Monday, March 04, 2013

Fr. Z has an interesting take on the Third Secret of Fatima.




I think it is an insightful consideration, and definitely a different perspective from what we have heard over the years since it was revealed.  Father's theories are noted in red of course.
After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!’. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it’ [It could be a reference to the Pauline image of seeing through a glass, "darkly". Some might be tempted to think of an image on a television screen or monitor.] a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father’. [Benedict is now just a "bishop dressed in white".] Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, [Granting that it was the 2nd Sunday of Lent and the Gospel was the Transfiguration, in his final Angelus address Pope Benedict said" "I feel that this Word of God is particularly directed at me, at this point in my life. The Lord is calling me to "climb the mountain", to devote myself even more to prayer and meditation."] at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins [The papal gardens at Castel Gandolfo contain Roman ruins from the time of Diocletain.] and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; [...] - WDTPRS
 

Fr. Z appears to be among those who think there may be another part of the Third Secret not revealed.  Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Bertone have said that the entire secret has indeed been revealed.  I accept them at their word, and believe the entire secret has been revealed.  Remember, the Third Secret is really just the third part of the entire secret of Fatima.  The essential part of the secret was known for decades, and that was Our Lady's intention - put all three together and you have the text and the vision.  The third part never needed to be made public - Lucia intended it for the Holy Father and left everything to his discretion - even the interpretation of the vision.  Blessed John Paul II made the decision to make it public.  That said, we know exactly what we need to know: Repent!

Speculation is simply entertainment.  Just like trying to guess who the next pope will be. 

Sadly, modern locutions and apparitions often seem to foster suspicion and mistrust of the clergy and hierarchy in their wake.

15 comments:

  1. I agree with you, Terry. Some one sent me the new book by Italian journalist Italian Socci called The Fourth Secret of Fatima. It gives a fairly balanced view of all the Third Secret controversy. I'll let you know how it ends.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fr. Z's take is interesting, though and is similar to what Socci is saying in his book even though the book came out before the resignation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have never read Socci's book - I'm certain Fr. Z has - so perhaps that jelled with him. I never thought of it in that light, associating the vision with the war, since Our Lady's warning were so much associated with both WW's. I'll try to run down a copy of the book.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'd definitely recommend Socci's book. The Italian version came out @ 2006, the English translation soon followed. As the late PJ2 said, Fatima places an obligation on the Church. Our Lady specifically asked for world wide devotion to her Immaculate Heart (hasn't happened), papal promulgation of the Five First Saturdays of Reparation (hasn't happened), for the Third Secret's release to the world (hasn't fully happened). Also, Sr. Lucia never said the Secret was meant only for the Holy Father; her bishop could have released it in 1943 but he refused to hear her when she offered to literally telll him. This story was related by another cleric, the same who measured the envelope and counted the lines of the Third Secret before it was sent to the Vatican in 1957. It was only after Lucia became seriously ill and her death was feared that the bishop finally asked her to "write" the Third Secret, since he still did not want to "hear" it. She also never said the Third Secret was for "the Church" to interpret; if this was true, why did PJII send reps to ask her questions over the wording of consecrations or which sought further illumination about the Third Secret? At any rate, Socci's book (and others that are also well-documented and come to the same conclusion) are very thought-provoking. God bless!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Marianna,

    I'm sorry to tell you that you are very much mistaken and have fallen for sensationalist interpretations. Lucia indeed said:

    "I wrote down what I saw; however it was not for me to interpret it, but for the Pope."

    Cardinal Ratzinger affirmed:

    "Thus we come finally to the third part of the “secret” of Fatima which for the first time is being published in its entirety. As is clear from the documentation presented here, the interpretation offered by Cardinal Sodano in his statement of 13 May was first put personally to Sister Lucia. Sister Lucia responded by pointing out that she had received the vision but not its interpretation. The interpretation, she said, belonged not to the visionary but to the Church. After reading the text, however, she said that this interpretation corresponded to what she had experienced and that on her part she thought the interpretation correct. In what follows, therefore, we can only attempt to provide a deeper foundation for this interpretation, on the basis of the criteria already considered."

    Private revelation, apparitions, and miracles are always - ALWAYS the exclusive responsibility of the Church to interpret and promulgate as the Pope and the bishops in communion with him see fit. No matter what any single priest, monk, or author says to the contrary.

    Please consult the Holy See website which contains all the information on the subject.

