wounds and regroup, ready to make a gigantic comeback and continue as before. This point could possibly see the rise of the Antichrist. The promised period of peace is just that, a period.

    Meanwhile, pray the Rosary.

    January 2, 2014 at 3:25 pm
    • Petrus

      Awkward Customer,

      There has never been an official claim that the Consecration of Russia has been performed. As far as I know, no pope or Vatican official has ever declared that this.

      Certainly individual commentators have spoken of it as being done, but that is quite different.

      January 2, 2014 at 7:02 pm
      • awkwardcustomer


        There doesn’t have to be an official claim that the Consecration of Russia has been done. It just has to be implied, repeatedly, as in:


        This document from the Vatican quotes Sister Lucia stating that the Third Secret has been revealed and that Fatima relates to events that, according to Cardinals Sodano and Ratzinger, are “in the past”.

        The fact that there is no official claim that the Consecration of Russia has been carried out is irrelevant. Fatima has been relegated to the past, officially.

        January 2, 2014 at 9:04 pm
      • awkwardcustomer

        Actually, it was Cardinal Bertone, not Cardinal Sodano.

        January 2, 2014 at 9:12 pm
      • editor

        Awkward Customer,

        As Pope Benedict, Cardinal Ratzinger made clear that Fatima is NOT in the past. In fact he said (at Fatima) that those who think that Fatima is in the past “are deceived”.

        I think it was Fr Gruner who pointed out that during that press conference in 2000, Cardinal Ratzinger was careful with his words – saying things like, “As Cardinal Sodano (yes he was there) says….” That is, always pointing to others at the press conference, not making any definitive statements himself.

        The above is from a (woozy) memory (I’ve got a heavy cold coming on) so I could be wrong in part or in whole. When I feel up to it (cough, cough, sneeze, sneeze) I’ll see if I can find either the actual press conference (maybe on YouTube?) Or a transcript.

        Whatever, Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II before him, made plenty of statements about Fatima to overturn the ridiculous and scandalous statements made at the 2000 press conference.

        January 2, 2014 at 10:36 pm
      • awkwardcustomer


        This is what Cardinal Ratzinger said:

        “And so we come to the final question: What is the meaning of the “secret” of Fatima as a whole (in its three parts)? What does it say to us? First of all we must affirm with Cardinal Sodano: “… the events to which the third part of the ‘secret’ of Fatima refers now seem part of the past”. Insofar as individual events are described, they belong to the past. Those who expected exciting apocalyptic revelations about the end of the world or the future course of history are bound to be disappointed. Fatima does not satisfy our curiosity in this way, just as Christian faith in general cannot be reduced to an object of mere curiosity. What remains was already evident when we began our reflections on the text of the “secret”: the exhortation to prayer as the path of “salvation for souls” and, likewise, the summons to penance and conversion.”

        It’s quite clear what he meant, isn’t it?

        Also, it is quite clear that Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Sodano and the rest of the hierarchy were determined that the Third Secret of Fatima had been revealed. In other words, Fatima’s relevance to us now is due to its “exhortation to prayer …. and …. summons to penance and conversion”.

        Surely therefore, anyone who calls for the Third Secret to be revealed and/or the Consecration of Russia is accusing these individuals of being, ahem, economical with the truth.

        But why mince words? Because the implications for this are terrible. Are the SSPX, and the others, calling Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Bertone etc – LIARS?

        If the answer is yes, come out and say so. If the answer is no, accept the hierarchy’s version of Fatima.

        January 2, 2014 at 11:47 pm
      • Petrus

        Awkward Customer,

        You may remember that Pope Benedict XVI said at Fatima, “Those who think the message of Fatima relates only to the past are deceived.” I’m paraphrasing slightly, but that was the jist of what they were saying.

        I don’t think it helps to band about names like liars. The Great Apostasy, which will begin at the top, started just after the Second Vatican Council. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Council was mentioned in the words of Our Lady in the third part of the Secret. Perhaps a way for the Cardinals who released part of the Secret in 2000 could get themselves off on that technicality. The Second Vatican Council was “in the past”, but the Secret certainly does not refer ONLY to the past. I don’t know.

