1. Fatima Christmas

    image
  2. Moscow Conference

    image
  3. Rome 2017

    Rome 2017
  4. Fatima Portugal

    Fatima Portugal 2017
  5. Ask Father

    image

Fatima - 75th Anniversary

"Nobody Pays Attention To Her Message"

by Brother François de Marie des Anges

This article published in August-September English issue of the CRC Magazine from France is by Brother François de Marie des Anges. It gives much background material for understanding the relentless propaganda war that has been waged against the Full Fatima Message especially since just before we held our Fatima Peace Conference in October 1992 for the Bishops. The war continues to this day.

"Father," said Lucy to Father Augustine Fuentes on December 26, 1957, "the Most Blessed Virgin is very sad for nobody pays attention to Her message, neither the good nor the bad." This warning from Our Lady's messenger is still topical today in 1992 when we are celebrating the 75th anniversary of the apparitions of Fatima. To be convinced of this it is sufficient to read the writing of Abbé Laurentin, or the latest testimony of Abbé Caillon or the most recent declaration of the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, Monsignor do Amaral, on the Third Secret: "I know that this Secret exists and I have never heard it said that it has yet been revealed. I tell everybody not to be concerned with it. What we know of the message, and if we put it into practice, is enough for men to come back to the paths of temporal and eternal salvation."1

Abbé Laurentin Questions the Rector of 
the Fatima Sanctuary

Abbé Laurentin follows very closely all our works and controversies. In February 1990 when our Contre-Réforme Catholique bulletin announced that in the following month we would be publishing an article entitled "The Letter from Sister Lucy is a hoax", he intervened with Abbé Caillon, President of the Fatima World Apostolate, to get him to repudiate it: "But yes or no," he wrote to him, "would the letter from Lucy saying the consecration has been done (as confirmed by the Sanctuary authorities) be a hoax? What have you to say on this key point?"2 More recently, having learned of the publication in the Diario do Coimbra of M. Joao Alvares' accusations concerning Lucy's apocryphal letters, Abbé Laurentin got on the telephone to Monsignor Luciano Guerra, the Rector of the Fatima Sanctuary, and asked him the question that springs to the lips of any one who has reflected at all on this controversy. Having received the answer, he then transmitted it to the editor of L'Homme Nouveau, who published it in an article entitled "Russia consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary" dated May 4.

Before analyzing his conversation with Monsignor Guerra, we need to remark that our eminent mariologist, Vatican II expert and resolute opponent of the definition of Mary Mediatrix of all graces, still has his "reservations" — to use his own expression! — about the authentic message of Our Lady. He fails to recognize the divine Will in the oracle that resounded in the sky at Cova da Iria in 1917, "God wishes to establish devotion to My Immaculate Heart", together with the whole divine plan for establishing the universal reign of this Immaculate Heart.

If we are to believe Laurentin, the request for the consecration of Russia was not clearly formulated by Sister Lucy. In order to excuse the Popes, to justify their attitude and their inertia with regard to this request, he accuses Sister Lucy and Our Lady: "It is understandable that the exegesis of these texts should have left the Popes embarrassed." But, we can quite plainly say that his demonstration is worthless, and for two reasons:

On the one hand, our journalist piles up errors, inexactitudes and howlers to a point where the reader, unsure of the chronology of the Fatima events, is completely disorientated. Among the eight errors picked out of his short article, we draw attention to this: "On August 31, 1941, Laurentin writes, the Virgin said to Sister Lucy: 'I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart and for reparatory Communion of the First Saturdays. If My request is heeded [according to the testimony of the Seer, Our Lady did not say "My request", but "My requests"] Russia will be converted and there will be peace.'" On reading, August 31, 1941, the Virgin said [...], your eyes were probably opened. In fact, these words of Our Lady were not pronounced on August 31, 1941, the date when Sister Lucy wrote her Third Memoir, but on July 13, 1917, the day when the Great Secret was revealed to the three little shepherds. Having apparently abandoned his chronological method, Abbé Laurentin obscures what is perfectly clear: Our Lady fulfilled Her promise of July 13, 1917 when She came to ask for the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart at Tuy on June 13, 1929.

On the other hand, Laurentin has little regard for the scientific work of Father Joaquin Alonso, who in 1966 was commissioned by the Bishop of Leiria, Monsignor Venancio, to establish the complete history of the apparitions and Message of Fatima. If the official expert was unable to publish before his death in 1981 his monumental work "Fatima, texts and critical studies", completed however in 1974, at least he was able to make known the essential and his conclusions in various articles and pamphlets. Now, Laurentin refers to another author, Father Dominiano Fernandez, who takes precisely the opposite view to that of Father Alonso's conclusions by imposing on his readers the thesis developed by Father Dhanis against Fatima. Father Dhanis' thesis is modernist, unjustifiable and scandalous in the light of the faith and quite inconceivable from a critical historical point of view. In an article published in 1986, Fernandez wrote: "We can rely on the sincerity and faithfulness of Sister Lucy, but for my part there is not the slightest doubt that historical circumstances, posterior to the Fatima events, have influenced the writing of this message, written twelve or twenty years later. Gradually, this message began to grow and to develop in the understanding and consciousness of Sister Lucy. It is normal, for the same thing happened with the Gospel accounts, which were influenced by the post pascal faith of the Christian community and by the historical conditions of those being addressed."3

Following in the wake of Fernandez, Laurentin mentions a testimony of Father Aparicio, who gave it to be understood that Sister Lucy formulated the request for the consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1926. He is plainly unaware that Father Alonso learnedly criticized this late declaration — of 1947! — of Father Aparicio's by showing how unconvincing it was.4

But to come back to the thinking of Sister Lucy on the Act of Offering of March 25, 1984, Laurentin's title reads: "Lucy finally agrees". Then he asks himself the question: "But why did she not give the Pope a satisfecit on the day after the feast of the Annunciation 1984? Why did she wait five years?" And he replies: "Briefly, the delay can be explained as follows: after the consecration of Pius XII and of the others, Lucy was waiting for the fulfillment of Our Lady's promise, in which She has absolute confidence. But the fulfillment did not come [...]. When in 1989, the persecution in the USSR came to an end, Lucy, on the lookout for signs, recognized this as the fulfillment of the promise." It has to be said that Laurentin is deceiving us. For after the act of consecration of October 31, 1942, Sister Lucy confided to her spiritual director: "The conversion of Russia is not for now5", and the seer in fact remarked that "the conversion of Russia will be for later" because "the act that His Holiness deigned to make was incomplete6. Secondly, in 1984, as soon as she learned of the text of the act of offering of the world, she judged it as failing to correspond with Our Lady's request. Three days before March 25, 1984, she declared to her old friend, Miss Eugenia Pestana: "This consecration cannot have a definitive character. Russia does not appear clearly to be the sole object of the consecration."7

Echoing the "official propaganda", Laurentin stated that Lucy finally recognized the "validity" of the consecration of March 25, 1984 "in this letter of August 29, 1989, addressed to Maria de Belem" and "on November 21 of the same year, she confirmed her judgment to another correspondent (who has remained anonymous)." These letters appeared, it will be remembered, in the conditioning campaign conducted in the United States in the autumn of 1989 by Father Fox.

Abbé Laurentin knows that their authenticity has been contested: "Fanatics, he writes, are eager to prove that these texts are apocryphal or forced from the hand of Sister Lucy. But that is all part of a disordered dialectic whereby these polemicists 'prove' that the Pope is heretical and off course." Our dialectic is disordered, so it should be easy for him to refute our criticisms of these letters. But Abbé Laurentin is not going to risk that and so he falls back on the argument from authority: "Father Guerra, the Rector of Fatima, whom I have just telephoned in order to check these testimonies, confirms that he too has spoken with Sister Lucy. He has no doubt about her position."

Monsignor Guerra is not eager to defend the authenticity of these letters, but he advances a new argument: He has spoken about the matter personally with the seer. On reflection, his answer does not impress. Given the pressure he has been under, we cannot rely on his word over this precise point.8Furthermore, until these last few months, he stated that he had never spoken with Sister Lucy about the message of Fatima. On June 27, 1991, he in fact wrote: "Sister Lucy has never talked to me about the apparitions or their content."9 And when he was asked last May by a Portuguese correspondent whether he had met Sister Lucy in the parlor at Coimbra during the course of this past year, he evaded the question as though he had not understood!

Paul VI Center in Fatima, at noon, October 12, 1992. At the end of the closing session of the first International Pastoral Conference in Fatima, Brother François (author of this article) confronts Monsignor Luciano Guerra. "Monsignor Rector, can you swear on the Gospel that you have not written the apocryphal letters of Sister Lucy?" "No, I do not want to. I cannot do it now in these conditions . . ."—"Internal criticism of these letters shows that they are fake." "I will not discuss with you. You have no heart ... you have no heart."

Laurentin must have noticed that Monsignor Guerra gave neither the date nor the circumstances of his conversation with the seer, and so he put the right question: "But why don't you ask Sister Lucy to publish confirmation of this officially?" In fact, why had not the Fatima authorities ever published a declaration by the seer about this act of offering of 1984, attested to by several witnesses? Monsignor Guerra replied: "Lucy does not think it will serve any purpose to enter into controversy." Is that what Lucy thinks ... or rather what Monsignor Guerra thinks? We can easily understand why the Rector of Fatima should not want to enter into this controversy. He knows that he would be caught out in this affair of the apocryphal letters in which he is directly involved.8 He admitted as much, in veiled words: "It is not good to mix Sister Lucy up with this controversy." But why, unless because Our Lady's Messenger did not yield to pressure from the Church's authorities?

These words of the Rector of Fatima, who is very well informed about the Pope's meeting with Sister Lucy on May 13, 1991, confirms that we were right in the analyses and conclusions we had formulated after this interview: "John Paul II's absolute silence after this meeting can only be explained if Sister Lucy and the Pope could not agree. This silence tells us about Sister Lucy's convictions. If at the time of this meeting Sister Lucy had told the Pope that the act of offering of 1984 had complied with Our Lady's request and that Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika was its supernatural fruit, John Paul II would have made known these words of Heaven's messenger."

Furthermore, we said, it can be supposed that during this interview "Sister Lucy forcefully stood out against the doings of the Fatima authorities and implored the Holy Father to use his authority to put a stop to having her testimony used abusively. Her sixty-five years of religious life and the many divine communications with which she has been favored can only have given her a greater taste and esteem for the virtue and wisdom of her mother, Maria Rosa, who "had never tolerated a lie from her children."

From what we know of Our Lady's messenger, we think she said to the Pope: "I cannot testify that the Consecration of Russia has been done as Our Lady wishes, since this consecration was not thus done." And the seer certainly explained how much she disapproved of the conduct of Bishop do Amaral and how absolutely opposed she was to his using her signature."10

And now for the final word of the Rector reported by Laurentin. It is absolutely amazing: "Many things can be clearly said after Lucy's death." How are we to interpret such a statement unless it means that Monsignor Guerra is awaiting the seer's death to be free to obscure definitively the requests of Our Lady, which "importune" the Holy Father, especially this request for the Consecration of Russia and of Russia alone?

For our part, we firmly hope to see Heaven's Messenger remain here below until the day when the wonderful events announced in the conclusion to the Secret are fulfilled. Did Our Lady not say to Sister Lucy on June 13, 1917: "Jesus wishes to make use of you to make Me known and loved. He wants to establish in the world devotion to My Immaculate Heart." Then, trusting in the designs of Providence, Abbé de Nantes wrote in the Contre-Réforme Catholique last May: "The eldest of the Fatima seers is still alive in her Carmel at Coimbra to testify to the apparitions, to repeat the message and doubtless to prevent it being stifled or falsified."11

The Basilica of Our Lady of Fatima, all lit up for the vigil Mass of October 12, 1992. The presence of over 1,000 bishops, most of whom were brought there by The Fatima Crusader Peace Conference, added greatly to the solemnity of this 75th Anniversary celebration.

International Congress: "Fatima and Peace"

Between May 8 and 12, an international congress was held at Fatima on the theme of "Fatima and peace". On his return to France, on May 15, one of the participants, who accompanied Abbé Caillon, gave us his impressions:

"Firstly, Our Lady was constantly ignored and ridiculed; the reparatory devotion was never mentioned, still less proposed as the only salutary course for obtaining the gift of peace.

       "Secondly, the enemy succeeded in penetrating the Sanctuary in the person of a Professor Robert Muller, Chancellor of the United Nations University for Peace, who made himself the star of the Congress with a boldness, determination and a nerve that was spine chilling. In summing up, he said: 'Ecumenism is outmoded now. We must now move towards universal religiosity and spirituality under the aegis of one-world government, which will soon see the light of day, and under the impetus of Pope John Paul II, who would be honored if he gave the Church this program.'"

The question of the Consecration of Russia and of the hierarchy's response to this request was touched on by only one of those present, Monsignor José da Cruz Policarpo, formerly auxiliary Bishop of Lisbon and now Rector of the Portuguese Catholic University. This man of the Left, known for his progressivist positions, is not unaware of the controversy that has developed over these last few years:

"Whilst some have seriously and humbly tried to understand the true meaning of the message, others, inclined to a simplistic reading of history, and with a taste for myth and the pseudo-eschatological, have accused the popes and the bishops of being responsible for the world's calamities through failing to accomplish the request of Our Lady of Fatima."

Monsignor José da Cruz Policarpo notes that "Russia is present as a backcloth in the consecrations of John Paul II, but not explicitly named in them". Then, he puts the question: "But is Our Lady concerned with the detail of the letter, or isn't this rather the concern of men who have not yet perceived the mystery of the Church? It has to be recognized that there is a gradual approach in the conditions requested by Our Lady, but they have always been applied in accordance with the Church's pastoral discernment." In short, he does not actually indicate whether, yes or no, the consecration has been done as the Blessed Virgin Mary wishes. He admits that "history may not yet have reached the culminating point desired by Our Lady". And he goes on to explain that perhaps one day a new act of consecration may be made "in union with the Russian bishops".

It is noteworthy that Monsignor José da Cruz Policarpo quoted Lucy's judgment on the consecration of October 31, 1942, but made no allusion to the seer's thinking about the act of March 25, 1984. Such an oversight cannot be unintentional, and to us it seems very revealing of Lucy's convictions.

On May 12, the last day of the Congress, Tatjana Goritscheva, a refugee from the Gulag and founder of a Russian movement called "Maria", gave her testimony. The glimpse she affords of Russia's future is not very reassuring. Certainly, there is a renewal of spiritual life to be observed at present, but it could be no more than a flash in the pan. And she added that "the old devil, dialectical materialism, has still not gone, whilst the new devil, practical materialism, has already arrived"!

The honor of giving the final address to this Congress fell to Cardinal Casaroli. The artisan of Ostpolitik gave no proof of unrestrained optimism:

"The Church (and here I am thinking in particular of the Holy See) who seemed to pay so much attention to the great questions of disarmament and tensions between the two blocs, now seems powerless before the mosaic of conflicts breaking out in the world. The fact that the highest international authorities prove to be equally powerless affords us no consolation." We have a toll of collapse! But the former Secretary of State is not going to abjure his faith in Vatican II's Masonic humanism for all that.

Abbé Caillon Faltered

Abbé Caillon remembered only one thing from this Congress: a sensational piece of information given him by his Portuguese friend, Father Messias Coelho, on May 12th in the course of a brief conversation between two conferences. And on July 9th last, he published it in the columns of La Croix under the heading: "The 75th anniversary of the apparitions of Fatima, has the consecration of Russia taken place?"

Without further ado, Abbé Caillon announces: "In the corridors of the Congress, I learned a new but hidden piece of information that many would like to know. On Saturday, March 21 of this year, a delegation went to the Carmel of Coimbra to consult with Sister Lucy. A rarity par excellence." This delegation comprised four people: the Apostolic Delegate to Portugal, his secretary, Doctor Francisco de Lacerda and Father Messias Coelho. Father Coelho, it will be remembered, is a long-standing Portuguese Fatimist who, until 1988, maintained with lucid explanations that the act of offering made on March 25, 1984, had not satisfied Our Lady's request. Then in 1989, after receiving instructions from the Vatican12 warning him that the Holy Father did not wish to be importuned with the request for the Consecration of Russia, he radically changed his position and placed his pen at the service of Father Fox's mendacious propaganda.

"The event was triggered off, writes Abbé Caillon, by a certain Father Gruner, who runs a review on Fatima in North America and who maintains that the Consecration of Russia has not been made. It was necessary, therefore, to go to the source.

"And so, in the afternoon of Saturday, March 21, 1992, the interview with Sister Lucy lasted one and a half hours. Sister Lucy declared that the Consecration of Russia has been made." Abbé Caillon continues, quoting only in part from the conversation of his Portuguese friend and adding commentaries of his own. It will therefore be useful to hear a witness to this conversation give an exact report of Messias Coelho's words:

"In the hubbub of the Congress, this Portuguese priest said to Abbé Caillon: 'This interview took place on the initiative of Doctor Lacerda, who was irritated with Father Gruner's campaigns. Lucy said that the consecration has been made, that she has always said so, that she had never asked anything concerning Russia, but only concerning the union of the bishops. And since this union was imperfect, the fruits will not be as good as might have been imagined.' I then immediately asked Father Coelho this question: 'Are you going to publish this information?' Without enthusiasm, he replied: 'Yes, maybe, but not immediately. We'll see ...' He added that any way there were things that Lucy had said which he could not report because the Nuncio had forbidden him. Then we separated and did not see each other again despite our efforts."

After this encounter, Abbé Caillon did not attempt to verify the truth of what Father Messias Coelho had said by approaching Doctor Lacerda, or the Nuncio and his secretary. When reporting Sister Lucy's declarations, Abbé Caillon always used to take care to inform himself from different sources beforehand. He used to question all the witnesses. This time he did not do so, and he does not even plan to do so. Abbé Caillon has therefore broken with his usual practice, on which his reputation as a serious and well-informed investigator was based.

As though he had entirely lost his critical spirit, Abbé Caillon immediately gave full credit to the words of his Portuguese friend. Did he not, therefore, notice that the words attributed to Lucy were problematic to say the least? It is in fact unlikely that Sister Lucy declared on March 21, 1992, that she had always said that the Consecration of Russia had been made when a series of concordant testimonies going back to 1984, 1986, 1987 and 198913, — a good number of them collected by Abbé Caillon himself13, — shows that during those years she often stated that the Consecration of Russia still had not been done as willed by Our Lady. Besides, how is it possible to believe that Sister Lucy confided that she had never said anything about Russia? We know in fact, that on several occasions during the last decade she explained why the acts of offering of May 13, 1982, and of March 25, 1984, which were practically identical, do not correspond with Our Lady's request14, at the same time affirming that "God wants Russia to appear as the sole object of the consecration". For the divine plan to be fulfilled, the Consecration of Russia alone is in fact necessary "because Russia is an immense, well defined territory, and her conversion will be seen and will thus be proof of what can be obtained through consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary."14

Thus, it is enough to analyze this supposed declaration of Sister Lucy to see that it is not an authentic statement of Sister Lucy but a fabrication of Father Messias Coelho. (See "Caillon Forgets Caillon", below.)

Furthermore, if Sister Lucy had really said on March 21, 1992, that the Consecration of Russia had been done, her declaration would not have remained secret, or "hidden" to repeat the word used by Abbé Caillon. Firstly, the Apostolic Nuncio, Monsignor Luciano Angeloni15, would have made it known on emerging from this parlor. Secondly, Father Messias Coelho would have published it in his review Mensagem de Fatima, and to be precise in his number which appeared a few weeks later for May (No. 189). Then Father Fox would not have failed to mention it in the July issue of his quarterly periodical, Fatima Family Messenger. Thirdly, Doctor Lacerda would have used this declaration of Lucy's as an unanswerable argument in his controversy with Father Gruner's representative at Fatima.16 Fourthly, the Rector of Fatima Sanctuary would have referred to it when questioned by Abbé Laurentin. Fifthly, Abbé Caillon would have learned this news not in "the corridors" of this Congress but from the mouth of Monsignor Policarpo when he delivered his communication "Fatima, Peace and Russia" mentioned previously.

The importance of this order of the Nuncio cannot be over-emphasized. Especially as it may have concerned not just a few words of Lucy's. Would the Nuncio quite simply have forbidden Father Messias Coelho to cite this parlor at all? It is possible.17 Any way, even if this order were aimed only at "certain things", it is inexplicable unless several of the words of Heaven's Messenger went against the official propaganda. It cannot be absolutely ruled out that Sister Lucy may have taken advantage of this parlor with a representative of the Holy Father in order to transmit yet again a message to the Vicar of Christ reminding him of the divine will concerning the divulging of the Third Secret and the Consecration of Russia.

Father Messias Coelho had Sister Lucy say at the end of her supposed declaration: "I have never asked anything concerning Russia but only concerning the union of the bishops and since this union was imperfect, the fruits will not be as good as they might have been imagined." There we have travestied both the request made at Tuy and Our Lady's promise! If the act of March 25, 1984, did not correspond with Our Lady's request, it was primarily because Russia was not the sole object of the consecration.18 As for the fruits of the act of offering of the world in 1984, Sister Lucy could have spoken about them this March 21, 1992, by repeating what she said to his predecessor, Monsignor Portalupi, on March 19, 1983: "From the consecration of the world, certain benefits can be expected, but not the conversion of Russia."19

Having heard these words from his Portuguese friend, Abbé Caillon drew the following conclusion: "We shall never know what the history of mankind as a whole might have been had there been no original sin — a history where no one ever experienced ignorance, concupiscence, suffering and death. Similarly, no one will ever be able to imagine what the history of mankind in the 20th Century and its consequences might have been if Pius XII had ordered the bishops of the entire world to unite themselves to Him in order to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary."

Abbé Caillon seems to have lost hope in seeing the eventual fulfillment of the events announced in the conclusion of the Secret: "In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me; Russia will be converted and a certain time of peace will be given to the world." Yet this promise is irrevocable and unconditional. It assures us that one day the Consecration of Russia will take place as Our Lady wills.20 Sister Lucy has often explained: 'In the end', in the context of the Secret, means that this promise is absolute."20 And when Father Alonso questioned her on Our Lord's words: "The Pope will consecrate Russia, but it will be late", she told him that "the Consecration of Russia and also the final triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary which will follow, are absolutely certain and will be fulfilled despite every obstacle."21

A Request to the Patriarch of Lisbon

From the 8th to the 12th of October, an international Congress is to be held at the Sanctuary on the "pastorale" of Fatima. But how is it possible to deal honestly with such a theme without unveiling, commenting on and explaining the third part of the Secret? For this oracle concerns precisely our times, the last decades of the 20th Century, and it is a salutary warning from our Mother in Heaven, which God wishes to be offered to all the Church's faithful.22

Today, thanks to the demonstration made by Father Alonso, taken up and completed by Brother Michael de la Sainte Trinité, we know the Third Secret in its main outlines. Furthermore — and this is a new and considerable fact — the Rector of the Sanctuary of Fatima has recently broken his reserve and has implicitly rallied to Father Alonso's thesis. On March 14, 1992, he in fact declared: "There exists different interpretations. For my part, I believe that the third part of the Secret must be related to the two previous parts since the three parts form a whole and are parts of the one Secret. I also believe that the third part must contain something very important for our times and that it must concern some historical event." And he refers to Sister Lucy's significant words concerning the date when it was to be divulged: "In 1960, it will appear much clearer." Then, Monsignor Luciano Guerra added: "Moreover, as, with the second version of the other two parts of the Secret, it ends with these words: In Portugal, the dogma of the faith will always be preserved', it is legitimate to suppose that the faith is the principal object of the third part."23

However, even if we know what the themes of this Secret are, it is still necessary "to make the text known in all its crystal clear truth, in its full prophetic richness, in its divine density and transcendence. For between what we can say about it and the very words of the Queen of prophets there is an abyss! The abyss that separates the shadow from the reality, of which it is the projection."24

This Secret of grace and mercy was entrusted to the Church and first of all to the Portuguese hierarchy, who were to have informed us of it and to have divulged it. "On June 17, 1944, when Monsignor da Silva, Bishop of Leiria, took possession of the envelope containing the manuscript of the third part of the Secret, he could have read it immediately. And he could then have made it known in so far as he judged fit. In 1945, it was arranged that in the event of Monsignor da Silva's death, the precious document would pass to Cardinal Cerejeira, Patriarch of Lisbon." Concerning the date of its publication, it has been proved that it should have been divulged "in 1944 at the earliest and in 1960 at the latest." This request of Our Lady's corresponded to a divine will, which Monsignor da Silva and Cardinal Cerejeira were publicly committed to obey."25 But when they were dispossessed of the manuscript in 1957, by means of a Roman maneuver, the Portuguese hierarchy never thereafter, as far as we know, attempted to satisfy this divine will. So, in this year which is the 75th anniversary of the apparitions, should not the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon, Archbishop Antonio Ribeiro, address Heaven's messenger personally and directly with a view to complying with the express demand of Our Lady, who wishes Her prophetic message to be made known to the world?

On the eve of this Congress on the "pastorale" of Fatima, this then is the request we formulate: We implore the Patriarch of Lisbon to order Sister Lucy to rewrite the text of the Third Secret, so that he can know what it is, and then divulge it solemnly in the presence of the seer on the occasion of one of the great pilgrimages to the Cova da Iria. In this way, the prophetic oracle could at last enlighten the Church's faithful and pastors with its divine light. It would teach them the power and the mission entrusted by our Heavenly Father to the Immaculate Mediatrix; it would reveal to them that only the reparatory devotion to Her Immaculate Heart is able to cure and preserve them from the seductions of the Prince of this world.

Footnotes:

1.

Quoted in the Spanish section of the Blue Army review, Sol de Fatima, no. 143, May-June 92, p. 3.

2.

Undated letter received by Abbé Caillon on February 15, 1990.

3.

"La consegracion de Rusia al Immaculado Corazon de Maria, en los documentos de Fatima", in Estudios marianos, vol. L, 1986, p. 286.

4.

Alonso, "El Corazon Immaculado de Maria, alma del mensaje de Fatima" in Ephemerides Mariologicae, 1973, p. 66-71. On the subject of the request for the consecration of the world having no direct relationship with the message of Fatima, cf. Frère François de Marie des Anges, Fatima, Joie intime, Événement mondial [FJE], December 1991, chap. XI, "La consecration du monde."

5.

Letter of February 28, 1943, cf. FJE, p. 248.

6.

Letter of May 4, 1943, ibid.

7.

FJE, p. 361.

8.

Under the authority of Bishop do Amaral, three ecclesiastics, resident in Portugal, were directly implicated in fabricating and spreading these apocryphal letters: Father Luis Kondor secretary to the bishop, Father Messias Coelho and Monsignor Luciano Guerra. We think that Monsignor Guerra personally wrote several of these letters, including that dated November 21, 1989. We have made our accusation and justified it in Fatima, Joie intime, Événement mondial (cf. p. 240, note 1 and p. 377).

9.

Personal correspondence.

10.

FJE, p. 383-386.

11.

Contre-Réforme Catholique no. 282. French edition.

12.

Cf. FJE, p. 374.

13.

Cf. FJE, p. 361; 372-374.

14.

Cf. the account of Sister Lucy's parlors under the pontificate of John Paul II, in FJE, p. 355,359-361.

15.

Questioned on the content of this conversation with Sister Lucy, Monsignor Luciano Angeloni replied in a letter dated August 4th: "On my last visit of this March 21st, I was accompanied by two specialists in Fatima affairs, who had asked me to provide them with the opportunity of returning to see Sister Lucy [whom they had not met since 1983]. Without it being necessary to make known the news in question, I can tell you that there was no conversation. There were no special declarations. It was simply a visit on my part, during which those who had asked to accompany me wished to see Sister Lucy again. They spoke with her about various current matters — matters, for example, which have been published in her 'Memoirs'."

16.

In a letter dated December 20, 1991, addressed to Father Gruner's representative at Fatima, Doctor Lacerda stated: "Pope John Paul II effected this consecration on March 25, 1984. And what Gorbachev has done since 1985 can only be explained by this consecration." But from March 21, 1992, until this month of August at the time of writing this, Doctor Lacerda has not so much as sent a note to Father Gruner's representative. It is significant that when the latter sent Doctor Lacerda a letter dated April 1, 1992, to tell him that the Diario de Coimbra had published the accusations of Joao Alvares concerning Lucy's apocryphal letters, Doctor Lacerda did not reply.

17.

It would explain why the editor of the Mensagem de Fatima was not eager to publish the account. He is probably waiting for the present Nuncio to retire when he reaches the age of seventy-five on next December 2nd.

18.

Before his "about-turn" in the course of the year 1988, the editor of the Mensagem de Fatima explained it himself with conviction (cf. FJE, p. 36).

19.

Cf. FJE, p. 360.

20.

We would point out that every morning at the end of the community Mass, our Father, Abbé de Nantes, recites the prayers at the foot of the altar prescribed by Popes Pius XI and Leo XIII. Hitherto, he has always said them "for the conversion of Russia", in conformity with the order given by Pius XI on June 30, 1930. Now, in this month of August 1992, he has personally modified the intention. He now recites the prayers "for the Consecration of Russia." Any changes made in the ritual by our Father are always the fruit of profound reflection.

21.

Cf. FJE, p. 435.

22.

Contrary to a widespread idea, without foundation in the Fatima revelations, and developed for the first time by Cardinal Ottaviani in his address of February 11, 1967, the Third Secret is not reserved exclusively to the Pope.

23.

Quoted in Sol de Fatima, no. 143, May-June 1992, p. 15.

24.

Frère Michel, Toute la Verité sur Fatima vol. III, p. 570.

25.

FJE, p. 289-291.

Caillon Forgets Caillon

In a long letter of January 1, 1988, addressed to Cardinal Ratzinger, Abbé Caillon related his five encounters with Pope John Paul II, in the course of which he implored the Holy Father to satisfy Our Lady's request. Hear him relate one of his brief interviews:

"The fourth time I spoke to the Pope was at the beginning of April 1985. That morning I had concelebrated with the Pope for the second time. There were about thirty other people, and I was the last. When the Pope came up to me, his secretaries said to him: 'Most Holy Father, this is Father Caillon who has been here before.' Then, I think I can say that the Pope considered me tenderly, for he must feel that I love him greatly. That morning, the Pope was in good form, full of health and joy, which was a pleasure to see. I said: 'Most Holy Father, I have returned from Portugal. Have you been told that the Consecration of Russia has not been done?' Then with great goodness, gentleness and a big smile, the Pope said to me: 'The consecration has been done. We do it afresh every morning.'" And Abbé Caillon commented: "It is good to know that the Holy Father renews his consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary every morning. But what is requested is that the bishops unite themselves to the Pope to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary."

On another occasion, May 12, 1987, John Paul II gave him this answer: "Pray for Russia as I pray for Russia." And Abbé Caillon concluded his letter to Cardinal Ratzinger by stating: "Plainly, we can and must pray for Russia. But what is requested is that the Pope order the bishops of the entire world to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Now this collegial Consecration of Russia has never been done by any Pope in the form requested by Our Lady." (Quoted in FJE, p. 370-372)

Shortly after Cardinal Ratzinger had received this letter of January 1, 1988, the Secretariat of State, Monsignor Somalo Martinez to be precise, at that time substitute, asked Abbé Caillon through the hierarchical channel to stop importuning the Holy Father with this request for the Consecration of Russia. In the months that followed, our poor Abbé remained firm in his convictions even though he refused to make a public display of them. On May 17, 1988, he wrote to one of his correspondents, M. de Colliéres: "This is what I know from a person who sees Sister Lucy regularly. The Consecration of Russia has not been done. But the Pope believes it has been done. Or rather, he is convinced that he has done all that it was possible for him to do. And above all, he wants to hear no more of this affair. In the words of Cardinal Gagnon: 'The Pope ventured into this affair blindly. He would feel ashamed now to go back on his decision before the whole world' [...]. It seems that pressure is being put on Sister Lucy. At any rate, it is certain that the Pope and Sister Lucy are in correspondence."

In March 1989, Abbé Caillon sent a photocopy of this letter of May 17, 1988, to some of his friends, including Brother Michael de la Sainte Trinité. To justify his communication, he wrote to one of them: "Before plunging into operations, I send you a letter I have found addressed to a good man in Paris who pesters me from time to time. It states that the consecration has not been done. I had decided not to talk about it so as not to displease the Pope. So, say nothing about it. Sister Lucy says that we shall have to wait for a better occasion. I have no idea what a better occasion could be. I know nothing of the future. The good God does not telephone me every morning to say what He is going to do. It is also said that 'The Pope having done all that he could do, God has accepted his gesture.' But has the Pope truly done all that he could do? The Pope told me: Russia cannot be consecrated separately, that is not what the texts say. Cordially, P. Caillon."