IRACLES ARE HOAXES
Fraud
at
INDEX
Errors
that disprove the divine origin
The
Booklet: What Happened at Fatima?
The Encylopedia on Fatima
Foreword
The apparitions of
the Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima in
The angels at Fatima
The Virgin Mary
allegedly appeared to three young children, Jacinta born 1910, Lucia born
1907 and Francisco born 1908 in Fatima Portugal in 1917. The visions of Mary were not the only ones
that Lucia and other children supposedly saw.
Lucia saw a
shapeless ghost three times before she joined forces with Jacinta and
Francisco which was when she started having clear visions of an angel which
was visible to them as well. Initially, the angelic apparitions took the form
of a shapeless being wrapped up in sheets which Lucia and her other
companions reported (page 7, What Happened at
The year previous
to the visions of Mary, Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco met the Guardian Angel
of Portugal. When guardian angels get
their power and orders for God to protect it is plain that there is no need
for them and God wastes time and energy making and appointing them. Catholics say God does no irrational
miracles but a guardian angel is an unnecessary miracle. We are told that when the angel was
appearing the children said nothing to anyone and no one noticed anything out
of the ordinary with them (page 12, What Happened at Fatima?). Probably because since this tale was told
by Lucia years after the event it was untrue!
Much later the
angel gave them communion saying: “Take and drink the Body and Blood of Jesus
Christ, horribly outraged by ungrateful men” (Is this the Third Secret?
page 8). With this it is astonishing
that the Church approved of
But here an angel
gives these kids their first communion!
This stands in stark opposition to the principle. Communion in a vision must be equal to the
communion on an altar. The angel
stressed that it was real communion.
The Church has recognised some people like St Catherine of
Since communion
must be consecrated by a priest the angel must have stolen it from a Church! The church will say it is okay if God
permits it for communion belongs to him but if I may approve an apparition
snatching communion then what is to stop me doing it if I think I have God’s
permission? The visionaries get
communion in a vision but they still don’t know if it is material communion
or if it is just an experience of receiving unreal or immaterial
communion. What we met before in the
last paragraph still stands for this reason.
The angel told
Jacinta who was only six at the time to make reparation for sinners. But she was only a child and it is believed
that children cannot become capable of merit until at least seven years of
age. That is why Catholics only accept children of seven or over for Holy
Communion and confession.
An angel told the
children to pray, “O Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, I offer
you the most precious body and blood and soul and divinity of Jesus Christ
present in all the tabernacles of the world in reparation for the outrages,
sacrileges and indifference with which he himself is offended. And through the infinite merits of his most
sacred heart and the immaculate heart of Mary I beg of you the conversion of
poor sinners”.
This prayer would
not have been taught to children for it contains material too advanced for
children such as the body and blood and soul and divinity of Jesus being
present in the Eucharist and the concepts of infinite merits or
deservings. Lucia made the prayer up
from existing prayers or much later.
Plus it is not the
communion wafer which is kept in the worlds tabernacles that is considered a
sacrifice in the Roman Church. The
sacrifice happens when bread and then wine are consecrated at
Plus Jesus seems
to be spoken of as if he is not God the Son in the prayer. How could you offer Jesus to God the Son
when Jesus is God the Son according to Catholic doctrine?
A note on page 99
of Lucia’s memoirs, admits that theologians have problems with this
prayer. One excuse is that it is not
necessary to think the prayer is word for word what the angel gave. So Lucia probably made a mistake in the wording. Lucia stood by the prayer in spite of their
criticisms. She said that it was right
when she first give it. Then it should
be taken as the definitive version.
Plus the children had the job of learning each other the prayer so the
angel would have made sure that they were able to get it right.
The other excuse
is that the prayer was influenced by other popular prayers! If so then there was an element of
imagination in Lucia’s visions.
It is significant
that the encounters with the angel were not mentioned until years after the
event even though they are basically a call for repentance and
reparation. Only a dishonest person
would hide such a heavenly appeal even if it was repeated by the Virgin.
