COLOGNE, February 15 (CNA) – Speaking on Vatican Radio about the upcoming first anniversary of the death of Sister Lucia, Cardinal Joachim Meisner, Archbishop of Cologne, said the last surviving witness of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima was a nun “filled with common sense and trust in God.”
Sister Lucia died one year ago at the Carmelite Monastery of Coimbra. Francisco and Jacinta Marto, the other two children who witnessed the apparitions, were beatified by Pope John Paul II in 2000.
Cardinal Meisner, who was a personal acquaintance of Sister Lucia, shared his memories of the late nun with Vatican Radio. He remembered her as “a very sober religious; she was the treasurer of the monastery. She was a sister full of good humor, common sense and great trust in God,” he said.
Recalling his last vis! it with her three years ago in Fatima, the cardinal said he brought her a white cassock as a gift from Pope John Paul II. “As I gave it to her,” he said, “she took it into her hands and said, ‘It would have been even better if the Pope came with it’.” [Source]
29 comments
I second the sister, on her death, a woman who actually saw the Virgin Mary with her own eyes, the death and her opinions as well as her third secret were kept hidden and clouded while the world weeped for JPII when he died, as he was a man who was willing to sell out the Catholic faith to make these false faiths feel more comfortable in their own skin (Eucharistic Hospitality sessions anyone?)
Sister Lucia knew the dark secret that was going on within the church, and as Our Lady prophesies, the church will soon become corrupt from within
God bless her soul
How can you accuse the Church of doing the things that you mention in your post, and then go on to imply that the corruption has not yet taken place?
Re Sr. Lucia:
1) She was faithful to John Paul. Had she felt otherwise, I think she would have kept her silence.
2) I take it John doesn’t believe that Sr. Lucia considered the third secret fulfilled.
3) Why is it that John seems to know about the contents of the third secret, and the rest of us don’t?
4) Even so, private revelation is not binding to the faithful. It may or may not be prudent to believe a particular apparition and its message, but it does not have the same standing as doctrine.
Sr. Lucia, and John Paul ll were and still are my two favorite people in my life time. Never met the Pope, and I’ve never been to Fatima, but I feel I knew and LOVED them both. I have lived in the time of Sr. Lucia, and John Paul ll who both were of greatness and humility in service. My little spiritual bucket has over flowed because of them.
Lucy
Sister Lucia aske for the third secret to be revealed in 1960 as Our Lady had asked her. Pope John XXIII and all of the post councillar popes refused to, nor did they ever consecrate the sacred heart to Russia as she asked, in defiance of her wishes.
Sister Lucia was kept locked away in silence her entire life by these Popes, never allowed to speak,
It was then that JPII “allowed” the secret to be revealed and somehow correlated it to him being shot, a big farce
It is clear that the church and the Vatican II popes disregarded Sr Lucia’s and our Lady’s wishes, even compromising her at Vatican II
How could God have allowed the bishops to approve so many errors at Vatican II? Maybe it was the way the bishops treated the Blessed Virgin Mary at the Council. Instead of boldly proclaiming her, the bishops were ashamed of her, and they compromised the Blessed Virgin Mary during the Council, because she was not “ecumenical.”
In the Fall of 1963 the bishops were asked to discuss a text on the Blessed Virgin Mary. Instead of having a document on the Blessed Virgin alone, some bishops thought that the text should be included as part of another document, because this would help foster ecumenical dialogue with “the separated brethren”.
When a vote was taken on Oct. 29, 1963, the majority of bishops decided not to offend the Protestants and voted to compromise the Blessed Virgin Mary, including the text on her as part of the document on the Church.
Then,in response to the wishes of several bishops, the title “Mary, Mother of the Church” had been removed and four German priests, including a young Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, requested that all references to “Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces” be removed from the document as well.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre tried to prevent the liberals from compromising the Blessed Virgin a second time. He wrote the bishops at Vatican II a warning. Recalling the words of Pope Pius XI in his encyclical ON FOSTERING TRUE RELIGIOUS UNITY, Archbishop Lefebvre called on his brother bishops to “pray to the Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, for she is at the heart of these disputes and she has always defeated heresies.”
