Our Lady has said to Sr. Lucia about not opening the Third Secret "until 1960 as it will be better understood". Well how I perceived that is Our Lady has accepted the Pope of 1960. She had the grace in knowing who he would be. If SHE accepts him and all the other Pope's since then that are bozo's then I should.
This is where my question comes--those that say they're sede, how do you feel about the Fatima Message and Our Lady accepting the Pope of 1960 when it appears you do not?
Hello!
I think you may be confusing two distinct issues: 1) whether or not the sedevacantists accept the message of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima, 2) whether or not it can be demonstrated that Our Lady implicitly "sanctioned" (for lack of a better term) the foreseen ascent of Roncalli at Rome.
I can only answer for myself, so I as a Catholic of the sedevacantist persuasion make thanksgiving to the Lord God on account of the visit of Our Lady of Rosary at Fatima, and her promulgation of the grand epitome of Divine Revelation as found in the Holy Scriptures, particularly the Gospels and the Epistles, and in sacred Tradition, as taught by Holy Mother Church: a little
Summa of dogmatic and moral theology of great simplicity and practicality. If Catholic put into practice the message of Our Lady with great generosity and self-abnegation, they would simply be following the way of salvation and perfection as outlined by Our Lord in the Gospel and by the Apostles in their Epistles, and as taught by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, together with the Saints and other masters of the spiritual life.
The value of the message of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima consists precisely in how faithful a mirror it is of Divine Revelation and the doctrines of the Saints and theologians.
In fact, if one follows the counsels that our Heavenly Mother gave at Fatima with great generosity that presupposes complete and universal mortification (exterior and interior) and a docility to the inspirations of the gifts of the Holy Ghost that presupposes in turn the active and passive purification of the senses and the soul, then a Catholic can arrive at the mystical union which St. Thomas Aquinas and St. John of the Cross saw as the normal efflorescence of the interior life. The unicity of asceticism and mysticism in the interior life as taught by these great Doctors and their commentators makes it clear that the soul ought to attain to the heights of the unitive life since grace and charity ought always to increase in us more and more day by day, especially they ought to augment significantly after each Holy Communion.
Furthermore, Our Lady at Fatima synthesized in a practical manner the doctrines of St. Louis de Montfort, and laid out a practical program whereby we may consecrate ourselves entire to Jesus through Mary and be enabled to attain to that apostolic zeal and charity that will enable us to edify our brethren and help restore Holy Mother Church.
---------------------
Now, regarding the question of whether Our Lady "sanctioned" John XXIII's supposed "reign" as Roman Pontiff, I cannot see this to be the case. For if this was so, why would John XXIII not only neglect to disclose the Third Secret but forbid its publication? If he had been looking for a vindication for his planned "Ecuмenical Council" and his "New Pentecost," would he not have readily availed himself of the "sanction" of Our Lady at Fatima if she did in fact give such a sanction?
Clearly, the message of Fatima contradicted the false optimism that John planned to implement as the "new springtime" of the Church, condemning the so-called "Prophets of gloom," and focusing on "positive" aspects of humanity. Fatima was clearly theocentric, Christocentric, and condemned the errors and heresies of Communism, materialism and modernism.
Anyways, the message of Fatima is private revelation that does not demand the assent of the faithful under pain of sin: Divine [public] Revelation ended with the death of St. John the Apostle, and nothing further can be added to the
depositum fidei.
However, as mentioned above, Fatima has immense value and relevance for us in the present age because it is a great little
Summa of dogmatic and moral theology that is of much utility and practicality for all the faithful: a faithful mirror of the Gospels and the Epistles and the teachings of the Fathers and the Saints, especially St. Louis Marie de Montfort. To spurn Fatima would be rash and scandalous, in my opinion, for this very reason.
But I cannot see how Fatima somehow "vindicates" Roncalli. If anything, it condemns his erroneous tolerance and optimism, and the heresies of "Vatican II" (the great "miracle of John XXIII" as my elders called it) whether one believes him to have been a legitimate Roman Pontiff or not (that is an entirely different question, whereupon the sedevacantists do not agree amongst themselves).
EDIT: Oh yeah, what Spiritus said so very well. I didn't read his great post until after I finished my reply.