Imagine my surprise waking up to see my comment elevated to its own post! Thank you Celia. A couple of brief comments:
- I take on board the comments about lack of blood being consistent with handgun wounds. OK, but my point was that all of the accounts of the day in print make a big play of how much blood was lost, and how much blood there was in the Popemobile. If those accounts are scientifically inaccurate, then it is those writers which need to have this pointed out to them. Personally, it surprises me that a person dressed in all white could take four bullets and not show any blood. But who knows.
- The main issue for me is not so much whether or not the assassination was faked, but the fact that most certainly the events were then tied in with the Fatima prophecies. Perhaps it was just a co-incidence that it took place on the Feast Day. Perhaps also, who knows, the bullet which nearly nicked his aorta was really deflected at the last moment by the hand of Our Lady of Fatima, as the Pope claimed. As a non-catholic, I find this explanation untenable, but I don't want to insult anyone's beliefs. But there is no question that this event was then presented to the world by the Vatican as connected to the Fatima apparitions. Now, there is a long dishonourable history of shamans and other religious leaders throughout history using apparent fulfilment of prophecy to extract certain behaviours from their flock, including some famous examples.
- I take Malachi Martin to be a truth-teller. I listened to those Art Bell interviews when they first came out. I take Malachi Martin's comments on the Third Secret to be very interesting and I'm inclined to believe what he says. But if he is correct, then the Vatican's release of the Third Secret in 2000 was certainly a false move. These are difficult points to make. I understand we are dealing with sensitive matters. But something stinks about all this.
- When Joh XXIII read the Third Secret, the blood was said to have drained from his face. Yet, there is nothing in the so-called Secret released in 2000 that would cause anyone to react in such a way.
- There is so much more strangeness to this event, which has escaped scrutiny. I suggest the reason is as I intimated in the comment yesterday. Within the Catholic Church there is a reluctance to subject this to what must seem like impious speculation. Outside the Catholic Church, people just snigger about all this. Sorry, but it's true. The usual approach is simply to dismiss what happened in 1917 as some kind of fraud, but quite clearly that is not the case. The Times of London sent their own correspondent, who was amongst the crowd of over 70,000 who watched the sun put on a very strange display in the sky, spinning and gyrating wildly. Something happened that day at the very limit of normal reality.
-All of this is germane to what is reported to be happening on March 25. Clearly there is some kind of long term strategy at play here. Clearly there is some kind of deception, even if it turns out the speculation about the fake assassination is unfounded. But even then: the Church claims that they took the magic bullet which was deflected by the Hand of Our Lady of Fatima, and welded it into the crown of her statue. Except that there are close-up photos of the bullet and it is in perfectly pristine condition, and clearly was not ever fired from a gun. So there is a little white lie here about the bullet. Does it not strike the listened as somewhat weird anyway to weld the bullet into her crown? But that's going off topic.
- So the main point I want to make is the use and abuse of prophecy as a tool for control of the masses, and the very strange manner in which the Church has co-opted the Third Secret and assimilated it to the events in St Peter's Square on May 13 1981, and the release of the false secret in 2000. Something stinks here. And yet, to return to my theme, this entire topic falls between the cracks of, one the one hand, the Church faithful understandable reluctant to question these events as they seem to have the stamp of the Pope's authority, and on the other hand, those outside the Church to take all of this seriously and not simply write it all off as some kind of tooth-fairy style delusion. I mean no offence, and hope I have not made any, but I do think this whole topic could do with some hard analysis.
Anything that takes your eyes off Jesus as the way, the truth and the life is a distraction Satan uses. The Bible says even satan can appear as an angel of light.
I'm confused. Just exactly where is this particular theory supposed to go? The would be assassin used a small caliber handgun, one not unlike the ones I frequently shoot at the range. Depending on where exactly the pope was hit, there might indeed be little or no blood visible for some minutes. Handguns are not what Hollywood pretends they are.
No, far from a mere theory, his existence is a palpable reality. Those who think otherwise are indeed very confused. Usually, experience manages to shake this confusion out of them eventually.
When a Jesuit Pope acts on these matters one has to scrutinze meticulously every single word and move he wants to make. Creating confusion is their preferred sport.