        What’s important is the future. No matter what individual Cardinals say, or write, we know from Pope John Paul II’s unscripted line in the 1984 Consecration of the World that the request of Our Lady hasn’t been fulfilled. Only a few years ago Benedict XVI was making enquiries with the Russian Orthodox bishops, asking if they would be greatly offended if he consecrated Russia. Crazy.

        On a side note, it’s amazing how many non-Catholics are starting to sense something is brewing in Russia. My 14 year old brother in law, a Protestant, is studying Modern Studies at school. He sat and told me on New Year’s Day that Russia will be at the centre of something big in the future. Something like the Third World War. Amazing.

        January 3, 2014 at 11:06 am
      • awkwardcustomer


        Do you have a reference for that quote by Pope Benedict XVI? Editor mentioned it too. Did Pope Benedict give any reasons as to why he changed his mind? Was the Holy Father admitting that he and Cardinal Sodano had been deceived when they made the claim about Fatima referring to past events? Or did he mean that the continued relevance of Fatima was Our Lady’s message of prayer, conversion and penance?

        You say that it isn’t helpful to “band about names like liars”. This suggests that it’s acceptable to imply dishonesty without actually saying so.

        According to the Vatican, the Third Secret of Fatima has been revealed and the ongoing relevance of Fatima lies in its message of prayer, conversion and penance. This is the Vatican line on the subject, accepted by the the majority of Catholics.

        Clearly you don’t believe that the Third Secret has been revealed. (Neither do I for that matter.) So you are willing to imply, along with the SSPX, that the Vatican is being – how shall I put it – less than honest over this matter. Or how about economical with the truth? Whatever. If they’re not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, what are they?

        Also, the Great Apostasy must have started long before Vatican II, or Vatican II would not have happened.

        January 3, 2014 at 12:00 pm
      • editor

        Awkward Customer,

        Pope Benedict XVI said (at Fatima) on May 13, 2010: “He deceives himself who thinks the prophetic mission of Fatima is concluded.” It’s quoted here (and in many other places)

        Thanks for providing the actual quote from the press conference in 2000 – I think that whoever I heard saying that Cardinal Ratzinger had pointed to Cardinal Sodano, not making the statements himself, was stretching “we must affirm with Cardinal Sodano” which makes me suspect it was Fr Gruner – with whom I differ somewhat in my interpretation of “prudence”.

        However, at Catholic Truth, although we do not shy away from calling a spade a spade, we tend not to call people “liars”. Thanks to the legal eagles who have given us friendly advice over the years, we’ve learnt that it is better to stick with the accurate term “falsehoods” because it is very difficult to prove that someone is lying – the implication being that the falsehood is spoken deliberately.

        In all our years of publication (15 in all this month) I have only used the term “liar” once, to describe a priest in Ireland who persisted in saying that Fr Gruner is suspended despite several letters from Fr Gruner himself and all the evidence anyone could hope for being provided in our newsletter (sent to him) and on the Fatima website. I argued that it is a fair assumption that that priest knew the truth when peddling the falsehood of suspension against Fr Gruner.

        Generally speaking, however, we happily accuse all and sundry of speaking falsehoods, if that is demonstrably true. Clearly, Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Sodano, who had read the Third Secret, spoke falsely at that 2000 press conference. I think as things worsened during his own pontificate, Pope Benedict tried to backtrack from that. However, there are commentators who don’t agree and argue that even the above quote from his 2010 visit to Fatima is double-speak.

        I’m sorry I took so long to get back to you but I’ve been coughing and sneezing for the past few days, culminating in the need for a day or two in bed, as my cold is in danger of turning into flu, and I’m feeling very sorry for myself.

        Apologies in advance, then, for any delays in responding to future posts over the next couple of days.

        January 3, 2014 at 2:33 pm
      • awkwardcustomer


        Fr Gruner said the following in the article you linked to:
        “As Pope Benedict XVI said on May 13, 2010: “He deceives himself who thinks the prophetic mission of Fatima is concluded.”

        As is so common with a lot of reporting, Fr Gruner provides no reference or context for this quote by Pope Benedict, who could have been referring to the part of the Fatima message which calls for ‘prayer, conversion and penance’. Without this vital information, it is simply not possible to conclude that Pope Benedict was backtracking in any way from the Vatican line on Fatima.

