Author Topic: Sister Lucy attended the Novus Ordo Mass for decades (Read 27186 times)

ClarkSmith · « **Reply #60 on:** October 13, 2014, 04:17:40 PM »

Quote from: awkwardcustomer

Why go to the trouble of setting up an imposter Sister Lucy?

If Sister Lucy died in the late 1950s or early 1960s, why wouldn't the Vatican, or the Communists, or whoever, just leave it at that?

You tell us. You claimed to have read the articles on TIA on page 1 of this thread.

Here it is:

Quote

The retirement of Sister Lucy I and introduction of Sister Lucy II before 1960, the year the secret was to have been revealed, would prevent the true witness from telling the world the full content of the Third Secret. This could only have been to the benefit of the progressivist wing that is dominating the Church in our days.

It took me about 30 seconds to find it.

Miseremini · « **Reply #61 on:** October 13, 2014, 04:37:35 PM »

Why does everyone say the secret was to be revealed in 1960?

In the 1950's we were waiting for it because we'd always been told the secret was to be revealed NO LATER THAN 1960.

Croix de Fer · « **Reply #62 on:** October 13, 2014, 04:49:31 PM »

Quote from: awkwardcustomer

Ascent said,
Quote

An imposter Lucia is more evidence that the Vatican has been rotten to the core for a long time. This was not some mistake that got overlooked. It's a policy of deception that goes on to this very day. It's more proof that the message from Our Lady of La Salette has been coming to fruition. The full crystallization will be when Rome becomes the seat of the anti-Christ - a jew.

But according to St Cyril of Jerusalem, the seat of the Antichrist will be the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, (Catechetical Lecture 15, para 15):

Quote

.... Who opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God, or that is worshipped .... so that he seats himself in the temple of God .... What temple then? He means, the Temple of the Jews which has been destroyed. For God forbid that it should be the one in which we are! Why say we this? That we may not be supposed to favour ourselves. For if he comes to the Jews as Christ, and desires to be worshipped by the Jews, he will make great account of the Temple, that he may more completely beguile them; making it supposed that he is the man of the race of David, who shall build up the Temple which was erected by Solomon.....

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310115.htm

That is a false temple. The real Temple spoken about in the Scriptures, according to Catholic and Orthodox prophesy, is the Holy Tabernacle which houses the true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. The anti-Christ may also put himself in a false temple in Jerusalem, but the real defilement of what is Holy will occur in the real Temple of God - the New Arc of the New Covenant - which is, indeed, the Holy Tabernacle. The Church has always eschewed the coming "rebuilt temple" in Jerusalem. It will not have much meaning except to the deceived zionist "christians" and Christ-hating jews.

awkwardcustomer · « **Reply #63 on:** October 13, 2014, 06:38:43 PM »

ascent said,

Quote

That is a false temple. The real Temple spoken about in the Scriptures, according to Catholic and Orthodox prophesy, is the Holy Tabernacle which houses the true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. The anti-Christ may also put himself in a false temple in Jerusalem, but the real defilement of what is Holy will occur in the real Temple of God - the New Arc of the New Covenant - which is, indeed, the Holy Tabernacle. The Church has always eschewed the coming "rebuilt temple" in Jerusalem. It will not have much meaning except to the deceived zionist "christians" and Christ-hating jews.

In what way has the Church "always eschewed the coming "rebuilt temple" in Jerusalem"? The Church Fathers seem quite clear about this - the Antichrist will sit in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem and reign for three and a half years. Then Christ will come.

St Irenaeus, 'Against Heresies', Book V, Ch 30:

Quote

..... But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire....

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm

St Hippolytus, 'Discourse on the End of the World', para 25:

Quote

.....he [the Antichrist] will build the temple in Jerusalem, and will restore it again speedily, and give it over to the Jews. And then he will be lifted up in heart against every man...... for three years and a half— Antichrist will reign upon the earth. And after this his kingdom and his glory shall be taken away. Behold, you who love God, what manner of tribulation there shall rise in those days, such as has not been from the foundation of the world, no, nor ever shall be, except in those days alone.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0504.htm

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #64 on:** October 13, 2014, 07:17:10 PM »

Quote from: Miseremini

Why does everyone say the secret was to be revealed in 1960?

In the 1950's we were waiting for it because we'd always been told the secret was to be revealed NO LATER THAN 1960.

And this is the correct wording. No later than 1960. Because in 1960 we had anti-pope
JXXIII. The coarse of apostasy in the church was irreversible.