Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fatima to Become Interfaith Shrine? An Account From One Who Was There
Fatima.org ^ | November, 2003 | John Vennari

Posted on 11/15/2003 2:49:36 PM PST by Land of the Irish

Fatima to Become Interfaith Shrine?

An Account From One Who Was There

by John Vennari

        From October 10-12, 2003, a pan-religious conference was held at Fatima entitled "The Present of Man – the Future of God: The Place of Sanctuaries in the Relation to the Sacred". It was held at the Paul VI Pastoral Center adjacent to the Fatima Shrine in Portugal. I traveled to Fatima to cover the Congress and attended the three-day event. It contained some of the most explicit heresy I have ever encountered.

        It described itself as a "Scientific" Congress, which is not the word we would use for it in North America. Here, we would label it an "Academic" Congress. In any case, the Congress comprised modern theologians and clergymen discussing the importance of religious sanctuaries – any sanctuary, be it Catholic, Buddhist or Hindu.

        The first two days contained numerous speeches from Catholics only, including the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, D. Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva; the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon, Jose da Cruz Policarpo; the notorious "interfaith theologian", Father Jacques Dupuis; and various other Ph.D.’s from Portugal.

        On Sunday, in sessions presided over by Archbishop Michael J. Fitzgerald, Prefect of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, representatives from the world religions — including Buddhist, Hindu, Islam, Orthodox, Anglican and Catholic — gave testimony to the importance of "sanctuary" in their religious traditions.

        Later, the Portuguese press published that the aim of this Congress was to establish Fatima as an interfaith Shrine.

The Sunday morning interreligious session presided over by Archbishop Fitzgerald. Here he sits with a Buddhist, a Hindu and a Muslim.

The Ecumenical Congress

        The theme of "Sanctuary" for this Congress reflects the lowest-common-denominator ecumenism prevalent for the past forty years. It is an approach that plays down doctrinal differences in the various religions and emphasizes "what we have in common".

        What do all religions have in common? They all believe in some sort of "God", so we can organize an ecumenical symposium and talk about the various aspects of "God". All religions believe in prayer, so we can have a pan-religious get-together where we can all "share" about prayer. All religions have sanctuaries, so we can hold an interfaith Congress where we talk about the importance of Sanctuaries in the various religious traditions. Thus, "Sanctuary", within the pan-religious perspective, was the focus of the latest Congress at Fatima.

        Anathema at these Congresses is any recognition of the fact that the Catholic Church is the one true religion established and willed by God, and that all other religions are false, man-made systems whose adherents believe in false gods. As such, these religions constitute an objective mortal sin against the First Commandment: "I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before Me." The false gods of Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam are "strange gods" that the First Commandment forbids all of mankind to worship.

        This applies also to Protestantism, since Protestants believe in a Christ who never existed. They believe in a Christ who did not establish a Church to teach, govern and sanctify all men. They believe in a Christ who did not establish a Papacy. They believe in a Christ who does not want us to honor His Holy Mother Mary. (And we know from the Fatima Message that God wants to establish in the world devotion to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart). They believe in a Christ who did not establish seven Sacraments as the primary means of grace for salvation. They believe in a Christ who did not establish the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In short, Protestants worship a false Christ, that is, a false God. This is why Blessed Pope Pius IX taught in his 1864 Syllabus that it is an error to believe that "Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion."[1]

        Thus, in the objective order, it is impossible for any non-Catholic, no matter how well-meaning, to obey the First Commandment.[2] We can thus understand why the Council of Trent spoke infallibly that without the Catholic Faith, "it is impossible to please God".

        This traditional, true Catholic doctrine is discarded at these interfaith events, and in ecumenical practice in general. Conversely, the new ecumenical theology says that members of all religions are part of the "Reign of God", and are "equal partners in dialogue". The Catholic religion may possess the "fullness of truth", but all other religions are part of God’s plan as well. This, particularly, is the thesis of the modernist theologian Father Jacques Dupuis, who spoke at the Congress on Saturday afternoon.

Poster containing logo of Congress.

Friday’s Sessions

        At first, I was skeptical of whether I could give a fair assessment of the Congress. The speeches were delivered in Portuguese, a language I do not speak. The Congress provided simultaneous translation into English, but the English translators were not very good. One man doing translations was practically worthless. I could tell I was getting from him one-sentence summaries of entire paragraphs from the speakers’ texts, and not very intelligible sentences at that. Luckily, two of the most important talks were delivered in English.

        From what I could gather from the Portuguese speakers, they talked about "Sanctuary" in general terms in trendy New-Church language: "Sanctuary is an altar of purification and promise", a "place of refuge in the face of temptation to pleasure and power". "Sanctuary" is part of the "mystery" in the "search for holiness, incarnation and transcendence". Keep in mind, the speakers refer here to the religious sanctuaries of all religions, whether they be Shrines of Our Lady or pagan temples.

        One would think that a Fatima Congress on Sanctuary would contain at least one lecture on the Fatima Sanctuary. Nothing. Fatima was only brought up incidentally, and every great once in a while. The Fatima Message, or even the history of how the Fatima Shrine came to be, received no spotlight. The Rosary, the Immaculate Heart, the vision of hell, the Five First Saturdays, Reparation for Sin, all constitutive elements of the Fatima Message, received no mention at all.

