Author Topic: How about a direct evidence of the identity of sister Lucy of Fatima? (Read 1869 times)

Thomas777 · « **on:** August 11, 2015, 03:32:55 PM »

Hello everyone,
Ok, what do you think about performing a DNA test on the so called deceased sister Lucy in 2005? This would be a direct evidence that she was/was not the real sister Lucy. I think the result would be so important that it would have a major impact on many traditionalists.
Is this an interesting idea? If yes, am I getting too optimistic about being able to perform this test? Well, if paid for, it shouldn't cost a fortune. Anyway, I am so interested by the subject that I would try to apply to a training where I myself could do a DNA test for identification, if I had some serious people support and some work to get authorization to open her tomb and take some samples. For the moment, this is a hypothetical thing.

Important: This is not a technical subject about how to do it and if it's possible. The aim of this subject is to state whether it's interesting or not, and whether taking samples from the tomb of sister Lucy is mission impossible or not.

CathMomof7 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 11, 2015, 03:50:11 PM »

You would have to have permission from her Order, who would probably have to have permission from the Pope. And probably a court order to exhume her body. Doubt that will happen.

Then you would have to convince her living sisters or other female relatives to also have said DNA done. Doubt that will happen.

Thomas777 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 11, 2015, 03:56:49 PM »

Well, if there's a reasonable doubt that she is an impostor, you should be able to do that NO MATTER what happens. If NOBODY of her family has the slightest doubt about her identity, then I'm afraid theories saying she's an impostor are wrong. I mean come on if she's an impostor you could definitely do something about it.

Nadir · « **Reply #3 on:** August 11, 2015, 06:01:31 PM »

Quote from: Thomas777

If NOBODY of her family has the slightest doubt about her identity, then ....

you are not going to get permission. Nobody will be digging her body up, except maybe if she is up for sainthood.

TKGS · « **Reply #4 on:** August 11, 2015, 07:23:47 PM »

Quote from: Nadir

Quote from: Thomas777
If NOBODY of her family has the slightest doubt about her identity, then ....

you are not going to get permission. Nobody will be digging her body up, except maybe if she is up for sainthood.

My guess is that if this ever happens, she will be the exception and the body will remain in the crypt, unopened.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #5 on:** August 11, 2015, 08:02:23 PM »

Ah, the same people who substituted the fake Sister Lucy could also switch the real Sister Lucy's body out with that of the fake, so a DNA match would mean nothing. Now a DNA mismatch would definitely be huge. But, absolutely, there's no way you'd get in there to do the test ... unless they were to canonize her and then you could get first class relics or something along those lines.

Thomas777 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 12, 2015, 01:56:31 AM »

Ok, I see that most think that's something interesting, but find it difficult to get permission to open the tomb. But that depends where her tomb is. Is it in her family's property or the monastery's property? Is there no one interested in the subject who could get permission? Definitely not me, have no connections at all.
Maybe see that with her family?

Thomas777 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 12, 2015, 06:53:54 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Ah, the same people who substituted the fake Sister Lucy could also switch the real Sister Lucy's body out with that of the fake.

woww too far as a theory, you think that's easy? No, wouldn't buy this.

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 12, 2015, 08:33:36 AM »

FACTS AND PHOTOS OF THE TWO SISTER LUCY'S

Looks convincing to me.

This is probably a Hugh conspiracy that involved the masons and the
modernists at the time of JXXIII.

They did not want the Third Message of Fatima that was to be publicized in 1960 released.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/g12htArt2_TwoSisterLucys.htm

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 12, 2015, 08:58:38 AM »

Here is some more convincing evidence that there is two Sister Lucy's.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B652_Lucys.html

CathMomof7 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 12, 2015, 10:44:54 AM »

Quote from: Thomas777

Well, if there's a reasonable doubt that she is an impostor, you should be able to do that NO MATTER what happens. If NOBODY of her family has the slightest doubt about her identity, then I'm afraid theories saying she's an impostor are wrong. I mean come on if she's an impostor you could definitely do something about it.

In 1990, her biological sister Carolina reported than she had been visiting Sr. Lucy for 40 years....but never alone. Sister Lucy was always behind the grille and surrounded by the other Sisters in the convent. She was never able to see her face, touch her hands, nothing.

So it is possible that her relatives didn't know.

Thomas777 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 12, 2015, 11:48:27 AM »

Yes possible... but no evidence, neither certitude. Anyway, I don't see anyone with too much interest in the issue as me, and I already contacted some who said this is not even interesting to know. Does nobody here have the will or the means to work on this subject?

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #12 on:** August 12, 2015, 12:42:40 PM »

Quote from: CathMomof7

Quote from: Thomas777
Well, if there's a reasonable doubt that she is an impostor, you should be able to do that NO MATTER what happens. If NOBODY of her family has the slightest doubt about her identity, then I'm afraid theories saying she's an impostor are wrong. I mean come on if she's an impostor you could definitely do something about it.

In 1990, her biological sister Carolina reported than she had been visiting Sr. Lucy for 40 years....but never alone. Sister Lucy was always behind the grille and surrounded by the other Sisters in the convent. She was never able to see her face, touch her hands, nothing.

So it is possible that her relatives didn't know.

This is fascinating.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #13 on:** August 12, 2015, 01:51:32 PM »

We need to keep a ready file of the facts as the pages of the calendar turn. The years pass and the evidence starts to deteriorate due to time.

Does anyone have the exact date that Pope John XXIII said that the Third Secret was not for our times?

In the future, even the three secrets will be downplayed and written off as legend.

Discrepancies in testimonies and timelines needs to be monitored also.

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 12, 2015, 04:02:34 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

We need to keep a ready file of the facts as the pages of the calendar turn. The years pass and the evidence starts to deteriorate due to time.

Does anyone have the exact date that Pope John XXIII said that the Third Secret was not for our times?

In the future, even the three secrets will be downplayed and written off as legend.

Discrepancies in testimonies and timelines needs to be monitored also.

It was 1960 and he claimed that the secret did not pertained to his
pontificate.

I do not believe that the real secret will never be written off as legend
and downplayed as long as the modernist heresies are allowed to
prevail because of tepid and week Catholics.
It is because of the Internet that will keep the real Fatima alive.
We will know some day what the real secret it either in this life
and beyond.
I been waiting since January 1, 1960, suspect since 1960 that we are
living in the Third Secret of Fatima.