Well, if this observation is accurate and points to some kind of hoax, then the commenter author should do a frame by frame examination of the shooting of Ashli Babbit. Very little blood. No obvious bullet entry point. No obvious blood splatter on walls. No one ripping open her shirt, attempting to find the wound so as to be able to staunch bleeding. Just folks fluttering around helplessly (some of them cops) and others yelling, “She’s dead; she’s dead!” All very strange - unless there is something we do not know about bullet wounds, except what we have seen on shoot-em-up shows.
I am not Catholic and don't really understand about consecrating Russia. Isn't Russian Orthodox the main religion there? What is the point of consecrating a land that already has a Christian religion?
I think the idea would be to try to drive a wedge in the united Orthodox faith of Russians in yet another attempt by NWO agents (e.g., the antipope Francis) to divide the masses on a major issue, whether political or religious. Eastern Orthodox Christians generally don't subscribe to the idea of "visions" or "apparitions," but Catholics generally do. If you can "consecrate" Russia via a major Church-recognized event like Fatima (i.e., apparitions and miraculous sightings), you can split the Russian people on matters concerning their faith -- i.e., get them to vigorously debate this issue because, after all, who doesn't want to be "consecrated"? It's the infiltrated Vatican (the Church is now Catholic only in name) effectively trying to bring the Russians involuntarily into the "Catholic fold" despite Russians being Orthodox.
It's a passive-aggressive attempt to divide a united Russia, where a united Russia is the last thing the NWO globalists want.
In looking at film of this event - which occurred before cell phones were around to record every thing in the world - I see the Pope go down and surrounded then by his aids. There are a few still photos - most again showing the Pope falling down into the jeep. One photo had some blood - as if someone had touched a wound and then the blood hit some of the folds of the cassock. As has been mentioned, bullet wounds do not always bleed very much:
"While bleeding can be visually distressing it is one of the easiest problems to manage since treatment is straight forward. That said, gunshot wounds may not bleed profusely -- most of the damage is internal and inherently more serious than typical wounds. Bullet wounds are especially damaging because they penetrate deeply, take an unpredictable path through the body and are accompanied by a shock wave. "
and:
Why Gunshot wounds may not bleed profusely.
Remember gunshot wounds are serious. Just because they may not bleed profusely it doesn't mean you are out of the woods yet.
- Entry and exit wounds are often small.
- Bullets rarely transect or sever major arteries and blood vessels
- Surrounding tissue acts as a barrier to blood loss
I didn't post this comment because of the bullet/blood part of it, but because it is such a, to my mind, brilliant and long overdue invitation for Catholics and Non Catholics to convene about this matter.
I didn't pick that up. I agree with the central point that is being made that Catholics take it for granted and non Catholics dismiss it. It's fascinating how many positions there are on this. It's a vast and deep subject to say the least. Thank you for posting about it.
I am not sure if Fatima can be a bridge because there are a number of hurdles from different denominations that would need to be overcome as well as different attitudes within the Catholic Church. Orthodox and Catholics share much Marian theology and reverence for Mary. Even here there is debate over the Catholic theology surrounding the Immaculate Conception, which is more a debate over the nature of original sin than about Mary. Some Protestant denominations such as some Lutherans and high church Anglicans have a Marian presence in their faith, while other Protestants only mention Mary at Christmas. Some Jewish people, although not believing the Christian faith, have a good understanding of the role of the queen mother in Jewish history as well as an understanding of the Ark of the Covenant - made of elements of the earth but bearing within the Word of God and the Bread of the Presence and thus could not be touch except by the high priest. A Jew may understand the Catholic connection between the Queen Mother, the Ark and Mary. So there is a lot of varying views of Mary and her place in belief and within the Catholic Church debate about the meaning of Fatima.
When I was young (long before Social Media and YouTube) there did not appear to be much debate. Fatima, like Lourdes and other apparitions were reminders of what was already held in Scripture and Tradition. However, the advent of social media and the Francis pontificate gave rise to different people to put for idea, both verified and supposition, about Fatima. The increasingly secular nature of culture and lack of belief combined with the unusual pontificate of Francis caused many to search recent apparitions for clues to end times or a time of punishment - and many exist from the vision of Pope Leo XIII, Akita, Garabandal. Social media has allowed like minded people to put forth their ideas, both noble and foolish and form followings creating more polarization than bridge building.