It is only fitting that this was such of a divisive council as the majority of bishops and the priests (like Fr. Ratzinger) rejected Our Lady as Mediatrix of All Graces, so God punished all of them by withholding His graces from them, allowing them to fall into a spiritual blindness, not seeing the errors they were promoting.
The church will become corrupt from within soon? yeah right…and did you find this in your crystal ball?
eat fish–ELY
sister Lucia, a gift to all of us
Ooooh Johnny did you back the wrong horse. What kind of books have you been reading? Let me guess. Did one of them have the title “Left Behind?” or ” The White throne of lies?” I think it’s you who has listened to just way too many lies and has lost track of hope and understanding. Good luck.
Settle down, people: John has interesting points, some of which I intend to research further. Let’s learn from each other without making comments that border on derision. For myself, I appreciate anything that can throw light upon what on earth happened at Vatican II. I, too, wish that more had been done by Sr. Lucia and our Holy Father together, for the good of souls, but maybe it WAS… who are we to be given the details of Vatican strategy at every turn?
I don’t mind someone calling attention to something of interest, but when someone logs on and basically rips into everyone when they’re having a tender moment about a soon to be saint and beloved Pope, well I tend to get testy.
Unfortunatly I would take Sr Lucia , a woman who was devout to the Virgin Mary over a Koran kisser any day. For that matter, you state you were “having a tender moment over a man who is about to become a saint”. Well lets see, this man over 26 years canonized more people that all of the Popes over the past 5 centuries. Are you telling me in his eyes more people were saints than the bar that is to be set for sainthood? Or was this just another political ploy on his part?
Canonizing John XXIII, Paul VI and even JPI!!!!
So there you have it, thanks to JPII all of the post Vatican II popes will be saints, so you can pray to them all and ask them for guidance
The man made a mockery of the Chair of Peter, allowed abuse to run amok, and crossed the line of heresy in the name of ecumenism
The man was willing to give the body of christ to Protestants, the son of the Virgin Mary, to those who denounce her and in many quarters despise her, and he changed the canon to do so
Shame on him and I would only ask for you to not be blinded by the world of 24 Hour TV and images and read and learn your true catholic faith and then compare it to the brand that is being sold today
“The man made a mockery of the Chair of Peter…”
???
Whoa!
John, it was RUSSIA that was consecrated to THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS. Not the other way around. And how do I know this? Because in my school, Sacred Heart, we all prayed for Russia’s conversion and that Christ would take the Russians to His Holy Heart. We were told this was part of the hope of Our Lady of Fatima. I wonder how that happened when clearly Sister Lucia was locked in silence. Must have been a miracle…
By the way, my novena for you started today.
Jesus: You are Peter, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail.
John: The gates of Hell have prevailed, and the Church is controlled by Satan. Run for the hills!
I think I know which one I believe.
DITTO! JOHN NEEDS A RETREAT!
DITTO!!! A long retreat.
Russia was never consecrated to the sacred heart so you must have missed that day of class. Pius XII made an attempt then died and then all was forgotten afterward
As far as the chair of peter-we have had horrible popes in our lifetime, and the gates of hell did not prevail then-but was the church teaching the truth or was she in error
Question-if the Pope told you tomorrow to go worship as a Moslem, knowing your christian and Catholic (hopefully “Ducky” has had some of that”)-would you do so?
That is how most of those who know the Catholic faith and know the past teachings of the church, the reverence of the liturgy, the infallible teachings of the church, and know that kissing korans and getting marked with cow dung during a pagan ceremony is the mark of heresy and a clear denial of the first commandment
One must be obedient to God first , then to man
As far as I can recall, the Pope was born with the stain of original sin and is mere mortal and prone to error as all are
John,
It wasn’t funny at Traditio in Radice, and it ain’t funny now.