        On Friday, we received lectures that dealt with the "Pastoral/Scientific Nature of Sanctuary". We were told, "What happens in the Shrine is an expression of the people of God in motion." One professor quoted glowingly the modernist Father Edward Schillebeeckx’s bizarre statement: "the history of salvation is not necessarily the history of revelation". Another speaker spoke of Fatima, Mecca and Kyoto in the same breath, thus placing the true Church of Christ on the same level with false creeds; and placing the true revelations of Our Lady of Fatima – an event verified by the Miracle of the Sun before 70,000 people – on the same level with the fables and superstitions of false religions. This is a mockery of the true God and a blasphemy against Our Lady of Fatima.[3]

At this Fatima Congress, Father Jacques Dupuis openly scorns defined Church dogma.

Father Dupuis

        As mentioned, two of the most important presentations were delivered in English: the ecumenical Father Jacques Dupuis on Saturday, and a brief address by Archbishop Michael J. Fitzgerald on Sunday. These I understood perfectly, and was horrified by what was said.

        As some readers may be aware, I have covered a number of these post-Conciliar conferences including New Evangelization Seminars, Rock’n’Roll World Youth Days, screaming Charismatic meetings, and evenings of Jewish-Catholic dialogue.[4] Yet the most explicit heresy I have ever heard at any of these events came from the mouth of the Belgian Jesuit Father Jacques Dupuis, only a few hundred yards from where Our Lady of Fatima appeared.

        Father Jacques Dupuis is a progressivist, ecumenical theologian who entered the Jesuits in 1941. At this Congress, he propounded his thesis that all religions are positively willed by God. He told us that we should not refer to the other religions as "non-Christian", since this is a negative term that describes them "by what we think they are not". Rather, he said, we should refer to them as "the others".

        He trashes the truth that there is only one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation, despite the fact that this teaching was infallibly defined three times. The most forceful and explicit definition of "outside the Church there is no salvation" was pronounced de fide from the Council of Florence:

"The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire ‘which was prepared for the devil and his angels,’ (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."[5]

        As Catholics know, whenever the true Church established by Christ — the Catholic Church — teaches a solemn, de fide declaration, it is stating infallibly that the doctrine defined is a truth revealed by God "Who can neither deceive nor be deceived." A Catholic must believe all of these defined truths for salvation. To deny an infallible dogma of the Church is to call God a liar, telling Him that what He revealed to us is not true.[6]

        Saint Louis de Montfort, faithful to this revealed truth, teaches, "There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this Truth perishes."[7] Likewise, Saint Alphonsus Liguori, Doctor of the Church, reaffirms, "The Holy, Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is the only true Church, outside the pale of which no one can be saved."[8]

        Yet Father Dupuis, at the recent Fatima Congress, openly showered contempt on this defined truth and on the teaching of the Saints and Doctors of the Church. On the point of "outside the Church there is no salvation", Father Dupuis said in disgust, "There is no need to invoke here that horrible text from the Council of Florence in 1442". I heard this with my own ears and I recorded it on tape.

        Thus, Father Dupuis told the audience that an infallible definition of the Catholic Church is wrong, and that the Divine Revelation of God is a lie.

        This is the most explicit heresy I have ever encountered at one of these post-Conciliar conferences. Usually the speakers dance around the dogma they deny, but not Father Dupuis. No, he says openly that a defined Catholic doctrine is a "horrible text" that must be rejected.

        Now, how did those at the conference react to Father Dupuis’ audacity? With grand applause at the end of his speech.

        Most disturbing is the fact that the room contained the "top-brass" of the Portuguese hierarchy, all thrilled with Dupuis’ apostasy.

        Seated directly to my left was the Fatima Shrine Rector Monsignor Luciano Guerra, who applauded Father Dupuis’ speech. (I captured this on film, see photo). Seated directly to my right was the Apostolic Delegate of Portugal, that is, the papal representative for Portugal, who also applauded Dupuis. Joining in the applause was the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, D. Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva, who still refuses to allow an "Indult" Tridentine Mass in his diocese.

Msgr. Luciano Guerra, the Fatima Shrine Rector, applauding Dupuis' heresy.

        During the applause, I could not see the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon from my seat. But it is certain that he agrees with Dupuis’ ecumenical thesis. Later the same day, a small group of young traditional Catholics questioned the Cardinal about the new interreligious orientation. A youth quoted to the Cardinal a passage from the book of Sister Lucy, Calls from the Message of Fatima, where she faithfully explained the First Commandment. The Cardinal responded, "Sister Lucy is no longer a point of reference today since we have such a good one in the Second Vatican Council".[9] In other words, the Cardinal says that Vatican II’s new ecumenical teaching eclipses the traditional Catholic teaching on the First Commandment, which forbids the worship of false Gods, as reflected in the writings of Sister Lucy.

        For years, concerned Catholics have said that the reason Fatima is now downplayed and eclipsed is because the new ecumenical religion of Vatican II has replaced it.[10] I am grateful that the Cardinal abandoned all pretense and admitted this disgrace outright. It explains why the present ecumenical hierarchy falsely consider Fatima to be of little importance.

        At the Congress, Father Dupuis also said that the purpose of dialogue is not to convert the non-Catholic but rather to help "the Christian to become a better Christian, and the Hindu a better Hindu".

