I was rather surprised to see this on LifeSiteNews, but I notice they have lurched significantly to the right ever since Msgr. Vigano began discrediting the conciliare church:
"New forensic files expose fake Sr. Lucy of Fatima?
A new compilation of forensic analysis and anecdotal evidence now being exposed suggest that the original Sr. Lucy of Fatima was replaced by a double -- that is to say an imposter -- by the Shadow Church."
https://www.lifesitenews.com/episodes/new-forensic-files-expose-fake-sr-lucy-of-fatima/?utm_source=top_news&utm_campaign=catholic
With the advent of modern forensic techniques, and ways to digitize and analyze photographs, it should be very easy to prove, one way or the other, the truth about the Sister Lucia situation. I would welcome this. If Lucia was indeed replaced (and, if so, what happened to her?), this could go a long way into jarring loose the mentality of "the post-V2 Church would never mislead us" among conservative Novus Ordo zealots.
With the advent of modern forensic techniques, and ways to digitize and analyze photographs, it should be very easy to prove, one way or the other, the truth about the Sister Lucia situation.
I don't think that's convincing at all, though. I don't see anything weird about Montini's fingers, definitely nothing that can't simply be due to lighting and angle.
And just because the newspaper published a photo in which Lucy was pasted in doesn't mean a whole lot except that newspapers tamper with photos, which is not exactly news.
In my mind, the real evidence is in the forensic analysis of the face and other things.
If, as Dr. Peter C. says, a fake Lucy emerged in 1967, why would a fake Lucy declare on the eve of jp2's 1984 Consecration, almost 20 years later, that his Consecration did not satisfy the instructions of Our Lady? Are we to assume that both the fake Lucy and the real Lucy were alive at the same time?Fake Sister Lucy ll said the 1984 consecration was “accepted by heaven”
Fake Sister Lucy ll said the 1984 consecration was “accepted by heaven”That may be true. But the 'real Lucy' is reported to have said otherwise. On page 224 of Mark Fellow's book, Fatima in Twilight, the authentic Lucy affirmed that the 1984 Consecration would not have a "decisive character," because once again Russia was not menioned (by name.)
BTW- there was no evidence of a REAL Sr. Lucy after the Fr Fuentes interviews of 1957. So the 1984 Sr Lucy was the imposter as well, no matter what confusing things she said to diffuse the truth.If the real Lucy disappeared after 1957, then Dr. C. is wrong in asserting that the imposter only appeared on May 13, 1967 and thereafter.
If the real Lucy disappeared after 1957, then Dr. C. is wrong in asserting that the imposter only appeared on May 13, 1967 and thereafter..
Last public interview with Fr. Augustin Fuentes in December 26,
1957. After this interview, Sr. Lucy was not allowed to be
interviewed anymore for the next several decades.
2. The interview was not published until May 1958.
• Fr. Fuentes described Sr. Lucy’s appearance as “very sad,
pale, and drawn.”
• She told Fr. Fuentes: “The chastisement from Heaven is
imminent. The year 1960 is on us, and then what will happen?
It will be very sad for everyone, and far from a happy thing if
the world does not pray and do penance before then.”
3. After the Fr. Fuentes’ interview was published, the Diocese of
Coimbra, on July 2, 1959, released a disconcerting note publicly
disavowing Fr. Fuentes along with the following words of
correction, supposedly from Sr. Lucy:
• “I know nothing, and could therefore say nothing, about such
punishments, which are falsely attributed to me.”
• The note closes with these words: “Sister Lucy has nothing more to say
on Fatima.”
Sister Lucia not publicly seen again until May 13, 1967 on the 50th Anniversary of Fatima
with Paul VI.
2. Strikingly, in her 1967 appearance before the world “Sr. Lucy” appeared jovial and in good
health – even gesturing to the cheering crowd as if prodding them for more adulation.
Yeti: Why?
If the real Lucy disappeared after 1957, then Dr. C. is wrong in asserting that the imposter only appeared on May 13, 1967 and thereafter.No record of sister Lucy appearances anywhere between 1957 and 1967 when they pranced Sr Lucy ll out with Paul Vl. She may have been killed or died at anytime in between.
I still have to wonder what the imposter's handlers were trying to accomplish by "confusing things." Obviously, her appearance would have been for one reason alone- to corroborate the authenticity of previous papal consecrations