In Fatima
Revealed and Discarded page 151 it is stated that the angel’s appearances
were talked about when they happened and that the anti-Fatima myth man, Fr
Dhanis was wrong to say they were imagined long after they happened. A Canon Formigao was allegedly told about
what the people had heard in 1917. No
documents are given in support of this.
Just hearsay.
A person who is
reluctant to accuse Lucia of deception such as the author of that book would
have to make such claims.
Canon Barthas who
said the Canon said this to him claimed that the parents knew the children
were in the habit of reciting what they said was the prayer of the angel but
they didn’t know who taught it to them.
But the children at the time they saw Mary used to say the first few
words of the Our Father and the Hail Mary to get the rosary over with quickly
when they prayed together. This is
hardly consistent with them having seen an angel. Why did nobody venerate the site of the
angelic appearances? Why did the
children not tell their parents? Did
they lie when their devout parents asked them about the origin of the
prayer? Probably not for they had no
lie to tell for they saw no angel. The
parents would have been interested in the prayer when the children said it so
often and they would have asked.
And we are told
the people knew about the angel and the parents were puzzled by the
prayer. Does this not show that the
people were not talking at all about the angel for the parents would have
known from the angel story that they must have got the prayer from the
angel? The children would have told
them. Jacinta was the loose tongued
one and certainly would have told.
Later Jacinta according to Lucia told about the Virgin for she
couldn’t keep it in despite her promise not to tell. Jacinta was younger than Lucia so she would
have been less mature and discreet about the angel than she was with the
Virgin when she got a bit older.
Barthas lied about Formigao.
The authorities
would not have tolerated the angel story.
They tried to stop the children speaking of the Virgin the following year
and they would have been easier to silence the year before with the angel
tale.
Errors that disprove the divine
origin
This examination
of the Virgin Mary’s appearances to Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco in
A private
revelation being inferior to the faith which says nobody can be totally sure
of salvation has no right to tell anybody that they will go to Heaven or who
will go there. The Fatima Lady however
even told the children when they asked about Maria das Neves and Amelia if
they were in Heaven that Maria was but Amelia will be in Purgatory until the
end of the world (page 18, What Happened at
The Lady told the
children to come to the Cova, the apparition site, every thirteenth for a
while to see her. On the 13th
August, the children were detained by the police and did not make it to the
Cova for the apparition. They did not
see the Lady. The Lady had not
foreseen this when she asked them to come every month on the thirteenth
day. The Lady was not the Virgin. The Lady could have appeared anywhere so
she broke her promise when she did not appear that day but a few days later
in Valinhos. This shows she was not a
supernatural being at all.
The Lady
forecasted a worse war than World War One during the reign of Pius XI if
Russia was not consecrated to her and that God would send it to punish the
world (Is this the Third Secret? page 5). The Second World War did not happen during
the reign of Pius XI but Pius XII.
Deuteronomy 18 says that if everything a prophet predicts is correct
one error attributed to God suffices to prove that the prophet was a fraud
and should be totally ignored.
Evidently, the prophet cannot use the excuse, “I misunderstood God”,
for if that could be allowed then the people would be in danger of being
misled. God would be shown as inept.
I detest the
suggestion of Lucia’s Virgin that the Second World War as retributive for it
makes Hitler an instrument of God who should not have been ashamed when Mary
gave permission for the retribution in 1917.
What about the innocent Jews?
The condemning of
The Lady promised
a strange light would appear to show that the next world war was near (page
136, The Thunder of Justice).
The light never appeared but Lucia had to make do with an Aurora
Boralis – a natural event! The Lady
meant something supernatural for natural strange lights have been with us all
the time. Lucia was not telling the
truth.
The Virgin
promised that if
God would be more
concerned about the quality of a prayer that its quantity or its words or who
it is being said by. The Virgin of
Fatima accuses her God of being a snob.
How could
Does the consecration of
The Virgin
promises that
The Virgin said
that World War Two and persecutions of the Church and the Pope suffering a
great deal would be arranged by God to punish the world if people did not
stop offending God (Is this the
Third Secret? Page 5).
