Consecration of Russia: God Got It Wrong! – World Apostolate of Fatimaeditor
Martin Blackshaw (aka blogger Athanasius) writes…
Alerted by the comment of a blogger here a few weeks ago, concerning a website claim by the World Apostolate of Fatima (WAF) that the consecration of Russia was done by Pope John Paul II in 1984, I began a correspondence exchange with a representative of that Apostolate with the aim of enlightening him and his colleagues to the truth of the matter.
For reasons of respect for privacy I will not name the individual with whom I debated the issue. All I will say is that, two weeks down the line, and after much batting back and forth of claim and counter-claim, I have been forced to conclude that the WAF is dangerous to unsuspecting Catholic souls and should be avoided.
There is an established principle in the Church when it comes to heresy, which is that a heresy containing elements of truth is much more dangerous than one that is an outright falsehood. The same principle applies in general wherever truth is paramount, be it WAF propaganda or the doctrines of secular ideologies.
Communism, for example, ensnared many because it sided with the poor working classes against the exploitation and injustices visited upon them by the rich and powerful. Accompanying its alluring empathy, however, was the lie that class warfare and a revolutionary overthrow of Church and State was the answer to all their problems.
The theoreticians, architects and implementers of the Communist utopia knew well how to woo the ignorant with promises of human dignity and equality for all. Like the poor beggars who fell for the same revolutionary rhetoric in 18th century France, however, the overthrow of Church and the established order was to result in a much more despotic governance than the one they had rid themselves of.
And so it proved in Russia and its satellites post-1917. Instead of freedom and their fill, as Communism had promised, the proletariat found itself more enslaved and hungry than before. It also found itself subject to mass extinction upon the whim of whatever paranoid ego maniac happened to murder his way to the top.
By the late 1980s the Soviet Union was so greatly in danger of internal collapse that it shifted its position to the delight of its long-suffering people. Now there was to be “Glasnost” and “Perestroika” (Openness and restructuring), a contingency plan laid out many decades before by Lenin himself.
All at once the Iron Curtain was withdrawn and western democracy was welcomed in together with its Capitalist ideals and market economy. Communism, it seemed, had failed in its objective and the world rejoiced.
For many lesser informed Catholics this was proof positive that the 1984 consecration of the world made by Pope John Paul II was accepted by heaven. Russia was converted, they said, though to what exactly remains a mystery to this day.
What has happened since, imperceptible to the masses, is that all Western governments including the United States have become more Socialist and atheistic in their governance, to the extent that God is today entirely banished from the political, economic and legislative life of almost all Western Democracies.
Evolutionism, first recognised and embraced by Karl Marx as the key to cultural anarchy, is now everywhere the fundamental global Gospel upon which all else is built and proceeds. Contrarily, The Creator, His Commandments and the natural law are dismissed as myths of a less enlightened age.
Complimenting this new vision for the new post-Christian Europe is a model of the old Supreme Soviet, called the European Union.
The Supreme Soviet was a series of legislative bodies (parliaments) based within the Kremlin that made all the laws by which the various Soviet Socialist Republics were bound. Though individual nation States in Europe are not yet entirely governed in the same way by the EU’s Brussels-based centralised government, this is the ultimate goal and many are walking blindly into it.
In their pre-Vatican II Encyclicals, the Popes warned of the dangers threatening nations should Communism ensnare them. They predicted in particular that such nations would rapidly decline financially, spiritually and morally. Who would argue that this is not the very scenario we are witnessing today in all the nations of Europe?
Yes, it would appear that the “Glasnost” and “Perestroika” introduced by Gorbachev nearly thirty years ago signified less the death of the Communist ideology in Russia than its surreptitious expansion to every corner of the globe.
It was the West that was opened up to restructuring; the moral voice of the Catholic Church having been silenced by the lure of Catholic/Orthodox relations at Vatican II, whose liberal prelates became metaphorically high on a truth-altering drug long promoted by Communism, called ecumenism.