        Father Dupuis further lectured that "Christians and ‘the others’ are co-members of the Reign of God in history". He also said that "the Holy Spirit is present and operative in the sacred books of Hinduism or of Buddhism. That He is present and operative in the sacred rites of Hinduism". Thus, according to Dupuis, the Holy Ghost is active and present in the "sacred rites" and "sacred books" of false religions. No wonder a prominent ecumenical Catholic kissed the Koran.

        A more detailed exposition of Father Dupuis’ apostate lecture will appear in a future installment. For now, I want to re-emphasize that the Congress delegates — including the Cardinal of Lisbon, the Bishop of Fatima, and the Rector of the Fatima Shrine — applauded Dupuis as magnificent. Worse still, the next day, Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, told the Congress "Father Dupuis yesterday explained the theological basis of the establishment of relations with people of other religions." In other words, Archbishop Fitzgerald praised Father Dupuis’ heresies.

        Archbishop Fitzgerald said further that he agreed with Father Dupuis that "the unity with God is not confined to the people who belong to the Church". The Church, according to this new union, should not proselytize. Nor is the purpose of dialogue to "convert" the "other" to Catholicism. This is pointless, since members of all religions, according to Dupuis, are already part of the "Reign of God". Rather, "the Church" says Fitzgerald, "is there to recognize the holiness that is in other people, the elements of truth, grace and beauty that are in different religions," and "to try to bring about a greater peace and harmony among people of other religions". Perhaps this Congress should have been called, "Fatima Meets the Age of Aquarius".

Archbishop Fitzgerald

Catholic Truth vs. the New Religion

        Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the Catholic Faith knows that the interfaith religion promoted at this Fatima Conference is contrary to Catholic teaching and is a blasphemy before God. As mentioned, the Council of Trent defined infallibly that without the Catholic Faith, "it is impossible to please God."[11] The Catholic Church also defined three times ex cathedra that there is only one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation.[12] And as Vatican I teaches, not even a Pope can change defined dogma, otherwise dogmatic truths were never true.[13]

        Blessed Pope Pius IX reiterated the truth "outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation" while combating the growing "Liberal Catholicism" of his day. He said:

"We must mention and condemn again that most pernicious error which has been imbibed by certain Catholics who are of the opinion that those people who live in error and have not the true faith and are separated from Catholic unity, may obtain life everlasting. Now this opinion is most contrary to the Catholic faith, as is evident from the plain words of Our Lord, (Matt 18:17; Mark 16:16; Luke 10:16; John 3:18) as also from the words of Saint Paul (2 Tit. 3:11) and of Saint Peter (2 Peter 2:1). To entertain opinions contrary to this Catholic faith is to be an impious wretch."[14]

        Pope Leo XIII, elaborating the same doctrine, taught, "since no one is allowed to be remiss in the service due to God ... we are bound absolutely to worship God in that way which He has shown to be His will ... It cannot be difficult to find out which is the true religion if it only be sought with an earnest and unbiased mind; for proofs are abundant and striking . . . From all these [proofs] it is evident that the only true religion is the one established by Jesus Christ Himself, and which He committed to His Church to protect and propagate."[15]

        Likewise, Pope Pius XII restated this doctrine within the context of a prayer to the Blessed Virgin:

"O Mary, Mother of Mercy and Seat of Wisdom! Enlighten the minds enfolded in the darkness of ignorance and sin, that they may clearly recognize the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church to be the only true Church of Jesus Christ, outside which neither sanctity nor salvation can be found."[16]

        From these sources, and from countless other magisterial teachings, it is clear that the only religion positively willed by God, the only religion in which "sanctity and salvation can be found" is the Holy Catholic Church established by Christ.

        Sacred Scripture likewise teaches infallibly that false religions are not pleasing to God, and the greatest charity we can show "the others" is to work and pray for their conversion to the one true Church of Christ. Our Lord commanded His disciples, "Go forth and teach", not "Go forth and dialogue". He said, "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." (Matt: 28:19). "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe shall be condemned.(Mark 15:16).

        The "belief" that Our Lord spoke of does not mean a vague belief in any religion, but express belief in Him and all that He taught. This is why Saint John, the Apostle of Love, said, "Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 1:22) Thus, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, any religion that rejects Christ, according to Scripture, is an Antichrist religion. Regarding heretical religions, for example, "Orthodoxy" and Protestantism, Saint Paul tells us that false creeds are the "doctrines of devils" (1 Tim. 4:1).

        Contrary to Father Dupuis’ notions, Antichrist religions and false creeds of heretics which are "doctrines of devils," cannot possibly be willed by God. Nor can their members be considered as being part of the "Reign of God".

        Thus, there can not be a new "ecumenical unity" which seeks to unite Catholics with members of false religions in a heretical notion of the "Reign of God". Pope Pius XI rightly taught in his 1928 encyclical against ecumenism, Mortaliam Animos: "Unity can only arise from one teaching authority, one law of belief, one faith of Christians." Likewise, Pope Pius XII taught in his 1949 Instruction on the Ecumenical Movement that "True reunion can only come about by the return of dissidents to the one true Church of Christ (the Catholic Church)."[17]

        But for now, the interfaith heresy rules the hour, and is poised to claim the Shrine at Fatima as its next victim.

