Google+ Followers

Monday, 12 June 2017

The Lying “Lady” of Fatima

 

The Lying “Lady” of Fatima






Seers and Secrets, Deception and Delusion, and the Politics of Global Power
Shaun Willcock
  The famous apparitions of “Mary” at Fatima, a small town in northern Portugal, allegedly occurred on six occasions between May and October 1917, when “Mary” supposedly appeared to three child shepherds and entrusted them with three great messages (called “secrets”).  The children were Lucia dos Santos, and siblings Francisco and Jacinta Marto.  At the time when “Mary” supposedly appeared to them. Lucia was 10, Francisco 9, and Jacinta 7.  Lucia became a cloistered nun in later years, but Francisco and Jacinta died at a very young age.
  1917 occurred in the midst of World War One, a war such as the world had never experienced before.  In that year the Roman pope, Benedict XV, appealed to the world for prayer for peace to be offered, not to Christ but to Mary, the Roman Catholic idol-goddess.  A mere eight days later, on 13 May 1917, it was claimed that “Mary” appeared to the three children near Fatima.  And it was during the “vision” of 13 July that the “three secrets” were supposedly given. 
  The cult of Fatima grew and spread very rapidly.  The number of pilgrims was only 60 on 13 June 1917, but by October of that year it had shot up to 60 000.  The number continued to rise, from 144 000 in 1923 to 588 000 in 1928.[1] 
The “Three Secrets” of Fatima, and the “Miracle of the Dancing Sun”
  The “first secret” of the Fatima “revelations” was supposedly a vision of hell.  Although they claimed this “vision” lasted only a moment, it shocked the three children so greatly that for the rest of their lives, we are told, they prayed for the conversion of sinners.  “There were devils and souls submerged in a great sea of fire… between cries of pain and groans of despair.  That horrified them and made them tremble with fear.”[2]
  The “second secret” of Fatima was, supposedly, a prophecy.  “Mary” told the children that if men did not stop offending God, World War Two would begin.  She also told them that Communism would expand, and that there would be persecution of the “Church” (the Roman Catholic institution) and of the pope of Rome himself.  To prevent these evils, “Mary” asked for the devotion to her “Immaculate Heart” to be established in the world, and for the pope to consecrate Russia to her.  Here, supposedly, are her words to the children:
 “The war [the First World War, then raging] is going to end.  But if people do not stop offending God, another and worse one will begin in the reign of Pius XI.  When you shall see a night illuminated by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign that God gives you that He is going to punish the world for its many crimes by means of war, hunger, and persecution of the Church [meaning the “Church” of Rome] and 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.”
  As for the “third secret” of Fatima, this was not revealed, but supposedly written down by Lucia many years later, and placed in a sealed envelope which was given to the Romish bishop of Fatima, only to be opened in the year 1960.[3]  But as this “third secret” was not revealed to the world by the pope until (so the Vatican claims) the year 2000, it will be analysed at the appropriate place in this article.
  And then also, on 13 October 1917 – the date of the last of the six Marian apparitions at Fatima – the so-called “Miracle of the Sun” is alleged to have occurred.  We are told, by Roman Catholic historians of Fatima, that some 70 000 people, who had gathered around the three children, witnessed this “miracle” for about ten to twelve minutes.  Lucia pointed up and said, “Look at the sun”, and the immense crowd looked into the sky.  The sun supposedly became pale; it spun three times on itself speedily, whirling and casting off great shafts of multi-coloured light; then it seemed to jump out of its orbit and come forward towards the people on a zig-zag course, causing them to cry out in terror and beg “Mary” to save them from their sins; then it stopped, and returned again to its normal position.
  But were the Fatima “visions”, and the solar “miracle”, genuine? 

What Really Happened at Fatima in 1917?
  Did three little shepherd children really experience visions of Mary?  Are the messages to be trusted?  Are they to be heeded?  Before analysing the three “secrets” themselves, these questions must be answered.
Lucia, Francisco and Jacinta
  In an article I wrote, published in The Bible Based Ministries Magazine in 2001, I said: “Rome has claimed that a number of supposed visions of Mary have occurred over the years, and the Fatima ‘vision’ is the most famous of all.  True Christians know, of course, that these ‘visions’ are manufactured Papist delusions, or perhaps in certain cases demonic deceptions.  Mary never appeared at Fatima, or anywhere else for that matter.  This was not a message from God, and it was not a message from Mary, either!  The Lord would not, and Mary could not, give such a message!  She was blessed among women (Lk. 1:28), in that she was chosen by God to be the mother of our Lord.  But she was a sinner like everyone else, who saw her need for the Saviour, and was converted to Him (Lk. 1:46,47).  She was not conceived without original sin, nor was she taken bodily into heaven, nor does she hear and answer prayer, nor does she appear to men, as Rome claims!  Any supposed ‘appearance’ of Mary is a lie!”[4]
  For the true Christian, then, the answer is straightforward: Mary did not appear to those children in 1917, and therefore no message from heaven was given to them.  And since it was not a message from God, we are not in any sense to trust it, nor to heed it.  Mary is in heaven along with all departed saints, but none of them are ever sent back to earth with messages from God (Lk. 16:19-31).  It is in fact strictly forbidden for the Lord’s people to try to make contact with the dead, or to receive any supposed messages from them (Deut.  18:10-12; Isa. 8:19,20).  Contact with the dead is the sin of necromancy – and Mary is most assuredly dead. 
  God speaks to us through His written Word, the Bible.  This is all-sufficient.  Visions of any kind are no longer given (protestations from Pentecostals notwithstanding!).
  And besides, the “Mary” of Romanism is a powerful goddess, who is worshipped by Romanists the world over.  This heathen idolatry, blasphemously claiming to be true Christianity, is an abomination to God!
  So then: what actually happened?  Most of the claimed “appearances of Mary” which occur from time to time in various parts of the world are frauds; manufactured Papist delusions.  In many cases, however, it may be that they have been demonic deceptions.  But there is also the possibility that some are a combination of both.  And this is what appears to have been the case with the Fatima apparitions.  To understand this, the reader will have to pay careful attention to all that follows.
  There are solid reasons for believing that the supposed “prophecies” of Fatima were fraudulent, as will become apparent as we proceed.  They were deliberate concoctions of the Jesuits.  Now of course, this is still satanic deception!  Satan inspires men to stage supposed “messages from the Virgin”, for the purpose of delusion.  Rome’s long history is filled with tricks, frauds, and deceptions of all kinds.  2 Thess. 2:9, a prophecy of the Papal Antichrist, speaks of his “lying wonders”: pretended miracles.  The supposed “prophecies of Mary” at Fatima were a huge fraud, designed to deceive the world.  The agents of Rome had very specific purposes in mind.
  However, the evidence certainly does indicate – strongly – that the three children really did see “something”, and that this “something” was a demonic manifestation.  The claimed “prophetic” element regarding Russia, war, etc., etc. (which we will examine below), was “manufactured” later by the agents of Rome; but the demonic delusion of the children was real.  Roman Catholicism is a religion of gross idolatry; and the Roman Catholic worship of “Mary” is nothing but the idolatrous worship of a powerful demon, who receives worship behind this name.  It is entirely possible, even most probable, that those three children were demon-possessed; for leaving aside the supposed “prophetic” element regarding Russia, etc., which was added by Rome’s priests later, the children went into trances, described “Mary” in glowing terms as they saw “her”, and promoted the evil false “gospel” of Roman Catholic salvation to the masses who flocked to hear them.  Satan was deceiving the masses through these children.  The devil transforms himself into an angel of light at times (2 Cor. 11:14); which is precisely how the children saw “Mary” (a beautiful lady” more brilliant than the sun”, is how Lucia described her).  Satan is the master-deceiver, and will use any means he possibly can to deceive men.

And there is more: about six months before the children saw the apparition of “Mary”, they saw an “angel”, who spoke with them as well.  This being identified itself in the following manner: “I am [Portugal’s] guardian angel, the Angel of Portugal.”[5]  Why is this significant?  In the book of Daniel, chapter 10, we are given a glimpse of the warfare going on in the unseen spiritual realm.  Verse 13 speaks of “the prince of the kingdom of Persia” who withstood God’s holy angel.  The following is from my book, The Prophecies of Daniel: this “was not King Cyrus of Persia, nor his son the prince; for how could any mortal man withstand the power of an angel for one second, let alone for three weeks?  Angels far exceed men in power!  No, this prince was an angel himself – but a fallen angel!  A devil…. This particular demon was over the kingdom of Persia.  Persia was a heathen kingdom.  Its people were idol-worshippers, and God’s Word tells us that the worship of idols is the worship of devils: Deut. 32:16,17; 1 Cor. 10:20.  Devils receive the worship directed to dumb idols.  From this text, therefore, we learn that the kingdoms of this world, which are all in spiritual darkness, are under the influence of very powerful demonic beings.  Over each heathen kingdom there is a demonic ‘prince’: a powerful demon who controls operations, so to speak.  And under him, in ways we are not told, are many other demons who do his bidding.  These are the rulers of the darkness of this world, the principalities and powers in high places (Eph. 6:12).”[6]
  Those three children saw the demonic “prince of Portugal”!  As an “angel of light” he appeared to them, for the purpose of deceiving them.  And deceive them he did, putting Mary on an equality with Jesus in the words he spoke, and appearing to them holding a chalice, above which was the “consecrated bread” of the idolatrous Roman Catholic mass (the “host”, as it is called), from which a few drops of blood flowed into the chalice, and calling the “host” and the contents of the chalice the actual body and blood of the Lord.[7]  This was blasphemous deception indeed, lies from the infernal pit, not from heaven.  This was no angel of God, but the most powerful demonic entity over Portugal!
  And what about the supposed “miracle of the sun”?  It was called “a stupendous miracle, such as no one had dared to imagine.”[8]  But was it?  Did the sun really do what it is claimed it did, on the date of the last of the six apparitions of “Mary” to the children?  Did 70 000 people at Fatima, assembled with the three children, really witness the sun becoming pale, turning three times on itself speedily, jumping out of its orbit and zig-zagging towards the immense crowd, then stopping and returning to its normal position?
  Historian Avro Manhattan drily commented: “The fact that the other two thousand million human beings in the world never noticed the sun agitate, rotate and jump out of its orbit did not bother the Catholic Church in the least”.[9]  And there is the answer.  Of course the sun did not do this.  It would have been witnessed by people in every country from which the sun was visible at that time, and not just those 70 000.  Not only that, but it would have been a divine miracle, to be compared with nothing but the miracle of the sun standing still at the command of Joshua (which is, in fact, precisely what a Jesuit priest, Pio Scatizzi, compared it with, writing: “In world history, outside ordinary eclipses, nothing prodigious has been recorded of the sun, with the single exception of the Biblical miracle of Joshua – the day’s standstill of sun and moon.  This fact and no other marks Fatima with a stupendous singularity quite apart from the rest of the story”[10]). 
  It simply did not happen. 
  “But 70 000 people witnessed it in one place at one time!” we hear people indignantly object.  “Were they all liars?”  It is true that newspapers at the time published photographs of the great crowd, and articles were written about the “miracle”.[11]  But we do not have the recorded eyewitness testimonies of even a fraction of those tens of thousands.  A few eyewitness accounts were recorded, however.  What do they reveal?
  One of these was the account of the father of the siblings Jacinta and Francisco, but we must set aside this testimony as it is naturally biased, the word of a loving father who believed in his children.  We must also discount the testimonies of priests of Rome – who naturally had much riding on the acceptance of the “vision”.  Even the testimonies of medical doctors, if they were devout Papists, are not to be trusted.  There is this common belief that because doctors are “men of science” we may trust every word that falls from their mouths, but doctors are mere men, and given to the same biases and religious inclinations as other men.  But there were others.  For example, the two principal newspapers of Lisbon reported on the incident, and claimed that it happened.  However, in one of these accounts there are two revealing statements.  The first is this: “in one place a woman cried out: ‘How terrible!  There are even men who do not uncover before such a stupendous miracle!’” – referring to the fact that many men uncovered their heads at the scene.  And the second is this: “People then began to ask each other what they had seen.  The great majority admitted to having seen the trembling and the dancing of the sun; others affirmed that they saw the face of the Blessed Virgin; others, again, swore that the sun whirled on itself like a giant catherine wheel and that it lowered itself to the earth as if to burn it in its rays.  Some said they saw it change colours successively”.[12] 
  Analysing this journalist’s account, the following stands out.  First: the most likely reason there were men who did not uncover their heads was that they had not, in fact, seen anything!  The journalist does not even consider this.  Second: although the journalist states that the “great majority” claimed they saw the dancing of the sun, there were said to be 70 000 people there.  Did he interview, or even hear the comments, of the “great majority”?  Impossible.  He would have only heard the comments of a small fraction of that immense crowd.  Third: if this was a real miracle from God, why did they all see such different things?  Why did only some claim to see “Mary”?  After all, she was at the very centre of the entire Fatima business.
Part of the crowd watching the “miracle of the sun”