Everyone else,
Just ignore these rantings. I know it is hard, but prayer is the only effective response. I’d recommend a 57 day Rosary Novena, and maybe a seperate novena to St. Lucy.
Franklin
Maybe you should go back to Traditio at Radice and take a look at the list of some of those “non popes” we have had
Not saying in any way shape or form that JPII was not the pope, I am saying quite clearly he in no way should be considered “great” nor a saint.
Is not America free? Must we blindly follow a man who led millions of catholics to not know their faith because they were taught by word and actions that, as Nostre Aetate states “we must hold teh Moslems in high esteem?”
Ecumenism was condemned by every pope until after Vatican II and JPII took it to the next and worst level. I am in no way saying we should not hold dialogue, but dialogue to show these false faiths, many of whom deny the divinity of Christ, their errors
John,
This has nothing to do with “the Great”. This has to do with…
“JPII…was a man who was willing to sell out the Catholic faith…”
You accuse him of all sorts of things that are clearly laughable; things I wouldn’t accuse my nominally-catholic neighbor of there were any more charitable way to intepret events. And yet you’ve done it, repeatedly, to Christ’s Vicar.
I’m sorry, but until you can demonstrate the love that Christ has brought to the world, and a modicum of good sense, people just aren’t going to take you seriously and you set the cause of Traditionalism farther and farther back.
In fact, the more I listen, the more convinced I am that you are a plant from some liberal catholic group. I find it hard to believe you could worship each sunday in the same beautiful liturgy I do, and not find yourself being drawn to Christ’s love.
Franklin
By the way, the response above was from me, as I forgot to change from my teenage son
I understand what you say, and I do Love you and what you are saying, but I have a hard time respecting this man, Love him, yes, believe in him as Pope, yes, but do I think he was genuine in his feelings for the defense of the holy catholic church, I do not, I am sorry. He was to mixed up in these other faiths, it corrupts ones soul
“The apostles and their successors are God’s vicars in governing the Church which is built on faith and the sacraments of faith. Wherefore, just as they may not institute another Church, so neither may they deliver another faith, nor institute other sacraments.”
–St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, III, 64, ad. 3
John:
I repeat:
The apparitions at Fatima are private revelations and therefore not binding on faith and morals. Whatever the Third Secret is, one may choose to believe it or not without danger to one’s soul.
And, FWIW, Sr. Lucia also said that John Paul’s consecration of Russia was valid, as well as his revelation of the Third Secret. I believe her. Or do you wish to call her a liar?
Then, John, may I offer some advice my dear old Baptist father raised me with? “If you can’t say something nice, don’t open your trap.”
You and I don’t agree on this issue. That’s fine by me, I can be amiable in disagreement. But none of these other people here are likely to be swayed by you either, for whatever reason(s). Surely you know that as well as I?
So rather than leave them with the impression that Traditionalists are all barking loons, could you quit this discussion and join instead one where you CAN present the truth we both value in a manner conducive to peace and light?
Lord knows I need to take my own counsel on this, too!
David
Can you please provide me a reference for you statement that Sr Lucia said Russias consecration was valid?
And Franklin-I do enjoy our debates as they stick to the facts and never get personal unlike so many others on blogs and even those the hosts, like Mark Shea who is a bully and once you give him facts he deletes your posts
God bless you
Here is a good link, put out by the church, which says that Yes Russia WAS consecrated in 1984 because “The Bishops that wanted it basically went along with it”. This is more JPII “the great” nonsense as it was not consecrated. How can one believe them, and their interpretation of the third secret?
http://www.catholicdoors.com/faq/qu26.htm#answer1
Q. 1. Was Russia ever consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary?
A. Yes, it was.
Return to Table of Contents
——————————————————————————–
Q. 2. This is confusing. Some say that it was while others say that it was not. Why this confusion?
A. Those who have a spiritual mind can perceive the truth in accordance with God’s Divine Plan. Those of a worldly mind, they have their own agenda as to how or when the Consecration of Russia should have been done to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. As such, they reject the truth.
