One day before the Immaculate Heart of Mary
Coming August 21:
Total Solar Eclipse over the United States
Ultimately it will probably be of no great significance, but we might as well spread the announcement: One day before we celebrate the feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, there will be a total solar eclipse over parts of the United States this year:
On Aug. 21, 2017, people across the United States will see the sun disappear behind the moon, turning daylight into twilight, causing the temperature drop rapidly and revealing massive streamers of light streaking through the sky around the silhouette of the moon. On that day, America will fall under the path of a total solar eclipse.
(“Total Solar Eclipse 2017: When, Where and How to See It (Safely)”, Space.com, May 29, 2017)
Although the total eclipse will be visible only along a certain path over the country, everyone in the continental United States will be able to observe some eclipse on Aug. 21, and this is something that hasn’t happened since 1918: “The total solar eclipse that will cross America this summer — an event that last happened 99 years ago — will be an important moment for scientific observers and a massive nationwide spectator event. It will also, for many people of faith, be evidence of God’s majesty — and even, to a few, a harbinger of the coming end of the world,” reports The Washington Post. NASA has put together a special web site for the event.
As we said in our post of Jan. 1, the year 2017 is a year of significant anniversaries, both good and bad:
- 500 years since the Protestant Reformation (Oct. 31, 1517)
- 300 years since the founding of modern Freemasonry, archenemy of the Catholic Church (June 24, 1717)
- 100 years since the Communist Revolution in Russia (Mar. 8 – Nov. 8, 1917)
- 100 years since Mgr. Eugenio Pacelli (the future Pope Pius XII) was consecrated a bishop (May 13, 1917)
- 100 years since the publication of the Code of Canon Law (May 27, 1917)
- 100 years since Our Lady appeared to the shepherd children at Fatima, Portugal (May 13 – Oct. 13, 1917)
To be sure, a solar eclipse is a natural event; it occurs in nature. It is not miraculous per se and there need be no divine sign attached to it at all. According to Space.com, a total solar eclipse is visible from some place on earth once every 18 months or so.
At the same time, we do know that God can and does act through natural signs, sometimes to underscore a greater reality. When our Blessed Lord died on the Cross, there was a total solar eclipse over the area despite it being a full moon phase: “And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst” (Lk 23:45). Christ announced a solar eclipse to precede His Second Coming (Mt 24:29-30), which was also prophesied by Joel: “The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood: before the great and dreadful day of the Lord doth come” (Joel 2:31; cf. Acts 2:16-20).
We recall that the miracle that stunned 70,000 direct witnesses on Oct. 13, 1917 at Fatima was a miracle of the sun. In the Apocalypse, our Lady is described as a “woman clothed with the sun” (Apoc 12:1). On Jan. 25, 1938, the “unknown light” prophesied by our Lady of Fatima announced that World War II was imminent. At Fatima, our Lady asked for devotion to her Immaculate Heart. In 1944, Pope Pius XII instituted the feast of the Immaculate Heart and ordered it to be celebrated every year on August 22, the octave day of the Assumption, which he himself would proclaim a dogma of the faith on Nov. 1, 1950. During that time, Pius XII himself witnessed the miracle of the sun in the Vatican Gardens, not once or twice, but as many as four times, as revealed by Cardinal Federico Tedeschini and printed in the Oct. 29, 1951 issue of La Domenica del Corriere.
Our Blessed Lord asked: “You know then how to discern the face of the sky: and can you not know the signs of the times?” (Mt 16:3).
The times we live in are evil. The great apostasy we now endure, the fruit of that “mystery of iniquity”, has been enabled only by a veritable eclipse of the Catholic Church, a Church that is as visible as before, but not actually seen as easily or by as many. The Pope, “he who now holdeth”, has been “taken out of the way” (2 Thess 2:7), so that
that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.
(2 Thess 2:8-11)
Ultimately, of course, what matters is not some sign in the sky per se, what matters is how such signs help us to attain salvation. What matters is the state of our soul before God and our very own personal end of the world, so to speak. It would behoove us, therefore, not to spend time in vain curiosity about when the world will end, or “how far along” we are, but to allow every sign of God, or every natural sign that reflects God’s great majesty, to remind us to do penance for our sins and prepare ourselves for the “great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Joel 2:31), whenever it may come.
Image source: shutterstock.com
License: paid
The “miracle of the sun” of Fatima was not really a miracle, but an illusion.
The dancing of the sun has not been seen from other places, Lisbon, Paris, Madrid, Rome.
Oh, well, since you say so; 70,000 + ‘delusioned’ people, and recorded history must bow to your superior…um.
PS. Pope Pius XII saw it from Rome. Maybe you are just taking the mickey?
Millions of people have not seen it. Those who have seen “that”, they have seen an illusion.
The sun did not dance. That is a fact.
Are you attempting to pour some cold water on Fatima because it requires a Pope for its complete fulfilment?