So what happened, in truth?  It was a case of mass delusion.  It was a case of the emperor’s new clothes.  Remember the story of the emperor who walked down the street without any clothes on, and no one in the crowd wanted to admit that he was naked, for then they would appear foolish in the eyes of their friends who claimed they could see his beautiful clothes.  This is what happened at Fatima.  People see what they want to see – especially in large crowds.  The crowd which gathered that day in 1917 was immense, and for the most part comprised of devout Roman Catholics, who either really believed in the apparitions, or who really wanted to believe in them.  All it would have taken was to have a few “plants” in the assembly, people primed beforehand by the priests (who were milking this moment for all it was worth) to jump up and start claiming they could see the sun doing these things, and within a short time the vast numbers of devout Papists in that crowd would be claiming to see it too – not because they really were seeing anything at all, but because they really wanted to see it.  This would have been especially so if, at that moment, there was some change in the weather, and some natural change in the appearance of the sun – nothing extraordinary, but exaggerated in the hearts and minds of those who really wanted to believe something extraordinary was happening, and whose emotions were already at fever pitch.  Many would have remained convinced for the rest of the lives that they really did see those things.  And yet they did not.  It was a delusion. 
  In addition, an optical illusion is caused by staring up into the bright light of day like that, if one keeps it up for some minutes.  To stare at the sun will damage the eyes, of course, and therefore the people in that crowd would really have been staring at the sky around the sun, for the most part.  And if one does this for some minutes, it creates the illusion of the sun moving.  One starts to see various colours, the sun seems to pulsate, etc.
  Therefore, this delusion at Fatima would have been caused by a combination of: mass religious hysteria; optical illusions caused by staring at the sky around the sun for too long; the desperate desire, in the hearts of so many in that multitude, not to be “left out” while their families and friends and neighbours were all apparently “seeing” it (the same thing happens to this day in mass gatherings of Pentecostals and Charismatics, when people see their friends being “slain in the Spirit” as they believe, and fall down themselves); and, doubtless, a number of carefully-placed “plants” at strategic points in the crowd.
  The book, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, written by Charles Mackay in the nineteenth century, demonstrates that this kind of mass delusion, in various forms, has occurred throughout history.  To give just one example: “An ancient couplet, preserved for ages by tradition, foretold, that in the year 1630 the devil would poison all Milan.”  And in that year a plague broke out in that very city.  It was believed, by the people, that the devil and his emissaries were spreading the plague, and anyone suspected of being in league with the devil to poison the city was killed by the mob, or tortured to death on the rack.  And then the story spread that Satan himself had been seen, and was living in a house in Milan where he was concocting his poison!  One man claimed to have been taken, by Satan himself, into the house where he saw the diabolical work being done there; and then “scores of witnesses, half crazed by disease, came forward to say that they also had seen the diabolical stranger.”  But then it became even more bizarre.  “The number of persons who confessed that they were employed by the Devil to distribute poison is almost incredible.  An epidemic frenzy was abroad, which seemed to be as contagious as the plague.  Imagination was as disordered as the body, and day after day persons came voluntarily forward to accuse themselves.”[13]  Incredible – but true.  If people can be so wrought upon as to voluntarily accuse themselves of being the agents of the devil, with the prospect of terrible punishment before them, then anything is possible!
The “Second Secret” of Fatima
  We can pass by the so-called “first secret” of Fatima, which as we have seen was straightforward: a “vision” of hell.  It is the second and third “secrets” which are most important, and which must be carefully analysed.
  The timing of the “second secret” of Fatima is all-important.  The three children supposedly saw “Mary” on six occasions, from May to October 1917.  And what great event occurred in October 1917?  The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, which swept the Communists to power in that great land!  Prior to 1917, Russia had been an overwhelmingly Russian Orthodox country by religion, and the great rival and enemy of the Roman Catholic institution.  For centuries Rome had desired the conquest of Russia and the destruction of Russian Orthodoxy.  And in the nineteenth century, Rome’s Jesuits began working with, supporting and financing, the burgeoning Communist movement.[14]  They believed that this would be the most effective way of destroying Czarist Russia and the Russian Orthodox institution.  By 1917 the Jesuits knew that the Communists were about to succeed.  Sure enough, in October Russia fell to the Communists in the Bolshevik Revolution, becoming officially Communist and atheist.  But in the months prior to the October revolution, so we are told by the Jesuits and other Romish authorities, the “visions” of Fatima occurred!
  We have to ask, then: was the timing of these “visions” merely coincidence?  There can be only one answer: no, not at all.  It was deliberately staged.  This “secret” was not part of the demonic manifestation at Fatima.  It was added later, by men!
  One proof of this is that “Mary”, it is claimed, told the children, “But if people do not stop offending God, another and worse [war] will begin in the reign of Pius XI.”  This pope’s reign began in 1922 – six years after the so-called “second secret” of Fatima was given!  The devil cannot predict the future, and the message did not come from the Lord, which leaves only one source: man.  The “second secret” was an invention of the priests of Rome, for the purpose of deceiving the world.
  In 1946, we are told that Lucia apparently confirmed she heard “Mary” say the name of Pius XI in her 1917 “vision”, but that at the time she did not know whether this was a pope or a king.[15]  But we only have what are purported to be Lucia’s words.  She may have said them, she may not have said them.  We simply do not know.  We cannot trust Rome.  People assume she was telling the truth, and they also assume that she really said these things; but none of this can be taken for granted.  By this time she was a nun in a cloistered convent, utterly under the power of the priests.  Nuns are sworn to absolute obedience.  A faithful nun, fanatically devoted to her “Church”, will lie if she is told to lie, “for the greater glory of God”.  And that is assuming these were even her words!  Who is to say for certain that they were?  It would have been a very simple thing for priests to “put words in her mouth”.  In fact, we cannot even be 100% certain she was still alive (more on this later).  This is why, in this article, when quoting from, or referring to, what are claimed to be Lucia’s words, I constantly say things such as, “so we are told”.  For the plain fact of the matter is that this is all we have to go on: the Vatican’s say-so.
  Importantly also, the “prophecy” is clearly a lying one, because factually, World War Two did not begin in the reign of Pius XI, but in the reign of Pius XII, his successor!  Now even if prophecies were still being given from the Lord today (which they are not, but we will assume for the sake of argument at this point), this fact alone would confirm that this is a false prophecy – for the true prophets of the Lord in biblical times never once gave inaccurate messages!

How do Roman Catholics try to wriggle out of this one?  Here is how: “The fact that the war is understood to have begun only in the reign of Pope Pius XII presents no great difficulty for Sister Lucia.  She remarks that the annexation of Austria by Germany – and we might add various other political events at the end of the reign of Pope Pius XI – constituted the preliminary stage of the conflagration that would take shape fully some time later.”[16]  Always a way to slip out of any difficulty – at least in their own eyes.    Likewise, another lying “prophecy” was given.  “On the 13th October [1917] both Lucia and Jacinta affirmed that they heard from the lips of the Blessed Virgin the words: ‘The war will end today.’”[17] Yet it did not end on that date at all.  How is this obvious falsehood explained away?  Even devout believers in the Fatima apparitions admit that this was “one of several contradictory or ambiguous statements.”  Yet it is explained by saying that either the children misunderstood “Mary’s” words, or they were excessively fatigued from being questioned for so many hours.  In 1924 Lucia said that although she believed “Mary” told her the war would end that day, Jacinta told her that “Mary” had said the war would end within a year.  Lucia claimed she was just too distracted that day by people wanting to give her petitions for “Mary” that she did not pay proper attention to what “Mary” said.[18]  But here we must ask: did any true prophet of the Lord ever give a false “prophecy”?  Never.  The Lord’s prophets gave His very words, often under extremely trying and difficult conditions, but they never erred.
  Another proof that this was a message concocted by men, is that we are told “Mary” requested the children not to reveal this “secret” until she gave them permission![19]  It was not part of what they revealed in 1917 but was only “revealed” years later – when Rome’s agents had had time to concoct it!  How many years later?  According to the official Roman Catholic account, Christ appeared to Lucia (who was by then a nun in a cloistered convent – very convenient!) in 1927 and gave her permission to reveal in writing everything that “Mary” had supposedly told her in the apparition in which she spoke about the devotion to her “Immaculate Heart”, but not the rest.  Lucia therefore revealed what had occurred during the June apparition in 1917. 
  Then in 1941, the bishop of Leiria ordered Lucia to write a detailed account of Jacinta’s life for a book being written about her.   And we are told that Lucia wrote of this order from the bishop: “This order touched the depth of my soul like a beam of light telling me that the time had come to reveal the first two parts of the secret”.  She then (or someone, at any rate) accordingly revealed the first and second “secrets” in writing, on 31 August 1941.  Then later still in that same year, on 8 December, she wrote yet another account, more detailed, on the bishop’s orders.[20]
  Very importantly, Lucia was surrounded with Jesuits!  In 1926 her priest-confessor was Jesuit superior, José da Silva Aparicio.  Another was his later replacement, a Jesuit priest named Gonçalves (who told her to write down the Fatima “prophecy”, promised to work for the realisation of the wishes of “Mary”, and also informed the bishop of Leiria and arranged that the matter should come to the knowledge of Pope Pius XI).  And a third was Jesuit priest, Francisco Rodrigues, to whom she wrote and with whom she met on a number of occasions.[21]
  No, the Lord had not appeared to poor Lucia.  Saul of Tarsus, later called Paul the apostle, was the very last to see the risen Christ (1 Cor. 15:3-9).  It was not the Lord, it was her priest-confessor who commanded Lucia to lie like this!  Those Jesuits were the real authors of the lies of Fatima!  Lucia was merely a pawn in their hands.  We will probably never know how much she herself wrote, or how much was written in her name by others.  We cannot believe a thing emanating from Jesuitical sources.
  As things turned out, once they took power the Russian Communists did not behave as the Vatican desired, and they in fact turned against the Vatican and went their own way.  They created an atheistic state, and instead of utterly destroying the Russian Orthodox institution, they hijacked it and turned it into a tool of Communism.  Yes, thousands of Russian Orthodox “church” buildings were destroyed, and thousands of priests and bishops, as well as millions of Russian Orthodox followers, were sent to concentration camps.  But in the case of the priests, these were the ones who did not capitulate and agree to work for the Reds, from within Russian Orthodoxy’s priesthood; and in the case of the common people, this was simply the Reds doing what they always loved to do: wiping out religious people.  Members of various religions were persecuted and massacred by the multiplied millions – including Roman Catholics.
  The Vatican’s cherished hopes of great things from the Communists did not materialise.  Something had to be done.  And so the Vatican turned from being a supporter of the Communist revolutionaries to being their opponent.  It now wanted to destroy Soviet Communism, for it realised that it could not use it as it had originally hoped.  And one way to “help along” the eventual downfall of atheistic Communism was to spread a story about “Mary” desiring to see Russia “converted”, and the dire consequences if this did not happen.
  And so to Portugal, and to a place called Fatima.
             The Vatican’s First Hope: The “Conversion” of Russia by Nazi Conquest of the USSR
  In 1929, so we are told, “Mary” again appeared to Lucia – the only surviving visionary, and who became a nun – and said the time had come for the consecration of Russia.  Here are the words, as we have been provided with them by the Vatican spin doctors: “The moment has come in which God asks the Holy Father, in union with all the bishops of the world, to make the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means.”[22]
  Mary did no such thing.  The message was a lie.  But it was a lie with a definite purpose.
  At the very same time as the Vatican was supporting the rise of Fascism in Italy and Nazism in Germany, it was also massively promoting the cult of Fatima.  Europe had been “Fatimaized” by 1938 – the year before the outbreak of World War Two.  In that year, the Vatican dispatched a papal nuncio to Fatima, and almost half a million pilgrims there were told that “Mary” had given three great secrets to the children.
  The reader will remember the part of the “second secret” which said: “When you shall see a night illuminated by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign that God gives you that He is going to punish the world for its many crimes by means of war, hunger, and persecution of the Church [meaning the “Church” of Rome] and the Holy Father.”  Well, by 1938, on the eve of World War Two, the Vatican deemed it to be the right time to claim the fulfilment of this part of the message.  Here is what we are told happened, by an official Roman Catholic book on the subject:
 “On the night of January 25, 1938, Sister Lucia stood at her convent window and saw an ominous red glow that lit the entire sky.  This light was seen throughout Europe and Africa and in part of America and Asia.  Scientists tried to explain it as a most unusual display of the Aurora Borealis, or Northern Lights.  But Sister Lucia knew that it was the great sign foretold by Our Lady on July 13, 1917, and that the punishment of the world was at hand.  Several weeks later, Hitler invaded Austria striking the match that was to set the world aflame.  Thus began another and worse war in the reign of Pius XI, as predicted by the Mother of God at Fatima.”[23]

Note the wording: “Scientists tried to explain it as a most unusual display of the Aurora Borealis, or Northern Lights.  But Sister Lucia knew that it was the great sign foretold by Our Lady”.  Any possible scientific explanation was airily dismissed, and the belief of a nun was accepted as the true one, regardless of the evidence.  When it comes to Rome’s “lying wonders”, Rome never lets the truth get in the way.
  What must always be borne in mind is that Lucia was a devout cloistered nun, and that she supposedly only spoke up and revealed these things on the advice of her priest-confessor – the priest to whom she always confessed her sins.  And this man, of course, was in direct communication with his superiors in the Vatican.  Poor, deluded Lucia!  She was a pawn in the hands of ambitious and cunning men.  Conditioned, as a cloistered nun, to obey her priest absolutely, she would not hesitate to lie for him if told to, “for the greater glory of God”.  She would have believed he was in the very place of God.
  Those three children claimed to see “Mary” and to deliver words from her, and as we have seen, there is good reason to believe that they did see and hear something, being deceived by the devil; but whatever messages they had originally been given, by a seducing spirit, back then, we may be certain that the agents of Rome changed or added to the messages at a later date, to make it appear as if they spoke of Russia’s persecution of the “Church”, its “conversion” one day, etc.   Those priests saw an opportunity – three young children claiming to be receiving messages from the Virgin – and decided to capitalise on it and put words in the children’ mouths.  Easy enough to do in a remote, rural, poor area of Portugal in 1917: bribes, gifts, threats even.  All these means could have been used; some would have been, for certain.  And suddenly Rome had a very powerful tool against atheistic Russia.
  It was all so perfectly timed; perfectly choreographed.  The language of Fatima was that Russia would be “converted”, while the language of the Fascists and Nazis was that Russia would be annihilated by their armies.  Perfect timing!  As far as the Vatican was concerned, Russia’s annihilation at the hands of the Nazis would be the beginning of her conversion to Roman Catholicism.  After all, the Nazi leaders were Roman Catholics, the Jesuits were the model which Hitler followed, and the Third Reich was a Roman Catholic crusade.[24]
  Look again at the supposed words of the “second secret”, given above.   “Mary” allegedly told the children that if the pope of Rome would consecrate Russia to her “Immaculate Heart”, that vast land would be converted, and a worldwide period of peace would follow.  By “converted”, of course, the Jesuits meant converted to Roman Catholicism – not back to Russian Orthodoxy!  This is important to bear in mind. 
  As we have seen, in 1929 Lucia claimed (or at least, the world was told, by Rome’s priests, that this is what she claimed) that “Mary” again appeared to her, stating that: “The moment has arrived wherein God is asking the Holy Father to consecrate Russia to my Immaculate Heart in union with all the bishops of the world.  He promises to save it by this means.”  Lucia, we are told, sent this request to Pius XI that same year, and he promised to take it into consideration.[25]  But this was not done, and Lucia in later writings (again, so we are told) said that the Lord was displeased.  Then, in a letter dated 2 December 1940, she addressed herself directly to Pius XII in obedience to her “spiritual directors”, again asking him to carry out “Mary’s” request.[26]
  Therefore the next question to be answered is: did the pope of Rome do this?  Did he “consecrate” Russia to Mary’s “Immaculate Heart”? 
  The answer is not as straightforward as one might imagine.  And there is a reason for this ambiguity.
  In 1941 Hitler invaded Russia.  As far as the Vatican of Pius XII was concerned, this was the beginning of the fulfilment of Fatima’s “second secret”, the conversion of Russia to Roman Catholicism.  “Pius XII encouraged Catholics to volunteer for the Russian front.  Catholics – most of them devotees of the Virgin of Fatima – joined the nazi armies, from Italy, France, Ireland, Belgium, Holland, Latin America, the U.S. and Portugal.  Spain sent a Catholic Blue Division.  In October, 1941, while the nazi armies rolled near Moscow, Pius XII, addressing Portugal, urged Catholics to pray for a speedy realization of the Lady of Fatima’s promise.”[27]
  And then what did the pope do?  In the midst of World War Two, on 31 October 1942, Pius XII in his radio message to the Portuguese nation consecrated Russia to the “Immaculate Heart of Mary”.[28]   The reason for this was that Pius XII was devoutly anti-Communist, devoutly pro-Nazi, and had assisted the Nazis to come to power in Germany; and he believed that the Nazis would conquer the Soviet Union.  This would be the beginning of Russia’s “conversion”, as had been predicted at Fatima.  Or so Pius XII believed.[29] 
  In other words, the first attempt at seeing the “prophecy” of Fatima fulfilled was by means of outright aggression and war!  Pius XII believed that Russia would be “converted” by being conquered militarily by the Nazis.
  This was it, Roman Catholics worldwide believed: this was the beginning of the fulfilment of the “second secret” of Fatima.  “‘The apparitions of Fatima open a new era,’ wrote Cardinal Cerejeira in that same year.  ‘It is the foreshadowing of what the Immaculate Heart of Mary is preparing for the whole world.’  The new era, in 1942, was a totally nazified European continent, with Russia seemingly wiped off the map, Japan conquering half of Asia and world fascism was at its zenith everywhere.”[30]  Yes, this is the nightmare the Vatican desired, and worked for.
  Alas for the Vatican, it was not to be.  “The fascist empire vanished with the collapse of Hitler.  In 1945, World War II ended.  And Soviet Russia, to the chagrined surprise of Pope Pius XII, emerged the second greatest power on earth.”[31]
  What, therefore, was the Vatican to do about that consecration of Russia to “Mary’s Immaculate Heart” by Pius XII in 1942? 
  There was only one thing to do: claim that the consecration had been invalid!  But how to do this?  A way was found: according to a letter she allegedly wrote in 1943, Lucia stated that Pius, unfortunately, had not consecrated Russia properly.  It was good but incomplete, because he failed to do it in union with all the bishops of Rome – as “Mary” had asked.[32]  Oh, what a pity!  If only the bishops had joined him, Communism would have been defeated instead of emerging from the War as a world power, with half of Europe in its iron grip!  This was how the Vatican reasoned.  And how it wriggled out of its dilemma.
  Even so, however, Rome claims that a miracle still happened, because within three days of the papal consecration the battle of el-Alamein began, which became the first defeat of Hitler’s army in the War.  And then the battle of Stalingrad began just three weeks later.
  Astounding how Rome claims the credit for the turning of the tide of World War Two –a war instigated and carried forward by the very Jesuits of Rome!  The Vatican of Pius XII fully supported the Nazis;[33] but always having a backup plan, it used Pius’ consecration of Russia to “Mary” to claim that this helped bring about the end of the War with the eventual defeat of Nazism!  They are nothing if not master tacticians, these Vatican princes.

Communism was not defeated by the War, however.  If it had been, we may be sure the Vatican would then have claimed that Pius XII’s consecration of Russia was valid.  But Communism expanded after World War Two, all over the world.  The time was not yet ripe, therefore, to claim that Fatima’s “second secret” had been fulfilled.
        The Vatican’s Second Hope: The “Conversion” of Russia by American Nuclear Defeat of the USSR
  If anyone thought the Fatima cult would die down after the failure to defeat Communism in World War Two, they were in for a huge surprise.  It was revived in a big way in 1945, with massive pilgrimages being organised to the shrine of Fatima itself.  And then in 1946, the idol of “Mary” was solemnly crowned in front of over half a million pilgrims.  The crown weighed 1200 grams of gold, it had 313 pearls, 1250 precious stones, and 1400 diamonds.  Pius XII broadcast a radio message from the Vatican on the anniversary of Fatima on 13 May 1946, calling on the faithful to “Be ready!  There can be no neutrals.  Never step back.  Line up as crusaders!”[34]  Rome was far from done with Fatima.  Or with Russia.
  The Cold War began in 1947, and the Vatican encouraged massive hatred of Russia.  It also sent an idol of “Our Lady of Fatima” on a world tour (called a “pilgrimage”), being taken to over 50 countries, welcomed by governments and adored by multitudes.  Wherever the idol went, Romanists were aroused to a frenzy of anti-Russian hatred.  Finally, in 1950 the idol was sent to Moscow itself!  And with the warm approval of the American ambassador, Admiral Kirk, the idol was solemnly set up in the church of the foreign diplomats – “To wait for the imminent liberation of Soviet Russia.” 
  Yes, the Vatican was still hoping that Russia’s “conversion” was about to be achieved, militarily.  Prominent Roman Catholics were urging Americans to prepare for a nuclear war with Russia.  The Cold War tension mounted dramatically.  In 1950 the Roman Catholic Secretary of the U.S. Navy, F. Matthews, called on the U.S. to launch an attack on Soviet Russia.  In this call this fanatical, devout Papist was fully supported by the Roman Catholic hierarchy, the Roman Catholic press, and the Knights of Columbus, a powerful American Roman Catholic order.
  The calls increased.  Political and military steps were being taken.  The Roman Catholic millions were being mobilised for an atomic war, led by America, against the Soviet Union.  Pius XII was personally using his immense influence to push for just such a war.  And – not surprisingly at all – he decided to capitalise on that “miracle of the sun” which the faithful believed occurred back in 1917.  He came out and told a blatant lie – that the sun had danced for him as well, just as it had for the three children long before!  And thus did the Roman pope stage “the greatest fake miracle of the century.”[35]
  How did he do it?
  In 1950, as he was doing everything in his immense power to get the United States to launch an atomic war against the Soviet Union – for the purpose of beginning Russia’s “conversion”, of course – Pius was visited by the Virgin Mary one day in October.  Or so we are told.  We have nothing but the Vatican’s say-so to go by, and frankly, its say-so is worthless.  It was just another one of those many, many Vatican “Just So” stories, as fanciful as anything Kipling ever wrote, which the world’s Roman Catholic population, not to mention everyone else, is just supposed to accept as absolutely true, because a pope said it.  After all, a pope would never lie… would he?
Pius XII
  Once he admitted to having been visited by Mary herself, Pius then commanded that the Fatima celebrations in October 1951 were to be the greatest ever held. And it came to pass.  Well over a million people assembled at the Fatima shrine.  And, master strategist that he was, Pius used the occasion to announce, to the assembled mass of humanity, through his personal representative (a cardinal named Tedeschini), that Mary had graciously visited him.  The cardinal faced the immense crowd and, in an emotional voice, announced that “another person had seen this same miracle” of “Mary” appearing to the children in 1917, when the sun did its dance.  “He saw it outside Fatima,” said the cardinal.  “Yes, he saw it years later.  He saw it at Rome.  The pope, the same our pontiff, Pius XII… yet he saw it.”[36]  He went on: “On the afternoon of October 30th, 1950, at 4 p.m., the Holy Father turned his gaze from the Vatican gardens to the sun, and there… was renewed for his eyes the prodigy of the Valley of Fatima.”  And then followed the cardinal’s description of what his dear pope saw: “Pope Pius XII was able to witness the life of the sun under the hand of Mary.  The sun was agitated, all convulsed, transformed into a picture of life… in a spectacle of celestial movements… in transmission of mute but eloquent messages to the Vicar of Christ.”  Furthermore, it occurred not once, but three times: on 30 and 31 October, and 1 November 1950.
  The news filled the over one million pilgrims at Fatima with great joy and excitement, as it did when it reached the rest of the Roman Catholic world via the media.  The Jesuits and other Romish theologians gave thanks to “Mary” for the privilege granted to Pius.  Papists the world over believed that Soviet Russia was on the very brink of being “converted” to Rome.  And of course, the only way they could see that was likely to happen was by the U.S. declaring war on the USSR.  Millions of Roman Catholics were actively praying for war.  In the United States, prominent Papists rose to prominent positions within the government, and an American ambassador was sent for the first time to the Vatican in 1951.
  The world was edging closer and closer to a nuclear holocaust in those Cold War days – and the Vatican was at the very centre of the intrigues to bring it about.  On 7 July 1952, Pius consecrated the world, and especially the Russian people, to the “Immaculate Heart of Mary” – again.[37]
  Indeed, by 1952, “Rome, claiming to be a center of peace, had become a vast, sinister center of war.  The ever more imposing procession of generals, admirals, war ministers, saturation bombing experts, clanking their boots along the Vatican’s marble corridors, was the damning demonstration that these individuals, professional war leaders, were there to see another war leader, Pope Pius XII…. The skillful amalgamation of papal diplomacy, religious administrative might and organized superstition had made of the pope one of the supreme war leaders in the active promotion of a third World War.”[38]
  Well, the world did not go to war then.  And although Pius XII continued to whip up Roman Catholic frenzy by means of “Our Lady of Fatima”, intensifying the cult and seeking to prepare Roman Catholics the world over for the inevitable coming war with the USSR, he died in 1958 – and with the election of a new pope, John XXIII, everything changed.  For John was a pro-Communist pope.  And global politics entered a new era – just as dangerous, if not more so, but decidedly different from what went before.
  Thus, twice, Pius XII’s hopes and dreams for smashing Russia failed to materialise.  He had hoped Hitler would do it, but Hitler lost.  Then he had hoped the United States would do it, but that hope, too, was destined to be dashed.
  Then on 21 November 1964, at the request of 510 archbishops and bishops from 78 countries meeting for the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI also consecrated the world to the “Immaculate Heart of Mary”.[39]  But nothing happened.  Russia was no more converted to Roman Catholicism in the wake of that 1964 consecration than it had been in the wake of the 1942 and 1952 consecrations.
  So then, if neither 1942, nor 1952, nor 1964, was the valid consecration of Russia to the “Immaculate Heart of Mary”, and if Russia was not beaten militarily, either by the Nazis in World War Two or by the Americans in the aftermath of World War Two, it was necessary for the Vatican to claim yet another date for the correct consecration, and yet another time for the “conversion” of Russia.
  Fast forward to 1984, and to the pope at the time, John Paul II.



