.

Oh, I think I see the problem here. I don't know of any indication that the third secret is a prophecy of the end times. I'm not aware that Our Lady or any of the seers said this. Why do you think it is?








The Faith teaches that the world will last until Christ comes again at the end of the world to judge the living and the dead. That will be the last judgment. After that, every human being will be either in heaven or in hell. The Church Militant and Church Suffering will no longer exist; only the Church Triumphant. That state will last for all eternity. Most of this is Catholic dogma. The statement of St. Augustine is referring to the state of eternity after the end of the world and the last judgment. The supernatural intervention that you mention is the second coming of Christ, the end of the world, the general resurrection, and the last judgment.

I'm not sure what you're describing here, and it doesn't seem to match this all that well.


Rome will not be the headquarters of the Church after the end of the world because the Church Militant will not exist any longer, and probably Rome itself will not exist either. My concern is that it seems to violate the canons of Vatican I, Trent, and other councils to say that Rome will cease to be the head of the Church before the end of the world. It is defined that the Roman pontiff is the successor of St. Peter and the head of the Church. Theologians have said this must mean that the holy see cannot be moved to any other diocese apart from Rome, since then the bishop of that other diocese, and not the Roman pontiff, would be the head of the Church.

But the text of this third secret says that the authority of the Church will be moved to Fatima, that the tomb of St. Peter will be moved to Fatima, that the cathedral of the pope (the headquarters of the pope as bishop of Rome) must be destroyed and replaced with one in Fatima. It also holds out the possibility that Rome itself, as a city, will be destroyed, which is something theologians have rejected as impossible for the same reasons, namely that there cannot be a bishop of Rome, i.e. a pope, if the city of Rome does not exist.

I think that we might have a different understanding of how the "era of peace" will come about and what the "era of peace" will look like. Can you describe, in your estimation, how this "era of peace" comes about and the main differences between our current era and that future "the era of peace?" Or, even better, can you provide quotes from Church-recognized authorities that explain what you are referring to?