I simply say that the “sun miracle” is no miracle.
I also keep my reservations about the Fatima phenomenon. I remember that a Catholic is not forced to believe in “private revelations.” This in particular has serious problems.
The “miracle” was announced. Then the illusion occurs. Worst of all is that the Fatima affair is considered as “dogma about all dogmas” in many traditionalist fields. It is absurd to proceed in that way. We must take into account the teachings of St. John of the Cross (and the Doctor of the Church) on mystical phenomena and union with God. He warns that these phenomena can easily move away from God.
But if it is approved by the local Bishop and the whole Church, then it poses no danger to Faith.
I do agree that many get way too carried away with trying to work out what’s “really” in the Third Secret, that we are in this period or that period of the Secret etc.
So I wear the Brown Scapular and have Daily Rosary, and made my Five Saturdays many years ago. For the rest, I hold to the Faith.
The absurd can not be approved.
Dum Spiro Spero
Can you prove it was an illusion? If you can’t you should shut your mouth instead of just simply not believing in it because you don’t want to ?
False apparitions exist and yes Catholic teaching comes first over “private” revelation but to say that this is a false apparition is not only insulting the Catholic Church for approving it but also scandalizes those who brush off anything as miraculous.
Your absurd comments can not be approved.
Yeah… like some guy walking on water, or calming the sea or healing the blind or raising the dead! Who could believe such things?! We will all pray for “ye of no faith”.
I have a big problem with those who make Fatima into a dogma, and we see them mostly in the semi-trad recognize-and-resist camp. Sadly, many of those people seem to believe in Fatima first, and in Catholicism only second. That’s why they evaluate everything, incl. sedevacantism, in light of Fatima. That blame has to be placed in large part, in my opinion, on the hyper-Fatimism of the Nicholas Gruner crowd.
I think it’s dangerous to denounce something as important as Fatima. Do you also disagree that we should pray the Rosary and avoid sin?
“Do you also disagree that we should pray the Rosary and avoid sin?”
I have to avoid sin, because God and the Church demand it.
The rosary is a prayer that has its origin in a private revelation, but its use gives no problem. On the contrary, it has been the most recommended prayer by so many Popes. It is a biblical prayer, very Marian, and extremely effective.
Good. And it’s true that we don’t “need” to accept any or all private revelation. You seem to have a very cautious approach, which is fine; but it disturbs me because it appears that you reject the Apparition and therefore the message of it. The message was to turn from sin and stop offending God. This is not very likely to have been from Satan or from “human imagination”
You’ve been drinking the badly researched koolaid of the anti-Fatima camp haven’t you? I tasted it myself and had an “uh oh” moment, before digging into the facts personally and with a little help from a friend it mounted up to nonsense and deception.
We have to be VERY careful these days… sloppy research and wild accusations up to and including who the last pope really was is a slippery slope!
Please give us reasonable explanations how this alleged illusion of the Sun in Fatima was performed; who performed it; what was seen on the Fatima sky that day if not the Sun and what happened with the Sun; how absolutely everybody (both learned and unlearned, Catholics and atheists) saw and claimed the very same thing; how people’s clothes was dry in an instant after them having been exposed to heavy rain that morning (miracle testified by everybody); how people’s clothes was perfectly clean after them having knelt in mud from fear (miracle testified by everybody); why this alleged illusion including these alleged illusions with clothes has never been repeated by anyone; what evidence there is for the alleged illusion etc.
Just because no one else saw the Fatima miracle just confirms it was a miracle: that it was meant to be seen only by those near Fatima and hidden to everybody else by power of God.
Your conclusion that the Sun did not dance therefore is not a fact and does not follow from the fact that others did not see anything. Your conclusion is therefore gratuitous and wrong unless you are able to prove otherwise. Can’t wait to see that. Before you prove the illusion and resolve all of the above mentioned you had better be quiet.
Private revelation isn’t a proper name for what happened in Fatima. The Sacred Heart was a private revelation indeed (revealed privately to a nun) but this happened in public before tens of thousands of people.
When The Blessed Virgin Mary does something like that in Fatima the message is clear: you’d better listen to Me or you’ll pay dearly.
The resurrection of Lazarus was done before those who believe, and before those who do not believe. All the miracles of the Gospel have been performed before ALL present, but testified by the unmistakable Word of God.
The Resurrection of the Lord is not a vision; He eats and drinks. His body is no longer in the tomb. It is a real and historical resurrection.
The miracle of the sun narrated in Joshua 10: 12-14 is a real miracle. There are even testimonies of other cultures of that time that speak of an unusually long night (in America) or of a day that did not decline (Egypt, India, China).
That has not happened in Fatima.
On the other hand, it is well to pray for the conversion of Russia. But who provoked the revolution in Russia? It was made from the Western Masonic lodges. Trotsky was sent to Russia from the USA. More than 80% of the Bolshevik officers were Jewish. Is the problem “Russia” or the enemies of the Church?