In our present situation I see bridge building more in the area of liberty and the Bill of Rights - but for that bridge to have a firm foundation it will require an understanding of where those rights and liberties arise from as well as grounding truth in reality, and even a recognition that there is “reality”. Even in his agnostic days, Jordan Peterson found Genesis as a book that was involved with “reality”. It is a start to at least recognize our preference, both religious people and secular, for a country that respects our free will as much as our Creator does. The message of Fatima is the message of belief. Love God. Love your neighbor. - including care for the poor and vulnerable. Be willing to sacrifice for your fellow man. Repent of the wrongs you have done and try to do better. Culturally, what constitutes a sin or a wrong in some areas are debated, but some are agreed upon - we can start there.
Yes. John Paul II had been part of an acting group in college and I believe wrote a few plays. He would not have forgotten the fake blood "Hollywood style" if he was going to fake an assassination.
Fatima was a very strange event and obviously humans at the time interpreted it utilizing their belief systems. There is a very real possibility the presence was not a historical religious figure but a visitor. I will leave it at that.
Interesting.... there have been lies and deception going on about Fatima for years, but it was a REAL event -the Miracle of the Sun proves it-so what exactly are they trying to hide and why. There are good Catholics and bad Catholics -nothing new here, and a lot of them trying to figure out how deep the 'bad' is, too!!
Catholics are always called to be sceptical about “private apparitions.” It was decades before the Church pronounced on this one. It has been labelled “worthy of belief”; thus, a Catholic may choose to embrace this apparition and its message, but does not have to believe in it to remain in good standing. Contrary to popular belief, the Church is a “big tent,” and understands the spiritual needs of many - from those who take solace in novenas, chaplets and rosaries, to those who embrace the eager arm-wavery and tongues of the charismatic renewal, to those who take comfort in Sacred Scripture.
Many Fatima apparition sceptics became convinced when they read the accounts of Oct 13, 2017, which included the miracle of the sun witnessed by 20,000 who had gathered there, including sceptics, journalists and photographers. Yet others remain sceptical. And that is fine.
If you talk with 20 faithful Catholics about Fatima, you are likely to get 20 different opinions. In a sense, it matters not. As they say, “For those who have faith, no explanation is needed; for those without faith, no explanation will suffice.” The train is rolling. We are aboard. Let us pray.
There will be much said about this in the next few weeks, and many non-Catholics will be scratching their heads, wondering about its importance. For those who have delved deeply into Catholic Marian teaching, this, indeed, is a very big deal. Does a mother forget her children? Mary is Jesus’ Mommy. She will always be His Mommy. A mother’s love never ends. In perfection, a mother’s love is unconditional. Jesus loves us so much he took our sins to the cross and died for us. Can we imagine that she, His mother, remains impassive about us, His followers; she who gave birth to Him, nursed Him, raised Him and stood at the foot of the cross while He hung bleeding?
In all “apparitions” Mary’s message is to exhort us to prayer, deep prayer, committed prayer. Let’s not kid ourselves; we call ourselves Christians, but do we really “pray always” as scripture reminds us? If Marian apparitions are real, this good, loving Mom comes to call us forward, reminding us to pray, to stay rooted in her Son, and to seek our final goal. And we ask her to pray for us, just as we ask our friends and family to pray for us.
Let us watch and wait - and love. This could be a big deal. And yet others will disagree. That’s okay. We will see how it plays out.
If there was some monkey business with that assassination attempt and the Fatima prophecies, we should perhaps explore what that assassination was suppesed to have prevented or proved.
The third fatima secret "revealed" by the Vatican never made much sense to me. In all probability it was a fake that was published.
If I remember correctly Mary at the apparition was supposed to have said that God was giving one more chance for mankind to end the warring and bloodshed. At the time it was the east-west conflict and the danger of war between Russia and the West.
Somehow Russia was said to have been converted to end the warring, and there was a consecration of Russia to Mary, done several years ago, and recently re-done because some said the first one didn't count. In this connection, Putin has been a strong supporter of the Russian Orthodox Church, which some years ago didn't quite merge with but got closer to the Catholic Church.
So Russia is now taking on the West (USA and NATO) still pushing for a war with Ukraine at the center of the action. Apparently Russian army is extremely careful not to hit civilians in the Ukraine, and the news we get is highly suspect. Russian sources have been banned officially in the West, and propaganda is running high.