Msgr. Guerra, the Fatima Shrine Rector, is seated on the left. Standing next to him is the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, D. Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva.

Fatima: An Interfaith Shrine?

        At the time, I saw no reports of this "Future of God" Congress in the secular and religious press. Two weeks later, however, the November 1 on-line edition of the Lisbon-based Portugal News published in English an article entitled "Fatima to Become an Interfaith Shrine". The article said, "Delegates attending the Vatican and United Nations inspired annual interfaith congress ‘The Future of God’, held during October in Fatima, heard how the Shrine is to be developed into a center where all the religions of the world will gather to pay homage to their various gods."

        The report quoted the Shrine’s rector, Monsignor Guerra, saying at the Congress that Fatima "will change for the better". Portugal News further quoted Msgr. Guerra: "The future of Fatima, or the adoration of God and His mother at this holy Shrine, must pass through the creation of a shrine where different religions can mingle. The interreligious dialogue in Portugal, and in the Catholic Church, is still in an embryonic phase, but the Shrine of Fatima is not indifferent to this fact and is already open to being a universalistic place of vocation."

        "Monsignor Guerra" said Portugal News, "pointed out that the very fact that Fatima is the name of a Muslim and Mohammed's daughter, is indicative that the Shrine must be open to the co-existence of various faiths and beliefs. According to the Monsignor: ‘Therefore we must assume that it was the will of the Blessed Virgin Mary that this comes about this way.’ Traditional Catholics opposed to the Congress were described by the Monsignor as ‘old fashioned, narrow minded, fanatic extremists and provocateurs’."[18]

        Now, I quote Portugal News on this point because I did not hear Monsignor Guerra make these statements at the Congress. But then again, I might have missed it. Monsignor Guerra spoke in Portuguese, and as I’ve already noted, the simultaneous translation into English was poorly done. Nonetheless, the idea of Fatima becoming an "interfaith" Shrine is consistent with everything I heard throughout that weekend, especially on Sunday when the members of various religions gave their testimony of the importance of "Sanctuaries" in their religious traditions.

        Representatives for this Sunday session included Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Hindu, Muslim, as well as a Buddhist who invited us to visit the Zenkoji Buddhist Shrine in Japan, and even supplied each of us with a colorful pamphlet of Zenkoji.

        But the testimony of the Catholic proved the most troublesome, and was, perhaps, a portent of what we might soon see at Fatima.

        Father Arul Irudayam, Rector of the Marian Shrine Basilica in Vailankanni, India, initially spoke beautifully about the history of this Shrine where our Lady appeared. The Shrine receives millions of pilgrims a year, including many Hindus.

        Father Irudayam then rejoiced that, as a further development of interreligious practice, the Hindus now perform their religious rituals in the church.

        Of course, the delegates were thrilled to hear that a Catholic church was used for pagan worship, but I was horrified. Sacred Scripture teaches clearly that "the gods of the Gentiles are devils". (Psalm 95:5). And the truth that the gods of Hinduism are devils was confirmed by one of the greatest missionaries of all time, Saint Francis Xavier.

A Buddhist gave everyone present at the Congress a pamphlet inviting us to visit the Buddhist Shrine of Zenkoji.

        While serving his missions, Saint Francis Xavier found particular delight in his small pupils. He was impressed that these young ones showed a great attachment to their faith, and a great zeal to learn the prayers and to teach them to others. The young pupils "also had a great abhorrence for the idolatrous practices of the pagans", in other words, for the practices of Hinduism. The pupils frequently "reproached their father and mother if they engaged in pagan ceremonies and came to tell the priest about it."

        When Saint Francis Xavier heard that "outside the village someone was practicing idolatry, he gathered together all the boys, and this was something which he did later also in the other villages that he visited, and went with them to the spot where the idols had been erected. His pupils smashed the clay figures of the demons to dust and spit and stamped upon them." Saint Francis Xavier’s biographer explains that these children "thus gave more insults to the devil than their parents had shown honor to him."[19]

        Even though this event would send ecumenical clergymen shrieking into the snowbanks, it is clear that Saint Francis Xavier recognized rightly that "the gods of the Gentiles are devils", that is, the "gods" of Hinduism. Now, however, these "devils" are worshiped in the Vailankanni Shrine of Our Lady in India. The Fatima Shrine Rector, as did all the Conference delegates, applauded the speech wherein the Indian priest related the practice of Hinduism in the Catholic Sanctuary.

        It is fair to conclude that if Catholics do not organize and protest, it is only a matter of time before this blasphemy takes place at Fatima, especially since plans are underway for a new, modern Fatima Shrine to be built.

        The Portugal News reported "The Shrine of Fatima is about to undergo a complete reconstruction with a new stadium-like basilica being erected close to the existing one built in 1921."[20] About a year ago, I saw a picture of the proposed building. It is a hideous modern monstrosity that looks like a futuristic airplane hangar.

        In the face of the proposed desecration of Our Lady’s apparition site at Fatima, a worldwide protest must be mounted. Absolutely no money should be donated to the Fatima Shrine in Portugal until the present Rector is removed and the invasion of the ecumenical religion at Fatima ceases. The new Shrine, if completed, will display ugliness from the outside, reflected in the hideous modern architecture, and ugliness on the inside, not only in the futuristic interior, but also in the pagan practices that might be allowed to take place in the very area sanctified by Our Lady’s appearances; the very area where the Miracle of the Sun took place, and where countless pilgrims were cured and converted.