    Paste and copy the following in your browser:

    http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html

    You are aware that Catholics are not bound to accept private revelation and apparitions. That said, it strikes me as innapropriate to assume the CDF's official description and explanation of the events and secrets of Fatima are not complete, and falsified. If that is your opinion, you are in effect calling Pope Benedict, Cardinal Sodano, and Cardinal Bertone liars.

    You people are essentially adding to what the visionaries related and the Church interpreted. You are making Fatima into a parallel cult/church.

    The original part of the secret that was revealed were the essential aspects necessary for the sanctification and salvation of souls.

    Paryer, sdaily Rosary, Five First Saturdays, Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, fidelity to the duty of one's state in life, and so on. The consecration of Russia took place and Sr. Lucia said heaven accepted it.

    Your assertions promote mistrust in the hierarchy - the Pope and the bishops in communion with him.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Terry, I suppose you aren't acquainted with my writing, and that's quite alright. :) Just know that I don't "fall" for sensationalist interpretations but I do research facts (from both sides of an issue). It is quite possible I've read every book ever published on Fatima, and I'm well-acquainted with the Vatican website. Incidentally, are you familiar with the quote from Cardinal Luigi Ciappi, who for 40 years served as papal theologian to five popes? It was he who said,“In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church begins at the top.” I am not being a wise-acre when I point out that he was (obviously) a member of the hierarchy. We could debate all day about whether or not the collegial consecration of *Russia* took place and whether or not Sr. Lucia said heaven accepted it. The facts I know say no to both questions. Let's be honest. You won't change my mind and I won't change yours. What I do know is that my small contribution to promoting Fatima with articles that explain the Miracle of the Sun, the meaning of the Star of Esther on the Fatima Virgin's robe, the connection between Fatima and Akita, and many others all share the same aim: to promote devotion to Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. May the peace of Jesus Christ be with you! :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I recommend reading Antonio Borelli's excellent take-down of Antonio Socci's book. Borelli shows how dots were invented in order to force the line to go in a certain direction at times. Speculation is no substitute for face. Borelli's objective analysis comes in, "On Antonio Socci's 'Fourth Secret of Fatima' - Some friendly reflections for clarification of a debate"

    I started reading Socci's book and only got half way through before I set it aside after one too many, "but how does he know that?" moments.

    The problem today is that we have been short-changed in our education and have not learned the art of logic and how to read objectively to spot speculation and distinguish it from fact. Socci's book is hugely speculative and in order to engage in that speculation, I felt I had to presume moral failure on the part of several members of the hierarchy which included then Cardinal Ratzinger. Borelli counters some of Socci's biggest claims with alternative possibilities and explanations. He includes some pieces of information that Socci left out.

    Anyway, it's there for the reading. Some are vaguely familiar with Borelli's objective analysis only through Christopher Ferrara who did not translate the thing in full, but gave his readers a few snippets to which he responded in a lengthy piece. But, now Borelli's piece is out therein full text. Let those who have read Socci's book read Borelli's analysis without filtering and draw their own conclusions. I've drawn mine and I will stick with prayer, penance and continuing to work on learning to live a holy life (and I have a long way to go).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correction of typo in my first paragraph should read, 'speculation is no substitute for fact."

      Delete
  8. Diane, Thank you for your good comment and excellent recommendation. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. BTW - that document by Borelli was recommended to me by a professor of dogmatic theology who is also a Mariologist with impressive credentials above and beyond the PhD. He is very devoted to Our Lady. He is fluent in several languages. Upon reading the Socci book and becoming disturbed, I emailed him and asked if he had read Socci's book. He wrote back saying he felt that, despite good intentions, it was a work of intellectual dishonesty. He then referred me to Borelli's work.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I do not mention his name because he has not commented on it publicly and I don't quote people by name without permission. At the time, I had to put it into a translator as it was not available in English. It was published in Lepanto in Italy.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am trying to be as objective as possible over this controversy. To me, the worst part of the Secret we already know in full. It is the vision of Hell.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree Elena. I think you are objective in your interest. I know you understand the connection between the King and consecration to the Sacred Heart and those consequences in relation to Fatima.

    There are so many reports of this or that, much stemming from the intimacies Jacintaenjoyed with Our Lady before her death - these are related of course, but I think they have inspired a lot of conjecture as well.

    I wish the other writings of Sr. Lucia - if they exist - would be published by her prioress - I was of the understanding they would be. I think people would calm down somewhat if these were made public. Sr. Lucia's spirituality matured significantly in Carmel, as one might expect.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm looking forward to Gruner's take.

    What?

    ReplyDelete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. Be sure and double check if your comment posted after you do the verification deal - sometimes it doesn't print if you made an error.