Anyway, this may sound confused, but that's where the trail of the prophecies (secrets) of Fatima leads and where someone should dig to find what's going on.
I have been raised in a Catholic family but am not invested in the faith, which I have officially renounced when leaving the Church some fifty years or so ago. I just have still sufficient interest in the story without looking at it as holy to be able to bridge that gap somehow, but unfortunately with a very limited knowledge of details.
Dear Celia, I'm an orthodox and I strongly believe that we are not puppets with strings doomed to fullfill some already written destiny, as otherwise God would not expect anything from any of us.
What Is Bergoglio Up to? Article by Stephen Karganovic
Bergoglio's PowerPLAY last paragraph > He is hoping for a piece of the action in the ignominious world order that is being designed by the ungodly coalition of which his fallen institution has become an integral member. Unfortunately for him, he may have overplayed his hand and met his match. Smart money is betting that when rewards for services rendered are distributed, and the Roman pontiff has even fewer divisions than are now under his command, he will be dumped as unceremoniously as over the centuries he himself had dumped the Lord whose earthly vicar he insolently claimed to be.
Jesus was very clear: signs and wonders, regardless of how genuinely supernatural they may be, are not necessarily good things. Often, they are quite wicked--attempts by the enemy to deceive even the most astute with eye-catchy flash (same trick that worked with Eve in the garden; same trick Pharaoh's sorcerers tried with Moses) and so distract from the unwavering substance of God's word. (Matt 24:24 & Mark 13:22) As for "consecrating" anything to Mary, Jesus pointedly warned against that as well. (Luke 11:24-28)
The Catholic Church, like all "institutions" are as corrupt as mans heart has always been. But more so the last 1000 years than ever. Fatima is interesting though. Have a look at this: https://streaming.lamarzulli.net/programs/fatima-1-and-2
Imagine my surprise waking up to see my comment elevated to its own post! Thank you Celia. A couple of brief comments:
- I take on board the comments about lack of blood being consistent with handgun wounds. OK, but my point was that all of the accounts of the day in print make a big play of how much blood was lost, and how much blood there was in the Popemobile. If those accounts are scientifically inaccurate, then it is those writers which need to have this pointed out to them. Personally, it surprises me that a person dressed in all white could take four bullets and not show any blood. But who knows.
- The main issue for me is not so much whether or not the assassination was faked, but the fact that most certainly the events were then tied in with the Fatima prophecies. Perhaps it was just a co-incidence that it took place on the Feast Day. Perhaps also, who knows, the bullet which nearly nicked his aorta was really deflected at the last moment by the hand of Our Lady of Fatima, as the Pope claimed. As a non-catholic, I find this explanation untenable, but I don't want to insult anyone's beliefs. But there is no question that this event was then presented to the world by the Vatican as connected to the Fatima apparitions. Now, there is a long dishonourable history of shamans and other religious leaders throughout history using apparent fulfilment of prophecy to extract certain behaviours from their flock, including some famous examples.
- I take Malachi Martin to be a truth-teller. I listened to those Art Bell interviews when they first came out. I take Malachi Martin's comments on the Third Secret to be very interesting and I'm inclined to believe what he says. But if he is correct, then the Vatican's release of the Third Secret in 2000 was certainly a false move. These are difficult points to make. I understand we are dealing with sensitive matters. But something stinks about all this.
- When Joh XXIII read the Third Secret, the blood was said to have drained from his face. Yet, there is nothing in the so-called Secret released in 2000 that would cause anyone to react in such a way.
- There is so much more strangeness to this event, which has escaped scrutiny. I suggest the reason is as I intimated in the comment yesterday. Within the Catholic Church there is a reluctance to subject this to what must seem like impious speculation. Outside the Catholic Church, people just snigger about all this. Sorry, but it's true. The usual approach is simply to dismiss what happened in 1917 as some kind of fraud, but quite clearly that is not the case. The Times of London sent their own correspondent, who was amongst the crowd of over 70,000 who watched the sun put on a very strange display in the sky, spinning and gyrating wildly. Something happened that day at the very limit of normal reality.