Saturday afternoon at the Congress.

Chastisement

        The new ecumenical religion propounded at Fatima threatens the salvation of countless souls, as it tells non-Catholics to remain in the darkness of their false religions. It also threatens to bring with it a great chastisement.

        In the early 20th Century, the eminent European churchman Cardinal Mercier, citing the consistent teaching of the Popes, stated the First World War was actually a punishment for the crime of nations placing the one True Religion on the same level as false creeds (as does the ecumenical religion promoted at Fatima Congress). Cardinal Mercier said:

"In the name of the Gospel, and in the light of the Encyclicals of the last four Popes, Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X, I do not hesitate to affirm that this indifference to religions which puts on the same level the religion of divine origin and the religions invented by men in order to include them in the same scepticism is the blasphemy which calls down chastisement on society far more than the sins of individuals and families."[21]

        What would Cardinal Mercier, and the Popes cited by him, say of this new attempt to bring about a "peace and harmony of religions", wherein Catholic Churchmen place the one true religion as an "equal partner" with false religions and pagan creeds? How will God react to this "blasphemy which calls down chastisement on society"? What sort of punishment will Heaven unleash when the land of Fatima, sanctified by Our Lady’s presence, and the Shrine that is consecrated to Her, is allowed by Catholic leaders to be desecrated with the worship of false gods? In the face of this, Catholics must not be complacent.

        Most disturbing of all, the new ecumenical religion, trumpeted at this Fatima Congress, is actually the religion of Freemasonry. The French Freemason Yves Marsaudon wrote approvingly:

"One can say that ecumenism is the legitimate son of Freemasonry ... In our times, our brother Franklin Roosevelt claimed for all of them the possibility of ‘adoring God, following their principles and their convictions.’ This is tolerance, and it is also ecumenism. We traditional Freemasons allow ourselves to paraphrase and transpose this saying of a celebrated statesman, adapting it to circumstances: Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Israelites, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, freethinkers, free-believers, to us, these are only first names; Freemasonry is the name of our family."[22]

        This Freemasonic religion is now promoted in Fatima. I heard it coming from the mouth of the soft-spoken Father Jacques Dupuis. Yet Dupuis’ words were a sugar-coated masonic doctrine from the underworld. It was Pope Pius VIII who rightly said of Freemasons, "their god is the devil".[23]

        Yet it should not surprise us that consecrated souls have come under the power of the devil. Sister Lucy predicted it over 40 years ago.

The Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon, Jose da Cruz Policarpo, being interviewed by the Press.

Lucy’s Warning

        In her 1957 interview with Father Fuentes, Sister Lucy made the prophetic warning:

"Father, the devil is in the mood for engaging in a decisive battle against the Blessed Virgin. And the devil knows what it is that most offends God and which in a short space of time will gain for him the greatest number of souls. Thus the devil does everything to overcome souls consecrated to God because in this way the devil will succeed in leaving the souls of the faithful abandoned by their leaders, thereby the more easily will he seize them."

        Sister Lucy continues,

"That which afflicts the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Heart of Jesus is the fall of religious and priestly souls. The devil knows that religious and priests who fall away from their beautiful vocation drag numerous souls to hell ... The devil wishes to take possession of consecrated souls. He tries to corrupt them in order to lull to sleep the souls of laypeople and thereby lead them to final impenitence..."[24]

        Sister Lucy’s prophetic words unfold before our eyes at the pan-religious Fatima Congress. Here we see the devil "overcome souls" who are consecrated to God. We see priests, religious, bishops, who have "fallen away from their beautiful vocation" of teaching the truths of the Catholic Faith, and who "drag numerous souls to hell" by their perverse, ecumenical teaching.

        The Cardinal of Lisbon, the Bishop of Fatima, and the Shrine Rector all swore the Oath Against Modernism upon their ordination.[25] An Oath before God is a sacred act, and to betray such an Oath is a mortal sin against the Second Commandment, "Thou Shalt Not Take the Name of the Lord Thy God in Vain." Yet those at the Fatima Congress betrayed this Oath by promoting a new modernist religion that claims that the Catholic truths of yesterday must not be the Catholic "truths" of today. As Msgr. Fenton pointed out decades ago, "The man who taught or in any way aided in the dissemination or the protection of Modernist teaching" after taking the Oath Against Modernism, "would mark himself, not only as a sinner against the Catholic Faith, but also as a common perjurer".[26]

        We can conclude that Father Jacques Dupuis, Cardinal Jose da Cruz Policarpo of Lisbon, Bishop Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva of Fatima-Leiria, and Fatima Shrine Rector Monsignor Guerra have promoted Modernism and are therefore sinners against the Catholic Faith and also common perjurers. It is a crime against God and justice that these men should hold authority in the land of Portugal where Our Blessed Mother appeared.

        In the mid 1990's, on a Mexican radio station, the Rector of the Shrine of Guadalupe denied the truth that Our Lady of Guadalupe appeared at Tepayac Hill. The people of Mexico were outraged and protested against the audacity. Within a year, the Shrine Rector was gone.[27] The same must be done at Fatima.

