The Lying “Lady” of Fatima

  What has been the reality since then?  Decades have passed since that 1984 consecration, and yet what is the reality, politically and religiously, in Russia?

  Politically, Communism did not die, and even in Russia itself Communism is alive and well, indeed flourishing.  And religiously, Russia has not, in fact, been converted to Roman Catholicism!  Oh, Russia is more open to Romanism, certainly; but has it become a Roman Catholic country?  Not at all.  The great hopes entertained within Vatican circles in the early 1980s have not materialised after all.  Russia has seen a massive resurgence of Russian Orthodoxy – but that is a very different matter, for Russian Orthodoxy is Rome’s great, centuries-old enemy.  A re-conversion to Russian Orthodoxy merely brings Russia much closer to where it was before the Bolshevik Revolution – which is why the Vatican supported that Revolution in the first place!

  Besides, the Russian Orthodox institution has been a tool of the Communists ever since the Russian Revolution.  Orthodox priests have been Communist secret agents.  Today, Russia is permitting a more overt Russian Orthodoxy than before – but it is all part of the smokescreen, to fool the world into believing Communism is dead and Russia has changed.  Orthodox priests are still Communist agents, and Russia is still ruled by Communists.

  There are those Roman Catholics who continue to maintain that John Paul II’s 1984 consecration was valid.  Faced with the problem of Russia re-converting to Orthodoxy instead of to Romanism, they have to put a good spin on this inconvenient obstacle in their way, and they do.  They explain it by claiming that when “Mary” spoke of Russia’s conversion, she meant Russia’s conversion to Russian Orthodoxy!  For example, Robert Moynihan, editor of Inside the Vatican, stated in 2017: “Indeed it is the most impressive conversion in history.  They built or reopened 29,000 churches in only 28 years, three every day!  The number of monasteries grew from 15 to 788, the number of faithful from below 50 million in 1990 to over 113 million today.  And today, 82% of all Russians follow Orthodox Christianity.  The Russian state spends more than $100 million every year for the restoration of churches destroyed or misused by the Communists.  The 500 theological seminaries are full of young men who follow their vocation…. I heard Orthodox chants right on the Red Square.  They rebuilt the Cathedral of Our Lady of Kazan, destroyed by the communists, and transmit all liturgies and prayers with loudspeakers on the square five times a day.  Lenin surely is rolling over in his mausoleum – it’s an exorcism!”[42]

  But again: what Moynihan described was Russian Orthodoxy – not Roman Catholicism.  And considering that Russian Orthodoxy has been the age-old enemy of Rome, and Rome has always sought its destruction, the fact that Russia is now more openly Orthodox is not, in truth, a desirable thing for Rome.


  Unless, by other means – ecumenical means – Russian Orthodoxy is being slowly drawn back under Rome!

  Great steps have been taken towards eventual “unity”, via the ecumenical movement.  And doubtless it is believed, by those Romanists who maintain that the 1984 consecration was valid, that although Russia is being converted increasingly to Russian Orthodoxy, it doesn’t matter, because slowly but surely Russian Orthodoxy is being drawn under the wings of the “Mother Church” of Rome.  In the long run, then, Russia’s conversion to Orthodoxy will mean Russia’s conversion to Romanism.  This is especially so, given Romanism’s enthusiastic embracing of its own brand of Catholic-Communism for decades now, particularly under the popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II, and Francis I.

  But Rome is always very careful to have a “Plan B.”  Back in 1984, when John Paul II carried out his consecration, the language of many Romish officials was somewhat guarded; somewhat ambiguous; a trifle vague.  This was deliberate, for the Jesuits and their fellow-workers are old hands at knowing how things can change very suddenly in the world.  Twice before in the past, their claim that Fatima’s prediction was being fulfilled backfired; and although things looked very promising this third time round, and they were optimistic at the time that Russia was indeed being converted to Romanism, they were realistic enough to know that various spanners could so easily be thrown into the works.  They therefore put forward two strategies, either one of which they may use, depending on the circumstances as they evolve in the coming years.  The first, as we have seen, is to claim that, yes, Russia is being converted – but to Russian Orthodoxy, to be followed at a later stage by conversion to Roman Catholicism. 

  And the second?

The Vatican’s “Wait and See” Approach

  The second strategy is to permit, even encourage, some influential Roman Catholic voices to claim that the 1984 consecration was not really valid (they will find various excuses as to why it was not), and that it still has to be done “properly”.  In this way Rome always leaves enough “wriggle room” for herself to slither out of any dilemma.  For example, in the official Roman Catholic booklet, Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, which carries the Nihil Obstat and the Imprimatur of Rome, it is categorically stated: “Yet even this singular act [John Paul II”s 1984 consecration] did not exactly fulfil the specific request of Our Lady for a Collegial Consecration of Russia by the Holy Father ‘in union with all the bishops of the world.’”[43]

  Certainly the side which is claiming that the 1984 consecration was not really valid are able to draw on some indisputable facts.  For one thing, Russia did not convert to Roman Catholicism after 1984 – and that was a long time ago now.  For another thing, a period of peace did not follow 1984 – and that was one of “Mary’s” promises too.  And for yet another thing, there are Roman Catholics who even doubt that Lucia was still alive when she was said to have stated that the consecration was valid, or if she was, they doubt that she really said what it is claimed she did!  It would have been easy enough to get some other woman to “stand in” for her, even on camera – no doubt about that. 