Return to Table of Contents
——————————————————————————–
Q. 3. When was the Consecration done?
A. It was done on March 25, 1984.
Return to Table of Contents
——————————————————————————–
Q. 4. What makes the Consecration of 1984 any different than those of 1942, 1967 and 1982?
A. In a letter addressed to Sr. Mary of Bethlehem by Sr. Lucia Santos, the seer of Fatima, Sr. Lucia clearly states that the Consecrations of 1942, 1967 and 1982 were not made in union with all the bishops of the world. But, the Consecration of March 25, 1984 that was made with the bishops who wanted to unite with His Holiness John Paul II, was made as Our Lady had requested.
(Please see Letter 1 at EWTN.)
Return to Table of Contents
——————————————————————————–
Q. 5. What assurance do I have that this is an authentic letter?
A. Father Robert J Fox, a world renown Catholic writer, wrote to Sr. Lucia Santos to inquire about the validity of the Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. He asked,
“If the Consecration made by Pope John Paul II on March, 25, 1984 in union with all the bishops of the world, accomplished the conditions for the Consecration of Russia according to the request of Our Lady in Tuy on June 13 of 1929?”
On July 3, 1990, St. Lucia responded to Father Robert J Fox by saying,
“Yes, it was accomplished, and since then I have said that it was made.”
“And I say that no other person responds for me, it is I who receive and open all letters and respond to them.
(Please see Lucia’s letter and translation)
A quote:
When Pope John-Paul II visited Fatima in 1982, he consecrated once more the world to Mary, without mentioning Russia one time, nor even explicitly speaking of the Immaculate Heart, and without requiring the union of all the world�s bishops. It was this same act of consecration that was renewed in Rome on March 25, 1984. Although the world�s bishops were invited to renew this act together with him, there was again no explicit mention either of Russia or of the Immaculate Heart, and it was nothing more than a renewal of the consecration of the world originally done by Pius XII in 1942, but this time without the specific mention of the Immaculate Heart, symbol of the perfect love of Mary�s virginal heart, to which reparation is due on account of her perfect oneness with Her Divine Son in accomplishing together with Him the work of our Redemption.
However, there is now another possible occasion, and it is not at all forbidden for us to pray that the miracle of the consecration as requested by the Blessed Mother be finally accomplished. John Paul II has announced that on Sunday October 8, when the world�s bishops are gathered for the Bishops� Jubilee in Rome, they will together make an act of consecration of the Church and the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, in front of the statue of Our Lady of Fatima.
There is as yet no intention to make the true consecration requested by Our Lady, namely that of Russia, to her Immaculate Heart, together with the world�s bishops. But what an opportune moment! Is it not possible for the Holy Ghost to change their plans, and to inspire the true consecration, especially if He was able to bring about the beatification of Jacinta and Francisco, and the promise of the release of the Third Secret this year? He is only waiting our cooperation to help bring about this miracle. And since it would certainly be a miracle of the supernatural order if this were to happen, let us not attempt to obtain it with natural means, such as petitions, letters and requests to a hierarchy that has consistently shown its indifference to the supernatural order. Prayer alone will obtain this grace for the Church and for the world, and consequently for Tradition, in which the Church�s supernatural life is lived.
John:
Why are you raising an apparition to the status of doctrine? That, in and of itself, is against Church teaching.
This was more than your normal apparition, and I am not elevating it to dogma. But it just plays into the thread and the careful nature the church plays when it comes to our Lady so as not to offend the Protestants.
John, you keep mentioning Russia? I know this was the main reason for the consecration by the Pope and the bishops of the world, but isn’t Russia part of the “whole world” ?
Comments are closed.