        Catholics around the world must unite and protest the outrage that was allowed, and will continue, to be perpetuated against the Catholic Faith and the Mother of God.

        We must also unite in prayers of reparation for the blasphemies spoken against the one true Catholic Church of Jesus Christ, whose Mother came to Fatima with a message for mankind, a Mother now betrayed by Churchmen in high place, and most especially, by members of the present hierarchy of Portugal.

The Paul VI Pastoral Center, adjacent to the Fatima Shrine, where the pan-religious Congress was held.

Notes:

1. Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, 1864, Condemned Proposition #18. Popes Against Modern Errors: 16 Papal Documents, (Rockford: Tan, 1999), p. 30.

2. In 1944, the eminent theologian Father Francis Connell, basing himself on the consistent teaching of the Popes, reminded Catholics that they have a duty of charity to tell the non-Catholic that he is in great danger of losing his soul if he remains in his false religion. He said, "Far from minimizing the exclusiveness of the Catholic religion, our people should be instructed unhesitatingly, whenever the occasion offers, and to let non-Catholics know that we consider them as deprived of the ordinary means of salvation, however excellent their intentions." Quoted from Father Francis Connell, C.Ss.R., "Communication with Non-Catholics in Sacred Rites, American Ecclesiastical Review, Sept., 1944.

3. Our Lady of Fatima asked specifically for the Five First Saturdays of reparation for the blasphemies against Her Immaculate Heart that are the fruit of these false religions. See "A World View Based On Fatima", The Fatima Crusader, Issue 64, Summer, 2000. On-line at http://www.fatima.org/library/cr64pg15.html

4. These were published in Catholic Family News.

5. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Feb. 4, 1442.

6. See The Source of Catholic Dogma, Ludwig Ott (first printed in 1960, reprinted by Tan Books, Rockford, IL), p. 4-6.

7. Cited from Hail Mary, Full of Grace, Still River, MA, 1957, p. 107. We could also quote Saint Francis of Assisi, who stated firmly, "All who have not believed that Jesus Christ was really the Son of God are doomed.  Also all who see the Sacrament of the Body of Christ and do not believe it is really the most holy Body and Blood of the Lord ... these also are doomed!". Quoted from Admonitio prima de Corpore Christi (Quaracchi edition, p. 4), cited from Johannes Jorgensen, St. Francis of Assisi, (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1912), p. 55.

8. Instructions on the Commandments and Sacraments. It should also be noted that Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, the former editor of The American Ecclesiastical Review, and one of most eminent theologians of the 20th Century, warned that the doctrine "outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation" is one of the key dogmas denied in our time. In 1958, four years before Vatican II, Msgr. Fenton wrote, "In every age of the Church there has been one portion of Christian doctrine which men have been especially tempted to misconstrue or to deny. In our own times, it is the part of Catholic truth which was brought out with a special force and clarity by St. Peter in his first missionary sermon in Jerusalem. It is somewhat unfashionable today to insist, as St. Peter did, that those who are outside the true Church of Christ stand in need of being saved by leaving their own positions and entering the ecclesia. Nevertheless, this remains a part of God’s own revealed message." (See Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation, Newman Press, 1958, p. 145.)

9. Documentation Information Catholique Internationale (DICI), November 3, 2003.

10. See "It Doesn’t Add Up", John Vennari, especially the final heading, "Don’t Rain on My Charade", The Fatima Crusader, Issue #70, Spring 2002. On-line at http://www.fatima.org/library/cr70pg12.htm

11. Session V on Original Sin. See Denzinger #787.

12. See text from the Council of Florence quoted earlier.

13. "The Holy Spirit was not promised to the successor of Peter that by the revelation of the Holy Spirit they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the Apostles and the deposit of Faith, and might faithfully set it forth." Vatican I, Session III, Chap. IV, Dei Filius. The eminent theologian Msgr. Fenton employs this text to explain that "Catholic dogma is immutable ... the same identical truths are always presented to the people as having been revealed by God. Their meaning never changes.", We Stand With Christ, Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, (Bruce, 1942) p. 2.

14. Quoted from The Catholic Dogma by Father Michael Muller (Benzinger Brothers, 1888), p. xi. Emphasis added.

15. Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter, Immortale Dei, cited from The Kingship of Christ and Organized Naturalism by Father Denis Fahey (Regina Publications, Dublin, 1943), pp. 7-8.

16. The Raccolta, Benzinger Brothers, Boston, 1957, No. 626 (Emphasis added).

17. Instructio (The Instruction from the Holy Office on the Ecumenical Movement, Dec. 20, 1949). Entire English translation published in The Tablet (London), March 4, 1950.

18. Portugal News, On-line edition, November 1, 2003.

19. Francis Xavier, His Life and Times, Volume II, India, 1541-1545, George Schurhammer, S.J. (English translation copyrighted 1963. Published by the Jesuit Historical Institute, Rome, 1977), p. 310.

20. This, perhaps, may be a typographical error in Portugal News. The small Capelinha was built in 1921. The present Fatima Shrine Basilica was built in 1951.

21. Cardinal Mercier’s Pastoral Letter, 1918, The Lesson of Events. Cited from The Kingship of Christ and Organized Naturalism by Father Denis Fahey (Dublin: Regina Publications, 1943), p. 36.

22. Yves Marsaudon, Oecumènisme vu par un Maçon de Tradition (pp. 119-120). English translation cited from Peter Lovest Thou Me? (Instauratio Press, 1988), p. 170. Except for the first line "One can say ..." which was translated into English by S.M. Rini.

23. Pope Pius VIII, quoted from Papacy and Freemasonry by Msgr. Jouin.

24. Fatima in Twilight, Mark Fellows, (Niagara Falls: Marmion, 2003), p. 145.

25. All priests had to take this Oath against Modernism until, tragically, it was abolished by Paul VI in 1967. It appears that all the priests I mentioned here were ordained before 1967. But even if a priest does not swear an Oath Against Modernism, he is still prohibited from promoting Modernism, or any heresy. It is still against the Catholic Faith to do so.

26. "Sacrorum Antistitum and the Background of the Oath Against Modernism," Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, The American Ecclesiastical Review, October, 1960, pp. 259-260.

27. See Fatima Priest,Francis Alban, (Pound Ridge: Good Counsel Publications, 1997), Chapter 14, p. 160 (2nd edition).


Search Feedback Info
Foreign Auto-Update


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist; fatima; heresy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
To: Askel5; Siobhan
I pray our next Pope is a disciplinarian. i>

I pray the next Pope will be holy, mighty, and ready to CLEAN HOUSE. An evil clown like Dupuis should have been muzzled and defrocked ages ago.

41 posted on 11/18/2003 12:36:00 PM PST by Maeve (Pray the Chaplet of Divine Mercy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Askel5; Siobhan
I pray our next Pope is a disciplinarian.

I pray the next Pope will be holy, mighty, and ready to CLEAN HOUSE. An evil clown like Dupuis should have been muzzled and defrocked ages ago.

42 posted on 11/18/2003 12:40:26 PM PST by Maeve (Pray the Chaplet of Divine Mercy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Disrespect for Mary is blasphemy against God who created her and sanctified her.

True. However, if you are trying to imply that an outrage against the Blessed Virgin Mary (e.g. denying her perpetual virginity) is not also a blasphemy against the person of the Blessed Virgin Mary, that is a lie and an impiety.

43 posted on 11/18/2003 12:41:27 PM PST by Jacinta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah; Hermann the Cherusker
I have the complete set of Malachi Martin's tapes, "The Reign of Darkness." Everything he says is completely orthodox. I have heard the allegations about his past. Either they are untrue, he repented, or everything he states in these tapes is complete fakery. Also, he seems to be right on the money in "Windswept House". So what IS going on here?
44 posted on 11/18/2003 1:07:50 PM PST by k omalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker; Askel5; Land of the Irish; Canticle_of_Deborah; Jacinta; raph
Anonymous Theologian
Cardinal Ratzinger also picks out «the doctrine on the existence of original sin» (Doctrinal Note, n. 11). But, for him «the doctrine of original sin says nothing other than this: the history of man is the history of his alienation» (PCT, p. 177). But on this subject, he ventures into formal heresy: «Original sin, he writes, cannot be conceived as the product of generation» (PCT, p. 96). He makes a further absurd statement: «The essence (!…) of original sin consists in being divided up into individualities» (PCT, p. 51). This sin is transmitted to all his descendants and, contrary to what Cardinal Ratzinger says, it is transmitted to Adam’s descendants through generation, as defined by the Council of Trent…

Hermann the Cherusker
On Original sin, it is amusing that the actual heretic is Anonymous Theologian… Original sin is as Trent notes: "transfused into all" "by propagation". Something that is transfused by an act cannot be said to be the product of the act…. The implication of saying it is produced by generation implies that the soul does not come from God, but from the fallen humanity

Product – From Latin productum p. part. of producere = to lead or bring forth
- something resulting from or necessarily following from a set of conditions.
Produce – to bring forth.

"The implication of saying it is produced by generation implies that the soul does not come from God, but from the fallen humanity."

The implication of what the Anonymous Theologian wrote, is that the soul is created by God, and that original sin is produced, or brought forth through generation. God certainly does not "produce" original sin.

45 posted on 11/18/2003 4:35:40 PM PST by Grigeo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker; Askel5; Land of the Irish; Canticle_of_Deborah; Jacinta; raph
How dare you put Fr. Congar in the same breath as those heretics?

Hans Kung’s heretical views are well known, and are expressed in one of his most famous works, On Being a Christian. In this book, Hans Kung:
denies the Divinity of Christ (p. 130)
dismisses the miracles in the Gospel (p. 233)
denies the bodily resurrection of Jesus (the resurrection "can not be a historical event... there was nothing to photograph or record" p. 349)
denies that Christ founded an institutional Church (p. 109)
denies that the Mass is a re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Calvary (p. 323)

"... the Council of Nicaea ... it is ... beyond dispute that the council remained utterly imprisoned in Hellenistic concepts, notions and thought-models which would have been completely alien to the Jew Jesus of Nazareth and the earliest community." (Christianity: Essence, History and Future, Hans Kung, p. 182.

"Nor did Paul want to replace Jewish belief in one God with a Christian belief in two Gods. Rather, he always regarded the Jesus who had been exalted by God’s spirit to God as subordinate to this one God and Father: as the Messiah, Christ, image, Son, of the one God. So his christocentricity remains grounded in and culminates in a theocentricity: ‘from God through Jesus Christ’—‘through Jesus Christ to God.’ To this degree Paul’s christology is directly compatible with Jewish monotheism." (Christianity: Essence, History and Future, Hans Kung, p. 113.

He also suggested that Blessed Pius IX was a psychopath and denies the Scriptural foundations of the papacy.

When Rome finally acted in 1980, it declared that Kung could no longer call himself a “Catholic” theologian. If you are a heterodox theologian, you have to work really, really hard to get censured by Rome.

46 posted on 11/18/2003 5:10:00 PM PST by Grigeo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker; Askel5; Land of the Irish; Canticle_of_Deborah; Jacinta; raph
Please ignore previous post. Kung / Congar? That's what I get for posting after being sick for 3 days. Good evening!
47 posted on 11/18/2003 5:20:22 PM PST by Grigeo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Grigeo
That's okay, I didn't know all this about Kung anyway. Feel better!
48 posted on 11/18/2003 5:23:07 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah (National health care gives the government the means to kill you when you become too expensive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Grigeo
A theologian

Hans Kung at least had the courage to sign his name to his propositions.

This clown is gutless. He should be treated like anyone who signs an anonymous letter.

49 posted on 11/18/2003 5:40:28 PM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Grigeo; sinkspur
He should be treated like anyone who signs an anonymous letter.

This coming from the anonymous deacon who speaks as a clergyman for the Catholic Church.

50 posted on 11/18/2003 5:53:50 PM PST by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
This coming from the anonymous deacon who speaks as a clergyman for the Catholic Church.

Anyone who identifies themselves by name on a website is crazy. Perhaps you'd like to identify yourself first, by name and location.

However, writing anonymously in a scholarly journal is cowardly.

51 posted on 11/18/2003 6:01:42 PM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Grigeo
The implication of what the Anonymous Theologian wrote, is that the soul is created by God, and that original sin is produced, or brought forth through generation. God certainly does not "produce" original sin.

Apparently we need to return to square one. What, in your view, is Original Sin?

52 posted on 11/18/2003 6:35:55 PM PST by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: k omalley; Canticle_of_Deborah
Martin is all wet on a number of issues. One of them is quite glaring - he denies the necessity of making the State Christian, or the usefulness of the Church being involved in the temporal sphere. In other words, he is against the Kingship of Christ.
53 posted on 11/18/2003 6:38:00 PM PST by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Jacinta
However, if you are trying to imply that an outrage against the Blessed Virgin Mary (e.g. denying her perpetual virginity) is not also a blasphemy against the person of the Blessed Virgin Mary, that is a lie and an impiety.

Personally, I think such outrages are better termed insults to the Blessed Virgin, and blasphemies against God. Jone (Moral Theology, 190) notes: "Blasphemy is any speech or gesture that contains contempt for or insult to God. It is always mortally sinful." It would not appear to me that the Blessed Virgin can be blasphemed unless you are making her one of the Holy Trinity.

54 posted on 11/18/2003 6:41:34 PM PST by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Hermann, your interpretation of a dead man's mindset does not make it the truth.

That's part of the problem around here. Everyone is so busy responding to their own perceptions of other posters that few are able to argue posts based on content alone.

55 posted on 11/18/2003 6:41:40 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah (National health care gives the government the means to kill you when you become too expensive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Perhaps you'd like to identify yourself first, by name and location.

Why? I am neither someone writing for a scholarly journal, nor am I a deacon of the Catholic Church.

You on the other hand claim a clerical position within the Church, yet you won't indentify yourself. By your own definition, you're no better than Father Moderator.

56 posted on 11/18/2003 6:51:11 PM PST by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
yet you won't indentify yourself

Why should I "indentify" myself?

So you and narses can egg my house?

When you give your real name on this forum, and your city, I'll do the same.

57 posted on 11/18/2003 6:58:29 PM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: raph; Catholicguy
But in the meantime, you know full well that Father Congar has been deeply entrenched with the other heretics mentioned. While his writings were suppressed by Pope Pius II; his progressive theological opinions gained widespread influence at the Second Vatican Council.

"His writings"? All of them? A single book? An article? What? Can you be a little more specific? How about pointing out what you think are the errors in them? Amusingly, its not hard to find quotations even in SSPX publications using Fr. Congar as an authority.

Even so, lets work from the assumption that there may have been some problem seen at the time in his "True and False Reform in the Church". He has since been vindicated in this book by the Church. How is this different than the supression of the works of St. Thomas Aquinas until his canonization, for example?

And I know you are familiar with Congar admitting that Vatican II's "Declaration on Religious Liberty" runs contrary to the Syllabus of Pope Pius IX.

In its effect on society/Church-State relations, yes. Doctrinally, no.

You are going to have to do better than this. Do you actually know anything about the man?

58 posted on 11/18/2003 7:22:49 PM PST by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; narses
So you and narses can egg my house?

Little bit of paronia, huh? Where's all that inner peace one finds in the Novus Ordo?

59 posted on 11/18/2003 7:24:27 PM PST by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
thanks for the additional info on Martin
60 posted on 11/18/2003 7:27:20 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson