The Third Secret of Fatima Describes Imposter Pope?
It’s amazing how much infighting and label pasting is happening these days. Particularly as people struggle with the notion of ambiguity emanating from Papal tweets, appointments, and implied duties imposed. Declaring who is schismatic and making easy bright lines of schism based on whether one disputes even one iota of utterance from Pope Francis is now a major league sport in the nomenklatura. I think it has become absurd.
Recently, I received a note from a reader that stuck the “recognize and resist” label on me. I have to laugh. I’ve never described myself that way, and perhaps, if this person had listened to the podcasts as closely as they claimed, they’d realize why I’d shun that label. Yet, we live in a time of fraud and imposture, so it’s important to some people to be able to make clean categories, even if those categories don’t work. The complexity of matters today force many to simplify matters so they can navigate their path in the storm – a topic for another day, the hyperreal, or hyper Catholic reality of today. Suffice to say here, it is a tendency learned from mass media and the Marxists – if you can label it, then you don’t need to think about it — just dispense of it according to the label.
Meanwhile, Our Lady of Akita is largely overlooked, or even flat out rejected. While everyone is off claiming that Sister Lucia was replaced by the Vatican, and that the third secret must be revealed lest we perish, in 1973 Our Lady revealed the third secret all by herself, particularly that the Church will become full of compromise. Those that had made compromises will wage war against those consecrated to her. Rather than what [Rev.] Gruner would tell you, she didn’t hinge all of human history on your shoulders and mine. Instead, she took care of it – as we should expect our Heavenly Mother to do. Our Lady’s words have such manifold economy that it’s easy to miss what she was telling us, especially because it appears so inane on first glance. She told you that we’d be facing error in the church, at all levels (Cardinal opposing Cardinal, Bishop against Bishop, etc.). She told you the remedy is to pray your rosary. That’s your job, that’s my job.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the fragment of the third secret released by the Vatican wherein the Pope is climbing a hill with dead bodies to realize that he’s looking at the Church itself. I’ve harped on this point before, and I will harp on it again… the line the children mention that they saw: a bishop in white passed “as if in front of a mirror“… we had the impression it was the Holy Father. In other words, it looked like the Pope. Looked like. Many people will say “walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.” The secret itself did not impute such certainty, however. It just said that it “looked like” and “had the impression.” This is the difficult part for many because they want to nail down certainty, so they put certainty in there themselves or skip ahead and conclude it is the Holy Father. If you can, however, don’t do that — rather, be convinced that what Lucia said of it has import and meaning: it looked like a bishop in white, gave the impression that it was the Holy Father, and was like seeing what is in a mirror (i.e., they knew the vision was something less than viewing reality). It was not certain as was the vision of hell — that was so certain that the children were absolutely positive of what they saw.
This must be highlighted in yellow, encircled in blue, underlined in red… Do you get it yet? the children described no other part of the secrets of Fatima this way — they saw the actual things. Only at this part of the “holy father” bishop in white did they say it was a mirage-like holy father, who gave the impression he is the holy father, who “looked like”… one can safely admit here that the open possibility is that the Papal-looking bishop they saw was not in fact the pope, he just gave them the impression he was.
Later in the secret, they see the Holy Father (the real one, or the reflection in the mirror?) surveying a city half in ruins with dead bodies all around… Perhaps that city is the Church and the soldiers are men from within the Church.
When Sr. Lucia was ordered by the Bishop to write the third secret down in 1944, she was faced with a quandary of authority: she was ordered by the Blessed Mother to keep it secret, so the bishop appeared to conflict what the Blessed Mother ordered her to do. So, she prayed, and our Heavenly Mother took care of it: She told Sr. Lucia to write down what she saw, but not what she understood it to mean. So we don’t have Sr. Lucia’s explanation. The Blessed Mother kept that part reserved.
Sr. Lucia died in 2005, same year as John Paul II. I think they both realized what that Third Secret actually meant. I think only now is it more clear to us what they might have seen in it.
Mother Angelica said back in 2001 that she didn’t believe we got the whole secret because it wasn’t scary. And Mother was very familiar with Akita — she had Bishop Ito on EWTN several times to explain Akita. But I don’t think she connected the two directly apart from the “fire from Heaven” reference.
Then Cardinal Ratzinger, when writing commentary about the third secret said the same – that the secret’s vision was not as spectacular as people had hoped for.
I think they both, at the time of seeing it, did not catch that opening — two bishops in white — one the holy father, the other merely giving the impression of being the holy father. A mirage. A church of martyrs destroyed from within. Sounds scary to me now. I think we did get the third secret… I just think we didn’t pay enough attention to what Sister Lucia said she saw.
This article, The Third Secret of Fatima Describes Imposter Pope? is a post from The Bellarmine Forum.
Do not repost the entire article without written permission. Reasonable excerpts may be reposted so long as it is linked to this page.