Would God punish
the world for sin by persecuting the Church and the Holy Father as the Lady
said? That is just what a sinful world
would like?
The Virgin showed
the children a vision of the fire of Hell with fire and demons with horns
(page 162,
The assumption
that Our Lady adjusts her revelations to suit the understanding of her
visionaries is unacceptable. The
Mother of God can make them understand without resorting to tactics that
could mislead. Why not show them dark
shadows crying out with despair?
Children could understand that the fire of Hell is deep sadness if it
is not literal. At least the Virgin
let them know that God does torments the souls in Hell against the popular
modern notion that they torture themselves.
The Virgin said
that most people who go to Hell go because of sins of the flesh. This is pure Catholic anti-sexualism. Most people die in old age when sex is no
big deal. Sins against faith are more
serious than sexual sin for they strike at the authority that says sex is
bad. These sins are the commonest with
most Catholics not knowing the faith properly and not wanting to know much. The Virgin said no such thing unless she
was really Satan himself in disguise.
The Lady revealed
hell to them as part of a secret.
Since the Church taught the existence of Hell anyway and it was no
secret the secret had to be that this vision of Hell was literally true.
The Church says
that revelations can only be accepted as authentic if they do not add to
infallible revelation but tell us to follow it. Fatima does add to it with its teaching
about the need to consecrate
In Fatima Revealed and Discarded
we read that a young woman, Maria do Carmo, with tuberculosis who was dying
walked several times all the thirty-five kilometres from her home to Fatima
to implore the Virgin to cure her (page 40).
The cure happened but despite the fact that it was not an instant cure
the Church accepted it as genuine.
I agree with the more sensible element in
the Church that a real miracle would be instant. And how sick was the young lady really when
she was able to walk like that when she was supposed to be dying? She sounds like a hypochondriac who
convinced her doctor that she really was dying when he told her she had only
two weeks to live. The girl believed
she was dying and by curing her as a reward for being willing to torment her
relations and kill herself by attempting the walk the Virgin was encouraging
that kind of attitude. The real Virgin
could not sanction such fanaticism.
The girl could have killed herself over looking for a miracle that the
Virgin might not have the will to give.
She abused herself and was rewarded by a cure! It wasn’t God who rewarded her but the
Devil who would like the bad example.
The importance of this non-miraculous event is that it was defended by
Canon Formigao who was the first to record the alleged events at
Lucia’s memoirs examined
The book, Fatima
In Lucia’s own words, is a must for the person who ventures to expose
Page 5 tells us
that the book is made up of the original manuscripts in which Lucia recorded
her alleged experiences.
Lucia claimed that
everything to do with the apparitions of the Virgin was clear in her head and
unforgettable to her (page 13, page 99).
The children
agreed to be discreet about the first apparition. However, Jacinta broke this promise (page
29). Lucia tries to convince us that
it was because her joy was so intense that she could not restrain herself
from telling. The reason for silence
would have been in case they were stopped from seeing the Lady again by the
grown-ups so Lucia lied about Jacinta’s motives. Jacinta was not such an innocent child after
all for she would not have put telling before risking not seeing the Virgin
unless she saw no Lady at all.
Lucia and
Francisco contradicted each other over whether or not the Lady had gold edges
on her dress. Lucia said it was a
trick of the light that make him think there were gold edges on it (page
175). She said it was caused by the
glowing of the dress. That cannot be
true for she would have thought there were lines too if the boy saw
them. And the trick of the light would
not have had the same effect on everything the Lady wore. When the Lady moved it would have been
evident that the gold edges were not there.
How could
something that God causes and which is not like natural light lead to tricks
of the light? God causing miraculous
tricks of the light? No that is too
much!
Lucia contradicted
herself about the Virgin’s earrings (page 175). She said that she had said the Lady was
wearing ones because of a momentary illusion caused by the light bathing the
Lady. Is that really believable? You don’t say a brown coat is green because
the light made it go green for a second.
Lucia forbade
Jacinta to even say that the Lady asked them to make sacrifices for sinners
for people would then ask what kind of sacrifices they were making (page
34). This stuff about the need for
reparation is a late addition to the story and this is merely an excuse for
it being unheard of in the early days.
The children knew they could have refused to answer. And when people knew they were seeing the
Virgin they would have expected a request from her to the children to do
penance for that was commonly requested in apparitions. The children hypocritically told one
another their sacrifices (page 42). In
Catholic theology that would be the sin of boasting.
Jacinta knew that
dirty water which clothes were even washed in could make her very ill yet she
drank it as a penance (page 86). She
could have imagined her Lady when she was that fanatical. She wasn’t thinking about the people who
would have to look after her.
Lucia was a good
teller of religious stories (page 24).
She could have invented her experiences. Lucia did actually decide to say that the
story of the apparitions was a lie (page 69).
This is as destructive of her evidence as it would be if she had
lied. She could not have thought that
the lie would make her life easier for it would not and would in fact get her
into bigger trouble and the other two would contradict her were the
retraction a lie. Her parents would
have warned her what would happen to her and them if she lied. Mark this well, here is a child who would
lie no matter how much bother or scandal it would stir up. Even Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who was
practically the real pope during the reign of John Paul II and is now
Benedict XVI declared on June 29th 2000 that Lucia might have read too many
devotional books and these led her imagination astray and coloured the
reports of her vision. Lucia has been
guilty of driving people into savage and terrible penance through letting
them think that the Third Secret was about an apocalypse that only the
penitent could escape. A friar who
knows her well said that she suffered from religious hallucinations and false
memories. His name is Mario de
Oliveira.
Jacinta and
Francisco could not have seen a Lady at all when they believed that Lucia
would be killed (page 72, 77) even though Lucia later claimed that the Lady
had promised them that she would outlive them. Lucia thought her end was nigh on one
occasion though the other pair were alive (page 79, 89).
The idea to make
the people see the sun spinning would have been suggested to Lucia by the
fact that over a month before that miracle many people were claiming to have
spotted signs in the sun (page 76).
The child knew that some would insist they had seen the sun spin if
she prompted them just before the famous miracle of the sun of October
13.
Lucia admitted
that there were things about the Lady and her sayings that she never revealed
until 1941. The idea of a girl
claiming that she seen the Virgin and keeping things back during the
investigation directed by the Church some years previous which resulted in
the visions being accepted by the Church as authentic is strange unless she
is lying. It was deceit for everything
has to be looked at to see if the vision was real or not. What else did she lie about? There was nothing in her visions that
should have been hidden until then.
Lucia says she was
mistaken when she said that the Lady promised that the war would end on the
day of the solar miracle, October 13th. That was the very first thing she said on
the matter and it is more likely to be what she was told than what she now
says: that the Lady did not say that.
The only reason it is denied now is because it turned out to be
wrong. Lucia said she was trying hard
to remember what the Lady said about graces so that she forgot what was
actually said about the war (page 170).
Yet she boasts of her memory – in the next line! (as well as on page 99. She says that supernatural events cannot be
forgotten and it is no wonder – forgetful visionaries of Medjugorje take
note!) – and how could she forget something that is more interesting than
promises about grace? And worse, what
the Lady said that day about grace and reparation was brief and repeated the
content of the earlier messages. Lucia
is certainly telling a big lie. The
visions of
Lucia claimed that
the aurora borealis that she said was a sign from God was probably not an
aurora borealis but a miracle (page 109).
That was dishonest. Science did
not support her in this and so it was not a real sign. The Lady said the sign would be an unknown
light (page 162). This means a
supernatural one. The obscurantist
Lucia claimed that science did not bother investigating it to find out that
it was not an aurora borealis (page 25, Queen of Peace, Fall
1995). Can we trust Lucia with her
visions and her whirling sun? She is
the only witness left for the others died before they could convince
anybody. I wouldn’t trust her.
Other Troubles for the Vision
The parish priest’s interviews with the
visionaries were made into a report.
This was their first interview by the Church and it can be read in the
book, Os Mouros Fatimidas e as Aparicoes de Fatima. The report says that during the first
vision Francisco only saw the Lady just as she was leaving though he was
there all the time. That suggests that
he wanted to see her like the rest did and he forced himself to hallucinate
or imagine the vision. The real Virgin
would be careful to eliminate psychological explanations. The extraordinary thing about the first
version of the first vision is that the children said that the Virgin wore a
skirt down to her knees and wore white socks unlike the Virgin had ever done
before. She wore a necklace with a
medal on it. She wore earrings and was
of medium height and her eyes were black which must mean she had eyes like an
alien. This description prompted some
to insist that the Lady was really the daughter of Muhammad, Fatima, and not
the Virgin Mary. Later the Church
manipulated the children to say that the Virgin looked the way she is
depicted in holy pictures with long dresses.
The short skirt was considered immodest.
The Bible forbids
women wearing anything fancy for it wants them to spend the time they would
spend on becoming glamorous on good works (1 Tim 2:9,10) so the Bible says
the woman was not Mary unless Mary is in Hell and Satan sent her. Jacinta had been seeing a small woman one
night near the trapdoor in the attic.
She said she saw the same Lady at the apparition site with the
others. This suggests that the child
had dreamt the vision near the trapdoor.
This is not clearly excluded from the accounts and it makes the rest
of the apparitions unreliable. The
real Virgin would have inspired her not to make this mistake. Jacinta showed confusion about when the
lightning that accompanied the Virgin’s arrival at times happened and on
whether the Lady spoke and yet she was able to notice minute details about
which fingers were holding the rosary beads and many others which suggests
that somebody was putting words in her mouth – something that Lucia would
have been good at.
Lucia wrote in
1937 that she was very bad at writing but yet the book she wrote then is well
enough written. Who wrote it for
her? Why did she lie about it being
all her work?
Fatima Attacked From Within
In chapter 10 of Fatima
Revealed and Discarded we read a refutation of those
Catholics who believed that even if the apparitions of 1917 were real.
The book itself confesses
that the bedrock of such attacks is the fact that Lucia gave out new
information about what had happened in 1917 during apparitions and waited
until 1935 and up to 1941 to disclose these things (page 134, Fatima Revealed
and Discarded).
The professor of
theology from
Dhanis acknowledged
that the new version of the Fatima story was inauthentic because the first
secret was an exaggerated and ridiculous vision of Hell and because the
prophecy by Mary of the strange light in Heaven was made after the event in
1942 and because Mary could not want all the bishops to consecrate Russia to
her heart for it getting them all to do it was unpractical and impossible
(page 140, Fatima Revealed and Discarded). He thinks Lucia copied her Lady’s great
promise from the great promise of the sacred heart to St Margaret Mary. The book responds that Lucia was not
carried away to make statements that were not true for God verified her
message with miracles! So even if she
admits to being a liar or overly imaginative they will still believe in
The Flop of the Century
In October, a
crowd of 70,000 had gathered. At the
end of the visions, the Lady who had identified herself as the Lady of the
Rosary, let the children see Jesus and Joseph and herself in the sun. Lucia shouted for the crowd to look at it
and then many of them but not all (page 77, The Evidence for Visions of
the Virgin Mary) saw the sun spinning or changing colour or both but the
accounts do not agree (ibid 78, 80).
Now, for the Lady to want the crowd to look at the sun which is very
dangerous over visions that might have been hoaxes shows that she was not the
Virgin Mary but something else – perhaps something equivalent to a fairy-tale
playmate. Despite all the
photographers who were present there are no photos of the changes in the sky
or any physical evidence. The best the
defender can do is produce photos of eclipses in far away lands! (page 78, The
Evidence for Visions of the Virgin Mary).
When a miracle is given for unbelievers one would expect the Virgin to
have done a better job of seeing to it being authenticated.
Many people would
have said they saw something though they did not. The Virgin had said the miracle was for
unbelievers and those who saw nothing might have been accused of being so
stubborn in unbelief that doing a miracle to convince them would not work.
The Virgin had
vowed at Valinhos to convince all that her apparitions were true and from God
by performing a great miracle (The
Thunder of Justice, page 137). But
all in the Cova did not see the miracle of the sun so she lied. The Church lies that the 70,000 did see the
miracle (page 54, What Happened at Fatima?) but then we are told that
no two people seem to have seen the same thing (page 55, What Happened at
In a Fortean
Picture Library photo in The Book of Miracles
some of the people are not looking up at the solar miracle evidently because
they have seen nothing and all of the faces looking up are not amazed. There are no open mouths or hands to the
mouth. There is nobody showing any
sign of fear. This picture tells a lot
of the real truth about the solar miracle.
It says Lucia herself did not see the miracle (page 54, What
Happened at
The Catholic
Church says divine miracles have mostly good fruits.
Let us finish with
an important line in Mc Clure’s wonderful book, The Evidence for Visions
of the Virgin Mary, “There are surprisingly few convincing accounts of
the solar event at
Fatima , a legend?
Kevin Mc Clure has
stated that “very little was written about
Mc Clure also
recognises that it is very difficult to be sure that the Lady told Lucia that
the other two children would die before her before they died (page 75).
To make her lies
easier, Lucia claimed that Francisco could not hear the apparition. That was in case she would say one thing
and he another. The Virgin treated
Lucia as the leader prompting the others to do the same. You really just have one person witnessing
to the message of
Yet he knew that
Lucia was wrong when she said that the Virgin had told her that the war had
just finished on the day of the solar miracle,
None of the early
reports about the messages mention the Lady’s emphasis on the danger of
communism. This warning was dreamt up
later. Did Lucia, who lived under an
atheistic regime keep it quiet in case there would be reprisals? If she really believed in the apparitions
she would have went to another country and revealed the message from
there. It did not need saying that the
Lady would have been against
To reveal the
dreadful and over-dramatised and hysterical things Heaven supposedly said
about Russia in 1942, at the time of the Second World War was an unbelievably
evil thing to do because it could have influenced Catholic leaders and
countries to attack and be paranoid of Russia for the sake of the faith and
the lives of the Catholics the Virgin said Russia would kill. Many were influenced but they could not say
so for fear of discrediting their faith.
The conversion of Russia was supposedly revealed in 1917 and not
mentioned until 1942 when it could have been mentioned and prayed for before
and gave an implicit blessing and approval to Nazi Germany as it geared to
attack Stalingrad!
There is something terribly amiss when God
let Jacinta and Francisco die before they could be questioned by the
investigation commission of the Church.
Why would God want us to be less sure that the Lady was the Virgin and
appeared? The answer is that he does
not want us to believe.
Their departures
caused uncertainty about the visions and the messages.
Lucia’s mother
allegedly said that Lucia had witnessed three times a most unusual being
before the angel and Mary apparitions.
It looked like a person wrapped up in a sheet and it would have
approached her and then went away. Was
she into ghost stories first? An angel
would not behave like that or go about with a sheet over its head. The account gives credence to those who say
that spiritualism and Satan produced the miracle of
Lucia described
herself as unintelligent and easily confused.
A witness of the Virgin could not have worse credentials when they say
that about themselves whether it is true or not. Some fairly knowledgeable Catholic behind
the scenes must have manipulated her and there is no doubt that she was far
more intelligent than we have been led to think. Catholic sources admit that she is caustic. Lucia is a rude person. Somebody that really seen Mary should be
happier and nicer to people.
She had a flair
for inventing religious stories (page 179, Looking for a Miracle) and
Jacinta said she forgot things relating to the visions of Mary and needed
Lucia to tell her what happened which shows that Lucia was manipulating her
(page 180, Looking for a Miracle).
Lucia had a magnetic influence over the nuns in her convent. Some nuns were so hypnotised by her that
they copied her. Her observations on
the rule made the nuns attain to greater sanctity (page 98,
The Booklet: What Happened
At Fatima ?
We find much to
object to in relation to the Fatima apparitions in the Catholic Truth Society
booklet What Happened at
It was scandalous
how the lady told the children they would go to Heaven before asking them if
they were willing to offer all their sufferings in reparation for
sinners. They could have refused on
the basis that they were promised Heaven anyway (page 20). She should have asked them first. It is easy to resolve to suffer which was
what the children did when you know the pie in the sky is hot and waiting for
you.
The lady even showed the children God in
the form of a light in which they saw themselves as they were in God (page
22). Strange that they were able to
sin after that for seeing God is seeing infinite good and is therefore so
attractive that we cannot sin afterwards.
Lucia said she showed them God.
The Lady then offered them a fake God and not the real God for had
they seen the real one and not her idol made of light and emotions they would
have been impeccable forever.
The parish priest, Fr Ferreira, held that
the apparitions were of Satan because they never told the three children to
tell everything about the visions and what they said to an orthodox Roman
Catholic priest in confession (page 30).
The priest was absolutely right if the Roman Catholic Church is the
truth. The fact that Jacinta later
reassured Lucia that the Lady was beautiful and went up to Heaven so the
vision was not the Devil who is ugly and lives under the ground (page 31)
proves that the children were prepared to ignore the Lady’s mistakes in order
to believe in her and they believed these superficial arguments knowing the
Devil would not be that obvious! The
priest was certainly right to see that the visions were fake.
The Lady told them
to pray for help from Our Lady of the Rosary and said she had come to tell
them to pray to her (page 32). As if
they had not been praying to her already.
This sounds like the vision is denying that it is the Virgin
Mary. The Lady could have brought an
angel with her to relay this message to avoid lying and pretending she was
not Our Lady. So she was an untruthful
person then. One sees an element of the Catholic tendency to think of Our Lady
of the Miraculous Medal, Our Lady of Lourdes and Our Lady of Knock as
separate people in this.
The Lady promised
to work a miracle for all to see and believe in, in October (page 33). But this is not true for many did not see
the miracle she promised and many who said they did could have been mistaken
or subject to illusion.
The Lady did not
let Francisco hear what she said but then she permitted the Third Secret,
that was only revealed recently, to be told to him (page 37). Strange!
The Church lies
that true apparitions promote feelings of peace. Then facts like the riots that nearly
happened (page 42) and torment of the visionaries families are left out of
the equation. This messing is hard to
stomach.
The Lady saying
that many souls go to Hell because there is no one to pray and sacrifice for
them (page 47). Jesus prayed for them
on earth and according to the Bible he still does it. She is saying they are not much good. God prefers to ignore Jesus’ prayers in
order to have human beings suffer and grovel for sinners. Nice chap!
And Jesus was supposed to be God and a mere one of his most
insignificant acts has more value than all ours put together.
Jacinta had a
great fear of dying alone (page 68). How
could she if she had seen God and Mary and Jesus? She always claimed to feel they were with
her. This to me suggests an innocent
child who was afraid to die because she had told lies.
When popular booklets like this one lie so much and twist the truth how can we trust the Church when it says that its Inquiry has found that an apparition report is true?
The Encyclopaedia on Fatima
In the New
Catholic Encyclopaedia’s entry, FATIMA, we learn that the
patriarch of
The commission was
started in 1922 when Jacinta and Francisco were dead leaving only Lucia. It was so easy for her then to get it to go
her way. And she did keep things from
it and yet she accepted their approval of her visions which was dishonest for
they hadn’t heard the whole story. A
child that deceives will only get worse as she or he grows up.
The entry says
that the visions of Lucia subsequent to Fatima were not tested by the Church
like the
God in the Bible
(Deuteronomy 18) forbids this selectiveness.
He said there that if a prophet is always right and predicts the
future right then his revelations are to be entirely thrown out if he makes
one false prediction or makes an error.
You can get a bunch of experts who will
come up with a verdict after a commission and you can set up another with a
different selection and the verdict will be the opposite. And even if their verdict is the same the
reasons could be very different. In
that case neither commission is of any help for it is vital that the same
reasons and perceptions be accepted and point to the same result. I mean two experts saying essiac cures
cancer means nothing if one of them is convinced by testimonies of cancer
patients who were cured and the other thinks there is psychic power in essiac
and that is evidence enough that cancer cures must happen. The reasons are more important than the
verdict for there can be no proper verdict without them. A person who believes you are good because
they saw it in your astrology chart may be right that you are good but they
only think it because of a bad reason.
It is not you they honour but their perception of you that they get
from astrology. That is not honouring
the truth. A truth believed for the
wrong reason is not a healthy or good truth.
It might as well be a lie.
Lucia calls us to devote ourselves to Our
Lady of the Rosary or Our Lady of Fatima.
But all we end up doing is believing experts which is so silly. What makes it worse is that it is experts
who have not published their deliberations fully and accessibly for us to
peruse. This is why all authenticated
apparitions of the Catholic Church should not be taken seriously.
The entry tells us
that Lucia contradicted what other trustworthy people said in things which
were of secondary importance. We are
informed that she did this a number of times.
If she was unintelligent or a liar she could not have been a true visionary
of the Blessed Virgin who has the power to make a person give her message
reliably and who would choose the right person.
Maria Emilia Santos
Maria Emilia Santos
is the Lady whose alleged miraculous healing was the reason the pope
beatified Jacinta and Francisco in 2000 testified that a prayer to Jacinta
for a cure healed her of a twenty-two year long paralysis. She said that she prayed to Francisco too
though she only spoke to Jacinta. That
the pope threw Francisco into this whole affair shows that if anything
strange happens the Church will pretend it verifies the sainthood of any
person it wants. It is illegitimate to
beatify Francisco when there is no reason to think he played a role in the
cure and yet the Church says that miracles are necessary to prove a person a
saint. The woman admitted that her own
brothers were sceptical of the miracle and that they suggested she was
exaggerating about how long she was paralysed. She explained that one of them hadn’t seen
her when she was paralysed but we are not told his side of the story and she
ignores the other. Also many of the medical
records were lost. The decision that
it was indeed a miracle was made as a result of investigations by two
It is noteworthy
too that the important mystic, Alexandrina da Costa, who was supposedly
surrounded by miracles and who allegedly miraculously but temporarily
recovered from paralysis to experience the crucifixion of Jesus many times,
confirmed by her visions and experiences that the Fatima events were
real. That says a lot about her (Alexandrina
The Agony and the Glory).
CONCLUSION
The apparitions of
BIBLE QUOTATIONS FROM:
The Amplified
Bible
BOOKS
CONSULTED
Alexandrina The
Agony and the Glory, Francis Johnson, TAN,
Celestial Secrets,
The Hidden History Of The Fatima Incident, Anomalist Books,
Fatima Revealed
and Discarded, Bro Michael of the Holy Trinity, Augustine,
Is This The Third
Secret? IF Colquhoun,
Looking for a
Miracle, Joe Nickell, Prometheus Books,
New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America
and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. Washington ,
District of Columbia
Os Mouros Fatimidas e as Aparicoes de Fatima
Queen of Peace (Newspaper),
Fall 1995,
Reason and Belief, Bland Blanschard,
The Book of
Miracles, Stuart Gordon, Headline,
The Evidence for
Visions of the Virgin Mary, Kevin McClure, Aquarian Press, Wellingborough,
Northamptonshire, 1985
The Rosary and the Crisis of Faith, Msgr.
Joseph a. Cirrincione and Thomas A. Nelson, Tan, Illinois, 1986
The Third Secret
of Fatima, Brother Michael of the Holy Trinity CRC, Tan,
The Thunder of
Justice, Ted and Maureen Flynn, Maxcol Communications Inc.
What Happened at
THE WEB
An Agnostic Looks
at
http://www.portcult.com/index.fat.htm
Where is the
Conversion of Russia? John Vennari
www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2002Mar/mar22fat.htm