Cardinal Josef Tomko, friend and advisor to Pope John Paul II at the time of the 1984 consecration of the world, later admitted that it was precisely for fear of damaging Catholic/ Orthodox ecumenical relations that he personally advised the Pope not to mention Russia.
That John Paul II complied with the request of Cardinal Tomko rather than with the request of Our Lady is obvious from the following unscripted line the Pontiff inserted into his ‘Act of Entrustment of the World’ at that time: “Enlighten especially the peoples whose consecration and entrustment by us you are awaiting.”
When I brought this glaring fact of a non-mention of Russia to the attention of my WAF correspondent, he rather indifferently replied that he personally saw it as the Pope exercising his power to bind and loose by prudently choosing a less direct form of consecrating Russia in order to avoid any persecution of Russian Catholics. He even drew ridiculous parallels with the wartime prudence of Pius XII in dealing with the persecution of the Jews to bolster his theory.
In other words, he was saying that heaven hadn’t really thought through the practical consequences of a direct consecration of Russia by the Pope to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and so the Pope was forced to employ corrective tactics that were more prudent than God’s.
I put it to him that what he was suggesting bordered on blasphemy, that all John Paul had demonstrated by his actions was disobedience to God and a woeful lack of trust in the divine promise.
To this he replied that Sister Lucy had herself confirmed heaven’s acceptance of the 1984 consecration. He even directed me to a DVD for sale on Amazon in which Cardinal Vidal apparently has Sister Lucy making the confirmation on camera.
My obvious response was that any such video confirmation from Sister Lucy, if it were genuine, would have been utilised to the full by the Vatican a long time ago. It would not be left as an obscure production available only to the few who stumble upon its existence and are prepared to fork out good money to buy a foreign language copy from Amazon.
Besides this, Sister Lucy is on record as having several times testified to the non-fulfilment of the 1984 consecration. She declared the fact, for example, in a 1985 interview with the Blue Army’s Spanish magazine Sol de Fatima, and again in 1987 to the journalist Enrico Romero.
A more thorough examination of the facts can be found here: http://www.cfnews.org/page10/page91/consecration-addup.html
So then I asked him about the non-participation of the world’s bishops in the 1984 act, to which he replied that they did in fact participate in “spiritual union” with the Pope. The problem with this strange assertion, however, is that said “spiritual union” was not clearly discernable to the world and is very hard to prove.
Had not Our Lord expressed to Sister Lucy His desire that His Mother’s Immaculate Heart be honoured beside His Sacred Heart, which is why he wants the world to see the conversion of Russia resulting from a public and solemn act to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Pope and the bishops?
As far as my WAF correspondent is concerned, though, there never was a specific request from heaven for a public and solemn participation of the bishops with the Pope. This, said he, was a corruption of the Message introduced by some of the more extreme Fatima enthusiasts.
And so I came to the fruits of the 1984 act of John Paul II. I chronicled for him the non-conversion of Russia, its continued hostility to Catholicism, its exploding immorality and its renewed Cold War stance with the West that threatens shortly to erupt into global nuclear conflict. This last observation was made recently by a former Commander-in-Chief of the British Armed Forces.
I further chronicled the crisis in the Church, the deteriorating culture of Western Nations, the rise of Islamic terrorism, the conflicts in the Middle East and so many other manifestations of evil indicative of a heavenly request not fulfilled and a world consequently running headlong into the abyss.
To this observation my correspondent replied that God rarely brings about miraculous conversions by divine intervention, and so we must be patient and permit the fall of Communism in 1989 to produce eventually the fruits promised by Our Lady, which fruits, said he, are only delayed by the refusal of individuals to obey Our Lady’s request for recitation of the Rosary and fulfilment of the five First Saturday’s devotions of reparation.
So there we have it. It’s not the Pope and the Bishops of the world who have failed to meet Our Lady’s request, but the faithful who refuse to embrace the Rosary and the five First Saturday’s. It is the latter rather than the former who are responsible for the non-conversion of Russia. How very convenient!
To emphasise his point, my correspondent sent me a link to some EWTN writings on the subject of Fatima by the Neo-Modernist Fr. Robert J Fox. This told me all I needed to know about my correspondent and the Apostolate he represents. Read about Fr. Fox
In summation. Like those heresies and ideologies I mentioned at the outset, the World Apostolate of Fatima proposes to readers of its website a great good, namely, the recitation of the Rosary and the five First Saturday’s devotion of reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. But then comes the poison, the liberal Modernist party line that Russia has been consecrated and the future looks rosy.
This single falsehood, so contradictory of the evidence before our eyes and so obstructive of an outpouring of God’s grace on Russia, the world, the Church and souls, undermines whatever truths the WAF otherwise confirms.
It is therefore incumbent upon all souls of good will to expose this and other so-called Fatima Apostolates that peddle the “Russia is consecrated” falsehood. For behind it lies the illusory ecumenical utopia envisioned and pursued at all costs by certain powerful Vatican officials. No less than the honour of Our Lady and the salvation of countless souls depends on our full objective fidelity to the truth about Fatima.
We’d especially like to hear from those who consider that we are now enjoying the promised period of world peace AND from those who agree with the World Apostolate of Fatima that it was necessary for the Pope to be “prudent”, given that God really didn’t understand the political implications of consecrating Russia…
For the record, I’ve sent the link to this thread to the man in charge at WAF and invited him to contribute.
The World Apostolate of Fatima is the successor to the Blue Army which started out being a good group, but soon became the puppet group for the Vatican to spread its propaganda on Fatima. Father Gruner’s apostolate took over and was (probably still is) the best source for information on the Fatima Message.
I’m not surprised that WAF is continuing the Blue Army party line. As Athanasius says in his excellent article, they’re laying the blame on the laity for the lack of world peace, not on the bishops for their disobedience!
I keep hearing this from different people, that if we were better, if we wore the Scapular and did the First Saturdays, then the Pope would consecrate Russia, but that’s not what Our Lady asked for – it’s really clutching at straws to make THAT excuse for the failure of the hierarchy to do what they should have done years ago.
I’ll be interested if anyone rises to the challenge to speak up if they think we are living in the promised period of world peace, or if they think the Pope had to be more prudent than God! – LOL!
Yes, this is the latest in diversionary tactics, to claim that it’s all our fault, if the faithful were more devotional, more faithful to the Fatima message, rosary, brown scapular, First Saturdays, THEN there would be peace in the world.
That’s to twist the Message of Fatima to make it into a brand new “message”, made in the image of the enemies of the truth about Fatima.
You are so correct, on all points!!!!
Sent from my iPad
You made a very pertinent point, which is that the Blue Army was once a great organisation spreading the Message of Fatima in all its integrity. What happened to it and other such organisations, I believe, is that the Vatican issued an order in 1989 commanding that from henceforth there was to be no more talk of the consecration not being done. All were to say that it had been done and the phoney line about Sister Lucy confirming the fact of her own free will was presented to convince them. They fell for it hook, line and sinker to the great detriment of the truth about Fatima.
The Fatima website explains this strange event, and others, here: http://www.fatima.org/essentials/opposed/cvrup4.asp
The following is a little taster:
“Instructions to Contradict
Two years later, in the summer of 1989, Sr. Lucia received a surprising instruction from an anonymous official at the Vatican. The instruction directed that Sr. Lucia and her fellow religious at the convent must now say that the consecration performed in March of 1984 satisfied the request of Our Lady of Fatima. This extraordinary order to flatly contradict herself was revealed by Father Messias Coelho, a longtime friend and occasional visitor of Sr. Lucia. In evident obedience to the same instruction, Sr. Lucia’s cousin Maria do Fetal suddenly reversed herself, and quoted Sr. Lucia as saying the consecration had been done.
Letters from Whom?
Shortly thereafter, various typewritten notes and letters supposedly signed by Sr. Lucia began to appear and circulate privately in pious journals outside of Portugal. All contained statements flatly contradicting everything Sr. Lucia had said about the consecration over the previous 60 years. The fact that the documents were not handwritten and contained some obvious factual errors and strange phrases made their authentic origin with Sr. Lucia highly dubious.