  And there is something else as well.  After World War Two Lucia was (apparently) interviewed, on 15 July 1946; and when she was asked about the part of the “prophecy” which said that if “Mary’s” requests were heeded Russia would be converted, and there would be peace, but if not, Russia would spread her errors throughout the world, the interviewer asked: “Does this mean, in your opinion, that every country, without exception, will be overcome by Communism?”  And Lucia is said to have replied: “Yes.”[44]  Those who do not believe that any consecration has yet been valid point to this and say, “Communism’s errors expanded after the War, and have continued to expand even after the so-called ‘collapse’ of Communism in the late 1980s/early 1990s.  Russia’s Communist errors have continued to cover the world like a blanket, and have indeed been adopted by most countries of the world now and become official policy everywhere, often without a shot being fired and usually under different names.”  In all of this they are certainly correct.  Communism, under other names, has been victorious throughout the world, conquering even the West. 

  Both sides will speak up against the other side, often with very strong language.  For example, those who deny the 1984 consecration’s validity were called “crazy Fatima-conspiracy-theorists”[45] by one of those who believe it was valid.  But this is not at all unusual.  The Jesuits have always played both sides, with undercover agents on one side criticising and hurling abuse at undercover agents on the other side.  The point is, however, that depending on which way the wind blows, one side will gain the ascendancy – deliberately so.  And by that time most people will have forgotten the issues that were once hotly debated.

  And so, for now, nothing is 100% settled.  The Vatican is watching, and waiting, to see how things “pan out”.  The time may yet come when it will claim, unequivocally, that the 1984 consecration was valid; or it will claim that it was not.  It all depends on what transpires, politically and religiously.  This is why one hears nothing dogmatic as yet, from the Vatican.  The “second secret” of Fatima is too valuable a “prophecy” to be absolutely dogmatic about it… just yet.

  And with that, let us turn to the third and final “secret”.

The “Third Secret” of Fatima

  Before examining this “third secret”, it will be profitable to understand how Rome views the Fatima apparitions and the messages supposedly given.  When the “third secret” was apparently made public in the year 2000 by Romish cardinal, Joseph Ratzinger, he stated that the vision was a “private revelation”, and therefore it was not a matter of faith, although it could be of spiritual help to Roman Catholics in their faith.  “The authority of private revelations is essentially different from that of the definitive public revelation.  The latter demands faith,” he said.  A private revelation considered genuine by the Vatican could be accepted by Roman Catholics with prudence.  It could help them understand the Gospel, but they were not obliged to use it.[46]

  What utter nonsense this is!  What confusion!  How different from the revelation of God’s Word!  If, as Rome wants the world to believe, the Fatima “visions” were genuine revelations from heaven (we know they were not, of course, but solely for the sake of argument let us say if they were), then of course they must be authoritative, and matters of faith!  If a revelation is genuine, then of course everyone should be obliged to use it!  This is typical of Roman Catholic confusion and man-made teachings: just as they attempt to tell us that there is a difference between the worship given to God, and the worship given to Mary (there isn’t – it’s all worship!), or that the Word of God consists of both the Bible and tradition (it doesn’t – it consists of the Bible alone), so they also want us to believe that a “private revelation” can be a genuine revelation from heaven, and yet need only be accepted “with prudence”, and that none are under obligation to use it!   All of God’s true Word, the Bible, is to be received as divinely authoritative, and a matter of faith.  When the prophets of God gave revelations from God, believers were to treat them as the Word of God, and to live by them.

  Pentecostals and Charismatics need to take note here!  When, week by week in their church services, so-called “prophets” and “prophetesses” stand up and say, “Thus saith the Lord”, many of them say that such “prophecies” are not to be equated with Holy Scripture.  Yet it is either a message from the Lord, or it is not.  If it is, then they are bound to receive it as of equal authority with the Word of God.  Otherwise they would be despising the Word of the Lord!  But in truth, the “messages” given in Pentecostal and Charismatic services are not divinely-given prophecies – they are no better than the “messages” of Fatima.  The Bible is the completed Word of God.  This is the clear teaching of 1 Cor. 13:8-11, as well as other places.  No more messages from the Lord are to be expected, because no more will be given.  The Pentecostals are bridging the gap to Rome by their extra-biblical “revelations.”

  Let us come to the “third secret” of Fatima.

One thought on “The Lying “Lady” of Fatima”

Comments are closed.