I can tell you why I had a problem with the two Sister Lucy theory and I knew that this was the reason for my non-acceptance at the time. I did not ever think that the theory was without merit but I did not believe it because....
It makes you call
EVERYTHING into question.
There are some rabbit-holes I am not prepared to go down.
Once you have a world so weird and mercurial that visionary nuns are bumped off and replaced by imposters and
their own families are fooled by the imposter, then you are in a world where you cannot have any confidence as to what is true and what is false.
- What if Francis is secretly a traditionalist and playing 4D chess to fully expose the bishops and their connections to the deep state?
- What if Michael Matt is controlled opposition.
- Perhaps Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer is deliberately planted by the SSPX to ruin the credibility of the resistance.
How does one navigate and make decisions and decide where to go to mass and who to trust in a world where such dramatic cօռspιʀαcιҽs are possible?
And what was the point of switching out Sister Lucy with a fraud? The fraud did not accomplish much for her 50 years of pretence. She hardly did any interviews and was mostly silent.
It is sobering to understand that her relatives and fellow nuns believed it was the same Sister Lucia. The two sister Lucia theory was posited by Marion Horvat.