-All of this is germane to what is reported to be happening on March 25. Clearly there is some kind of long term strategy at play here. Clearly there is some kind of deception, even if it turns out the speculation about the fake assassination is unfounded. But even then: the Church claims that they took the magic bullet which was deflected by the Hand of Our Lady of Fatima, and welded it into the crown of her statue. Except that there are close-up photos of the bullet and it is in perfectly pristine condition, and clearly was not ever fired from a gun. So there is a little white lie here about the bullet. Does it not strike the listened as somewhat weird anyway to weld the bullet into her crown? But that's going off topic.
- So the main point I want to make is the use and abuse of prophecy as a tool for control of the masses, and the very strange manner in which the Church has co-opted the Third Secret and assimilated it to the events in St Peter's Square on May 13 1981, and the release of the false secret in 2000. Something stinks here. And yet, to return to my theme, this entire topic falls between the cracks of, one the one hand, the Church faithful understandable reluctant to question these events as they seem to have the stamp of the Pope's authority, and on the other hand, those outside the Church to take all of this seriously and not simply write it all off as some kind of tooth-fairy style delusion. I mean no offence, and hope I have not made any, but I do think this whole topic could do with some hard analysis.
Anything that takes your eyes off Jesus as the way, the truth and the life is a distraction Satan uses. The Bible says even satan can appear as an angel of light.
I'm confused. Just exactly where is this particular theory supposed to go? The would be assassin used a small caliber handgun, one not unlike the ones I frequently shoot at the range. Depending on where exactly the pope was hit, there might indeed be little or no blood visible for some minutes. Handguns are not what Hollywood pretends they are.
No, far from a mere theory, his existence is a palpable reality. Those who think otherwise are indeed very confused. Usually, experience manages to shake this confusion out of them eventually.
When a Jesuit Pope acts on these matters one has to scrutinze meticulously every single word and move he wants to make. Creating confusion is their preferred sport.
Well, if this observation is accurate and points to some kind of hoax, then the commenter author should do a frame by frame examination of the shooting of Ashli Babbit. Very little blood. No obvious bullet entry point. No obvious blood splatter on walls. No one ripping open her shirt, attempting to find the wound so as to be able to staunch bleeding. Just folks fluttering around helplessly (some of them cops) and others yelling, “She’s dead; she’s dead!” All very strange - unless there is something we do not know about bullet wounds, except what we have seen on shoot-em-up shows.
I am not Catholic and don't really understand about consecrating Russia. Isn't Russian Orthodox the main religion there? What is the point of consecrating a land that already has a Christian religion?
I think the idea would be to try to drive a wedge in the united Orthodox faith of Russians in yet another attempt by NWO agents (e.g., the antipope Francis) to divide the masses on a major issue, whether political or religious. Eastern Orthodox Christians generally don't subscribe to the idea of "visions" or "apparitions," but Catholics generally do. If you can "consecrate" Russia via a major Church-recognized event like Fatima (i.e., apparitions and miraculous sightings), you can split the Russian people on matters concerning their faith -- i.e., get them to vigorously debate this issue because, after all, who doesn't want to be "consecrated"? It's the infiltrated Vatican (the Church is now Catholic only in name) effectively trying to bring the Russians involuntarily into the "Catholic fold" despite Russians being Orthodox.
It's a passive-aggressive attempt to divide a united Russia, where a united Russia is the last thing the NWO globalists want.
Ok. I see. I think that if I were Orthodox, someone trying to make my land Catholic would be offensive.
In looking at film of this event - which occurred before cell phones were around to record every thing in the world - I see the Pope go down and surrounded then by his aids. There are a few still photos - most again showing the Pope falling down into the jeep. One photo had some blood - as if someone had touched a wound and then the blood hit some of the folds of the cassock. As has been mentioned, bullet wounds do not always bleed very much:
"While bleeding can be visually distressing it is one of the easiest problems to manage since treatment is straight forward. That said, gunshot wounds may not bleed profusely -- most of the damage is internal and inherently more serious than typical wounds. Bullet wounds are especially damaging because they penetrate deeply, take an unpredictable path through the body and are accompanied by a shock wave. "
and:
Why Gunshot wounds may not bleed profusely.
Remember gunshot wounds are serious. Just because they may not bleed profusely it doesn't mean you are out of the woods yet.
- Entry and exit wounds are often small.
- Bullets rarely transect or sever major arteries and blood vessels
- Surrounding tissue acts as a barrier to blood loss
- As blood pressure falls, bleeding slows.