Recall that Pope Leo XIII asked to pray the usual prayers after the Mass with the intention of protecting the Church from its enemies. The Popes Pius XI and Pius XII extended these intentions to the one of conversion of Russia.
That’s what matters.
The sun did not move in the sky for anyone else; yet it appeared to dance and change colour and plummet toward the Earth near Fatima. Whether it was an illusion or some type of miracle — does it really matter?
Honestly, that particular appearance may even be the deception of the devil.
Papal infallibility is not compromised by the approval of a private revelation. Because it does not mean that everything and every word of the apparition is approved. I also remember that private revelations are not the object of faith.
Finally, it is very important to understand this: the government of the Church is not subject to private revelation. A pope can not be “guilty” for “not obeying” what was said in an apparition, even if it is approved.
I think this is the reason why Pius XI and Pius XII “does not obey” the “requirement” of Fatima.
You are one super cautious dude!! Yes, almost anything could be a deception. But again, the devil does not EVER give messages about turning from sin before God chastises us. He is more like “every religion is just fine” like at Bayside. You would need to show some sort of teaching that opposes the Church…otherwise it is acceptable of belief AKA in line with Church doctrine.
You are correct, the Church/Popes are the ones with the only authority. But the fact that you say “Fatima may have been of the devil”…that sounds an awful lot like Protestant talk.
I am not sure of the reason the popes did not “obey”…I think it has much more to do with the fact that half (or more) bishops/clergy were and are Freemasons.
I do not say, “Fatima may have been of the devil,” but that the miracle of the sun is not authentic, and may be the result of a deception of the devil.
Devil, who is a very cunning person, and not a symbol as Sosa says. However, the devil can not move the sun, but he can do the illusion.
On the other hand, the whole matter of “secrets”, I do not like either. When it has been seen in the Bible or in the Tradition of the Church, that the Lord or the Virgin give a “secret” in a paper, and say: “this you have to open in that year? I’m sorry, but that sounds absurd. If God wants to say something through a prophet, he does it immediately. So we see it also in the New Testament. But you should note that for example St. Paul does not listen to a prophet who warns him about the danger in Jerusalem. Again the Lord appears to him and tells him to go to Macedonia. St. Paul now is obeying, but this is part of the Public Revelation.
“Prophets” may exist even today, but the one that discerns is the Church. A prophet can not rule over the Magisterium.
Finally, there is a private appearance at the Novus Ordo in Medjugorje. That apparition is ridiculous. Curiously, there was talk of the movement of the Sun, of the “secrets” on some papers that have received the seers, etc. The most striking thing is that this apparition asked the local bishop … to obey and believe in the apparition! The bishop realized that the apparition was false. Also his successor. But people still believe in Medjugorje.
There the apparition told a friar who can disobey his bishop (on an order to leave a parish, something the friar did not want). The friar stayed in the parish of Medjugorje … and you know what happened? That a nun from the parish became pregnant. But people still believe in Medjugorje … because there are so many conversions!
Okay, Fatima and Medjugorje is not the same, but it has certain similarities: the dancing of the sun, secrets …
“that particular appearance may even be the deception of the devil” sounds a lot like you are saying Fatima was of the devil. But I don’t think you believe that. You know that Fatima is not like Medjugorje, which is a ridiculous and creepy false apparition (Medjugorje “Mary” says: “all religions are just peachy!”)…. What you are saying in general is true, and that’s why the Church always has/had to examine each apparition very carefully to ensure it is not against Truth. Satan is a master of deception for sure, and people often acknowledge this fact and then go on believing in their Mormonism Pentecostalism etc. So what you are saying makes sense. I just find it very frightening when people attribute things to satan. You have to be very, very careful and it would be better to maybe say “I don’t know that I think about the sun dancing in the sky” rather than “satan did it!” We were not there and we did not see what happened.
About secrets and times/dates, Fatima was not the only apparition in which secrets to be released after certain dates are mentioned. La Salette is another one and there are probably others. I do not know why those dates are mentioned but I don’t think that they are a reason to disbelieve in them.