The Plot Unravels
The Vatican’s attempt to revise history quickly unravelled. In 1990, Sr. Lucia’s sister Carolina told Father Nicholas Gruner that little or no trust could be put in any typewritten letter from Sr. Lucia, as she does not know how to type. Any such letter would have to have been drafted by someone else, even if it were signed by Sr. Lucia.
A Forged Signature
Sr. Lucia’s signature on one of these documents was soon called into question. A forensic expert examined her purported signature on a letter dated November 1989 and declared it to be a forgery. Nevertheless, excerpts from some of these fake letters were widely cited and circulated in other publications as “proof” that the consecration has been done.
Disappointingly, the Blue Army turned against poor Fr Gruner, joining in his persecution. All very sad.
However, if anything, the Blue Army Mark II – WAF – is even more culpable because those involved in that organisation must know perfectly well – unless they really are brainless – that the Russian Consecration has not taken place or we wouldn’t be watching the world tearing itself apart, right in front of us on the TV news day in and day out.
As for the nonsense of the Pope’s “prudence” – apart from the ridiculous notion that the Pope has to censor God’s instructions to make them fit a perceived more important political agenda – has there EVER been a less prudent pope than Papa Francis?
Instead of helping to bring about the fulfilment of the Fatima Message, WAF is the ENEMY of Fatima. Of that, there is no doubt. Sadly.
I’m snowed under just now but I’m going to try to post something everyday, even if it’s just a few lines.
Excellent article by Athanasius. I couldn’t agree more, heresy with a little bit of truth is much more dangerous then outright heresy. If there’s a little bit of truth it can be very misleading.
I also agree that this Apostolate should be avoided. It’s doing more harm than good. I also think the Legion of Mary has become dangerous. There are many fantastic members in the Legion who do great work, but I think the majority would shy away from promoting the real message of Fatima.
I agree about heresy with a bit of truth being more dangerous than outright heresy. So true, but what makes you say that the Legion of Mary has become dangerous? I’m only asking because I presume they could do give the true message on their home visits and the diocese would be none the wiser, but are you saying they don’t have the belief themselves in the real message of Fatima?
In a way I think I know the answer because most Catholics I know don’t talk about Fatima, and the ones who do (in my experience) go along with the line that it’s all finished now, Consecration of the world has fulfilled the request. It goes to show that propaganda works. I am just wondering why you singled out the Legion of Mary?
I can’t speak for Petrus, but I suspect he mentioned the LOM because that’s where the supposed Catholic activists are to be found and we would expect them, more than others perhaps, to be fully informed about Fatima.
The problem is, they are tied up in the diocesan/Vatican machinery and so they either fall for the propaganda (as you indicate) or are too afraid to contradict the party line for fear of being excluded from doing their various tasks. I’m not sure, anyway, that there is much home visitation these days. From what I hear the Legionaries tend to be among the Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion/readers etc. – in other words, working around the sanctuary more than anywhere else.
If I’m wrong (which I’d love to be) no doubt someone will correct me… I’m waiting!
Thank you, Athanasius, for a superbly cogent article. I would honestly be shocked, Editor, were his correspondent, or anyone else from the WAF-flers, appear here to debate this issue. Professional liars – whether they be Freemasons, Communists, VII ecumaniacs or WAF-flers – studiously avoid those who are well-informed and who embrace and affirm the truth. Rather, their typical response to their lies and absurdities being exposed is either complete silence, or an orchestrated campaign of calumny against their enemy. A tactic straight out of the Bolshevik playbook.
As for mixing truth with heresy to make the end result palatable and even convincing, I note that our present Pope is quite adept at that (at least, he thinks he is!). Exhibit A: Amoris Laetitia.
I have to wonder, though, how Athanasius managed to keep a straight face whilst reading the absurd replies of his correspondent. This howler alone undoes the entire WAF/Vatican party line: “God rarely brings about miraculous conversions by divine intervention…” Well DUH! That’s because there has been no divine intervention in Russia! And why? Because the Pope and the Bishops have not invoked it, as requested by Our Lady!
Just like the militant homosexuals, this deluded group has concocted their own rationale with which to explain and defend everything about their depraved beliefs and behavior. Unfortunately for WAF, their rationale makes them look like fools. And liars.
It’s now been 32 years since 1984’s “consecration.” How ironic that George Orwell wrote a book entitled with that same year…..
That’s a very interesting point.
I didn’t mention it in the article but I did in fact respond to the ludicrous suggestion that God would not intervene directly in Russia following a consecration of that nation to Our Lady. I reminded my correspondent of the miraculous conversion of Portugal when it was consecrated to the Immaculate Heart in May, 1931. However, it seems my example suggesting a greater miracle reserved for Russia fell on deaf ears.
Strange that you should link George Orwell’s “1984” with the fabricated consecration of Russia under John Paul II that same year. The coincidence hadn’t occurred to me. Very interesting!
Should you find yourself in another duel with a correspondent from the World Apostolate of Father Dhanis, here’s a silver bullet for your firearm:
If the Consecration was performed in 1984, then why, after his election in 2005, did Pope Benedict send an emissary to the Russian Orthodox to find out how they would feel were the Consecration to be performed?
(I recall Father Gruner mentioning this in one of his videos with John Vennari).
But did Fr Gruner mention it as a rumour he’d heard, or as a fact?
Rumour: Editor of Catholic Truth keeps spreading the rumour that she is slim, glamorous, witty and intelligent.
Fact: Editor of Catholic Truth has a ripe imagination!
There’s a third option, you know, besides rumor and fact: potential! 🙂
Anyway, I believe Father said he was told that, but I’d have to try to find that video to verify. Stay tuned….
Believe me, I’m beyond my potential! It says it all when a nephew opines that I I look better without make-up…
He is one cruel boy, I told him. One cruel boy… 😀
Don’t worry – with the teenage fashions around today, payback time will come in due course. Trust me!
Speaking of payback, I’m still waiting for my back pay…
Cheque (or in your case, check) in post!
Now that you mention it, I do remember Fr. Gruner speaking of this emissary Benedict had sent to the Russian Orthodox. I also recall Fr. Gruner mentioning that he (Fr. Gruner) met with the Russian Ambassador in Rome, at the Ambassador’s request, during which he was asked about the Fatima Message, Secret and consecration. It seems obvious from this that the Russian authorities are not convinced that their country was consecrated back in 1984. I must look these events up.
I’ve emailed The Fatima Center to ask for help locating this information, rather than spend hours wading through their Consecration videos. Will post their answer when it arrives….
That’s another great article from you. It’s very thorough and I was especially taken by the links about Fr Robert Fox.
“On an April 25 EWTN program, Father Robert J. Fox ridiculed those Catholics resisting the new interfaith program at Fatima. He said all reports of interfaith activity at Fatima were mere “fabrications,” and that Shrine Rector Guerra would never allow such things to take place. Less than two weeks later, a Hindu ritual was performed at Fatima with Rector Guerra’s approval. Now, Father Fox suddenly defends Rector Guerra permitting pagan worship at a Catholic altar, and he again attacks those Catholics who protest the pagan outrage at Our Lady’s Shrine.”
I don’t need to know anything else about Fr Fox, because if he could defend that scandal, which remember well, then he’s off the rails. I wouldn’t accept anything he says about Fatima, the Consecration or anything, because he is obviously not a truthful person.
The problem with WAF is that they have such a professional website, and so many ignorant people will be led astray by them. God forgive them, for this is a most serious matter, to distort and twist the Fatima Message must surely be a damnable offence, if unrepented and uncorrected.
You hit the nail on the head in the last paragraph of your comment. These professional Catholic websites, with such great influence with the faithfu,l are being used to spread a distorted account of Fatima which does great harm to Our Lady’s Apostolate. I just hope these guys believe themselves to be in good faith, though the evidence is there for all to find if they are in good faith.
Pope John Paul II made it clear that the 1984 Consecration of the world was not enough.