The Vatican’s Third Hope: The “Conversion” of Russia by Means of the Staged “Collapse of Communism” in 1989-1992 
  On 13 May 1981 – the 64th anniversary of the first apparition at Fatima! – Pope John Paul II survived an assassination attempt in the Vatican at the hands of a Turkish gunman.  Attributing his survival to “Mary”, John Paul II then consecrated the world (and maybe Russia – there is uncertainty about this) to “Mary”, possibly in union with all the bishops (again, there is some uncertainty), twice – the first time on 13 May 1982, and then again on 25 March 1984.  The second date was very significant; for the very next year – 1985 – Mikhail Gorbachev came to power, perestroika began, and this signalled the beginning of all the progress which the Roman Catholic institution made in the USSR thereafter.
  But was this the real deal this time, according to Rome?  Had the pope really done it properly?
  Well, yes.  Or maybe not.  Again the answer is far from straightforward.  And again there is a reason for this.
  Up until about mid-1989, it is claimed that Lucia always insisted neither one of the consecrations by John Paul II were valid.  But since about mid-1989, she supposedly began to recognise the validity of the 1984 consecration.  She said this was the real one, although she also said that this was her personal opinion, not a supernatural revelation.[40]  But we have to ask: was she even saying anything at all about them at this time?  Or was her name simply being bandied about by far more powerful figures?  A pawn in a gigantic geopolitical Vatican power game?

Two Lucias? Earlier and later photographs

Two Lucias? Earlier and later photographs
  There are many, including many traditionalist Roman Catholic groups, who believe that the original Lucia died many years earlier, and that another woman was presented to the world as “Lucia” thereafter!  However far-fetched this may sound, photographic evidence certainly creates doubts, as the later “Lucia” looks quite different from the earlier one.[41]  She was also far more jovial, and relaxed, even when surrounded by high “Church” figures or in the presence of the pope of Rome himself – very surprising for a woman who had supposedly lived for many years as a cloistered nun, shut off from the world and especially from almost all male company. 


The later Lucia with Popes Paul VI and John Paul II
  The Vatican would not only be perfectly capable of pulling off such a deception, but more than willing to go to such lengths if it deemed them necessary.
  Lucia apparently said that the Third World War would have broken out in 1985 if John Paul II had failed to consecrate Russia to “Mary’s Immaculate Heart” when he did, a year before in 1984.  But because he had done so, instead of a world war in 1985, that was the year in which Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in Russia and started his perestroika policy, which culminated, in 1991, in the demise of the Soviet Union and what the world was led to believe was the collapse of Soviet (and thus Russian) Communism.
  Note, as always, I have said she “apparently” said this.
  But why did Rome deem the 1980s to be the right time (this time) for the pope to consecrate Russia to “Mary’s Immaculate Heart”?  It is because of what was occurring in the Soviet Union and its satellite states in those years, and because of the huge role which the Vatican of John Paul II was playing in those events.
  By the 1980s the Vatican had created its own brand of Communism, which may be called Catholic-Communism, and was exerting ever-increasing power on the Soviet Union itself, in all sorts of ways.  And by 1988 the Vatican could smell victory.  And so it was that the changes which took place in the Soviet Union and the eastern-bloc Communist countries from 1988 to 1990 were claimed to be the fulfilment of “Mary’s” words in her “second secret”: that Russia was being converted to Roman Catholicism!  The Soviet Union had its own agenda, of course, behind the staged events of those momentous years.  For indeed the events were staged: Communism did not “die” then, as the world was deceived into believing.  It is as much alive and well today, in those countries, as it ever was.  But that is another story, too large to tell here.  For now our focus is on what the Vatican perceived to be the beginning of the conversion of Russia to Romanism, in those years.
  1989 was one of the most significant and eventful years in world history.  It was the year when one eastern-bloc country after another appeared to be casting off the shackles of Communism.  And, very significantly, Roman Catholic Poland was where it all started!  The Polish pope, John Paul II, had laid the groundwork well: Poland was to be the place where the Roman Catholic takeover of Eastern Europe was to begin.  The dominoes started falling there.  Two versions of Communism knocked heads.  In April 1989, Solidarity, the Catholic-Communist Polish trade union movement, was legalised by the Moscow-backed, atheistic Communist government in Poland.  Then on 17 May, the Polish parliament granted legal status to the Roman Catholic institution – for the first time since the Communist takeover of Poland in 1944!  Thus Poland became the first eastern-bloc country to be reconciled with the Great Harlot (Rev. 17:2)!
  By August, the “domino effect” had begun in Eastern Europe.  Hungary was next.  The Communist government there began to relax its hardline stance against Roman Catholicism.  Diplomatic relations with the Vatican were sought.  In Poland in August, after the Communist prime minister resigned, a Solidarity leader was asked, by the president, to form a government.  Poland, therefore, became the first country since World War Two to oust an atheistic government.  The new prime minister was a devout Roman Catholic, a Solidarity member, and a devout Catholic-Communist.  And in Czechoslovakia, a Romanist became the first deputy premier.
  Then, on 1 December 1989, the most significant event in a year of significant events occurred.  Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union met John Paul II in the Vatican!  This was the first time ever that a Soviet leader had done so.  Gorbachev called the meeting “a truly extraordinary event”, and the pope said their meeting “will hardly fail to have a powerful impact on world opinion.”  It would “be interpreted as singularly meaningful: a sign of the times that have slowly matured, a sign that is rich in promise.”
  Was Russia indeed being converted to Roman Catholicism this time?  Was Fatima’s fraud paying off?  As far as Rome was concerned, the answer was yes.  It really did appear, to the powers that be in Rome, that they were about to witness the conversion of Russia to Roman Catholicism.
  But were they?

What has been the reality since then?  Decades have passed since that 1984 consecration, and yet what is the reality, politically and religiously, in Russia?
  Politically, Communism did not die, and even in Russia itself Communism is alive and well, indeed flourishing.  And religiously, Russia has not, in fact, been converted to Roman Catholicism!  Oh, Russia is more open to Romanism, certainly; but has it become a Roman Catholic country?  Not at all.  The great hopes entertained within Vatican circles in the early 1980s have not materialised after all.  Russia has seen a massive resurgence of Russian Orthodoxy – but that is a very different matter, for Russian Orthodoxy is Rome’s great, centuries-old enemy.  A re-conversion to Russian Orthodoxy merely brings Russia much closer to where it was before the Bolshevik Revolution – which is why the Vatican supported that Revolution in the first place!
  Besides, the Russian Orthodox institution has been a tool of the Communists ever since the Russian Revolution.  Orthodox priests have been Communist secret agents.  Today, Russia is permitting a more overt Russian Orthodoxy than before – but it is all part of the smokescreen, to fool the world into believing Communism is dead and Russia has changed.  Orthodox priests are still Communist agents, and Russia is still ruled by Communists.
  There are those Roman Catholics who continue to maintain that John Paul II’s 1984 consecration was valid.  Faced with the problem of Russia re-converting to Orthodoxy instead of to Romanism, they have to put a good spin on this inconvenient obstacle in their way, and they do.  They explain it by claiming that when “Mary” spoke of Russia’s conversion, she meant Russia’s conversion to Russian Orthodoxy!  For example, Robert Moynihan, editor of Inside the Vatican, stated in 2017: “Indeed it is the most impressive conversion in history.  They built or reopened 29,000 churches in only 28 years, three every day!  The number of monasteries grew from 15 to 788, the number of faithful from below 50 million in 1990 to over 113 million today.  And today, 82% of all Russians follow Orthodox Christianity.  The Russian state spends more than $100 million every year for the restoration of churches destroyed or misused by the Communists.  The 500 theological seminaries are full of young men who follow their vocation…. I heard Orthodox chants right on the Red Square.  They rebuilt the Cathedral of Our Lady of Kazan, destroyed by the communists, and transmit all liturgies and prayers with loudspeakers on the square five times a day.  Lenin surely is rolling over in his mausoleum – it’s an exorcism!”[42]
  But again: what Moynihan described was Russian Orthodoxy – not Roman Catholicism.  And considering that Russian Orthodoxy has been the age-old enemy of Rome, and Rome has always sought its destruction, the fact that Russia is now more openly Orthodox is not, in truth, a desirable thing for Rome.
  Unless…
  Unless, by other means – ecumenical means – Russian Orthodoxy is being slowly drawn back under Rome!
  Great steps have been taken towards eventual “unity”, via the ecumenical movement.  And doubtless it is believed, by those Romanists who maintain that the 1984 consecration was valid, that although Russia is being converted increasingly to Russian Orthodoxy, it doesn’t matter, because slowly but surely Russian Orthodoxy is being drawn under the wings of the “Mother Church” of Rome.  In the long run, then, Russia’s conversion to Orthodoxy will mean Russia’s conversion to Romanism.  This is especially so, given Romanism’s enthusiastic embracing of its own brand of Catholic-Communism for decades now, particularly under the popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II, and Francis I.
  But Rome is always very careful to have a “Plan B.”  Back in 1984, when John Paul II carried out his consecration, the language of many Romish officials was somewhat guarded; somewhat ambiguous; a trifle vague.  This was deliberate, for the Jesuits and their fellow-workers are old hands at knowing how things can change very suddenly in the world.  Twice before in the past, their claim that Fatima’s prediction was being fulfilled backfired; and although things looked very promising this third time round, and they were optimistic at the time that Russia was indeed being converted to Romanism, they were realistic enough to know that various spanners could so easily be thrown into the works.  They therefore put forward two strategies, either one of which they may use, depending on the circumstances as they evolve in the coming years.  The first, as we have seen, is to claim that, yes, Russia is being converted – but to Russian Orthodoxy, to be followed at a later stage by conversion to Roman Catholicism. 
  And the second?
The Vatican’s “Wait and See” Approach
  The second strategy is to permit, even encourage, some influential Roman Catholic voices to claim that the 1984 consecration was not really valid (they will find various excuses as to why it was not), and that it still has to be done “properly”.  In this way Rome always leaves enough “wriggle room” for herself to slither out of any dilemma.  For example, in the official Roman Catholic booklet, Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, which carries the Nihil Obstat and the Imprimatur of Rome, it is categorically stated: “Yet even this singular act [John Paul II”s 1984 consecration] did not exactly fulfil the specific request of Our Lady for a Collegial Consecration of Russia by the Holy Father ‘in union with all the bishops of the world.’”[43]
  Certainly the side which is claiming that the 1984 consecration was not really valid are able to draw on some indisputable facts.  For one thing, Russia did not convert to Roman Catholicism after 1984 – and that was a long time ago now.  For another thing, a period of peace did not follow 1984 – and that was one of “Mary’s” promises too.  And for yet another thing, there are Roman Catholics who even doubt that Lucia was still alive when she was said to have stated that the consecration was valid, or if she was, they doubt that she really said what it is claimed she did!  It would have been easy enough to get some other woman to “stand in” for her, even on camera – no doubt about that. 
  And there is something else as well.  After World War Two Lucia was (apparently) interviewed, on 15 July 1946; and when she was asked about the part of the “prophecy” which said that if “Mary’s” requests were heeded Russia would be converted, and there would be peace, but if not, Russia would spread her errors throughout the world, the interviewer asked: “Does this mean, in your opinion, that every country, without exception, will be overcome by Communism?”  And Lucia is said to have replied: “Yes.”[44]  Those who do not believe that any consecration has yet been valid point to this and say, “Communism’s errors expanded after the War, and have continued to expand even after the so-called ‘collapse’ of Communism in the late 1980s/early 1990s.  Russia’s Communist errors have continued to cover the world like a blanket, and have indeed been adopted by most countries of the world now and become official policy everywhere, often without a shot being fired and usually under different names.”  In all of this they are certainly correct.  Communism, under other names, has been victorious throughout the world, conquering even the West. 
  Both sides will speak up against the other side, often with very strong language.  For example, those who deny the 1984 consecration’s validity were called “crazy Fatima-conspiracy-theorists”[45] by one of those who believe it was valid.  But this is not at all unusual.  The Jesuits have always played both sides, with undercover agents on one side criticising and hurling abuse at undercover agents on the other side.  The point is, however, that depending on which way the wind blows, one side will gain the ascendancy – deliberately so.  And by that time most people will have forgotten the issues that were once hotly debated.
  And so, for now, nothing is 100% settled.  The Vatican is watching, and waiting, to see how things “pan out”.  The time may yet come when it will claim, unequivocally, that the 1984 consecration was valid; or it will claim that it was not.  It all depends on what transpires, politically and religiously.  This is why one hears nothing dogmatic as yet, from the Vatican.  The “second secret” of Fatima is too valuable a “prophecy” to be absolutely dogmatic about it… just yet.
  And with that, let us turn to the third and final “secret”.
The “Third Secret” of Fatima
  Before examining this “third secret”, it will be profitable to understand how Rome views the Fatima apparitions and the messages supposedly given.  When the “third secret” was apparently made public in the year 2000 by Romish cardinal, Joseph Ratzinger, he stated that the vision was a “private revelation”, and therefore it was not a matter of faith, although it could be of spiritual help to Roman Catholics in their faith.  “The authority of private revelations is essentially different from that of the definitive public revelation.  The latter demands faith,” he said.  A private revelation considered genuine by the Vatican could be accepted by Roman Catholics with prudence.  It could help them understand the Gospel, but they were not obliged to use it.[46]
  What utter nonsense this is!  What confusion!  How different from the revelation of God’s Word!  If, as Rome wants the world to believe, the Fatima “visions” were genuine revelations from heaven (we know they were not, of course, but solely for the sake of argument let us say if they were), then of course they must be authoritative, and matters of faith!  If a revelation is genuine, then of course everyone should be obliged to use it!  This is typical of Roman Catholic confusion and man-made teachings: just as they attempt to tell us that there is a difference between the worship given to God, and the worship given to Mary (there isn’t – it’s all worship!), or that the Word of God consists of both the Bible and tradition (it doesn’t – it consists of the Bible alone), so they also want us to believe that a “private revelation” can be a genuine revelation from heaven, and yet need only be accepted “with prudence”, and that none are under obligation to use it!   All of God’s true Word, the Bible, is to be received as divinely authoritative, and a matter of faith.  When the prophets of God gave revelations from God, believers were to treat them as the Word of God, and to live by them.
  Pentecostals and Charismatics need to take note here!  When, week by week in their church services, so-called “prophets” and “prophetesses” stand up and say, “Thus saith the Lord”, many of them say that such “prophecies” are not to be equated with Holy Scripture.  Yet it is either a message from the Lord, or it is not.  If it is, then they are bound to receive it as of equal authority with the Word of God.  Otherwise they would be despising the Word of the Lord!  But in truth, the “messages” given in Pentecostal and Charismatic services are not divinely-given prophecies – they are no better than the “messages” of Fatima.  The Bible is the completed Word of God.  This is the clear teaching of 1 Cor. 13:8-11, as well as other places.  No more messages from the Lord are to be expected, because no more will be given.  The Pentecostals are bridging the gap to Rome by their extra-biblical “revelations.”
  Let us come to the “third secret” of Fatima.

 This so-called “third secret” was supposedly written down, by the nun Lucia, in 1944.  We are told that it happened like this:
 When she (apparently) fell very ill in 1943, the Romish bishop of Leiria asked her to write down the “third secret”, but she did not feel she could do this.  He then ordered her to do so, but still she felt she could not.  But finally, “Mary” herself appeared to Lucia in the infirmary of the convent, on 2 January 1944, and ordered her to write down the “third secret”.  So she did, on 3 January.[47]  She placed the document in a sealed envelope which was given to the safekeeping of the bishop of Leiria, and she wrote on the envelope that it could only be opened, either by the patriarch of Lisbon or by the bishop of Leiria, in (or after – there is some uncertainty here) 1960.  But this instruction (if genuine) was entirely ignored: not only did the Inquisition (the “Holy Office”) ask the bishop of Leiria, in 1957, to send it to Rome, where it ended up in the Secret Archive of the Inquisition on 4 April 1957,[48] but also, as we shall see in a moment, Pius XII claimed to have read it before 1960.
  It was said to be a terrifying revelation.  And it was not revealed to the world by the Vatican until the year 2000.  Or so the Vatican wants the world to believe.  There is no reason for us to believe the account above of how it came to be written down.  As we have said, it was all part of Rome’s “lying wonders”.  It was all a manufactured hoax, and all for political gain in the world.  Poor Lucia was an obedient nun.  She wrote as she was told – if she even wrote at all.  Anyone could have been used.  It did not have to be her.  Was she alive or dead by this time?  If alive, was she lucid?  We have no way of telling.  What matters is that it was all a great hoax.
  Pope Pius XII, the pope of World War Two, believed, as we have seen, that Fatima would be fulfilled by the military conquest of the Soviets by the Nazis.  The intention was that, with this being accomplished, the “third secret” of Fatima could be revealed to the world in the year 1960.  As Avro Manhattan, an authority on the Vatican in world politics, wrote: “Pius, who always thought and planned in quasi-apocalyptic terms, had carefully planned his timing of revealing the final secret of Fatima.  One day he ‘confided’ to a few intimates, who curiously enough seemed to have close connection with the Catholic and world press, how he had read the third prophecy.  Upon reading it, Pius informed them, he had ‘trembled with fear, almost fainted with horror.’”[49]
  In other words, the whole thing was designed, by Pius and his pals, to have maximum effect once it was revealed.
  Roman Catholic sources prefer to claim that it is not known whether or not Pius XII read the “third secret”.  Pius’ intimate friend, a priest named Leiber, denied that the pope had fainted, or even cried, when reading it (which indicates he had read it).[50]  Well, they would, wouldn’t they?
  But the Nazis did not conquer the Soviets and the War ended with the Nazis’ defeat.  Pius XII then forged an alliance with America, in the post-War years, with the hope of instigating a third World War in time, so that Russia could be conquered, as we have seen.  This period was known as the Cold War, a very dangerous period indeed in world history.  And once again, he invoked “Our Lady of Fatima”, claiming that a third World War would accomplish what she had prophesied.  And he convinced the millions of Roman Catholics in Europe and the USA that he was right.[51]
  But he was succeeded in 1958 by Pope John XXIII, who was a very pro-Communist pope, not an anti-Communist one as Pius had been.  The Vatican claims that John XXIII obeyed the commandment given to Lucia, and opened the sealed envelope in 1960.[52]  Manhattan wrote: “Pope John XXIII, however, being a matter of fact man, fulling realizing the anticommunist implications of the [Fatima] cult, considered the revelation as an arm of the Pentagon and indeed as a leg-pulling burlesque.  In France, the French hierarchy, at the personal instigation of Pope John, condemned the cult, as a war mongering movement meant to support the USA’s armed conflict against Russia.”[53] 
  The official Vatican version is that, when John opened and read the “secret” in 1960 (or earlier in August 1959,[54] in which case this pope, too, disobeyed Lucia’s instruction), he (and “ecclesiastical authorities”) decided not to reveal it to the general public, and gave it back to the Inquisition.  It was argued that no one in authority had ever said the secret had to be revealed to the world in that year – only that the sealed envelope had to be opened then![55]  But the real reason it was not revealed is as explained above: John XXIII was pro-Communist, and nowhere near as mystically-minded as Pius had been.  He simply rejected the entire Fatima business as an anti-Communist, pro-American hoax.
  John was correct about the Fatima cult being used, by Pius XII in alliance with America, to promote anti-Communism.  The Fatima cult was used, during World War Two and its aftermath, to advance American anti-Soviet interests.  In other words, Fatima was a political tool.  And truthfully, this is what it has always been.
  Apparently Pope Paul VI (who succeeded John) also read the “third secret”, on 27 March 1965, and also decided not to reveal it to the public.  Then, after the attempt on his life on 13 May 1981, Pope John Paul II asked for the envelope to be brought to him, on 18 July of that year – and he read it, and identified himself with the “bishop dressed in white” mentioned in the text (more about this below).[56]  And on 17 May 2000, he announced that “since the times seemed ripe, did I deem it opportune to make public the content of the so-called third part of the Secret.”[57]  
  And so it was that on 26 June in the year 2000, the “third secret” of Fatima (the world was told) was revealed to the world for the first time.  For decades, rumours and speculations abounded as to exactly what was contained in it.  It was purported to be a most horrifying vision.  In 2000 the Vatican “revealed” it to the world, through Joseph Ratzinger, the cardinal in charge of the Vatican’s diabolical Office of the Inquisition, known today as the “Congregation for Doctrine.”  Ratzinger was thus the Vatican’s top doctrinal official and the watchdog of the Roman Catholic faith.[58]  A few years later, of course, he became Pope Benedict XVI. 
  Explaining the timing of the publication of this “secret”, Ratzinger stated that until the close of the twentieth century, the vision would have made little sense to the world.  He believed the particular period of struggle described by the vision, culminating in the attempted assassination of the pope in 1981, had ended, and therefore it was now appropriate to reveal the contents of the “secret.”  And Lucia claimed that the Vatican’s interpretation was correct.  Or again, so the cardinal said.
  What then was the “third secret”, supposedly not revealed until 2000?
  In their “vision”, the children supposedly saw an angel brandishing a flaming sword, threatening the world.  But “Mary’s” splendour, radiating towards the angel, caused the flames to die out.  Then the angel cried out with a loud voice, “Penance, penance, penance!”  Then, in Lucia’s alleged words, this is what was seen next:
  “A bishop dressed in white (we had the impression it was the Holy Father).  Other bishops, priests, men and women religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big cross…. Before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins, and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way.  Having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other bishops, priests, men and women religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions.” 
  Next, “Beneath the two arms of the cross there were two angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.”
  No true Christian could believe such nonsense!  Firstly, visions are no longer given by the Lord, nor are they ever given by Mary.  Secondly, the content of this supposed “vision” is obviously spurious, for Lucia spoke of the biblical Antichrist as “the Holy Father” (if indeed she said these words at all), a title given by the Lord Jesus to the heavenly Father in Jn. 17:11, and never to be applied to any man.  Thirdly, in the “vision” the pope prayed for the dead – a heathen and Popish practice indeed, without any scriptural support.  Fourthly, angels simply don’t do what she said they did.  And fifthly, the Bible nowhere commands men to do penance – this is a Roman Catholic concept and part of its false gospel of works – but constantly calls men to repentance.  Repentance and penance are poles apart.
  What did Ratzinger believe this “vision” to be all about?  He said in 2000 that Rome does not have an official definition or interpretation of the “vision”.  However, Lucia is said to have told the Vatican official sent to interview her that the vision “concerns, above all, the struggle of atheistic Communism against the Church [the “Church” of Rome] and against Christians [Papists] and describes the terrible sufferings of the victims of the faith in the 20th century.”  And in his commentary on the text of the “vision”, Ratzinger wrote that it described the path of the “Church” of Rome through the twentieth century as a “journey through a time of violence, destruction and persecution”; a symbolic prophecy of the “Church’s” struggles in the twentieth century with evil political systems, and of its ultimate triumph.
  “The history of an entire century,” declared Ratzinger, “can be seen represented in this image…. In the vision we can recognise the 20th century as a century of martyrs, a century of suffering and persecution for the Church, a century of world wars and many local wars.”  He also declared that in the ascent of the mountain “we can undoubtedly see a convergence of different Popes.  Beginning from Pius X up to the present Pope, they all shared the sufferings of the century…. In the vision, the Pope too is killed along with the martyrs.”[59]
  Ratzinger also appeared to believe that this struggle against atheistic Communism culminated in the assassination attempt on John Paul II, who was shot in 1981 and almost died at the hands of a Turkish gunman hired by the Soviet Union.  He declared, when giving his interpretation of the “third secret”: “When, after the attempted assassination on 13 May 1981, the Holy Father had the text of the third part of the ‘secret’ brought to him, was it not inevitable that he should see in it his own fate?”[60] 
  This is a good place to look at that assassination attempt.  Why was it made?  Who was behind it?
Moments after the shooting              
Mehmet Ali Agca

For reasons we will not go into at this point, as it would take us too far off course in this article, Pope John Paul II visited Turkey (a Muslim country) in 1979 – a visit which was not at all welcomed by the Turkish government, being considered (correctly) as papal interference in Turkish affairs.  In addition, Moscow was watching events closely.  This pope was pro-American, anti-USSR (although he was a Communist himself, he supported Catholic-Communism, not Moscow Communism).[61]  The Kremlin wanted him out of the way; and it was not difficult for Soviet agents in Turkey to find and groom a young Turk, Mehmet Ali Agca, as the assassin.
  On 13 May 1981, Ali Agca made the attempt on the life of John Paul II in St Peter’s Square in Rome, firing shots at him.  He was severely wounded, but not killed.
  But there was much more to the attempted assassination than the Soviets making use of a Muslim Turkish hit man.  Note the date on which the assassination attempt was made: 13 May!  The 64th anniversary of the very first Fatima apparition!  We have to ask: was it merely coincidental that, on the very anniversary of the so-called “prophecies” of Fatima, which stated that the pope would be killed by (it was claimed) Communist forces, Pope John Paul II was shot in an assassination attempt?
  Either it was coincidental, or it was not.  If it was coincidental, then there were those in the Vatican hierarchy who swiftly made the most of the situation, and tied the assassination attempt to the “prophecy” of Fatima.  But if it was not coincidental, then we have to accept that there were not merely KGB agents behind the assassination attempt, but Vatican agents as well (which means Jesuit agents).  It means there were those within the inner structures of the Vatican, men desiring the conversion of Russia according to Fatima, who instigated this assassination attempt in conjunction with the Soviets (albeit for widely different reasons), to give global credence to the Fatima apparitions and massive impetus to John Paul II’s work in seeking to undermine the Soviet Union and transfer the centre of power of the international Communist movement from Moscow to Rome.
  Does this second scenario sound too far-fetched?  Perhaps it is.  But it is worth pondering a few points, which cannot be easily explained away.  First, in the words of Avro Manhattan, “It is significant that Ali Agca was acting not so much as an instrument of Islamic mysticism, but also as the instrument of a twilight world where Islam, the Orthodox Church, the Vatican, Soviet Russia, and the U.S. all met in their struggle to further their respective interests.”[62]  A twilight world of agents and double agents, of conflicting and merging interests.  Second, there is the date of the attempted assassination: 13 May.  Yes, coincidences happen.  But doubts arise.  Third, there is the fact that Ali Agca, an expert gunman, did not manage to kill the pope even though he was just metres away, and fired more than one shot.  This caused many to wonder if this was the point all along: merely to wound, not to kill.  The Soviets would have wanted to kill him; but the Jesuits?  Perhaps not.  Perhaps what the Soviets wanted to be a final termination of John Paul’s life, the Jesuits turned into an attempted termination, by a Soviet-hired hit man on that particular date, to give the appearance of fulfilling the Fatima “prophecy” in a symbolic sense (as Ratzinger later claimed).  Fourth, there is the “Muslim connection”.  But more about that a little later.
  Whether the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II on the very anniversary of the first Fatima apparition was coincidental or not, one thing is certain: it played right into the hands of those promoting the message of Fatima concerning Russia and concerning the “bishop dressed in white”.  The symbolism was very powerful indeed.
  Oh the mileage Rome has obtained from the “visions” of Fatima, through the years!  Constantly there is reference to Communism’s war against Rome, and yet Rome’s ultimate victory.  Considering that the Vatican believed, in 2001, that the rise of Gorbachev in the old Soviet Union, and the supposed “changes” that occurred in the USSR and the Eastern European Communist nations in 1989 and 1990, were the beginnings of the conversion of Russia to Romanism, and thus the fulfilment of the “second secret” of Fatima, it is not surprising that when the Vatican chose to release what it told the world was the “third secret”, it would again refer to these things.  But the Vatican’s attempt to make the Romish “Church” look like a suffering martyr is hollow indeed, given the fact that the Papal system has persecuted and shed the blood of millions for many long centuries (Rev. 18:24) – and that Communism itself was a rebellious daughter of the Roman harlot!
  When asked how the Vatican came to its interpretation, as the pope is killed in the “vision” whereas John Paul II was only wounded, Ratzinger replied that the vision’s language is symbolic, and that it does not predict the future, but rather warns what the future may hold if people do not convert and pray.  He added that the vision fitted the twentieth century’s two world wars, Nazism, Communism and other forms of totalitarianism which oppressed the “Church”.  He suggested that the figure of the “bishop in white” might represent a convergence of several twentieth-century popes who helped the “Church” ward off the dangers of the century.
  Again he spoke of the suffering of the “Church” of Rome!  But what is the terrible truth?  This: that both world wars were to a very large extent instigated by the popes of Rome; and that Nazism and Communism were both daughters of Rome, created by her and for her![63]  But this history is virtually unknown to people today.  How well the facts have been covered up, and how soon the truth, once known to many, has been forgotten!
  As for the popes “warding off” these dangers, this is laughable.  Pius XII, for example, was extremely pro-Nazi, and popes John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II were extremely pro-Communist.[64]  They did nothing to “ward off” these evils, but everything they could to encourage them and promote them!
  Ratzinger said that the central point of the message of the “third secret” was “that faith and prayer are forces which can influence history and that in the end prayer is more powerful than bullets and faith more powerful than armies.”  History reveals, however, that Rome has certainly never lived by this sentiment! – bullets and armies (and other weapons) have always been her preferred method of “converting” the nations!
  In support of Ratzinger’s 2000 interpretation, there was (so we are told) Lucia’s statement, as well as the historical events of the twentieth century, which to many people gave the appearance of a great struggle between Roman Catholicism and Communism.  But there were real problems with his interpretation, and many Roman Catholics were far from satisfied with this “official revelation” of the “third secret”.  For one thing, Lucia may not actually have still been alive to truly say this was the correct interpretation, or if she was, she may not actually have said what they claimed she said: it would have been a very easy thing for the Vatican to fake.  After all, we only have its own word for it that Lucia really did say these things, and Vatican officials would never lie to us – would they? (only the naive and the ignorant would believe that!).
  For another thing, despite Ratzinger claiming the death of the pope in the “vision” was symbolic, we again only have his interpretation of it this way.  Many Papists just could not see the connection between the death of the “bishop dressed in white” and the attempted assassination of John Paul II.  Not only did the pope not actually die, but no one else died either; only one non-soldier fired at him, not many soldiers; John Paul II was riding in the popemobile when he was shot, not toiling up a mountain; there was no big mountain, no kneeling at the cross, and no half-ruined city.
  For yet another thing, some writers, while not excluding the attack on John Paul II in 1981 from the context of persecution of the “Church”, nonetheless prefer to see the figure of “a bishop dressed in white” as a symbol of several popes rather than just one in particular.  This even fits in with Ratzinger’s view as well.[65]
  Furthermore, when the same Joseph Ratzinger, the cardinal who released the “secret” in 2000 and gave his own interpretation above, spoke of this “secret” some years earlier in 1984, he said at that time that the “third secret” involved “dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian and therefore of the world”, and that it also marked the beginning of the end times.  The two accounts of the same “secret” are quite different!  Indeed, Ratzinger’s 2000 interpretation did not even fit with that of Vatican scholars who had studied the Fatima “prophecy”, and stated that it concerned a global crisis of faith emanating from within the hierarchy of Rome itself.[66]
  Then, in May 2016, just a year before the 100th anniversary celebrations of Fatima, the “third secret” again made headlines, because, in an interview, a friend of Pope Benedict XVI, Romish theologian Ingo Dollinger, stated that in 2000 Benedict (who was Romish cardinal Ratzinger back then) had not fully published the “third secret”.  This caused Benedict to deny this strongly, claiming he never spoke with Dollinger about Fatima, and that Dollinger’s statements were “pure inventions, absolutely untrue.”  He stated: “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete.”[67]
One who doubted the 2000 explanation was famous Italian journalist and author, Antonio Socci.  In his manuscript entitled The Fourth Secret of Fatima, he maintained that the Vatican had deliberately withheld an important part of the Fatima “revelation” in 2000.  He also stated that the nun Lucia was grilled for hours and hours, over a number of years, by a Vatican cardinal.  Yet this man – Tarcisio Bertone – did not record the conversations; and Socci believed it was because viewers would then be able to see just how intense was the pressure on Lucia, who by then was a very old woman (we are told she died in 2005 at the age of 97).[68]  She would have been a virtual prisoner inside the cloistered convent which she had joined so many years before.
  Again it must be borne in mind that Rome always has a “Plan B” – just in case things don’t quite pan out as it hoped.  And various things which have occurred since 2000 have caused people within the Roman “Church” to question the validity of Ratzinger’s interpretation of the “third secret”. 
  In the words of one of those who was not convinced of Ratzinger’s interpretation, German Roman Catholic historian and author, Michael Hesemann, considered an expert on Fatima, “But already a year later [a year after Ratzinger’s revealing of the “third secret” in 2000] 9/11 happened and we are not so sure anymore that this vision indeed refers only to the past.  The persecution of Christians is more violent than ever, and the ‘Islamic State’ openly declared war against the ‘People of the Cross’ and ‘Rome.’  Russia was converted, but not all mankind, unfortunately, and great parts of the West lost their faith, practice abortion and follow antichristian doctrines like ‘gender.’  Therefore, we can indeed expect new chastisements.  As Pope Benedict XVI stated on his pilgrimage to Fatima in 2010: ‘We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete.’”[69]
  Note from the above statement how the message of Fatima, and its supposed fulfilment, is sufficiently ambiguous that at any time, the Jesuit/Vatican leadership can “re-interpret” aspects of it to fit new circumstances.  We saw this with the “second secret”, and now we see it with the third one.  Was Russia properly consecrated as per “Mary’s” wish?  Maybe; maybe not.  Has Russia been “converted”?  Maybe; maybe not.  Was the “third secret” fulfilled by the persecution of Roman Catholics by Communists in the twentieth century, or is it being fulfilled by Islamic terrorists in the twenty-first?  It may be the one, but then again it may be the other.  As John Paul II was not actually killed when an assassination attempt was made on him, was that aspect of the “vision” fulfilled or not?  Well, possibly, but then again possibly not.  Everything is deliberately sufficiently vague, so as to fit new times and new scenarios as they arise.  Very clever indeed, and very useful to keep the faithful guessing, but hardly a message from heaven!
The Muslim Aspect of Fatima
  We have already looked at the attempted assassination of John Paul II in 1981; and I said that the “Muslim connection” would be examined later on in this article. 
  The apparitions occurred near Fatima, in Portugal.  Think of the name: Fatima!  What is not widely known in the West is that Fatima was the name of Mohammed’s daughter!  She is highly revered within Islam.  Was this just another coincidence?
  We have already asked: was it mere coincidence that the Vatican claimed the three children had their “visions” pertaining to Russia’s “conversion” in the very months preceding the Bolshevik Communist Revolution of 1917?  And the conclusion is obvious: no, it was not mere coincidence.  It was deliberate.
  Now we must ask: was it also mere coincidence that the place where the children supposedly experienced these “visions” was a place called Fatima?  Just as Russian Orthodoxy is Rome’s age-old adversary, so too is Islam.  Rome has desired the conquest of both for centuries.  Is it possible that Fatima was deliberately chosen, the plan being to make use of this symbolism at some time in the future, with regards to Islam?
  There is no way, at this present time, of saying for certain.  Perhaps it really was nothing but coincidence.  But if so, it still remains true that the Vatican has gained much mileage from the fact that the “visions” of “Mary” occurred at Fatima.  Both Mary and Fatima are highly revered within Islam.  Mary is mentioned many times in the Koran, with one chapter in that book being named after her; and Muslims even call her “Our Lady” (just as Romanists do).  Fatima was the daughter of Mohammed himself, and Muslims believe he stated that Fatima has the highest place in heaven after Mary!  There can be no doubt that, at the very least, these things softened Islam’s approach to Roman Catholicism as the twentieth century progressed, and interfaith moves began to occur between these two giant false religions.  Today, an increasing number of Muslims actually make pilgrimages to Marian shrines – particularly Fatima![70]
  Certainly, there have been, and are, prominent Roman Catholics who believe that it was all part of the plan – although of course they attribute it to Mary herself.  For example, the popular and well-known Roman Catholic archbishop and TV personality, Fulton Sheen, believed that Mary chose to be known as “Our Lady of Fatima” as a pledge and sign of hope to Muslims, and as an assurance that they, who respect her so much, will one day accept Christ as well.[71]
  And then is Mehmet Ali Agca, the would-be assassin.  And we have to ask, also: was it mere coincidence that the man chosen to try to kill John Paul II was a Muslim, on the payroll of the Soviets (thus there was the link between Rome’s two great enemies under the pontificate of John Paul II – the Soviet Union and Islam), and that he made the attempt on the anniversary of Fatima?  What was the impact, perhaps on millions of Muslims worldwide, when one of their own tried to kill the pope on the anniversary of “visions” given at a place called Fatima, the name of their prophet’s revered daughter?  And then, how much greater still was the impact on them, when that same pope attributed his survival to Mary – another woman greatly revered in Islam – and even forgave Mehmet Ali Agca, visiting him in his prison cell and holding a long conversation with him in private?
John Paul II speaking privately to Ali Acga in his cell
  Again, with all the unknowns, the imponderables, the uncertainties, this much is certain: Fatima has massively assisted Rome’s global advances, including its inroads into Russia and the Islamic world.
2017: Francis I and the 100th Anniversary of Fatima
  With the 100th anniversary of the Marian apparitions occurring in 2017, Fatima once again became global news.  In addition, the timing was opportune: Russia on the one side, and the United States and western Europe on the other, are facing off today, all over again.  The atmosphere is tense.  A papal visit to Fatima now, emphasising Fatima’s message of “the conversion of Russia”, sends a clear message, just as it has at other important moments in history: the Vatican will be supportive of any and all steps to bring about the collapse of the Russian political-military government.
  Remember Pius XII and how, in alliance with the USA, he used Fatima as a political tool against Russia?  Today the Vatican is targeting Russia all over again.  And Fatima is a very helpful tool in this deadly and global political game.  The 100th anniversary occurred at a most convenient and opportune time, as far as the Papacy was concerned.

And so it was decided, by the Vatican powers-that-be, to dispatch the Jesuit pope, Francis I, to Fatima, to “canonise” two of the three children as “saints” in the Roman Catholic religion: the siblings, Francisco and Jacinta Marto.  The former died at the age of 10, just 18 months after the apparitions, and the latter at the age of 9, just over two years after the apparitions.  Both children were “beatified” (the first step towards “sainthood”) in 2000, by John Paul II.  Their “canonisation” became possible after a “miracle” was attributed to their intercession in heaven with God: it was claimed that a five-year-old Brazilian child was miraculously healed of serious cranial trauma and loss of cerebral tissue.[72]  As with multitudes of other “miracles” claimed by all kinds of people, from Papists to Pentecostals, we are simply required to accept it on the say-so of parents, priests, “pastors”, and occasionally medical practitioners, who, if devout followers of their religion, may easily be bribed, coerced – or hoodwinked into believing the “miracle” themselves.
  Now that they are “canonised”, the two children are to be known in Roman Catholic circles as “Saint Francisco of Fatima” and “Saint Jacinta of Fatima”.  And Roman Catholics may pray to them, ask for their intercession with God, etc.!
  The third “seer”, their cousin Lucia dos Santos, died (so we are told) at the age of 97 in 2005.  She could not be “canonised” with the other two because not enough time had elapsed since her death for the Vatican to study and complete her “beatification” and “canonisation” cause.  But it is only a matter of time before she, too, will be “beatified” and then “canonised”, becoming “Saint Lucia of Fatima”.
  Rome’s leaders made sure they could get maximum mileage out of the 100th anniversary.  Here is what was said in a Roman Catholic newspaper (comments in brackets are my own):[73]
 “The message of Fatima is as relevant and significant today as it was 100 years ago.  For even though the world has witnessed the demise of the Soviet Union [The demise of the Soviet Union did not mean the demise of Communism, however], we find ourselves faced with many of the same evils as faced the world in 1917.  We only have to look around us to see how the world is engulfed in sin.  An unparalleled explosion of sexual immorality, contraception, abortion, divorce, cultism, corruption, mindless bloodletting across the world and a host of other crimes abound today because too few people are fulfilling Our Lady’s request at Fatima [Really? Is this the cause?  The Bible says otherwise: the cause of all these sins is the depravity in the hearts of all men, and the only solution is for men to turn in repentance to Christ – not to fulfil “Mary’s” Fatima request!  What a satanic lie, a false “gospel” indeed].  We should renew our dedication to the Holy Rosary and pray it at every opportunity [No, this is nothing but “vain repetition” (Matt. 6:7,8), a prayer to a demon].  Prayer and penance can bring our sinful world back to God [Again, no: penance is the soul-damning Papist counterfeit of true repentance; and men must repent of their sins, not “do penance” for them].”
  And so it is that multiplied millions of faithful Roman Catholics throughout the world are, once again, being mobilised, via the Fatima cult, to oppose Russia by any and all means, so as to bring about the expansion of Vatican interests in that land, and its eventual conquest by Rome.
The Religious Aspect of Fatima: Francis I a Devout Worshipper of Mary
  Francis I, the pope of Rome, is (like every devoted Jesuit) a worshipper of Mary, the Roman Catholic goddess.  This fact alone, even if no others were known, proves that neither he, nor any Roman Catholic, is a true Christian.
  On 10 May 2017, Francis said: “I will go to Fatima on pilgrimage, to entrust to the Virgin the temporal and eternal destinies of humanity.”[74]  Is this man a Christian?  Absolutely not.  The temporal and eternal destinies of mankind are in the hands of the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – not in the hands of a weak and fallible human being.  And what’s more, Mary ceased being a virgin even while on earth, for she and her husband, Joseph, had other children after Jesus was born (Matt. 13:55,56).
  On 11 May 2016, Francis said that the “Mary” of Fatima “invites us once again to turn to prayer, penance, and conversion.  She asks us to never offend God again.  She forewarns all humanity about the necessity of abandoning oneself to God, the source of love and mercy.  Following the example of St John Paul II, a great devotee of Our Lady of Fatima, let us listen attentively to the Mother of God and ask for peace for the world.”[75]  Mary, Mary, Mary – but not a word about Christ!  The true deity of Romanists is Mary, not Christ.  They are commanded to listen to her, not Christ, by their own pope in these words of his.  And in addition, the Mary of Scripture was the mother of our Lord’s humanity, but she was never the “Mother of God”.  God has no mother!
  On 12 May, during his greeting at the “Chapel of the Apparitions”, Francis said, blasphemously (quoting Pope Paul VI): “if we want to be Christian, we must be Marian.”[76]  And there are blind “Protestants” who think the Roman pope is a true Christian!  “If we want to be Christian,” this wicked man says, “we must be Marian.”  Was Peter Marian?  Was Paul Marian?  Were any of the apostles, or any of the early Christians, Marian?  No!  But let us go even further: Mary herself was not Marian!  By which I mean, Mary did not point to herself as Saviour, nor in any way exalt herself to the high position of goddess which the Roman Catholic “Mary” holds!  She herself said, by divine inspiration, “My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour” (Lk. 1:46,47).  If Mary needed a Saviour, if she trusted in the Lord God to save her, then was she “Marian”?  Did she ever once, at any time, set herself up as a saviour?  Never!  “Whatever he (Christ) saith unto you, do it” (Jn. 2:5), is how she spoke.
  In his prayer at this “Chapel of the Apparitions” at Fatima, Francis continuously exalted Mary, praying to her, adoring her, attributing great names and powers to her:[77] “Hail, Holy Queen, Blessed Virgin of Fatima, Lady of Immaculate Heart, our refuge and our way to God!”  “Hail, Mother of Mercy, Lady robed in white!”  “Hail, life and sweetness, Hail, our hope, O Pilgrim Virgin, O Universal Queen!  In the depths of your being, in your Immaculate Heart, you keep the joys of men and women as they journey to the Heavenly Homeland…. With your virginal smile, enliven the joy of Christ’s Church.  With your gaze of sweetness, strengthen the hope of God’s children.  With your hands lifted in prayer to the Lord, draw all people together into one human family.”  “Show us the strength of your protective mantle.  In your Immaculate Heart, be the refuge of sinners and the way that leads to God.”   It is easy to see that in the mind of the Jesuit pope, Mary is a goddess, with divine powers, deserving worship.  As these words of his show plainly, he looks to Mary, not Christ, to lead him to God!
  Oh, what a world of tragedy is contained within the following words of Francis!  “My one hope of glory, Lord, is this: that your Mother will take me in her arms, shelter me beneath her mantle, and set me close to your heart.”  Imagine the awful spiritual state of one whose only hope of glory is in Mary!  He has no hope of being enfolded in the arms of Jesus the only and true Shepherd: “He [Jesus] shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young” (Isa. 40:11).  He desires shelter beneath Mary’s mantle, but the psalmist knew better than to seek shelter beneath any but the Lord: “For thou [God] hast been a shelter for me” (Psa. 61:3).  Christ alone is the Man, yea that very God-Man, who “shall be as an hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land” (Isa. 32:2). 
  This benighted man, considered by millions upon millions of people to be the greatest Christian on earth, is in truth the Man of Sin and Son of Perdition (2 Thess. 2:3), the Antichrist (1 Jn. 2:18), the greatest  deceiver the world has ever known.

On 13 May, in his homily at the “canonisation” of the two children, Francis added blasphemy to blasphemy, exalting Mary at every opportunity.  After quoting Rev. 12:1 (which is not in any sense a prophecy of Mary!) and Jn. 19:27 (where Jesus entrusted the care of His mother to his disciple John), Francis said: “We have a Mother!”[78]  Well, yes, we certainly do, all of us, or we wouldn’t be alive; but our mother is not Mary the mother of the Lord!  She was the mother of Jesus as Man, and of four other sons and an unknown number of daughters; but she was the mother of no others.
  Of course, Francis was meaning that the Roman Catholic “Mary” is the mother of all Roman Catholics.  But this false teaching has no basis at all in God’s Word.  It is a lie of the devil.
  After saying that the children saw Mary, Francis then said: “We will have all eternity for [seeing her], provided, of course, that we go to heaven.”  Note the emphasis, solely, on seeing Mary.  How different from John the apostle, who wrote: “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is” (1 Jn. 3:2).  And John wrote that in heaven, believers “shall see his [Christ’s] face” (Rev. 22:4).  As for the uncertainty of going to heaven, Francis has no assurance of salvation and nor do his followers – nor can they have, for they are unregenerate and unconverted.
  Francis went on: “We need but take refuge under the protection of the Virgin Mary and to ask her, as the Salve Regina teaches: ‘show unto us… Jesus.’”  But the Word of God points to the LORD, not to a mere creature like Mary, and says the very opposite of the Roman pope: “Be merciful unto me, O God, be merciful unto me: for my soul trusteth in thee: yea, in the shadow of thy wings will I make my refuge” (Psa. 57:1); “He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty” (Psa. 91:1).  As for asking to be shown Jesus, this is what some men asked Philip to do for them (Jn. 12:21); and certainly seeking sinners may go to a true Christian and ask him to reveal the Lord Jesus to them in the Gospel.  But it is blasphemous to pray to Mary to be shown Jesus!  He reveals Himself to all His elect, in due time (Acts 9:3-8).  He needs no help from her.
  Yet Francis went on: “Dear pilgrims, we have a Mother.  Clinging to her like children, we live in the hope that rests on Jesus.”  This sentence does not even make sense.  If Papists cling to Mary, how possibly do they live in the hope that rests on Jesus?  But the Bible says Christians are, “with purpose of heart”, to “cleave unto the Lord” (Acts 11:23) – not Mary. 
  Again, Francis’s Christ-denying words: “I could not fail to come here to venerate the Virgin Mary and to entrust to her all her sons and daughters. Under her mantle they are not lost”.  Yet true Christians are the sons and daughters of the Most High God – not Mary.  And a true Christian would, in prayer, entrust Christians only to Christ, and no other.
  Lastly: “With Mary’s protection, may we be for our world sentinels of the dawn, contemplating the true face of Jesus the Saviour”.  Always, this man (like all his predecessors before him) speaks only of Jesus as one to be approached through Mary, or with Mary’s help, or under her protection.
  Over and over again, the Roman Antichrist points men and women to a counterfeit saviour, a mere creature, instead of to Christ the only Saviour of sinners!
The Religious Aspect of Fatima: How Roman Catholics Are to Celebrate the 100th Anniversary
   With the anniversary in 2017, Roman Catholics were called upon to “express [their] praise and gratitude to the Most Holy Trinity for the love poured out, through Mary, on a humanity in need of being reconciled with God and longing to get up from the abyss.”[79]
  Francis I granted a plenary indulgence (or so his followers believe) for the entire year of the centenary of the apparitions.  Indulgences are nothing but a part of Rome’s satanic, lying doctrine of salvation by one’s own works.  The reader may learn more about indulgences in my article, Limited Time Offer on Indulgences: Hurry Now Before “Treasury of Merits” Slams Shut Again.[80] 
  Big-Hearted Arthur (i.e. Francis) granted a plenary indulgence to the faithful Papists who visit the sanctuary of Fatima on pilgrimage and devotedly participate in some celebration or prayer in honour of “Mary”, pray the “Our Father”, recite the Creed, and invoke “Our Lady of Fatima”. 
  He also granted a plenary indulgence to the faithful who visit with devotion an image (an idol – let’s call it what it truly is) of “Our Lady of Fatima”, solemnly displayed to public veneration (to worship), on the anniversary days of the apparitions, and who devotedly participate there in some celebration or prayer in honour of “Mary”, pray the “Our Father”, the Creed, and invoke “Our Lady of Fatima”.
  And he granted a plenary indulgence to the faithful who, due to age, illness or another serious cause, are hindered from moving, if they have repented of all their sins and with the firm intention to carry out, as soon as they can, the three conditions to earn a plenary indulgence (as given above), in front of a small image (idol) of “Our Lady of Fatima”, on the days of the apparitions, joining the celebrations spiritually, offering with confidence to God, through “Mary”, their prayers and pains, or the sacrifices of their own life.
  Nothing like a plenary indulgence for one’s sins to get “the faithful” to celebrate Fatima!  And yet no one ever asks: why does the pope only grant this indulgence at such a time as this?  If he really has the power to grant full forgiveness of sin, why does he not grant it all the time?
  But all the above is nothing but salvation attempted by one’s own works – and on this the Scriptures are crystal clear: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8,9).  Rome’s “gospel” of salvation by one’s own efforts is a lying false “gospel” that damns millions to hell and saves no one!


Conclusion
  And so the “Lying Lady of Fatima” has entered into the global political and religious atmosphere of the twenty-first century, and is all set to play a role as large as, or perhaps larger than, that which “she” played in the political and religious atmosphere of the twentieth century.  But when we reflect on the pivotal role which Fatima’s “Lady” played in the wars and sufferings of millions of men and women in the twentieth century, then we can only view, with deep concern and foreboding, the role which “she” may yet play in the wars and sufferings of the time yet to come, before the Lord Jesus Christ returns.  Indeed, understanding these things, we must view this “Lady” as nothing but a very important facet, and in truth a reflection, of that Woman, that Great Whore, that false religious system masquerading as a “church”, which reigns from Rome, the city on seven hills (Rev. 17 and 18).  That Harlot is no true lady, and this expression of her evil, which radiated out into the world from Fatima, is no true lady either.  That which Papists call “Our Lady of Fatima” was both a demonic manifestation to three children for the purpose of deceiving millions and leading them to hell, and a very useful political and religious tool in the hands of Jesuits and other priests of Rome, who hijacked the original demonic apparitions and then proceeded to put words in “her” mouth for the purpose of promoting their global agenda of expanding Vatican control over all the nations of the earth.
June 2017
Shaun Willcock is a minister, author and researcher.  He runs Bible Based Ministries.  For other articles (which may be downloaded and printed), as well as details about his books, audio messages, pamphlets, etc., please visit the Bible Based Ministries website; or write to the address below.  If you would like to be on Bible Based Ministries’ email list, to receive all future articles, please send your details.
This article may be copied for free distribution if it is copied in full
WORLDWIDE CONTACT FOR BIBLE BASED MINISTRIES:
Contending for the Faith Ministries
695 Kentons Run Ave
Henderson, NV 89052
United States of America
BBMOrders@aol.com
ENDNOTES:

[1]. Vietnam: Why Did We Go? by Avro Manhattan, pgs. 27-28. Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1987.
[2]. Rome Reports, article: “What Are the 3 Secrets of Fatima?”  May 3, 2017. www.romereports.com.
[3]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pgs. 11-12. Originally published in 1950.  Reprinted in 1990 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., Rockford, Illinois.  Nihil Obstat: Fintan G. Walker, Censor Librorum.  Imprimatur: Paul C. Schulte, Romish archbishop of Indianapolis, January 15, 1950.
[4]. The Bible Based Ministries Magazine, February-June 2001, No. 93.  Article: “Rome Reveals the Third ‘Secret’ of Fatima.”  The magazine is no longer published, but back copies are available.  Contact info@biblebasedministries.co.uk.
[5]. Fatima from the Beginning, by John de Marchi, pg. 47.  Distributed by The Ravensgate Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, with ecclesiastical approval, second edition 1980.
[6]. The Prophecies of Daniel, by Shaun Willcock, pgs. 225-226. Bible Based Ministries, 2016.  Available from: www.biblebasedministries.co.uk.
[7]. Fatima from the Beginning, pgs. 47-50.
[8]. Fatima from the Beginning, pg. 135.
[9]. The Vatican’s Holocaust, by Avro Manhattan, pg. 183.  Ozark Books, Springfield, Missouri, USA, 1988.
[10]. Fatima from the Beginning, pg. 250.
[11]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 8.
[12]. Fatima from the Beginning, pg. 137.
[13]. Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, by Charles Mackay, pgs. 260-265. Wordsworth Editions Ltd., Ware, Hertfordshire, 1995.
[14]. See “Holy War” against South Africa, by Shaun Willcock, pg. 69ff.  Bible Based Ministries, 2011.  Available from: www.biblebasedministries.co.uk.
[15]. Fatima: Past or Future? by Antonio A. Borellia, pg. 48.  Tradition, Family, Property, Glasgow, United Kingdom, second printing 2003.
[16]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 48.
[17]. Fatima from the Beginning, pg. 149.
[18]. Fatima from the Beginning, pg. 154
[19]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 5.
[20]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 11; and Fatima: Past or Future? pgs. 26,29.
[21]. Fatima from the Beginning, pgs. 247-248.
[22]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 11.
[23]Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 12.
[24]. See, for example, The Secret History of the Jesuits (Edmond Paris, Chick Publications, Chino, California, translated from the French 1975), and The Vatican against Europe (Edmond Paris, the Wickliffe Press, London, reprinted 1988).
[25]Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 105.
[26]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 109-110.
[27]. Vietnam: Why Did We Go? pg. 29.
[28]. Fatima from the Beginning, pgs. 228-234.
[29]. Murder in the Vatican, by Avro Manhattan, pg. 40.  Ozark Books, Springfield, Missouri, 1985.
[30]. Vietnam: Why Did We Go? pg. 29.
[31]Vietnam: Why Did We Go? pg. 29.
[32]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 110.
[33]. See, for example, The Secret History of the Jesuits and The Vatican against Europe.
[34]. Vietnam: Why Did We Go? pg. 30.
[35]. Vietnam: Why Did We Go? pg. 38.
[36]. The account is found in the Osservatore Romano, the Vatican (Jesuit) newspaper; and also World Press, October 14, 15, 16, 1951.
[37]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 13.
[38]Vietnam: Why Did We Go? pgs. 48-49.
[39]Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 111.
[40]. Fatima: Past or Future? pgs. 111-112.
[41]. See, for example, the following traditionalist Roman Catholic websites: www.traditioninaction.org, www.novusordowatch.org, www.fatimacrusader.com, etc.
[42]. The Moynihan Letters, article: “Fatima at 100", 10 May 2017.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com.
[43]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pgs. 13-14.
[44]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 56.
[45]. The Moynihan Letters, 10 May 2017.
[46]. The Bible Based Ministries Magazine, February-June 2001, No. 93.
[47]. Fatima: Past or Future? pgs. 29,31.
[48]. Fatima: Past or Future? pgs. 97-98.
[49]. Murder in the Vatican, pg. 40.
[50]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 98.
[51]. Vietnam: Why Did We Go? pgs. 25-27.
[52]. Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 12.
[53]. Murder in the Vatican, pgs. 40-41.
[54]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 98.
[55]Our Lady of Fatima’s Peace Plan from Heaven, pg. 12; and Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 98.
[56]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 99.
[57]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 99.
[58]. The Southern Cross, July 9, 2000.
[59]. Fatima: Past or Future? pgs. 61-62.
[60]. Fatima: Past or Future? pg. 62.
[61]. See The Vatican Moscow Washington Alliance, by Avro Manhattan.  Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1986.
[62]. The Vatican Moscow Washington Alliance, pg. 62.
[63]. As documented in various historical works, including The Vatican against Europe and The Secret History of the Jesuits, by Edmond Paris.
[64]. The Vatican Moscow Washington Alliance, among many others.
[65]Fatima: Past or Future? pgs. 62-63.
[66]. NewsWithViews.com, article: “Exo-Vaticana”, Part 13, by Thomas R. Horn, March 12, 2013.  Although we certainly do not support Horn’s view of prophecy, nor of much else he writes, he references the details we have given here of those who believed the “third secret” was something other than what Ratzinger claimed in 2000.  It is solely for these references that we mention his article here.
[67]. Rome Reports, article: “Benedict XVI Insists: The Secret of Fatima Has Already Been Published,” May 23, 2016. www.romereports.com.
[68]. NewsWithViews.com, article: “Exo-Vaticana”, Part 13, by Thomas R. Horn, March 12, 2013.  Again, although we certainly do not support Horn’s view of prophecy, nor of much else he writes, he references the details we have given here of those who believed the “third secret” was something other than what Ratzinger claimed in 2000.  It is solely for these references that we mention his article here.
[69]. The Moynihan Letters, 10 May 2017.
[70]. Queen of Rome, Queen of Islam, Queen of All, by Jim Tetlow, Roger Oakland, and Brad Myers, pg. 36.  Eternal Productions, Fairport, New York, 2006.
[71]. Queen of Rome, Queen of Islam, Queen of All, pg. 36.
[72]. Zenit.org, article: “Brazil: Inexplicable Cure of Little Lucas (from Fatima),” May 13, 2017.
[73]. The Southern Cross, article: “Benefits of Celebrating Fatima Centenary,” May 3 to 9, 2017.
[74]. The Moynihan Letters, 10 May 2017.
[75]The Southern Cross, May 3 to 9, 2017.
[76]. Zenit.org, article: “‘Pilgrims with Mary… But Which Mary?’ Pope Francis Asks in Fatima,” May 13, 2017.
[77]. Rome Reports, article: “Pope Francis’ Prayer on the Chapel of Apparitions,” May 12, 2017. www.romereports.com.
[78]. Rome Reports, article: “Pope Francis’ Homily at the Canonization Ceremony of Jacinta and Francisco Marto,” May 13, 2017. www.romereports.com.
[79]. The Southern Cross, May 3 to 9, 2017.
[80]. Limited Time Offer on Indulgences: Hurry Now Before “Treasury of Merits” Slams Shut Again, by Shaun Willcock.  Bible Based Ministries, January 2013.  Available on our website: www.biblebasedministries.co.uk.  See: http://www.biblebasedministries.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/Limited-Time-Offer-on-Indulgences.pdf