        I am not suggesting that we make outright accusations of lying about anyone. But those who accept the Vatican version of Fatima will conclude that this is what the SSPX means when a Rosary Crusade is launched for, among other things, the Consecration of Russia.

        Speaking a falsehood may not be a deliberate lie if the person is not aware that what they are saying is not true. Fair enough. But anyone who believes that the Third Secret has not been revealed, has to conclude that those who have read the Third Secret are lying. They have read the Third Secret after all and must have deliberately set out to deceive the Faithful and the world by claiming Sister Lucy’s vision to be the Secret.

        May you recover soon from your cold and may it not develop into the flu.

        January 3, 2014 at 3:28 pm
      • Josephine

        Awkward Customer,

        Here is the relevant two paragraphs and then the full text of what Pope Benedict said at Fatima on Feast of Fatima, 2010

        “We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete. Here there takes on new life the plan of God which asks humanity from the beginning: “Where is your brother Abel […] Your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground!” (Gen 4:9). Mankind has succeeded in unleashing a cycle of death and terror, but failed in bringing it to an end… In sacred Scripture we often find that God seeks righteous men and women in order to save the city of man and he does the same here, in Fatima, when Our Lady asks: “Do you want to offer yourselves to God, to endure all the sufferings which he will send you, in an act of reparation for the sins by which he is offended and of supplication for the conversion of sinners?” (Memoirs of Sister Lúcia, I, 162).

        At a time when the human family was ready to sacrifice all that was most sacred on the altar of the petty and selfish interests of nations, races, ideologies, groups and individuals, our Blessed Mother came from heaven, offering to implant in the hearts of all those who trust in her the Love of God burning in her own heart. At that time it was only to three children, yet the example of their lives spread and multiplied, especially as a result of the travels of the Pilgrim Virgin, in countless groups throughout the world dedicated to the cause of fraternal solidarity. May the seven years which separate us from the centenary of the apparitions hasten the fulfilment of the prophecy of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, to the glory of the Most Holy Trinity.”

        To me, the bit at the end beginning “May the seven years…” shows that Pope Benedict was backtracking and trying to make clear that he knows the Message of Fatima has not yet been fulfilled. For some reason the popes have not felt free to speak out in words of one syllable to say this and that is what Fr Gruner contends judging by his speeches on the subject. He seems to think that the Secretary of State (first Sodano and then Bertone) prevented the popes from speaking out. This would tie in with the “forced resignation” theory.

        January 3, 2014 at 4:27 pm
      • Petrus

        Awkward Customer,

        I have to say that I agree with most of your last post. You wrote:

        “they’re not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”

        Spot on. What they released is the vision, but that’s not the whole thing. What’s missing is the words of Our Lady after the vision. So, they released part of the Third Secret and then tried to give dodgy interpretation of it. In fact, Our Lady explained the meaning of the vision. We know from various sources that the Third Secret was written on two pieces of paper. One containing the vision and one containing the words of Our Lady. Therefore I find it hard to disagree with you – the Cardinals withheld key information that day. This is misleading and deceptive.

        What I think happened was that they tried to bury Fatima once and for all. I’m not sure how many people were convinced by that press conference. I’m pretty sure Mother Angelica said live on EWTN, “I get the feeling we weren’t given the full story”.

        The following story I’ve heard a couple of times but I can’t for the life of me remember where. Cardinal Ratzinger had a conversation about twenty years ago with a German priest friend about the Third Secret. After the Press Conference of 2000, both the Cardinal and his friend were getting ready to concelebrate a Mass when the friend confronted him about the discrepancies between what was discussed many years before and what was released in 2000. Apparently, Cardinal Ratzinger admitted “There is more”. Now, I don’t have a source for this but I’ve heard it a few times. It’s very telling.

        Was Pope Benedict backtracking when he said what he said at Fatima in 2010? I don’t know. I don’t think he had the strength or courage to come out and say “I was wrong. I didn’t reveal the whole thing” so he tried to do it in a subtle way. This is only my opinion.

        As for your last paragraph, the Church has always had enemies within. St. Pius X said he hadn’t defeated Modernism, but had only forced it underground. However, when the Second Vatican II was called, a traditional schema was written up. Only at the very last minute was this schema binned and the Council started with a blank canvas. If the original schema had stayed we might have ended up with a very different Council.