“The Catholic Church now suffers overt persecution by the Putin regime, whose neo-Stalinist authoritarianism has drawn protests from the Vatican, world leaders and human rights organizations. Wars rage around the globe, and the holocaust of abortion continues unabated. The situation is so grave that on the 20th anniversary of the 1984 ceremony Pope John Paul II himself lamented: “Twenty years later, the world is still marred by hatred, violence, terrorism and war. … So much blood continues to be shed in many regions around the world. … The wait for justice and peace becomes longer and longer in every part of the world.”1
Clearly, the 1984 ceremony has not produced the benefits promised by the Virgin at Fatima. Since the Virgin could never make a false promise, there is only one possible explanation for the state of affairs in which we find ourselves: a consecration of the world is simply not what Our Lady requested. As Sister Lucy herself stated in response to the question (by Father Umberto Maria Pasquale) whether Our Lady had ever mentioned consecrating the world as opposed to Russia: “No, Father Umberto! Never! At the Cova da Iria in 1917 Our Lady had promised: I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia … In 1929, at Tuy, as She had promised, Our Lady came back to tell me that the moment had come to ask the Holy Father for the Consecration of that country [Russia].”2
I think I took that from the second Father Fox link on the first class article by Athanasius. All the links are rivetting.
BTW, Fr Fox is well named – he is a devious man. He set about making ad hominem attacks on Fr Gruner to try to bolster his claim that the Consecration had been done. I wouldn’t give credibility to anything he says about Fatima.
90 percent of Catholics wouldn’t know what a brown scapular was, far less wear one, and as large a percentage of priests would think you were doolally if you asked to be enrolled in it.
I’m surprised Our Lady forgot to mention that there would be a wait of well over thirty years after the consecration before we were to feel the benefit.
At the rate the churches are emptying She may have to revise Her plans a wee bit.
Absolutely right on all counts. It’s also worth mentioning that while the WAF talks up the five First Saturday’s devotion of reparation requested by Our Lady, it never addresses the fact that a majority of bishops and priests have never made the devotion available to their flocks. I wonder why?
At one time it would have been difficult to know whether or not a priest, or a nun even, was wearing a scapular but nowadays with their open neck shirts and low(er) cut dresses it is plain to see that the scapular is well out of fashion with them.
Maybe if the scapular could be tattooed on they would be more interested.
Yes, for many the Scapular and rosary are pious excesses born of myth. Very tragic indeed. Every priest and religious should be equipped with brown scapular and rosary. Thankfully, there are still some who are.
“90 percent of Catholics wouldn’t know what a brown scapular was, far less wear one, and as large a percentage of priests would think you were doolally if you asked to be enrolled in it.”
I am happy to report that a priest I have great respect for, recently enrolled my grandson, for which I am truly thankful. Wish we had more good priests like him!
Good to hear that.
He must have been one of the 10 per cent.
Why would the Pope (any of them) not make all haste to consecrate Russia?
PS It is the US that is putting military pressure on Russia, now from the very borders by siting military hardware in neighbouring states. The US is, I suspect, quite relaxed about triggering a nuclear exchange limited to Europe as this would take out the EU and Russia, both obstacles to US hegemony.
Editor (and Athanasius):
Still looking for the right Fr. Gruner video wherein he mentions Pope Benedict’s emissary to the Russian Orthodox, but meanwhile, here is another one in which he states that JPII himself admitted, TWICE, right after his 1984 Consecration to the world, that the Consecration requested by Our Lady still had not been done:
“Why would the Pope (any of them) not make all haste to consecrate Russia?”
Because Fr. Dhanis’ corrupt theory is believed by them and because they prefer their own vision of bringing peace to the world through the falsehood of ecumenism. It really is that simple. John Paul II seems to have been the only Pope who really wanted to go ahead and consecrate Russia, but he was notoriously weak when upholding his convictions against whispering prelates and so gave in to their objections.
Thanks for your reply. I am simple soul and baffled. Consecrating Russia can do no harm. I seem to remember praying for the conversion of Russia at sunday Mass. Maybe the Russian Orthodox Church will recognise the primacy of the Pope? As for the Third Secret was maybe kept in the envelope for Pope’s personal reasons?
I find it hard to imagine this sort of stuff happening in 100AD.
I wish it were only recognition of the Primacy of the Pope that kept the Russian Orthodox apart from the Church. There are other serious doctrinal issues to be corrected by them, however, before they could ever be reconciled to the true faith.
The Third Secret was not exclusively for the Pope to reveal or suppress at will. It is a Secret that involves the entire Church and is to be made public by Our Lady’s own instruction. No Pope has a right to suppress it. That’s abuse of authority.
Thanks for your response. My limited knowledge is that the other issues with the Russian Orthodox Church relate to the understanding and significance of Purgatory, and the relationship of the Holy Ghost to God the Son. These may not be that significant as they are the subject of argument and interpretation rather than the actuality which is beyond our comprehension anyway.
As regards the Pope’s refusal to share the contents of the envelope, I was suggesting that it was and is an abuse of power. As you say.
The attack on Fr. Gruner by Fr. Fox is typical of the Neo-Modernist plan of action. The same perverse tactic of character assassination was carried out on Archbishop Lefebvre, and still is. There is no honesty in these people. When you catch them out in a lie, they go for the jugular!
Diabolical disorientation indeed. And how lacking in faith they are. No wonder Our Lady at Fatima asked the three children to pray the Rosary and make sacrifices to make reparation. That is a request that applies to us all.
Someone up above said that the majority of priests don’t make available to their parishioners the necessary facilities for doing the first Saturdays. I’m a bit confused by this as I thought all that was needed was Confession, Communion, the Rosary and 15 minutes meditation before the Blessed Sacraments? In my experience this is possible in every church I’ve attended.
I hope you don’t need to do the meditation before the Blessed Sacrament! I’ve never read that that is a condition?
No, you don’t need to do the meditation before the Blessed Sacrament for the Five Saturdays. As long as you do the meditation on the mysteries of the Rosary, it can be any time of the day and anywhere you choose.
I wrote the comment that you’re querying above.
You’re absolutely right in what you say, the five First Saturdays can be done without a priest. What I should have said was that the priests neither instruct nor remind the faithful concerning this important reparational devotion. Hence, many are ignorant of it.
Thank you Athanasius, so what exactly does one need to do?
To personally meet the requirements set out by Our Lady for the five First Saturdays, we should say the rosary, go to confession and Holy Communion and spend 15 minutes with Our Lady contemplating the mysteries of the holy rosary. And all with the intention of making reparation to her Immaculate Heart.
Pope Pius XII permitted the confession and Holy Communion to be transferred to the Sunday for those who have to access to these Sacraments on Saturday.
I’ve been reading the website of WAF and it is terrible. They distort things and attack Fr Gruner personally.
It’s incredible that they make out that Fr Gruner lied about the Hindu prayer meeting at the Fatima Shrine but the evidence is there, in photographs.
They are a bunch of liars at WAF. I’m glad to have been alerted to them by this blog.
It’s laughable that they think the Consecration has been done, given the state of the world.
The Church’s handing of the Fatima story has been a disgrace, one which has undermined the credibility of both the Church and the apparitions.
As if, should the Mother of God appear with instructions and requests, one would fail to do anything other than exactly what She said. How would it be conceivable to do otherwise? Yet the Church has managed it.
The repeated “failed attempts” by Popes to consecrate Russia is simply laughable. Its like repeatedly failing to hit the ground with a dropped object. Its just ridiculous.
Belloc wasn’t kidding when he spoke of the “knavish imbecility” with which the Church is run.
I didn’t even know about Fatima until I found the SSPX, which says everything about the commitment of the mainstream Church to its message.
You are absolutely right. It seems, however, that those who perpetuate the myth that the consecration is done have lost all sense of just how ridiculous their claim appears in the face of indisputable evidence to the contrary. Wilful blindness springs to mind, resisting the known truth.
The Mass of Ages – quarterly magazine of the Latin Mass Society – Issue 188 Summer 2016 has an article by Donal Foley ,Secretary of the World Apostolate of Fatima in England and Wales.
Nothing about the non-Consecration, mainly about merceeee . I will be avoiding this magazine from now one. Also some other dubious articles in there. LMS – a changing organisation, methinks.
Editor, Athanasius, et al:
I have received a kind reply from Joanna Swords of The Fatima Center, partially confirming my memory about Father Gruner’s statement regarding Pope Benedict’s emissary to Russia – “partially” because it was not in one of his videos, but in his address to the EU Parliament in 2012.
Download Issue 104 of The Fatima Crusader (a PDF), and go to page 9, wherein you will read this:
“And so people have tried
many ways – Popes, bishops,
diplomats; all sorts of ways have
been tried – anything else but
the one indicated by Our Lady of
Fatima. The present Holy Father,
Pope Benedict XVI, has already
sent a delegation to Moscow
to ask them if they would
mind if the Pope would do this
the emissary they sent did not
understand the Message well
enough. It is not a criticism of
Russia, this consecration; it
is a blessing for Russia and a
blessing for the world.”
Here is the link: http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr104/toc104.asp
Thanks for posting this reminder of Fr. Gruner’s words confirming that Pope Benedict sent an emissary to Russia to ask if the consecration of that nation would be acceptable. This is yet more proof, if such were required, that Pope John Paul II did not consecrate Russia in his 1984 act. I’ll download that Crusader edition and read it.
1st time visitor. I like it. My comment on the consecration: It has NOT been done according to our Lady’s wishes! N.O. people have it wrong. Also, if ‘Sister Lucy’ said it had been done, I believe that there was another person in the person of the real Lucy. Just look at their faces. They are totally different. The one who received the visits of our Blessed Mother was rather homely, with not very good teeth, and no glasses. However, the person in latter images has perfect teeth and glasses. I think the real Lucy had died or put away somewhere, and this impostor replaced her, due to the wishes of the corrupt clergy. Thank you for letting me vent.
Welcome to the blog. It’s a quite a common theory that the real Sister Lucy was replaced with a fake. The Internet has no shortage of photographic comparisons claiming to prove exctly what you said about changed features. However, these claims have all been debunked by experts in the field, oncluding Fr. Gruner.
It’s much more likely that the Sister Lucy we see on a video recording is not saying what we’re told she’s saying, or else she is saying what we hear but not in the context of the interview as it unfolded. There are lots of ways these Vatican fraudsters can make Sister Lucy say what she did not say, they don’t need a fake Sister Lucy for that. Besides, the feature changes we saw in Sister Lucy were perfectly consistent with ageing. Photos, like everything else, can be fitted to an agenda. Some people have it in their heads that Sister Lucy was swapped with a lookalike and no amount of reasoning can make them re-think the absurdity of their position. Don’t believe a word of this particular conspiracy theory.
You’re absolutely right about Russia not being consecrated to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart, however. The evidence is there for all to see. It is therefore tragic that the World Apostolate of Fatima (once the Blue Army) is fixed on promoting what is an obvious falsehood. They even dismiss the evidence of Fr. Amorth, the Vatican’s chief exorcist, who arranged the 1984 event for Pope John Paul II and has twice stated that some bishops said “no” when he asked if he should mention Russia in his consecration act. Fr. Amorth heard the conversation because he was right next to the Pope just before the act was performed.
I am not sure whether I should post this link on June: month of the Sacred Heart, or here. It has been reported in the Remnant Newspaper of a Solemn Consecration of the City of Aliquippa to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus on June 4th. I find that amazing and just how many graces will that city receive for that action.
It is a sad state of affairs that the Pope and Bishops seem to have contempt for Our Lady’s request for Russia to be Consecrated to her Immaculate Heart.
It’s fine to post that information here because it helps to underline the fact that anywhere and everywhere is being consecrated EXCEPT Russia – the one place Our Lady asked to BE consecrated! It’s of Ealing Comedy proportions now.
Comments are closed.