On the mode of deception that the devil is able to do, it is convenient to remember rigorous reading:
Archbishop Kenrick notes: “The wonders which Antichrist with his agents will perform, will be illusory. ‘He will display all power, but nothing real, all things only for deception’ – Saint John Chrysostom (“The Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of St. Paul, the Catholic Epistles and the Apocalypse”, Bishop Francis Patrick Kenrick, 1851 edition, page 449)
Regarding God sending them the strong delusion he explains: “This is strongly expressed, to show that even the machinations of Satan are under Divine control” (“The Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of St. Paul, the Catholic Epistles and the Apocalypse”, Bishop Francis Patrick Kenrick, 1851 edition, page 449)
“With regard to their agency in the air, we are told that the devil sent a great wind, which threw down the house where Job’s children were assembled and destroyed them; and that he sent fire and lightning from heaven, which consumed Job’s sheep and their keepers. From the power which these wicked spirits have in the air, St. Paul calls the devil “the prince of the power of the air,” Ephesians 2, 2. And again he says, that our spiritual enemies are “principalities and powers, the rulers of the darkness of this world,” Ephesians 6, 12.” (“The Scripture Doctrine of miracles displayed”, Bishop George Hays, 1873 Edition, Volume 1, page 26)
“If the angels can at all act upon bodies, why not upon the air and light as well as on any other body, without taking a material body to assist them? Nay, if an angel could make to himself a body of air, or any other matter, in order thereby to move the air or light so as to affect the senses of those present, why could he not as well directly move the air or light itself, without the intervention of any material instrument?” .” (“The Scripture Doctrine of miracles displayed”, Bishop George Hays, 1873 Edition, Volume 1, page 49)
“Another way by which spiritual beings may appear to do things miraculous in our eyes, is by what is called fascination or bewitching, which may be conceived possible in two different ways, either by making such impressions upon the organs of our senses, as if the real material object that naturally could make them were present and acting on them, or by taking upon themselves the outward appearances of the things which they wish to represent” (“The Scripture Doctrine of miracles displayed”, Bishop George Hays, 1873 Edition, Volume 1, page 47)
“That spiritual beings, both good and bad, have a very great power in acting upon our internal senses, by altering and moving the humours of the body, so as to raise many ideas in our imagination, and affections in our appetite, will not be called in question by any who profess the Christian religion”(“The Scripture Doctrine of miracles displayed”, Bishop George Hays, 1873 Edition, Volume 1, page 48)
Hello While There’s Breath There’s Hope, there is no question that demons can affect and have some control over nature and other things at times (but only if and when God allows). This is why people believe in pagan and other false religions. Miracles occur, and “healers” can “heal”. Once I was speaking to a Vietnamese classmate about the miracles of healing which Jesus did and does (ironically I was protestant at the time), and she said “Buddha does that too!” And there are New Age “healers” who “heal illnesses” which were caused by demons in the first place.
So you are right to remind us that we need to be careful about visions,apparitions, etc.
But my question is, why throw cold water on the Apparition at Fatima? Is this not an Apparition which warns us to become better Christians? I believe the Virgin Mary was trying to warn us of the great apostasy. The fact that millions of novus ordo heretics don’t know this…sort of proves it to be true.
If the Virgin Mary gives a warning to Sister Lucy and
Sister Lucy tries to give this warning to the Pope but is prevented in various ways…
And she disappears to be replaced with a woman who claims to be Sister Lucy who now claims that there is no secret…
You want everything in Fatima to be true. But it turns out that you are very dependent on Fatima. We can depend only on the Word of God, Tradition and the Magisterium. Prophecies and apparitions make sense only if they are part of this context.
Obviously, I do not like the “miracle of the sun”, because the sun did not move in reality. Millions of people have seen it as they always have. So among other things I am very cautious with this appearance.
I recommend you study the work of St. John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel. In it, the Doctor of the Church warns about the dependence of visions, apparitions, etc. His work is the application of the theology of St. Thomas to the mystic. He himself has discovered several false mystics, one even had a good view of the Pope (which was not teaching for the whole Church). His advice was to depart even from apparitions that might be authentic, because they make faith based on some extraordinary, or visual aspect, etc. That is why he said that the soul has to advance through the “night of the soul”, that is, to live only from supernatural faith on the road to charity.
As for Fatima, there are several things that draw attention. Was Russia the only one to blame for things happening in the world? Rather, Russia was a victim of the Zionist conspiracy. See the Protocols of Zion. It was necessary to build the New World Order by destroying its natural and supernatural bases: the Throne and the Altar, along with the natural family. That is the profound reason why the Czar and his whole family are murdered. But all this began in a systematic way since the French Revolution. In fact, Napoleon attempts to subjugate Russia by force. The Bolshevik Revolution is simply another continuation of the same attempt. But the origin of evil is in those who systematically do not want to accept Christ as Messiah. You know that these are the Zionists, who want to impose their order on the world, and why they want to destroy the Church just as they did with the Body of Christ. The Zionists (talmudic Jews) make these attempts through masonry and finance.
Another great enemy of Christians since its inception is Islam. Of all these things we do not speak in Fatima. But the Popes did talk about this. Saint Pius V requested the prayer of the rosary at the Battle of Lepanto. And we know what happened. I think there is a big difference.
We need nothing more than the Scripture, the Fathers, the Tradition, the Magisterium. And if we have the prophecies, these can not have a rare taste.
Another thing. Pius VI and Pius VII fled from Rome expelled by Napoleon. Pius VI, like a martyr who refused to bow to the violent, died in exile. The messages of Fatima speak of a Pope fleeing from Rome. Well, we are waiting 100 years for this to happen. Is Francis going to flee from Rome and will he be fulfilling the prophecies? Ha, ha, ha. Forgive my laughter, but don’t you see that this is strange?