Source: https://danger.mongabay.com/gunshot_wound_bleeding.htm
A little online research and this becomes a non-story.
I didn't post this comment because of the bullet/blood part of it, but because it is such a, to my mind, brilliant and long overdue invitation for Catholics and Non Catholics to convene about this matter.
I didn't pick that up. I agree with the central point that is being made that Catholics take it for granted and non Catholics dismiss it. It's fascinating how many positions there are on this. It's a vast and deep subject to say the least. Thank you for posting about it.
I am not sure if Fatima can be a bridge because there are a number of hurdles from different denominations that would need to be overcome as well as different attitudes within the Catholic Church. Orthodox and Catholics share much Marian theology and reverence for Mary. Even here there is debate over the Catholic theology surrounding the Immaculate Conception, which is more a debate over the nature of original sin than about Mary. Some Protestant denominations such as some Lutherans and high church Anglicans have a Marian presence in their faith, while other Protestants only mention Mary at Christmas. Some Jewish people, although not believing the Christian faith, have a good understanding of the role of the queen mother in Jewish history as well as an understanding of the Ark of the Covenant - made of elements of the earth but bearing within the Word of God and the Bread of the Presence and thus could not be touch except by the high priest. A Jew may understand the Catholic connection between the Queen Mother, the Ark and Mary. So there is a lot of varying views of Mary and her place in belief and within the Catholic Church debate about the meaning of Fatima.
When I was young (long before Social Media and YouTube) there did not appear to be much debate. Fatima, like Lourdes and other apparitions were reminders of what was already held in Scripture and Tradition. However, the advent of social media and the Francis pontificate gave rise to different people to put for idea, both verified and supposition, about Fatima. The increasingly secular nature of culture and lack of belief combined with the unusual pontificate of Francis caused many to search recent apparitions for clues to end times or a time of punishment - and many exist from the vision of Pope Leo XIII, Akita, Garabandal. Social media has allowed like minded people to put forth their ideas, both noble and foolish and form followings creating more polarization than bridge building.
In our present situation I see bridge building more in the area of liberty and the Bill of Rights - but for that bridge to have a firm foundation it will require an understanding of where those rights and liberties arise from as well as grounding truth in reality, and even a recognition that there is “reality”. Even in his agnostic days, Jordan Peterson found Genesis as a book that was involved with “reality”. It is a start to at least recognize our preference, both religious people and secular, for a country that respects our free will as much as our Creator does. The message of Fatima is the message of belief. Love God. Love your neighbor. - including care for the poor and vulnerable. Be willing to sacrifice for your fellow man. Repent of the wrongs you have done and try to do better. Culturally, what constitutes a sin or a wrong in some areas are debated, but some are agreed upon - we can start there.
Yes. John Paul II had been part of an acting group in college and I believe wrote a few plays. He would not have forgotten the fake blood "Hollywood style" if he was going to fake an assassination.
Fatima was a very strange event and obviously humans at the time interpreted it utilizing their belief systems. There is a very real possibility the presence was not a historical religious figure but a visitor. I will leave it at that.
People at Fatima who had binoculars said the light was a UFO, with people in the windows?
Interesting.... there have been lies and deception going on about Fatima for years, but it was a REAL event -the Miracle of the Sun proves it-so what exactly are they trying to hide and why. There are good Catholics and bad Catholics -nothing new here, and a lot of them trying to figure out how deep the 'bad' is, too!!
Catholics are always called to be sceptical about “private apparitions.” It was decades before the Church pronounced on this one. It has been labelled “worthy of belief”; thus, a Catholic may choose to embrace this apparition and its message, but does not have to believe in it to remain in good standing. Contrary to popular belief, the Church is a “big tent,” and understands the spiritual needs of many - from those who take solace in novenas, chaplets and rosaries, to those who embrace the eager arm-wavery and tongues of the charismatic renewal, to those who take comfort in Sacred Scripture.
Many Fatima apparition sceptics became convinced when they read the accounts of Oct 13, 2017, which included the miracle of the sun witnessed by 20,000 who had gathered there, including sceptics, journalists and photographers. Yet others remain sceptical. And that is fine.
