It is currently Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:41 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ] 
 Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis? 
Author Message

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:58 am
Posts: 50
Location: Massachusetts, USA
New post Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
James Schroepfer wrote:
Quote:
There must be a way because Our Lord is awaiting the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and that can't happen without a Pope. In fact, Our Lord said that the consecration will take place but it will be late. Maybe it is late because we haven't figured out how to elect a Catholic Pope yet.


Be careful. This should be started in another thread so as not to derail this one. Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia in the 1950's I believe. The Fatima-pope argument is a common argument used by the R&R against sedevacantism led by "Father" Gruner.


I am starting another thread so as not to derail the other one. Is Fatima really in conflict with the sede vacante thesis? It seems to me that the sede vacante thesis fits with the Fatima message better than the R&R thesis. Why did Our Lady want the Third Secret revealed no later than 1960? The R&R thesis has no real answer to that question. It seems like a strange date considering that no objectional documents were promulgated until 1964. In fact, the R&R folks accept the 1962 missal. So why 1960? Why not 1962 when the Council opened. Or 1963 when Pope John XXIII died? Or 1964 when the Decree on Ecumenism was promulgated? I would think also that if Pope John XXIII's election was invalid the date should have been 1958. But I don't think he was a public heretic in 1958. That's why he was peacefully accepted even by truly Catholic clergy. But according to the late Mr. Patrick Henry Omlor, RIP, in his book The "Unpersoning" of St. Philomena, Pope John XXIII did become a public heretic in 1961.

Patrick Henry Omlor wrote:
On February 14, 1961, Roncalli, the visible head of the Robber Church, aided by his hit men, attempted to "unperson" St. Philomena by means of a single sentence that appeared on p. 174 of Vol. LIII of Acta Apostasticae[sic*] Sedis: "Festum autem S. Philumenae V. et M. (11 augusti) e quolibet calendario expungatur." "On the other hand, the feast of St. Philomena Virgin and Martyr (August 11th) is expunged from every calendar."

The forgoing is the final sentence in a section of Chapter V (of a decree of S.R.C.). The heading of this section reads: "De festis quae communiter <<devotionis>> vocantur": "Regarding feasts commonly called 'devotional'." Next follows a list of fourteen feasts which could accurately be described as being purely "devotional" (for example, "The Crown of Thorns" and "The Flight into Egypt"). A concession is then made: "Such are feasts that can be retained if they are connected with a special necessity in certain places."

Not so lenient is what comes next: "On the other hand, the feast of St. Philomena Virgin and Martyr (August 11th) is expunged from every calendar." What's wrong with this picture? In the first place, St. Philomena's feast on August 11th is not in any sense "devotional," as the very heading of the section purports to be discussing. It is the feast of a Virgin Martyr in the Church's sanctoral cycle to be celebrated with the Mass Loquebar.

In the second place, in the section "Proprium Sanctorum pro Aliquibus Locis" of altar missals, in which the Masses for the aforesaid fourteen "devotional" feasts appear, we also find the propers of the Mass for the feasts of twenty-three saints including St. Philomena, all of which feasts are by no means "devotional," for they have their place in the sanctoral cycle of the Church's liturgy. Twenty-two of the twenty-three feast days of saints escaped "expunging," the sole exception being that of St. Philomena.

There's plenty wrong with this picture! The gangsters' hit on St. Philomena was clumsy. Their intention was clearly to eliminate her. But how and where? In a separate section? No, that would have been too obvious. And so, as a last resort it was done by inappropriately slapping on her condemnation as the final sentence of a section devoted to a totally unrelated matter: Regarding feasts commonly called 'DEVOTIONAL'.

Although expunging St. Philomena's feast "from every calendar" was a serious matter, it was not the same as striking her name from the list of saints; that is, an attempt to "de-canonize" her. Nevertheless it was widely interpreted as such (a result that was probably intended). For example, it merited a mention in the "Britannica Book of the Year 1962". On p. 588 there was also a photo by Ted Polumbaum that originally appeared in Life, depicting a worker smashing a 5-foot casting used for making statues of the Saint.

The striking from the Church's list of saints the name of a saint already canonized, by its denial of the infallibility of the Church in Her canonizations would be an heretical action, and it would also thereby deny Her indefectibility. After the February 14th St. Valentine's Day Massacre, The Robber Church's "Ministry of Truth" waited two months before doing exactly this, namely, in effect declaring to the world that the Sovereign Pontiff Gregory XVI erred in canonizing St. Philomena: "On April 18, 1961, the Congregation of Rites struck Philomena's name from the list of saints for lack of historical evidence."(95) (There is no recording of this in AAS.)

...
95 PHILOMENA, ST., LEGEND OF, the article by E. Day on p. 292 in Vol. 11 of the NEW Catholic Encyclopedia.


Note: All emphasis in the original. The entire quote can be found on pp. 50-52, Section 10 The 1961 St. Valentine's Day Massacre, in The "Unpersoning" of St. Philomena, (c) Patrick Henry Omlor, Printed by the Missionary Sisters of the Holy Ghost, Catholic Research Institute, dated July 27, 2001.

* that might be an intentional "typo"

Maybe that's why 1960 was the cut-off date. By that time, a liberal Pope was in office and he had already announced that the council would be convened. So it makes sense that at that time the message would be "clearer". And 1960 was before the first public heresy of Pope John XXIII so maybe 1960 was his last chance to reform his life before Our Lord would abandon him (and the rest of the modernists) to his own devices. I don't see how any other part of the Fatima message conflicts with the SV thesis either. Our Lord said that Russia will be consecrated but it will be late. All of this information was known to Pius XII and he still approved the devotion and even encouraged it. And finally, the CMRI encourages devotion to Our Lady of Fatima so I find it hard to believe that they would take that position if Fatima was truly in conflict with the SV thesis.


Last edited by ClemensMaria on Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wed Jun 11, 2014 2:59 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
ClemensMaria wrote:

I am starting another thread so as not to derail the other one. Is Fatima really in conflict with the sede vacante thesis?... But according to the late Mr. Patrick Henry Omlor, RIP, in his book The "Unpersoning" of St. Philomena, Pope John XXIII did become a public heretic in 1961.

Patrick Henry Omlor wrote:
On February 14, 1961, Roncalli, the visible head of the Robber Church, aided by his hit men, attempted to "unperson" St. Philomena by means of a single sentence that appeared on p. 174 of Vol. LIII of Acta Apostasticae[sic*] Sedis: "Festum autem S. Philumenae V. et M. (11 augusti) e quolibet calendario expungatur." "On the other hand, the feast of St. Philomena Virgin and Martyr (August 11th) is expunged from every calendar."
...
The striking from the Church's list of saints the name of a saint already canonized, by its denial of the infallibility of the Church in Her canonizations would be an heretical action, and it would also thereby deny Her indefectibility. After the February 14th St. Valentine's Day Massacre, The Robber Church's "Ministry of Truth" waited two months before doing exactly this, namely, in effect declaring to the world that the Sovereign Pontiff Gregory XVI erred in canonizing St. Philomena: "On April 18, 1961, the Congregation of Rites struck Philomena's name from the list of saints for lack of historical evidence."(95) (There is no recording of this in AAS.)

...
95 PHILOMENA, ST., LEGEND OF, the article by E. Day on p. 292 in Vol. 11 of the NEW Catholic Encyclopedia.


Note: All emphasis in the original. The entire quote can be found on pp. 50-52, Section 10 The 1961 St. Valentine's Day Massacre, in The "Unpersoning" of St. Philomena, (c) Patrick Henry Omlor, Printed by the Missionary Sisters of the Holy Ghost, Catholic Research Institute, dated July 27, 2001.

* that might be an intentional "typo"

... I don't see how any other part of the Fatima message conflicts with the SV thesis either. Our Lord said that Russia will be consecrated but it will be late. All of this information was known to Pius XII and he still approved the devotion and even encouraged it. And finally, the CMRI encourages devotion to Our Lady of Fatima so I find it hard to believe that they would take that position if Fatima was truly in conflict with the SV thesis.


First point is a denial of the infallibility of canonizations, although tantamount to heresy and a serious sin, is not heresy in itself. Second, is I am absolutely for a devotion to Our Lady's Immaculate Heart and agree 110% this devotion is in no way contrary to the sedevacante thesis.

Now what I was referring to:
The common R&R argument using Fatima against sedevacantism is that without a pope Russia cannot be consecrated. They cling to Our Lady's promise of Russia's consecration by a Roman Pontiff to say there must be a pope or Russia cannot be consecrated. I have even been accused of being a Fatima Hater, a blasphemer of Our Lady, etc. by dogmatic anti-sedevacantist for espousing the sedevacantist thesis because they view this as something contrary to Our Lady's promise at Fatima. This is based however on two false presumptions and one argued point of fact.

The first presumption is that the sede vacante thesis excludes the possibility of a Roman Pontiff ever being elected again. This is false as although the sedevacantist cannot know how it is going to happen, it certainly has been demonstrated citing from theologians several possibilities for a papal election even if there are no more Cardinals.

The second presumption is that after the consecration of Russia their will be a period of absolute peace, a Shangri la on Earth like the Garden of Eden. It is almost as bad as the Protestants or Jehovah Witnesses waiting for the Rapture. My understanding based on history and my Catholic faith is this place is called Heaven, and given Earth is a place of trial to test our fidelity to God, it isn't moving here. Christ teaches one must carry their cross. Even in the height of the Holy Roman Empire or in the time of Christ there was not absolute peace.

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

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA

You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end: but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the Pontificate of Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father. To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of reparation on the First Saturdays. If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world


Third is an argument over a historical fact. Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia in 1952 and although it does not fit "father" Gruner's explanation of what Our Lady meant or Gruner’s thesis of a perfect world peace, I believe it fulfilled Our Lady’s promise for two reasons.

The message was given in chronological order so if the Third Part of the Secret is a revelation of the Great Apostasy, which the few readers have all claimed, then the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Our Lady which is in the Second Part of the Secret has already taken place.

The other reason is Russia is no longer spreading her errors, and the Russian Communist Empire is no longer persecuting Catholics like it was under Stalin who died in 1953.

Now granted this is my personal opinion based on historical facts and relative to the information and person opinion, but I would argue at least as valid as Gruner’s theory who needs financial support for his theory. The other thing is it keeps Catholics worried about whether the pope is going to consecrate Russia and a distraction form the elephant in the room, THE GREAT APOSTASY!!!!!

Quote:
PIUS EPISCOPUS
EPISTULA APOSTOLICA
CARISSIMIS RUSSIAE POPULIS*
AD UNIVERSOS RUSSIAE POPULOS
…Nos una vobiscum eam supplici imploramus prece, ut christiana fides, humanae vitae decus et tutamentum, in Russorum populis roboretur et augescat, omnesque religionis hostium fallaciae, errores callidaeque artes respuantur ac procul a vobis repellantur; ut publici privatique mores apud vos evangelicis praeceptis conformentur ; ut qui praesertim apud vos catholico censentur nomine, etsi suis privati Pastoribus, fortes adversus impietatis impetus impavidique ad mortem usque resistant; ut iusta illa libertas, quae homines, quae cives, quae christianos decet, omnibus, ut oportet, restituatur, Ecclesiae imprimis, cuius est ex divino mandato veritatem virtutemque docere omnes; ut denique sinceri nominis pax carissimae Nationi vestrae cunctoque terrarum orbi affulgeat, ac tutissimis iustitiae fundamentis innixa fraternaeque caritatis afflatu alita, gentes universas ad communem illam singulorum populorumque prosperitatem, quae ex mutua concordia oritur, feliciter conducat.
Ac velit benignissima Mater eos etiam suavibus suis oculis clementer respicere, qui infitiatorum osorumque Dei agmina instruunt eorumque inceptum urgent ; velit eorum mentes superna collustrare luce, eorumque animos divina ad salutem permovere gratia.
Nos interea, ut Nostrae vestraeque preces supplicationesque facilius exaudiantur, utque singulare erga vos benevolentiae Nostrae praebeamus documentum, quemadmodum paucis ante annis universum hominum genus Immaculato Deiparae Virginis Cordi consecravimus, ita in praesens cunctos Russiarum populos eidem Immaculato Cordi peculiarissimo modo dedicamus ac consecramus, fore omnino sperantes ut quae Nos, quae vos, quae boni omnes verae pacis, fraternae concordiae debitaeque omnibus, imprimisque Ecclesiae, libertatis vota facimus, ea, potentissimo suffragante Mariae Virginis patrocinio, quam primum feliciter effecta dentur; ita quidem ut — vobis una Nobiscum cunctisque christianis gentibus comprecantibus — salutiferum Iesu Christi Regnum, quod est « Regnum veritatis et vitae, Regnum sanctitatis et gratiae, Regnum iustitiae, amoris et pacis » (Praef. in festo I. Ch. Regis) ubique terrarum firmiter constabiliatur.
Atque eamdem clementissimam Matrem supplici rogamus prece ut vos cunctos universos in praesentibus rerum augustiis tueatur ; atque a Divino Filio suo illam mentibus vestris obtineat lucem, quae a Caelo oritur, illam animis vestris impetret virtutem fortitudinemque, qua quidem, caelesti suffulti gratia, errores impietatesque omnes evincere ac superare possitis.
Datum Romae, apud S. Petrum, die VII mensis Iulii, in festo Ss. Cyrilli et Methodii anno MDCCCCLII, Pontificatus Nostri quarto decimo.
PIUS PP. XIIhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pi ... no_lt.html

Apostolic Letter Carissimis Russiae Populis (1952)
On the Immaculate Heart and the People of Russia
Pius XII
…MARY IMPLORED FOR RUSSIA
We, together with you, are raising to her Our suppliant invocations, that the Christian Faith, which is the honor and support of human society, may be strengthened and increased among the peoples of Russia, and that all the wiles of the enemies of religion, all their errors and their deceptive artifices, may be driven far from you; that public and private morality may be brought into conformity with the teachings of the Gospels; that those especially who among you profess themselves as Catholics, although deprived of their pastors, may resist with fearless fortitude the assaults of the impious, if necessary even unto death; that just liberty, which is the right of the human person, of citizens, and of Christians, may be restored to all as it should be, and in the first place to the Church, which has the divine mandate of teaching to all men truth and virtue; and finally that true peace may come with its shining light to your beloved nation and to all men throughout the world, and that this peace, founded securely upon justice and nourished by fraternal charity, may lead all mankind to that common well-being of citizens and peoples which is the fruit of mutual concord.
May our most loving Mother be pleased to look with clemency also upon those who are organizing the ranks of militant atheists and upon those who are collaborating in promoting such activities; may she deign to obtain for their minds that light which comes from God and direct their hearts through divine grace unto salvation.

RUSSIA CONSECRATED TO THE IMMACULATE HEART
In order that Our and your prayers be more readily answered, and to give you an especial attestation of Our particular affection, therefore, just as not many years ago We consecrated the entire world to the Immaculate Heart of the Virgin Mother of God, in a most special way, so now We dedicate and consecrate all the peoples of Russia to that same Immaculate Heart, in confident assurance that through the most powerful protection of the Virgin Mary there may, at the earliest moment, be happily realized the hopes and desires which We, together with you and with all those of upright intention, have for the attainment of true peace, of fraternal concord, and of rightful liberty for all: in the first place for the Church, so that through the mediation of the prayer which We raise to heaven in union with you and with all Christian peoples, the saving Kingdom of Christ, which is "a Kingdom of truth and of life, a Kingdom of sanctity and of grace, a Kingdom of justice, of love, and of peace,"[3] may triumph and be firmly established in every part of the world.
And with suppliant appeal We pray the same most loving Mother that she may assist every one of you in the present sad circumstances and obtain from her divine Son heavenly light for your minds, and for your souls that virtue and fortitude by which, with God's grace, you may be able victoriously to overcome impiety and error.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/consecra.htm


Wed Jun 11, 2014 1:56 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
James, I'm with you in all of this.

St. Thomas says that presumption is the mother of error.

Oh, how true that is!

One of the delights of sacred theology is coming across revealed truths that one did not suspect, precisely because God is beyond our very comprehension, and His truths are likewise above us, so that just when we think we have a particular aspect of His revelation completely clear in our mind, something appears which seems simply not to fit - yet we know it does, somehow, and we have not, as in our complacency imagined that we had, gotten the subject clear at all. We're almost at the beginning again...

There'd be no dogmatism about this crisis, from Fatima devotees, sedeplenists, sedevacantists, Feeneyites, or any of the other myriad partisans of our day, if this were universally realised. We're all destined for some surprises, but some more than others, and for some, the surprises will not be pleasant.

OK, back to you normal transmission. :) Sorry about the digression.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Wed Jun 11, 2014 2:14 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 12:28 pm
Posts: 284
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Dear James,

Although I enjoy most every post you make, this one is excellent, thought provoking, and insightful.


Wed Jun 11, 2014 5:33 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:58 am
Posts: 50
Location: Massachusetts, USA
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
James Schroepfer wrote:
First point is a denial of the infallibility of canonizations, although tantamount to heresy and a serious sin, is not heresy in itself.


I would be curious to know what others believe was the definitive moment when Pope John XXIII lost his office (either the papacy or some earlier office).

James Schroepfer wrote:
Second, is I am absolutely for a devotion to Our Lady's Immaculate Heart and agree 110% this devotion is in no way contrary to the sedevacante thesis.


Agreed. Are you intentionally avoiding specific support to devotion to Our Lady of Fatima? I agree that devotion to the Immaculate Heart is central to the Fatima message but I think it is impossible to ignore the related prophecies associated with Our Lady of Fatima which have and will continue to have historical significance in the spread of devotion to the Immaculate Heart. I don't see how either the devotion or the prophecies are in any way conflicting with the SV thesis. But I see devotion to Our Lady of Fatima and devotion to the Immaculate Heart as going hand in hand so maybe that's how you see it too?

James Schroepfer wrote:
The first presumption is that the sede vacante thesis excludes the possibility of a Roman Pontiff ever being elected again. This is false as although the sedevacantist cannot know how it is going to happen, it certainly has been demonstrated citing from theologians several possibilities for a papal election even if there are no more Cardinals.


Yes, I agree.

James Schroepfer wrote:
The second presumption is that after the consecration of Russia their will be a period of absolute peace, a Shangri la on Earth like the Garden of Eden. It is almost as bad as the Protestants or Jehovah Witnesses waiting for the Rapture. My understanding based on history and my Catholic faith is this place is called Heaven, and given Earth is a place of trial to test our fidelity to God, it isn't moving here. Christ teaches one must carry their cross. Even in the height of the Holy Roman Empire or in the time of Christ there was not absolute peace.


I have never heard that from Fr.* Gruner before (* I don't know if he is a priest or not). I have only ever heard that Our Lady promised that a period of peace would be given to the whole world. But certainly there hasn't been any significant period of peace in the world at least since the beginning of WWII. I don't consider the Cold War to have been a period of peace and I'm sure the vast majority of the world agrees with me on that considering that the period was referred to as the Cold War. Certainly for Communists "War is Peace" but I don't agree with that. Neither has Russia converted to the Catholic Faith (another promise of Our Lady of Fatima). So I don't think anyone who has studied the issue closely takes seriously the idea that Pius XII's consecration of Russia was sufficient. Sister Lucy said it failed because he didn't do it with all the bishops of the world. The Conciliar antipopes agreed because Paul and JP2 both consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart. So I think it is reasonable to conclude that the consecration has not been done.

James Schroepfer wrote:
Third is an argument over a historical fact. Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia in 1952 and although it does not fit "father" Gruner's explanation of what Our Lady meant or Gruner’s thesis of a perfect world peace, I believe it fulfilled Our Lady’s promise for two reasons.


It didn't fit Sister Lucy's explanation either. That is a historical fact. I trust her judgement.

James Schroepfer wrote:
The message was given in chronological order so if the Third Part of the Secret is a revelation of the Great Apostasy, which the few readers have all claimed, then the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Our Lady which is in the Second Part of the Secret has already taken place.


You forgot the first part, the vision of Hell. How does that fit with the chronological order theory? Also, how does the Bishop in White getting killed fit in to the chronological order theory? And the half-ruined city? I think the Bishop in White is a curious thing. Sister Lucy said she didn't know if it was the Pope or not. She just assumed that it was probably the Pope because he was wearing a white cassock. But it was not clear. Interesting.

James Schroepfer wrote:
The other reason is Russia is no longer spreading her errors, and the Russian Communist Empire is no longer persecuting Catholics like it was under Stalin who died in 1953.


There's only so much spreading anyone can do! What more can they do now that the whole world has embraced practical institutionalized atheism. Mission accomplished!

James Schroepfer wrote:
Now granted this is my personal opinion based on historical facts and relative to the information and person opinion, but I would argue at least as valid as Gruner’s theory who needs financial support for his theory. The other thing is it keeps Catholics worried about whether the pope is going to consecrate Russia and a distraction form the elephant in the room, THE GREAT APOSTASY!!!!!


Yes, I don't blame Fr. Gruner or devotion to Our Lady of Fatima but you are right that most people don't recognize the extent of the destruction. We are certainly in the midst of the Great Apostasy. Yes, I believe that.

Thank you, Mr. Schroepfer for your thoughts on this topic.


Wed Jun 11, 2014 9:47 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
I did mean the devotion to Our Lady of Fatima and Our Lady's Immaculate Heart synonymously.

Can you please show me where in the message of Fatima it says there will be world peace as in an extended period of no human conflict? Perhaps I also missed where it said specifically that Russia would be converted to the Catholic faith. Yes it said Russia would be converted, but are we to take this private revelation as meaning Russia will be converted to the Catholic Faith. Converted from her current errors of communism perhaps? Converted from her extreme anti-Catholic persecution? Please note the wars, as in actual blood shed, and the Catholic persecution have subsided in Russia. They certainly could be still axing heads today. At least I don't think they have run out of people yet.

As far as the Cold War, can we actually call it a "war" in the true sense of the term. I am not trying to minimize the stress people felt during that period, only saying can we say it was equal in destruction and human death as let's say WW II or KOREA. I don't know for sure, but I think we must be careful not to try and read too much into private revelation. And we certainly should not try to make our opinion of the meaning a dogma of the Faith.

The second thing I was trying to point out was the message was given in chronological order. If this is the case, do you have an explanation how we are in part three without part two being accomplished?

Quote:
ClemesMaria:
It didn't fit Sister Lucy's explanation either. That is a historical fact. I trust her judgement.


Which Sister Lucy?

I suggest reading
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTop ... rLucys.htm

I am curious to what you think in all honesty and sincerity?

In my opinion an imposter explains the support "Sister Lucy" gave to the Vatican II popes and the Vatican II religion i.e. mass.

Quite open to other people's thoughts?


Thu Jun 12, 2014 1:44 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Signs and wonders which if possible will deceive even the elect :!:


Thu Jun 12, 2014 2:23 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
A priest friend of mine (SSPX) just returned from three weeks in Russia. He described the religious scene there in various aspects and I commented that it sounds like a truly massive religious revival, and he said yes, it is. Apparently the devotion of the common people is phenomenal. This is totally counter to the trend everywhere else in the world, and I do wonder if presages a conversion to the true Church.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Thu Jun 12, 2014 3:19 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:58 am
Posts: 50
Location: Massachusetts, USA
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
James Schroepfer wrote:
Which Sister Lucy?

I suggest reading
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTop ... rLucys.htm

I am curious to what you think in all honesty and sincerity?


Yes, I agree that there was a dramatic change in appearance between Sr. Lucy ca. 1940's and Sr. Lucy ca. late 1960s. However, I find it hard to believe that none of her family or confreres in religion noticed the switch. I definitely don't believe in two Pope Pauls (another conspiracy theory) but because of the dramatic change in appearance of Sister Lucy it is a little harder to dismiss that theory. But it is more probable (in my opinion) that the change was due to oral surgery (it is confirmed that she did have oral surgery). It is disconcerting to see her receive communion from JP2 but I think maybe her understanding of sacramental theology was limited. So she just obeyed her superiors. She did say:

Quote:
J.M. Coimbra, Dec. 4, 1970

Dear Maria Teresa,

. . .

Our Lady requested and recommended that the Rosary be prayed every day, having repeated this in all the Apparitions as if forewarning us that in these times of diabolical disorientation, we must not let ourselves be deceived by false doctrines that diminish the elevation of our soul to God by means of prayer.


It would be quite a failure for the imposter to go to so much trouble to silence Sister Lucy and then say something like the above!


Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:40 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 12:28 pm
Posts: 284
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Yes, looking at the pictures of her mouth, I'm almost certain that she has an immediate denture.


Thu Jun 12, 2014 9:42 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Quote:
ClemensMaria:
But it is more probable (in my opinion) that the change was due to oral surgery (it is confirmed that she did have oral surgery).


As it is my opinion that there were two Sister Lucy's based on circumstantial evidence (I don't have a DNA sample), you are of course entitled to your opinion. However, you still have a major problem with your hypothesis.

Quote:
ClemensMaria:
So I don't think anyone who has studied the issue closely takes seriously the idea that Pius XII's consecration of Russia was sufficient. Sister Lucy said it failed because he didn't do it with all the bishops of the world. The Conciliar antipopes agreed because Paul and JP2 both consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart. So I think it is reasonable to conclude that the consecration has not been done.

James Schroepfer wrote:
Third is an argument over a historical fact. Pope Pius XII consecrated Russia in 1952 and although it does not fit "father" Gruner's explanation of what Our Lady meant or Gruner’s thesis of a perfect world peace, I believe it fulfilled Our Lady’s promise for two reasons.

It didn't fit Sister Lucy's explanation either. That is a historical fact. I trust her judgement.


The major problem with your hypothesis is that Sister Lucy (post 1960) said Russia had been consecrated, and by antipope JP II none the less. Here is Sister Lucy's explanation:

Quote:
SISTER LUCY: SECRET OF FATIMA CONTAINS NO MORE MYSTERIES - REJECTS GRUNERITES AGAIN

VATICAN CITY, DEC 20, 2001 (VIS) - Made public today was a communique regarding a meeting which took place at the convent of Coimbra, Portugal, on November 17, 2001, between Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone S.D.B., secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Sister Mary Lucy of Jesus and of the Immaculate Heart.

"Over the last few months," says the communique, "and especially following the sad event of the terrorist attack of September 11, articles have appeared in various newspapers regarding presumed new revelations by Sister Lucy, announcements of warning letters to the Pope and apocalyptic re-interpretations of the message of Fatima.

"Moreover, emphasis has been given to the suspicion that the Holy See has not published the integral text of the third part of the 'secret,' and some 'Fatimid' movements have repeated the accusation that the Holy Father has not yet consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

"For this reason, in order to obtain clarification and information directly from the surviving visionary, it was considered necessary to organize a meeting with Sister Lucy. This took place in the presence of the prioress of the Carmelite convent of St. Teresa and of Fr. Luis Kondor S.V.D., vice-postulator of the causes of Blesseds Francisco and Jacinta; and with the permission of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and of the bishops of Leiria-Fatima and Coimbra."

"The meeting, which lasted more than two hours, took place on the afternoon of Saturday, November 17. Sister Lucy, who will be 95 on March 22 next year, was in good health, lucid and vivacious. She first of all professed her love for and devotion to the Holy Father. She prays much for him and for the Church as a whole."

With reference to the third part of the secret of Fatima, she affirmed that she had attentively read and meditated upon the booklet published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and confirmed everything that was written there. To whoever imagines that some part of the secret has been hidden, she replied"Everything has been published; no secret remains." : To those who speak and write of new revelations she said: "There is no truth in this. If I had received new revelations I would have told no-one, but I would have communicated them directly to the Holy Father."

Sister Lucy was asked: "What do you say to the persistent affirmations of Fr. Gruner who is gathering signatures in order that the Pope may finally consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which has never been done?" She replied: "The Carmelite Community has rejected the forms for gathering the signatures. I have already said that the consecration that Our Lady desired was accomplished in 1984 and was accepted in heaven."

"Is it true," the communique concludes, "that Sister Lucy is extremely worried by recent events and does not sleep but prays night and day?" Sister Lucy replied: "It is not true. How could I pray during the day if I did not rest at night? How many things are attributed to me! How many things I am supposed to have done! Let them read my book, there are the advice and appeals that correspond to Our Lady's wishes. Prayer and penitence, accompanied by an immense faith in God, will save the world."

No More Mysteries in Fatima Secret, Sister Lucia Says

Confirms That Russia Has Been Consecrated to the Virgin Mary
http://sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id129.html


Now if we are going to take Sister Lucy at her word as a historical fact, your hypothesis has a hole in it, and I am still right that Russia has been consecrated. I just presume the consecration done by a valid pope (Pope Pius XII) would be more meaningful then the anti-pope, servant of the devil John Paul II. But again, it is my personal opinion :)

"Sister Lucy" (post 1960) also said the Vatican released all of the third secret. Now it is interesting to note Antonio Socci authored a book demonstrating that there is no way the Vatican version can be the third secret. Also that those who had read the document or have seriously studied the matter all affirm it relates to the Great Apostasy contrary to the text released by the Vatican who said it was a prediction of JP II being shot (which is in the typical Vatican II language of ambiguity).

Look at the first and second part of the secret. The first part, a vision of hell, a place where poor sinners go. Clear enough :shock: The second part, do prayer and penance or there will be a terrible war and Russia will spread her errors. Clear enough :shock: The Vatican's version of the third part, mumbo jumbo, mish mash, unclear modernist lingo. Say what :?

I think you still need to address:
Quote:
The second thing I was trying to point out was the message was given in chronological order. If this is the case, do you have an explanation how we are in part three without part two being accomplished?


Quote:
ClemensMaria:
Quote:

J.M. Coimbra, Dec. 4, 1970

Dear Maria Teresa,

. . .

Our Lady requested and recommended that the Rosary be prayed every day, having repeated this in all the Apparitions as if forewarning us that in these times of diabolical disorientation, we must not let ourselves be deceived by false doctrines that diminish the elevation of our soul to God by means of prayer.


It would be quite a failure for the imposter to go to so much trouble to silence Sister Lucy and then say something like the above!


What good would an imposter be if she did not at least act or talk at least in part like the original Sister Lucy? This is what makes the sign and wonder all the more diabolical. Not a surprise as the devil is the Master of Lies and Deceit, sorry Paul VI. Yes the post 1960 Sister Lucy talked a lot of diabolical disorientation (say what :? ), and not she never bother to explain what this diabolical disorientation was. Or if she was aware of diabolical disorientation, why did she seamlessly go along with the new religion?

Signs and wonders which if possible will deceive even the elect :!:

Quote:
ClemensMaria:
There's only so much spreading anyone can do! What more can they do now that the whole world has embraced practical institutionalized atheism. Mission accomplished!


Food for thought. Was it Russia which caused the loss of faith among the how many millions of Catholics or was it Vatican II? We agree on the effect, the loss of faith, but I would argue the cause was Vatican II, (the apostasy by members of the hierarchy) not Russia.

John Lane wrote:
A priest friend of mine (SSPX) just returned from three weeks in Russia. He described the religious scene there in various aspects and I commented that it sounds like a truly massive religious revival, and he said yes, it is. Apparently the devotion of the common people is phenomenal. This is totally counter to the trend everywhere else in the world, and I do wonder if presages a conversion to the true Church.


That is very interesting John. Hard times and persecution do bring people closer to God. Us mortals can only learn the hard way it seems like :( I wonder as well if they will convert to the true Church.


Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:08 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
James, I would say that Vatican II was the presentation of the errors of Russia (i.e. the errors of the French Revolution) as the teaching of the Catholic Church.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:50 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
John Lane wrote:
James, I would say that Vatican II was the presentation of the errors of Russia (i.e. the errors of the French Revolution) as the teaching of the Catholic Church.


I agree. I was just saying that Russia did not impose these ideas on the Council by force (I would certainly concede perhaps by coercion) nor did the teaching of Vatican II stem, i.e. originate from Russia. Communism (a government with no religion or against religion) yes, but these other errors like religious liberty have there roots more in Protestanism, Modernism, and Nominalism. I am not trying to be cantankerous as I am not pretending to hold the key to understanding the message of Fatima, just more or less thinking out loud.


Fri Jun 13, 2014 2:22 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
James Schroepfer wrote:
John Lane wrote:
James, I would say that Vatican II was the presentation of the errors of Russia (i.e. the errors of the French Revolution) as the teaching of the Catholic Church.


I agree. I was just saying that Russia did not impose these ideas on the Council by force (I would certainly concede perhaps by coercion) nor did the teaching of Vatican II stem, i.e. originate from Russia. Communism (a government with no religion or against religion) yes, but these other errors like religious liberty have there roots more in Protestanism, Modernism, and Nominalism. I am not trying to be cantankerous as I am not pretending to hold the key to understanding the message of Fatima, just more or less thinking out loud.


James, there are two questions here.

1. What role did Russia play in the conspiracy to bring about Vatican II?
2. Are those particular errors rightly described as "errors of Russia"?

1. I don't think we have sufficient data yet to be certain of the answer. From my reading the calling of the Council and the mode of procedure was due to a conspiracy. The conspirators included John XXIII, who lied outright about the origin of the idea, and Cardinal Bea, who was in many ways the key figure in the whole thing and who was the conduit to Freemasonic and revolutionary parties. Contacts with Russia were initiated and some of those came out into the open even at the time. Russia played a role, we just don't have sufficient information to define that role. Also, keep in mind Montini was reputedly sent away from Rome by Pius XII precisely because he was betraying priests in Russia to the Soviets. He certainly had Russian Communist connections.

2. The particular errors of Vatican II are well described as "liberty, equality, and fraternity" translated into theological terms. That is, the French Revolution. The general governing principle of this revolution was the replacement of God by man as the object of worship of men. The Russian Revolution was the continuation and geographic extension of the French Revolution. I am not aware of any key features that it included which were new. Even the Marxist economic system was not a substantial difference, because the Bolsheviks abandoned true Marxism in circa 1921, and from then on described its pre-1921 implementation as "the war economy" in order to disguise what they were doing. They took this drastic step because Marxist economics ruined the production system and threatened the Revolution with immediate and total failure. After 1921 the system was totalitarian, with a great deal of state control over the means of production and distribution, but it was no longer Marxist in the sense that really mattered - that is, the elimination of money income from work and enterprise as the key factor and facilitator of distribution. Paul Craig Roberts describes all of this in his book, Alienation and the Soviet Economy (This article - http://www.johndclare.net/Russ6_WarCommunism.htm - displays various historians' theories debating the motives of the Bolsheviks, but accepting the fact - typical of lefty historians, they debate the non-core question as a distraction from the really interesting and central fact.). So, in all of its main features the Russian Revolution was a continuation of the French Revolution, governed by the same principles and with the same end - to divorce man from God and the sound principles revealed by God for the successful life of man in light of his eternal destiny.

Vatican II implemented the same errors. Religious Liberty (from God and His dogmas and laws), Ecumenical Fraternity (all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy, which is the denial of the truth of any one religion, and therefore essentially, inchoate atheism), and Collegial Equality (the elimination of the true notion of hierarchy, the true notion of authority, the replacement of these by a form of democracy). Was this an accident? :D

_________________
In Christ our King.


Fri Jun 13, 2014 4:44 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:44 am
Posts: 76
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
John Lane wrote:
A priest friend of mine (SSPX) just returned from three weeks in Russia. He described the religious scene there in various aspects and I commented that it sounds like a truly massive religious revival, and he said yes, it is. Apparently the devotion of the common people is phenomenal. This is totally counter to the trend everywhere else in the world, and I do wonder if presages a conversion to the true Church.

AFAIK Russia is one of the few countries in the world where the atheist/agnostic percentage of the population is actually declining!


Wed Jun 18, 2014 10:06 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Putin has recently banned four-letter words in public, including in the media. Absolutely amazing how contrary to the rest of the world he is going.

My friend, a priest, who just returned from Russia added some details regarding the situation there. He visited many churches in Moscow and St. Petersburg over a three-week period. He witnessed six baptisms by coincidence. In every church there were long lines for confession (twenty yards long or longer). In the church where the icon of Our Lady of Kazan is kept in St. Petersburg, there was a very long line of pilgrims waiting to venerate it. The vast majority of the women in these churches wore a head covering. He said the signs of devotion are extraordinary, like nothing you'd see anywhere in the world.

He also heard an odd story concerning Stalin. Apparently when the Germans were looking invincible, Stalin took the icon of Our Lady of Kazan and held it up in public asking for her intercession. Bizarre. I did a search and came across these similar stories: http://02varvara.wordpress.com/2008/01/ ... er-of-god/

Anyway, there it is. A genuine religious revival, apparently a flood of actual graces being poured forth on these poor people and with a real response from them. Who knows where this will end? Perhaps when Rome recovers we will indeed see the final conversion of Russia.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:27 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
John Lane wrote:
Putin has recently banned four-letter words in public, including in the media. Absolutely amazing how contrary to the rest of the world he is going.

My friend, a priest, who just returned from Russia added some details regarding the situation there. He visited many churches in Moscow and St. Petersburg over a three-week period. He witnessed six baptisms by coincidence. In every church there were long lines for confession (twenty yards long or longer). In the church where the icon of Our Lady of Kazan is kept in St. Petersburg, there was a very long line of pilgrims waiting to venerate it. The vast majority of the women in these churches wore a head covering. He said the signs of devotion are extraordinary, like nothing you'd see anywhere in the world.

He also heard an odd story concerning Stalin. Apparently when the Germans were looking invincible, Stalin took the icon of Our Lady of Kazan and held it up in public asking for her intercession. Bizarre. I did a search and came across these similar stories: http://02varvara.wordpress.com/2008/01/ ... er-of-god/

Anyway, there it is. A genuine religious revival, apparently a flood of actual graces being poured forth on these poor people and with a real response from them. Who knows where this will end? Perhaps when Rome recovers we will indeed see the final conversion of Russia.


Wow! Thank for this information. I had heard good things about Putin, from Brother Nathaniel and bad things from people I suppose do not know what they are talking about or want to bias the people because he is one of the few good leaders left.


Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:15 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post full New "Catholic" Encyclopedia article on St. Philomena
New 'Catholic' Encyclopedia (my emphases in red) wrote:
PHILOMENA, ST., THE LEGEND OF

In 1802 archeologists unearthed a tomb in the Catacomb of St. Priscilla. The remains appeared to belong to a young woman of the second or third century. Nearby were tiles painted in red: LUMENA PAXTE CUM FI, with images of a whip, arrows, anchors, a lily, and palm. They reconstructed this as PAX TECUM FIILUMENA, "Peace [be] with you, Filumena." The tiles were thought to have sealed the original tomb. The images were taken to be instruments of a martyr's suffering and emblems of her purity and heavenly victory.

Nothing was known of any historical Philomena. Eminent archeologists insisted that the tiles came from a nearby tomb. Despite these efforts to dampen the enthusiasm of those who declared these the bones of a martyr, within two decades there was a flourishing cult of Philomena, a detailed biography, and reports of many miracles. In 1961 the Congregation of Rites struck her feast from the Roman Calendar for lack of historical evidence of her existence, along with that of St. Christopher. The rise of Philomena's cult and her continuing veneration into the twenty-first century need to be read against the background of the duel between traditional religiosity and modern rationalism.

The cult of St. Philomena arose and spread in this environment. Religious orders including the newly reestablished Jesuits appreciated Philomena as model of Christian perseverance in a time not unlike the period of persecution by the ancient Roman empire. Bishops who visited Rome in the 19th century often brought home relics as this was a period when many catacombs were being excavated. In 1805, Father Francesco di Lucia of Mugnano del Cardenale petitioned for the relics. After being denied them, he was cured of a fever. He attributed his cure to Philomena. After much persistence he was granted the relics and enshrined them in his home town in 1832.

Reports of miracles during and after the relics were brought to the shrine advanced the cult. Sister Maria Louisa, Superior General of the Sisters of Sorrow of Mary (d.1875), recorded visions of Philomena whose biography stressed chastity and resistence to persecution. In 1832 di Lucia recorded the biography, the story of the discovery of the relics, and many miracles, along with an essay on chastity. Eminent Catholics supported her cause including John Vianney, Madeleine Sophie Barat, Pierre-Julien Eymard, and Pauline Jaricot. In 1855 the Congregation of Rites established a feast day (Sept. 9), Mass, and Office for her.

Even when her feast was officially suppressed, her devotees continued to ask for and attribute cures to her intercession. Her omission from the calendar was not a prohibition of private devotion, but it does mean that the [Conciliar Church] Congregation of Rites found insufficient evidence regarding her to mandate a place in the calendar or to allow the naming of official Catholic institutions for her.

Bibliography: F. DI LUCIA, Relazione istorica della translazione del sacro corpo e miracoli di santa Filomena vergine e martire da Roma a Mugnano del Cardenale (1834). A. BUTLER, The Lives of the Saints, rev. ed. H. THURSTON and D. ATTWATER, 4 v. (New York 1956) 3:299–301. Acta Apostolicae Sedis 53 (1961) 174. S. LA SALVIA, "L'inventione di un culto: S. Filomena de taumaturga a guerriera della fede," in Culto de santi e classi sociali in età preindustriale (1984).

[M. A. TILLEY]

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:33 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
ClemensMaria wrote:
Mr. Patrick Henry Omlor, RIP, in his book The "Unpersoning" of St. Philomena
Is Mr. Omlor's book online?

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:40 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Pope St. Pius X allegedly said in 1912:
Quote:
To discredit the present decisions and declarations concerning St. Philomena as not being permanent, stable, valid and effective, necessary for obedience, and in full-effect for all eternity, proceeds from an element that is null and void and without merit or authority.

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:53 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
What's most absurd about the St. Philomena "fiasco" is that the [Conciliar Church] Congregation of Rites does not, as the New "Catholic" Encyclopedia article above says, "allow the naming of official Catholic institutions for her." What saints can't we name official Catholic institutions after‽

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:05 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Alan Aversa wrote:
What's most absurd about the St. Philomena "fiasco" is that the [Conciliar Church] Congregation of Rites does not, as the New "Catholic" Encyclopedia article above says, "allow the naming of official Catholic institutions for her." What saints can't we name official Catholic institutions after‽


In a very rural county of Indiana that had, at one time, a sizable Catholic population there was a small parish church named in honor of St. Philomena. This parish was closed, according to the history I have read, prior to Vatican II when a larger church (named after a different saint) was built in a town nearby. The building was not destroyed, however, and ended up being used for other functions by the parish which owned the land and structure: weddings, funerals, etc. Apparently, they would have a Mass there on occasions. The sanctuary was never remodeled after Vatican 2. A number of archdiocesan faithful convinced the archbishop to allow the building to be given over to the exclusive use of the FSSP and the group of faithful raised the funds to refurbish the building and it was re-opened as a chapel under the administration of the FSSP.

The archdiocese would not allow the chapel to be opened with the name St. Philomena and renamed the chapel St. Cecilia. The chapel, however, began operating using the name, quite unofficially, SS. Cecelia & Philomena. At some point in time the reversed the order and, to this day, operate under the name SS. Philomena & Cecelia. Interestingly, once they were finally able to get their chapel listed on the archdiocese's webpage several months after they had been open, it appears as SS. Philomena & Cecelia. I have never been able to ascertain whether or not this addition of St. Philomena's name is truly official and I would hate to inquire because I would not want someone at the chancery looking into the matter and forcing the chapel to remove her name from their title if they never really obtain permission to use her name, though I don't believe they ever asked.

I was never a part of the group, but I had several friends from my homeschooling group who were and they were quite upset that the archdiocese would not allow them to name the chapel St. Philomena since that is what it was prior to closing. They were the ones who told me that they were just going to add St. Philomena's name to the chapel "unofficially".

_________________
Daniel Peck, Indiana, United States


Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:42 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:58 am
Posts: 50
Location: Massachusetts, USA
New post Re: Is Fatima in Conflict with the Sede Vacante Thesis?
Alan Aversa wrote:
ClemensMaria wrote:
Mr. Patrick Henry Omlor, RIP, in his book The "Unpersoning" of St. Philomena
Is Mr. Omlor's book online?


Not that I know of but you can order the book here: http://www.catholicresearchinstitute.com/catalog.html


Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:52 pm
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.