I don’t know if it’s fair to say I “want” to believe in Fatima.I just am very afraid of calling evil “good” and vice versa. As I mentioned before, I prefer to just say “no comment” or something like that. It’s true that many books say we should not search or pray for visions and other mystical experiences because even if they are legit, they can make a person proud or crazy, etc.
No one is blaming “Russia.”. It’s just that Russia was the first of the Communist takeovers (which could have been prevented by our repentance). Yes, the Masons are evil and you are right that they first began with the French Revolution. I think it’s a bit much to expect an Apparition of the Blessed Virgin to say to peasant children who couldn’t even read: “The communist freemasons will orchestrate a revolution in Russia…” and have them pass it on accurately. To the rest of the world, it was Russia. Even though we know most of those killed in the October Revolution were actually…Russians.
Yes, for sure we must listen to the popes. And the popes and RCC have the last say. And it could even be said that Fatima has been taken over and confused or mutilated by the novus ordo. But I think what I find most comforting in this Apparition and in La Salette, Quito, etc is that the Great Apostasy we are in has been foretold. I don’t know about you, but in my country, I don’t think there is ONE decent traditional proper Holy Mass. So it’s comforting to know there is a reason for this! Otherwise the temptation to go novus ordo is too great.
What is very important to point out here is that neither Pius XI nor Pius XII were not guilty, nor were they “disobedient” to the Virgin for not consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, nor even “reckless.”
What I say is just the opposite of what many traditionalist sites say and teach. Think for example in Tradition in Action, Salza, Siscoe, etc. But their statements make no sense. That’s just not Catholic. A Pope can not be bound by private revelation. That is to reverse terms in the mode of government in the Church. It is the Holy Spirit who guides the Church through the ordinary hierarchy, especially the Pope. Period. Because otherwise is equivalent to ruling through the seers. That would be a “Charismatic Church,” and the Lord has not founded that Church.
This point is very, very important.
The insistence on the consecration of Russia has completely diverted the attention of so many traditionalists (and also of the conservative part of the Novus Ordo, or SSPX). So some people think: “The problems of the world can not be solved until the Pope obeys the Virgin.” Others say: “if Pius XI had consecrated Russia, its conversion would have become before, or perhaps the WW” would not take place.”
Do you realize what it is? The SEER is the one who rules. That is very serious.
Oh…but who is saying the popes are disobedient? Those “traditionalists” are not real. They are like SSPX or whatever it’s called. False traditionalists. Yes, good point. The RCC has authority over everything. The true RCC not the counterfeits.
Fatima has replaced the devotion of the fifteenth Saturday, approved and promoted by Leo XIII. “The Devotion of the Fifteen Saturdays,” as it is called, is now very widely spread amongst both members and non-members of the Rosary Confraternity, who are anxious to show reverence to the Queen of the Holy Rosary, and to obtain favours through her hands. The Devotion consists in this, that on fifteen consecutive Saturdays – generally, but not necessarily, the fifteen which immediately precede Rosary Sunday – the faithful –
1. Go to Confession and receive Communion.
2. Visit a Chapel or Altar of the Rosary, or failing that a public Church;
3. Then say at least five decades of the Rosary or perform some other act of devotion;
4. On each of the fifteen Saturdays specially think about and devoutly say one of the fifteen Rosary Mysteries in succession.
Our Holy Father, Leo XIII, has granted a Plenary Indlugence to all, even though not members of the Confraternity, who fulfill the above conditions. This Indulgence may be gained on any of the fifteen Saturdays, but only on one of them. (S.C.I. Sept. 21, 1889)
This Indulgence may be gained by going to Communion on the Sunday, if prevented on the Saturday.
An Indulgence of seven years and seven forty days may be gained also, on the Saturdays on which the Plenary is not gained (Index of Indulgences, Aug. 19, 1899) (“The Rosary Guide for Priests and People” by The Very Rev. Father J. Procter, S.T.L., 1901 Edition, Pages 268-269)
Interesting! I read somewhere once that many people found it too difficult to do 15 Saturdays in a row so God switched it to 5… not very likely come to think of it, but who knows? I used to try to just do every Saturday, (not just the first Saturdays) but it’s difficult because I am not near a Church. I can only do Spiritual Communion and I didn’t think that would cut it.
Thank you for including the name of the book about the Rosary. I am always looking for books about it. I’d like to look into this more.
Another very important thing. Fatima was the Muhammad’s daughter. And in this apparition does not say a word of the growing threat of Islam for the whole world and the Church. Islam is clearly a religion, rather ideology, totally contrary to the Christian faith. It appears six centuries after Jesus Christ, denying his divinity. But not a word about Islam. Only against communism. But communism has been an effect of hatred against God initiated strongly more than a century before in the French Revolution.
This has made the minds of so many conservatives focus on the Russian problem. When in fact it is more an effect, than the cause. Fatima has contributed greatly to the alignment of so many Catholics with the positions of anti-communist liberal politicians. But being against communism does not mean that you are of the “good.” You might be at the other extreme, but also a bad one.
Another example of the same attitude was the support of the Nazi troops against the Soviets. Italy has left 60,000 soldiers at the Russian front, have returned with life about 6,000. Significant support was also given in Spain and Croatia. The communist problem blinded the ability to see Nazi paganism. While Nazism was a Zionism-induced construction to justify the creation of the Jewish state. The Zionists needed Jewish victims to justify their claims. But for decades it was only necessary to “consecrate Russia.” No attention was paid to the Zionist owners of the world, who in turn used Islam to weaken and de-Christianize Europe. And, of course, introduce harmful elements and doctrines in Catholic seminaries. Remember the Alta Vendeta project, unveiled by Gregorio XVI.
The political vision of traditional Christianity was not democracy (the power comes from the people, without any submission to God). Plato also denounced democracy as the corruption of the Republic. Democracy was never supported by the Church. But in the twentieth century, so many Catholics have made common cause with the liberal parties, because they are anti-Communists (it is true that one has to be anti-communist, but for a very different reason).
All this has made the Muslims also see themselves as “allies” against the struggle against communism. Just look at the history of Afghanistan.
So I ask myself, since I am not obliged as a Catholic to believe in the “Virgin of Fatima”: have the shepherds seen the daughter of Mohammed? Was Fatima the deception of the devil to mislead the Catholics?
You can answer me: but Fatima has been approved by the Church! I have already told you that you have to see it only in the Catholic context, and nothing more. The Church never said, “Our Lady appeared at Fatima.”
On the other hand, do you like Renaissance art? To me humanly I like, but there I notice a difference with the previous Christian art. Before, in the Christian art the centrality of God was clear. The figures were not so prominent in their human aspect. In Renaissance, however, art focuses on man. The Popes were patrons of this art. I see there is a penetration of secularism. This fact, of course, does not affect infallibility.
Hi, well it is kind of odd that it takes place near a town named after a Muslim “saint”. But remember that Portugal had been taken over by Islam for a long time. I don’t know if it has that much importance. However, when the Blessed Virgin appeared, WW1 was still going strong and Muslims were not a main or immediate threat; Communism was. Twelve days after the Miracle of the Sun, the Russian Revolution began and we are still dealing with the ramifications. Yes, Islam has been a threat on and off for 1400 years + and it is also used by the Freemasons to stir up troubles via terrorism. Complicated stuff.
Now if the Church has approved Fatima, does that not mean that it is “worthy to be believed”? We are not strictly compelled to accept it, but it must be reliable if the RCC has ok’d it. This is where what you say disturbs me. The true RCC (not the post Vatican 2 counterfeit) approved it as worthy, so for you to say it may have been diabolical in origin is extremely disturbing. You can say: “The Church does not force us to believe in any Apparition or private revelation” but that is far cry from, “Perhaps the Apparition at Fatima, approved by the Church, is of the devil.” You can say that we are free to accept or ignore private revelation but to go beyond that is worrysome. Perhaps you are right, perhaps we do put too much emphasis on certain Marian Apparitions. But in this current state of near-despair and apostasy, I find Fatima comforting.
Do you have a true, traditional Church you go to?
Regarding Renaissance art, yes, it’s a well known fact in art history that the Renaissance spurred increased focus on Man and this led to Humanism and the so-called Enlightenment. Some popes approved of the art and others did not. But that is no different from some popes having mistresses and others being saints– it does not infect Infallibility.
I began these reflections not many weeks ago. I’m also surprised by the approval. That is why I understand the approval in terms of the indications of Benedict XIV: the apparitions themselves can only be accepted with human faith.
But let us also consider the government of Benedict XV, Pius XI and Pius XII. When was the Second Vatican Council prepared? During more than four decades. Not by them (the Popes), but under their rule. St. Pius X did an incredible purge of the modernists. But these came back in the 1920s. The CVII can ‘t be the work of a day. It was prepared in shade all this time.
On the other hand, the plans of Alta Vendeta clearly indicated the penetration in the body of clergymen. We must take into account that Saint Pius X was elected Pope thanks to the veto of the Emperor Francis Joseph. In fact was chosen Rampolla, of which they speak that had been mason; What is certain is that it has been liberal. And yet, they chose him – unsuccessfully – Pope. Who chose it? This means that there was already a liberal wing among the body of the cardinals.
In addition, Benedicto XV was the secretary of Rampolla. Gasparri (Pius XI) and Pacelli (Pius XII) also had relations with him.
The government of the Church does not affect infallibility, because they depend on a prudential act. However, there you can see certain attitudes that cost us to understand, and can’t seem right. For example, the position of Pius XI regarding the Cristeros. Or the change in the liturgy of Easter during the time of Pius XII.
What is certain is that the CVII was prepared by men who studied at the time of Pius XI and Pius XII.
I haven’t read the Alta Vendeta yet but I know the gist of it. If you’ve read the Plot Against the Church you know that the Freemasons are just another version of the same old Enemy of Christ from the beginning. They started sending communists/atheist/humanists in to train and pose as priests from at least the 1940’s and probably the 20’s. Maybe earlier. So it would make sense that these 1000+ guys who were being ordained as priests in the 20’s, 30’s, 40’s 50’s 60’s were voting in and instigating all kinds of subtle changes. You are aware that John 23 was a high level FM (imagine the gall of taking the same name as the previous John 23!!!). They voted him in. It’s all downhill from him.
I am not aware of Cristeros or the change of the Easter liturgy so I will have to look into these more. I heard that someone added St. Joseph to the liturgy although he was not ever supposed to be added (not sure why).
You can read it in “The work of human hands”, Fr. Cekada.
Isn’t he SSPX?
No.
My Godfather says he’s a bit off. And check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Cekada . He was in SSPX and then went to SSPV.
Not that wikipedia is 100% reliable but still.
Also there are almost no valid priests anymore, since Paul 6 mutilated the Rite of Ordination in 1968. Cekada was ordained in 1977 by Lefebvre (who was weird,semi traditional). Of course Cekada’s book can still be very good despite all this, but I think I am pretty solid on Freemasonry etc. I think there might be a series of You Tube videos about that book, come to think of it. Also, vaticancatholic has some very good stuff on You Tube about why Vatican 2 was insane as well. But they have some weird teachings too.
Dum Spiro Spero, do you pray the entire Rosary every day? (3 Mysteries, not 4)
In the first place, I have to say that I am not a priest, but a simple Catholic. Therefore, I tell you these things in case my experience can serves you. You will see what can serve to you, or not. But I recommend you should have a spiritual direction with a priest. Because, as the Book of Wisdom says, “the spirit itself is a bad counselor.”
I pray every day only one part (of all three, of course) of the Rosary. But I also do more things. Following the indications of Saint Teresa of Jesus, I do daily mental prayer (meditation on the mysteries of God that I try to project on my life, I also try to examine all my actions in the light of faith, hope and charity). Half an hour in the morning and half an hour in the afternoon. I spend about fifteen minutes reading the Bible, also about ten minutes reading a classic spiritual book). I also maintain the doctrinal formation with the study of classic authors (Summa of St. Thomas, etc.). In total I spend approximately two hours a day for prayer (understood in this way).
Order is very important. It can’t be that one day you pray an hour or half an hour, and another four. That is not right. It is necessary to have a stable plan of prayer, study, work and apostolate.
I am a father of a family, but the photo of my profile is of Marcos de Aviano, Capuchin Franciscan who accompanied the Austrian army against the Turks in the defense of Vienna, and the subsequent campaign against the Turks.
iudicamedomine@gmail.com
Hello DSS, I do try to ask my priest, but he is 84 years old and extremely busy. My Godfather, who was the one who introduced me to Sedevacantism, is extremely learned and strict and very very helpful to me. I live 2000 miles from my Church so I can only go to Communion once a year or so.
I am glad you recite the whole Rosary every day. This is essential to at least avoid mortal sin, according to St. Louis de Montfort. I am at work, but I will comment some more in a bit.
iudicamedomine@gmail.com
Are you going to the Eastern Orthodox schismatics?
…People still believe in Medjugorje because they love the idea that “all religions are welcome in God’s mansion” or whatever garbage that apparition teaches. People believe all kinds of stuff they shouldn’t…that’s the whole problem with the 20th and 21 centuries!
BTW who is the man in your profile pic? he looks a bit stern
Like Pharaoh’s magicians aping the true miracle wrought through Moses when his staff turned into a serpent.
Are you high?!
Actually it was a miracle because it had rained profusely, the people were soaked by the rain but in a matter of minutes people and land were dry. THAT IS A MIRACLE. Even the Freemasons and atheists experienced the miracle and wrote about it in the local newspaper, I suggest you research more deeply the “miracle of the sun” on October 13, 1917.
Pride goeth before destruction: and the spirit is lifted up before a fall. Proverbs 16:18, DRV
You are free to use your free will as you decide.
Decide carefully. You soul could be in grave danger if you choose unwisely.
Miracles happen all the time. The fact Mary revealed herself to the 3 pairs of young innocent eyes is entirely believable for me.
That 70,000 saw the miracle of the sun is also entirely believable.
And the complete horror of WWI came to pass as St. Mary warned it would if the world continued to follow the evil one.
“You are free to use your free will as you decide.”
No, I am not free to do evil. Simply, every “private revelation,” even that which is approved, is not Revelation. You are not obliged to believe in those “prophecies.” You can pray, do penance, etc. There is no problem with that. But you can not go any further.