        January 3, 2014 at 4:18 pm
      • awkwardcustomer

        Thank you Petrus and yes, they released the vision without the words of Our Lady, and claimed that the full Third Secret had been revealed. Does this count as dishonesty by omission?

        As I replied to Josephine below, the full text of Pope Benedict’s words at Fatima in 2010 (posted by Josephine above) do not suggest to me in any way that Pope Benedict was backtracking, either subtly or otherwise. While it is admirable to always look for the best in people and not view other too harshly without the full facts, I think this virtue can be taken too far sometimes.

        The question must be, why would the Conciliar Popes try to close down Fatima in this way. Perhaps the words of Our Lady in the Third Secret challenge the Council. Or perhaps in these ecumenical times they don’t want Russia to convert.

        Which raises the question as to the inaction of pre-Conciliar popes. Has Fr Gruner or anyone else, offered an explanation for the fact that neither Pope Pius XI or Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia?

        Perhaps there’s a very mundane answer to all this. Popes, Cardinals, Bishops simply don’t take Marian apparitions to peasant children all that seriously.

        January 3, 2014 at 6:48 pm
      • Petrus

        Awkward Customer,

        “Does this count as dishonesty by omission?”

        I have to say, yes, it does. Without questions. I’m sure not telling “the whole truth” is dishonesty.

        “The question must be, why would the Conciliar Popes try to close down Fatima in this way.”

        I think this can be answered using two words – diabolical disorientation. A loss of Faith. I don’t think the majority of the hierarchy believe in Fatima. If they truly believed they would follow Our Lady’s instructions.

        “Perhaps the words of Our Lady in the Third Secret challenge the Council. Or perhaps in these ecumenical times they don’t want Russia to convert.”

        I think both of these things are true. In fact, I’m sure there will be something about reforming the liturgy in the Third Secret. This reminds me of the prophecy of Cardinal Paceilli, the future Pope Pius XII:

        “I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in her liturgy, her theology and her soul….

        “I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject her ornaments and make her feel remorse for her historical past.

        “A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them, like Mary Magdalene weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, “Where have they taken Him?”

        You then asked the question:

        “Which raises the question as to the inaction of pre-Conciliar popes. Has Fr Gruner or anyone else, offered an explanation for the fact that neither Pope Pius XI or Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia?”

        This is a very good question and one which I don’t think I’ve heard asked before, never mind answered.

        All of these things are a result of the diabolical disorientation. The Devil is having a field day. Remember what Our Lady told Sr Lucy:

        “She (the Blessed Virgin Mary) told me that the devil is in the mood for engaging in a decisive battle against the Virgin. And a decisive battle is the final battle where one side will be victorious and the other side will suffer defeat. Also from now on we must choose sides. Either we are for God or we are for the devil. There is no other possibility.”

        Sadly, modern prelates, the popes included, have been instruments of the Devil. Hopefully, the forthcoming Rosary crusade will increase grace and deliver us from these awful things.

        January 3, 2014 at 8:50 pm
    • Frankier

      Even a devastating war or societal collapse still wouldn`t convince most of the hierarchy. Not when they are still not convinced by the church scandals, the filth and secularisation of the world or the rapidly emptying churches. I wouldn`t like to ask many of them to say a Hail Mary far less a decade of the rosary.

      January 2, 2014 at 9:22 pm
      • editor


        Correct – they’re apostates, most of them.

        January 2, 2014 at 10:38 pm
      • awkwardcustomer


        Perhaps they won’t survive. The ‘Third Secret’, or vision, or whatever, could be viewed literally. Then it’ll be up to whichever true bishops remain to choose a pope who will carry out the consecration.

        January 2, 2014 at 11:53 pm
  • catholicconvert1

    Of course we should say the Rosary as often as is humanly possible. People may mock and deride us for our devotion to it, but we can never be too devoted to Our Lady, as through the Rosary we meditate on the life of Christ through Mary’s eyes. She brings us closer to God, in her role as the Mediatrix of all Graces. Just look at what the Saints and Popes have said about it:

    “Never will anyone who says his Rosary every day be led astray. This is a statement that I would gladly sign with my blood.” Saint Louis de Montfort
    “You must know that when you ‘hail’ Mary, she immediately greets you!…If you greet her, she will answer you right away and converse with you!” Saint Bernardine of Siena
    “Of all prayers the rosary is the most beautiful and the richest in graces…love the Rosary and recite it every day with devotion St. Pius X
    “How beautiful is the family that recites the Rosary every evening.” by Pope John Paul II
    “The Rosary is my favorite prayer. A marvelous prayer! Marvelous in its simplicity and its depth.” Pope John Paul II
    “The Rosary is a priceless treasure inspired by God.” by St. Louis De Monfort
    “There is no surer means of calling down God’s blessings upon the family… than the daily recitation of the Rosary.” by Pope Pius XII
    “The Rosary is the most excellent form of prayer and the most efficacious means of attaining eternal life. It is the remedy for all our evils, the root of all our blessings. There is no more excellent way of praying.” by Pope Leo XIII
    “Give me an army saying the Rosary and I will conquer the world” by Pope Blessed Pius IX
    If you desire peace in your hearts, in your homes, and in your country, assemble each evening to recite the Rosary. Let not even one day pass without saying it, no matter how burdened you may be with many cares and labors.” by Pope Pius XI
    “Our Lady has never refused me a grace through the recitation of the rosary.” by St. (Padre) Pio of Pietrelcina
    “The greatest method of praying is to pray the Rosary.” Saint Francis de Sales
    “One day, through the Rosary and the Scapular, Our Lady will save the world.” Saint Dominic.

    One look at this glorious list should tell our detractors who is on the right side. At times like this, I can’t help but think of the sickening comments uttered by Pope Paul VI- ‘the Rosary is a prayer fit only for the poor, the illiterate and the blind’.

    January 2, 2014 at 3:56 pm
    • Petrus

      Catholic Convert,

      Actually, I don’t believe Pope Paul VI said that. I’ve read that on a few websites but I can’t accept it. He certainly wouldn’t have meant it in the way it is presented. He may have said something about the Rosary being a prayer for everyone, including the blind etc.

      It may interest you to know that when Archbishop Bugnini butchered the Mass, his Commission then tried to move onto the Rosary. Pope Paul VI didn’t allow it. That’s why I take these claims with a large pinch of salt.

      January 2, 2014 at 6:57 pm
      • Vianney

        I agree with you Petrus, I’ve never heard that Pope Paul VI said this and don’t believe he did especially as I came across this quote from him:

        ” If evils increase, the devotion of the People of God should also increase. …Pray ardently to our most merciful mother Mary by saying the Rosary during the month of October, as We have already indicated. This prayer is well-suited to the devotion of the People of God, most pleasing to the Mother of God and most effective in gaining heaven’s blessings.”

        January 2, 2014 at 11:14 pm
  • Frankier

    It’s not all that difficult to work out whether or not Russia has been consecrated to The Immaculate Heart. Our Lady promised the conversion of Russia and a period of peace if her wishes were fulfilled.
    I would assume that the conversion and peace would have kicked in right after the consecration.

    For those who think otherwise, I can assure them that there has neither been a conversion nor the promised peace. In fact, the reverse has happened.

    Anyone who still maintains that the consecration has been carried out must therefore assume that
    Our Lady was either at the kidding or has reneged on her promises.

    January 3, 2014 at 12:02 pm
  • awkwardcustomer


    There’s no space to reply to you above, but thank you for posting the full text of what Pope Benedict said at Fatima in 2010.

    And now it seems obvious to me that Pope Benedict was not backtracking in any way on what he previously said. Sorry. Pope Benedict did not stray from the official Vatican line on Fatima, at least in public. What he might have said in private is irrelevant. The Pope is a public figure and Pope Benedict did not challenge in any way the official Vatican line that the Third Secret has been released, that Heaven is satisfied with the Consecrations that have been carried out, and that the continued relevance of Fatima relates solely to Our Lady’s message of ‘prayer, conversion and penance’.

    I cannot believe for one minute that the popes have not felt free to state loudly and clearly the full truth about Fatima, as you suggest. Does Fr Gruner really believe that the Secretary of State (Sodano and Bertone) has the power to prevent the popes from speaking out? How can he think this?

    My contention is that they have deliberately withheld the full truth about Fatima.

    January 3, 2014 at 6:18 pm
    • editor

      Awkward Customer,

      (Responding to the full text of the Pope’s statement at Fatima, posted by Josephine)

      “And now it seems obvious to me that Pope Benedict was not backtracking in any way on what he previously said …Pope Benedict did not stray from the official Vatican line on Fatima, at least in public”

      Having attended a couple of Fr Gruner’s conferences in Rome, I recall that he (and others) argued that, given that the Pope is effectively being bullied by the Secretary of State (my word, not theirs) the Pope can only speak in some sort of code (so to speak!) and send signals. Thus, what he said at Fatima in 2010 is interpreted by Fr Gruner et al, as a signal to the faithful that he, the Pope, knows that Fatima is not in the past.

      Obviously you can take that interpretation or you can leave it. Personally, I’m at a loss, which is why I generally ignore this part of the argument and focus on the key objective data only, which is that the Consecration has not been done. There are plenty of signs, such as the crazily erratic weather right now, that the beginning of some sort of physical chastisement is already upon us, but the key objective fact is that the Consecration of Russia has manifestly not been done – because if those who claim that it has been done are right, then Our Lady hasn’t kept her word about the promised period of peace in the world, and we know that that is unthinkable.

      And you are right – it is no exaggeration to say that it looks very much like the Popes are deliberately withholding the full truth about Fatima from us. It is certainly a fact that we have not been given the full truth about Fatima. No question about it. Whether it makes them “liars” or not is a moot point. As ever, I prefer to stick with the issues and try not to give our enemies a stick with which to beat us by accusing us of name-calling. The key issue is that the Popes have not published the full Fatima Message. We can speculate on motives and so on (and the motive seems clear – see below) but no intelligent person can deny the fact that we have not been given the full “secret”. The Vatican authorities, from successive popes down, have failed to give us the Third Secret in its entirety and there can be no justification for this, given that Our Lady instructed it be revealed in 1960. Regarding motive – you don’t have to be a genius to work out that Our Lady probably warned against the changes in the Church/Council etc, hence the Vatican cover-up, culminating in the disgraceful press conference of 2000 with the shameful attempt to close down Fatima forever. Shame on all involved. And God help them at their judgment.

      January 4, 2014 at 1:13 pm
      • awkwardcustomer


        I find it difficult to believe that not just one Pope but a succession of Popes, have been bullied into covering up the full truth of Fatima. They are grown men after all. They must have at least SOME backbone. However…..

        Six Popes have failed to consecrate Russia, including Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII, both of whom were alive as the Russian Bolsheviks murdered millions of their own citizens. Our Lady asked in 1929 for Russia to be consecrated. If Pope Pius XI had carried out the Consecration then, or soon after, Russia might have converted in time to prevent the deliberate starving to death in the early 1930s of 7 million Ukrainians, many of them Catholics, in the genocide that the Ukrainians call the ‘Holodomor’. What’s more, WWII, which resulted in the death of 60 million people and the Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe, might have been prevented.

        Do you have an an opinion as to why the pre-Conciliar Popes also failed to consecrate Russia?

        Unless Fr Gruner really does have a point. But if he does then the Fatima message was being obscured long before Vatican II.

        PS I have to go out now, but will be musing on this. I would love to hear any explanation for the fact that neither Pope Pius XI or Pope Pius XII carried out the Consecration of Russia according to Our Lady’s wishes. Think how many lives might have been saved.

        January 4, 2014 at 6:33 pm
      • editor

        Awkward Customer,

        There is no suggestion that the two pre-conciliar Popes – Pius XI and XII – were “bullied” into not consecrating Russia. In the case of Pius XI, he simply did not believe that the apparitions were fully proven – click here and in the case of Pius XII he performed two inadequate consecrations – one of the entire world, and the second naming Russia but not involving the bishops of the world – click here

        Arguably, there is some excuse for these two popes, at that early stage, to have failed to carry out the Russian Consecration, but as the crisis has deepened so clearly in our times, there is absolutely no excuse for any pontiff, from Pope John XXIII onwards – especially if Vatican II and the “reforms” to be imposed are mentioned in the Third Secret – to refuse to consecrate Russia as prescribed. No excuse whatsoever.

        January 4, 2014 at 7:22 pm
      • awkwardcustomer


        I clicked both of the links you provided but am none the wiser. At the end of the day, neither Pope Pius XI or Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia according to Our Lady’s wishes. Not even while Stalin, of all people, ruled Russia.

        January 5, 2014 at 7:38 pm
      • editor

        I know that. The links explain that Pius XI didn’t really believe the apparitions (to put it simply) and Pius XII did not include all the bishops, but consecrated Russia by name without including them. This is the information in the links. I was not trying to prove that they consecrated Russia – your question was why did the pre-conciliar popes NOT consecrate Russia.

        January 5, 2014 at 8:30 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    I think they may have withheld the Third Secret on purpose but then again I don’t know for sure if they have the spoken words of Our Lady. I mean the paper could have been destroyed or hidden. Perhaps they had the vision and the rest by word of mouth. Anyway I wouldn’t call Cardinal Bertone or Pope Benedict a liar. They may not have the document anymore.

    January 3, 2014 at 8:25 pm
    • editor


      They have the documents. They’ve read the Third Secret. They have not been truthful. Those are facts. Since we cannot read souls then the extent of their dishonesty is not for us to determine, which is why I prefer not to call them “liars” but they may well be liars. They are certainly not telling the full truth about Fatima and at the press conference in 2000 they pretended they had done so. Notice, neither Pope John Paul II nor Sister Lucy attended that Press Conference. If they had the truth on their side, don’t you think Cardinals Sodano & Ratzinger would have invited, at least Sister Lucy, to verify that the Fatima Message had been fulfilled and should now be consigned to history? Instead, they strongly implied that parts of the Fatima Message, may be the result of childish pious belief or some such phrase. The full text is above, posted by Josephine, so you can check that for yourself.

      Don’t let’s make excuses for the Vatican on this. There IS no excuse. If Our Lady asked for the Fatima Message to be revealed in full by no later than 1960, it was for good reason. It was not for them to decide that Our Lady got it wrong.

      January 4, 2014 at 1:26 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        I’m sticking with my opinion on the Third Secret. I believe Pope John XXIII read it and withheld it. I believe the secret was in two parts, the vision and Our Lady’s spoken words. I don’t know if the Vatican had the spoken words by the time John Paul was elected. It was supposed to have been read in 1960 or at Sr. Lucia’s death (why the latter I can’t figure out).
        Anyway after 1960 why would the secret be kept whole and entire? Why would someone like Cardinal Villot or others be oh so eager to have it passed on to the next Pope? To me there’s enough doubt at least to resist calling Cardinal Bertone a liar although he and the Popes would have had access to those who had read the full secret. The interpretation put out with the vision was ridiculous.

        January 4, 2014 at 4:59 pm
      • editor


        Why not email Fr Gruner to ask for the answer to the question in your concluding paragraph – he is answering questions every day in short video interviews questions@thefatimacenter.com

        It’s very obvious, in my opinion, that such an important document would not be thrown into the bin, but would be kept in the Vatican archives, but for your own certainty, it would be worth asking Fr Gruner who may well be able to provide the level of evidence required to convince your good self.

        January 4, 2014 at 5:53 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        I was always told that putting something in the Vatican Archives was just as good as hiding it! I’ve read Fr. Gruner since I could read (his letters and magazines never went into our archives 🙂 ) and I’ve read The Devil’s Final Battle. I still don’t know for sure if Pope John Paul and those around him had physical access to the words Sr. Lucia wrote. I think there’s enough evidence that you can believe they probably did. But to me there’s still room for doubt and so I don’t accuse anyone of lying, that’s all.
        (I think I might ask Fr. Gruner what he thinks Our Lady meant when she said she will come back a seventh time.)

        January 4, 2014 at 7:12 pm
      • editor


        I asked a priest who has read much on Fatima about this and he replied as follows -(Andrew Cesanek works at the Fatima Center in Canada with Fr Gruner):

        About 13 years ago Andrew Cesanek wrote an article meticulously and systematically presenting all the documentary evidence that the popes did indeed read the secret. We even have the name of the native Portuguese speaking bishop who translated the secret into Italian: Mons. Tavares (later Bishop of Macau), for John XXIII. There was an expression in Portuguese that seemed theologically problematic to John Paul II, who spoke both Italian and Portuguese – so he asked for a second translation from a native Portuguese speaker, Mons. Carreira (this information is not in Andrew’s article and comes from a different source in Rome.) Same result. The problematic phraeseology regarding a pope . . . There are other texts in books and articles too – I read them long ago. END.

        I asked Father if he would obtain the title of the article/book by Andrew and when he provides it. I’ll publicise it on our links page.

        January 5, 2014 at 12:26 am
      • 3littleshepherds

        Okay. Thank you.

        January 5, 2014 at 12:32 am
  • Theresa Rose

    Bishop Fellay has called for Rosary “Crusades” before. And really it is not a new idea, but it is essential for our times. Over the centuries I am sure there have been other such crusades. After all the Rosary is a weapon that demons fear. Think back to Austria after the second world war ended. Russian communist troops up and left Austria following one such crusade. It had never been heard of before, Communistic Russia always held onto countries they conquered. Then there was the successful outcome of the Battle of Lepanto against the Muslims and Europe was saved from their rule.


    Our Lady at Fatima did call for the Rosary to be said and many of them, it is the most powerful prayer after the Mass.

    January 4, 2014 at 7:32 am
    • 3littleshepherds

      Theresa Rose
      That’s it in a nutshell.
      Bishop Fellay has also asked everyone to make sacrifices as part of the rosary crusade. Some Catholics don’t understand what this means. They don’t understand how to make an offering of their actions, their sufferings, their prayers, etc. in union with Our Lord’s merits. One good way to learn how to do this is to read St. Therese’s autobiography or the story of the three children of Fatima.

      January 4, 2014 at 8:36 am
      • Petrus

        The most effective sacrifices we can make is to do the little things well, being faithful to our duty of state.

        January 4, 2014 at 8:46 am
      • Lily

        I’ve actually heard one Catholic saying he thought the whole business of offering things up was a way of keeping the faithful in subjection.

        January 4, 2014 at 4:19 pm
      • Petrus

        I’d question the catholicity of such a person.

        January 4, 2014 at 4:45 pm
      • editor

        The entire spiritual life of any Catholic is built upon the unique self-sacrifice of Christ on the Cross and His injunction to follow His example and take up our cross every day. That is a clear instruction to “offer things up”. It sure is easier said that done but it’s certainly not a way “of keeping the faithful in subjection” but of preaching the core of Christianity – which is the cross. I remember once being present at a Catholic teachers’ in-service day when this question was raised and one of the Heads of (RE) Department present, shook his head, and waving his hands slightly in front of himself to indicate “balancing” said: “the cross and Christianity?” That’s a difficult one.


        January 4, 2014 at 9:29 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    Here’s a list of some of the sacrifices one can offer up. This is from the US district’s crusade booklet.
    Being attentive while praying
    Being attentive during Mass
    Meals on time and in common
    Keeping a good schedule
    Keeping the house clean
    avoiding internet and movies
    Being punctual for work
    Returning home on time
    Being attentive at work
    Avoiding wasting time
    Not being obstinate with our opinions 😳
    Moderation in food and drink
    Not complaining
    Bearing our tribulations well
    Preparing well for confessions
    Going often to Holy Communion
    Frequent spiritual communions
    Frequent confessions

    January 4, 2014 at 9:21 pm
  • editor


    You omitted the smiley face at this one – so let me add it now…

    avoiding internet and movies 🙂

    January 4, 2014 at 9:31 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    One of the books recommended in the crusade booklet is “Let Yourself Be Led by the Immaculate” which is in the words of St. Maximilian Kolbe.

    January 4, 2014 at 10:38 pm
    • Lily

      I don’t see the connection – did St Maximilian Kolbe say we shouldn’t use the internet or watch movies?

      January 4, 2014 at 11:01 pm
      • 3littleshepherds

        I wasn’t replying to Editor. I was just saying that was a good book to read during the crusade. 🙂 It does look like a reply.

        January 5, 2014 at 12:15 am
      • editor


        That’s funny!

        I must check out that book by St Maximilian Kolbe. Thanks for mentioning it.

        January 5, 2014 at 11:46 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: