Author Topic: Fatima and sedevacantism (Read 10558 times)

Kephapaulos · « **on:** June 15, 2009, 07:39:23 PM »

Quote from: DeMaistre

Quote

MHFM does not preach the Catholic faith inviolate. If it did, it would definitely believe in BOD and BOB and not be sedevacantist.

Those two topics are an oft-debated subject.
Quote

If I'm not mistaken, does not MHFM argue that Russia has been consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

I believe that they say that the consecration was done by Pius XII - however, it was late, so there was only a small period of peace, and the benefits that would have come about if the consecration was done on time and according the instructions of the Blessed Virgin did not.
Quote

If so, how can they explain the fact that the Russian state does not confess the Catholic faith and still has the errors of communism under the guise of a "democratic republic"?

above

Quote

The question also to pose to sedevacantists is how will there be another pope properly elected if they would even argue that all sees are vacant?

It would fall upon the clergy of the Diocese of Rome to elect their bishop.

Our Lady of Fatima's request that Russia be consecrated has not been fulfilled. There was no period of peace at all and has not been up to this day. No pope who has attempted to do the consecration has done it in the manner prescribed by the Blessed Mother. So, De Maistre, it does not make sense that the consecration was already done and was late since in 1942, Pius XII consecrated the WORLD to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, not Russia by name. What MHFM says concerning Fatima is related to what many in the Novus Ordo would probably argue, for there is the argument in the Novus Ordo that John Paul II accomplished the consecration in 1984. Either argument does not hold weight. As far as I know, none of the attempts at the consecration were done with all the bishops participating. Also, if MHFM argues that there was a small period of peace, there was not truly a period of the peace Our Lady meant. The peace she meant is the peace of Christ.

sedetrad · « **Reply #1 on:** June 15, 2009, 08:08:15 PM »

The dimond's are cranks.

CM · « **Reply #2 on:** June 15, 2009, 09:53:39 PM »

Fatima was supernatural yes, but it was not from God. It was from satan. It occurred during the reign of an antipope, and the three shepherd children who were subject to that antipope received 'communion' at the hands of the 'angel' and 'our lady'.

It is unlawful for schismatics to receive communion, so this cannot have been anything but a trick of the devil, designed to keep people in communion with the line of antipopes he had installed in the Vatican.

trent13 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 15, 2009, 10:25:10 PM »

Wasn't the big message of Fatima to pray the rosary? What was the devil's point if you believe he was behind Fatima?

Dulcamara · « **Reply #4 on:** June 15, 2009, 11:20:50 PM »

Don't be too surprised if there are those who say Fatima was the work of something unholy. Remember that in the Bible, the enemies of God said the same kinds of things about Christ for casting out devils.

There have always been people like that, and there probably always will be. If the words and works of Christ weren't "holy enough" for some people, it can hardly be shocking that Fatima should "fall short" as well.