“Ultimately, of course, what matters is not some sign in the sky per se, what matters is how such signs help us to attain salvation. What matters is the state of our soul before God and our very own personal
end of the world, so to speak. It would behoove us, therefore, not to
spend time in vain curiosity about when the world will end, or “how far
along” we are, but to allow every sign of God, or every natural sign
that reflects God’s great majesty, to remind us to do penance for our
sins and prepare ourselves…”
Well said… BRAVO!!!!
Good points
I’m sorry for reminding you of this, but the devil can do that too. Therefore, this fact is not proof of the miracle.
No, as a Catholic I am not obliged to believe in private revelation. In that subject, infallibility is not compromised, because private revelations are not the object of faith.
No, infallibility of the Church would be compromised if She approved as supernatural anything directly from the devil.
In private revelations human mistakes NOT CONTRARY to the Catholic faith are tolerated but the Fatima miracle of the Sun couldn’t have been a mere human mistake: everybody, atheists included, testified for the same FACT.
While it’s true that Fatima isn’t object of Catholic faith you nevertheless greatly err when you think you can write freely whatever you want about particular private revelation, that is, about the miracle of the Sun as possibly an illusion produced by the devil.
You can’t do that without compromising infallibility of The Church Who passed Her infallible judgment on the miracle of the Sun also. Therefore, retract to avoid mortal sin.
Dragi Branimir, the Church has NEVER said that the Virgin appeared at Fatima.
According to the norm given by Benedict XIV, private revelations can only be answered with human faith, not supernatural.
Finally, the content of private revelation is NEVER the object of the Catholic faith.
By the other hand, those who recognize the Second Vatican Council think just like you. They say: “the Pope has said it, period”. But the Pope can not contradict the faith.
Here, however, a Catholic is not asked to believe in Fatima. You have to understand this.
I repeat: the sun did not actually move, because it was not seen from other parts of Europe. What I say is a reasonable thing, and faith can never ask us something absurd.
Someone who believes in the direct creation of Adam and Eve tells you. Because Scripture has said it and the Church has taught it, science does not contradict it, and it is also reasonable. But the matter of the sun at Fatima is different.
October 1930 – Announcement of Dom Jose Alves Correia da Silva,
Bishop of the Diocese of Leiria-Fatima on the Results of the
Investigative Commission
“In virtue of considerations made known, and others which for reason
of brevity we omit; humbly invoking THE DIVINE SPIRIT and placing
ourselves under the protection of the most Holy Virgin, and after
hearing the opinions of our Rev. Advisors in this diocese, we hereby: –
1. Declare worthy of belief, the visions of the shepherd
children in the Cova da Iria, parish of Fatima, in this diocese, from
the 13th May to 13th October, 1917.
2. Permit officially the cult of Our Lady OF FATIMA.”.
Therefore, you tell a LIE that The Church has never told us that Our Lady appeared at Fatima. Pope Pius XI tacitly approved decision of the bishop which is the approval of The Church.
Since The Church approved Fatima as Divine and supernatural It approved the miracle of the Sun also as Divine and supernatural. Although the decision of the bishop doesn’t mention the miracle of the Sun if the devil had made an illusion with the Sun that would have destroyed Fatima as Divine and supernatural since God doesn’t co-operate with the devil.
Therefore, you aren’t allowed to contradict The Church by writing that the miracle IMPLICITLY approved as Divine and supernatural could have been of the devil and not supernatural. You do that and you sin mortally because of your (1) denial of infallibility of The Church and of The Divine Spirit in the case of Fatima (2) blasphemy that God could have co-operated by the devil in Fatima.
Thus, the devil couldn’t have moved the Sun nor made an illusion,
men couldn’t have made that illusion (no technology at the time), the
Sun didn’t move itself nor make an illusion since it isn’t a person,
therefore, only The Blessed Virgin could have moved the Sun and hidden it from distant parts by the power of omnipotent God.
No one is required to believe in Fatima as in a Catholic dogma yet everyone is bound under pain of mortal sin to obey The Church regarding Fatima, which is quite another thing and which you haven’t done so far.
In October 1930 bishop of Leiria announced decision that the cult of Our Lady of Fatima was officially approved.
In 1934 Pius XI explicitly wrote in Apostolic letter “Ex officiosis litteris” that the Most Holy Virgin Mary, Mother of God, has deigned, in that newest age, to endow Portugal with extraordinary benefactions.
Of necessity follows that the Pope and with him The Church judged the Fatima apparitions of Our Lady as true and supernatural.
Thus it’s a huge lie that The Church never said that The Virgin (The Virgin Mary) appeared at Fatima.
Inability of anyone to believe in Fatima as in a dogma, that is, by Catholic faith is one thing and holy obedience to infallible judgement of The Church is quite another thing.
Therefore all Catholics by virtue of holy obedience must believe that Fatima apparitions and the miracle of the Sun are true to avoid contradicting The Church and mortal sin but must believe that not by Catholic faith but by some lesser faith.