If you talk with 20 faithful Catholics about Fatima, you are likely to get 20 different opinions. In a sense, it matters not. As they say, “For those who have faith, no explanation is needed; for those without faith, no explanation will suffice.” The train is rolling. We are aboard. Let us pray.
There will be much said about this in the next few weeks, and many non-Catholics will be scratching their heads, wondering about its importance. For those who have delved deeply into Catholic Marian teaching, this, indeed, is a very big deal. Does a mother forget her children? Mary is Jesus’ Mommy. She will always be His Mommy. A mother’s love never ends. In perfection, a mother’s love is unconditional. Jesus loves us so much he took our sins to the cross and died for us. Can we imagine that she, His mother, remains impassive about us, His followers; she who gave birth to Him, nursed Him, raised Him and stood at the foot of the cross while He hung bleeding?
In all “apparitions” Mary’s message is to exhort us to prayer, deep prayer, committed prayer. Let’s not kid ourselves; we call ourselves Christians, but do we really “pray always” as scripture reminds us? If Marian apparitions are real, this good, loving Mom comes to call us forward, reminding us to pray, to stay rooted in her Son, and to seek our final goal. And we ask her to pray for us, just as we ask our friends and family to pray for us.
Let us watch and wait - and love. This could be a big deal. And yet others will disagree. That’s okay. We will see how it plays out.
I am flattered. Yes, of course if it may help.
If there was some monkey business with that assassination attempt and the Fatima prophecies, we should perhaps explore what that assassination was suppesed to have prevented or proved.
The third fatima secret "revealed" by the Vatican never made much sense to me. In all probability it was a fake that was published.
If I remember correctly Mary at the apparition was supposed to have said that God was giving one more chance for mankind to end the warring and bloodshed. At the time it was the east-west conflict and the danger of war between Russia and the West.
Somehow Russia was said to have been converted to end the warring, and there was a consecration of Russia to Mary, done several years ago, and recently re-done because some said the first one didn't count. In this connection, Putin has been a strong supporter of the Russian Orthodox Church, which some years ago didn't quite merge with but got closer to the Catholic Church.
So Russia is now taking on the West (USA and NATO) still pushing for a war with Ukraine at the center of the action. Apparently Russian army is extremely careful not to hit civilians in the Ukraine, and the news we get is highly suspect. Russian sources have been banned officially in the West, and propaganda is running high.
Anyway, this may sound confused, but that's where the trail of the prophecies (secrets) of Fatima leads and where someone should dig to find what's going on.
I have been raised in a Catholic family but am not invested in the faith, which I have officially renounced when leaving the Church some fifty years or so ago. I just have still sufficient interest in the story without looking at it as holy to be able to bridge that gap somehow, but unfortunately with a very limited knowledge of details.
Dear Celia, I'm an orthodox and I strongly believe that we are not puppets with strings doomed to fullfill some already written destiny, as otherwise God would not expect anything from any of us.
What Is Bergoglio Up to? Article by Stephen Karganovic
Bergoglio's PowerPLAY last paragraph > He is hoping for a piece of the action in the ignominious world order that is being designed by the ungodly coalition of which his fallen institution has become an integral member. Unfortunately for him, he may have overplayed his hand and met his match. Smart money is betting that when rewards for services rendered are distributed, and the Roman pontiff has even fewer divisions than are now under his command, he will be dumped as unceremoniously as over the centuries he himself had dumped the Lord whose earthly vicar he insolently claimed to be.
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/19/what-is-bergoglio-up-to/
Jesus was very clear: signs and wonders, regardless of how genuinely supernatural they may be, are not necessarily good things. Often, they are quite wicked--attempts by the enemy to deceive even the most astute with eye-catchy flash (same trick that worked with Eve in the garden; same trick Pharaoh's sorcerers tried with Moses) and so distract from the unwavering substance of God's word. (Matt 24:24 & Mark 13:22) As for "consecrating" anything to Mary, Jesus pointedly warned against that as well. (Luke 11:24-28)
God we need you now
https://youtu.be/J2pWOD1nk7g
The Catholic Church, like all "institutions" are as corrupt as mans heart has always been. But more so the last 1000 years than ever. Fatima is interesting though. Have a look at this: https://streaming.lamarzulli.net/programs/fatima-1-and-2
Celia, John Paul was in an open Jeep. I have no info if this is true, but more than likely he would have wearing a bullet proof vest.