CathInfo.com

Dear awkward, if you don't believe in Fatima, that is your choice, most here do believe in the message of Fatima and it does have  Church approval, although the apparition was never declared dogma. Yet, the message of Fatima is Biblical.   Penance, amendment of life, and prayer, is that what you object too?

Many of the apostles did not agree about things, read the book of Acts. Things that were not dogma, yet they all served God, with the exception of Judas, but then he was replaced. Proving no one is indispensable.

What difference does it really make, when Sister Lucy died,  she, Sister Lucy has gone to her eternity, she has been judged and rewarded, so why are you even here putting doubt in the minds of those who are trying to live their Faith by obeying the message of Fatima?

What is your real point?  I wonder!  

My problem is that I find it almost impossible to believe that God would have let His instrument march into conciliardom.  Therefore my logic tells me that Sister Lucy cannot have been God's instrument.  I could be wrong, of course.  But I cannot reconcile Sister Lucy being God's instrument with her embracing of conciliardom.

Why not, she was human, as long as she kept the Faith.  There was a time when most of us embraced conciliarism, but we kept the Faith, and God brought us out of it with His grace.  His timing is most perfect for all of us.  Sister Lucy died in His grace that I am sure of.  


 

Did st. Vincent Ferrer die following an anti-pope?

OHCA said,

Quote

Because she [Sister Lucy] was a mere fallible sinful creature with free will, borne of, and unpreserved from, original sin and man's fallen nature.

Either Fatima must be false, or we, at least by default, should fall in line and accept the bastardized "mass" and "sacraments?"  Not true.......

.... The implication is that if Lucy is this saint-like figure, then she should be followed into conciliardom.....

Do people have to be saints to recognise the errors of Vatican II?  I'm not a saint. Are you? And yet we both recognise Vatican II for what it is.  Aren't all Traditionalists "fallible sinful creature with free will, borne of, and unpreserved from, original sin and man's fallen nature"?

Traditionalists, who are not saints, reject Vatican II.  Sister Lucy, who is not a saint either, accepted Vatican II by attending the Novus Ordo Mass every day in a Novus Ordo convent and never speaking out against the Council.  Surely that is ample reason for Traditionalists to question Sister Lucy.

Your whole argument here seems to be based on Sister Lucy not being saint-like enough to reject Vatican II, that she was a fallible human being, like the rest of us, and that we shouldn't expect sinless perfection from her. In my twenty years in the Church, I've never met a Traditionalist who claimed to be a saint.  But from what I've observed and studied, Traditionalists can at least claim to have enough Catholic sense, Catholic common sense, to recognise Vatican II for what it is.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for Sister Lucy.  I wouldn't expect Sister Lucy to demonstrate saint-like perfection.  But I would hope that she could at least have displayed the kind of Catholic common sense that Traditionalists display by rejecting Vatican II and all its errors.

And yes, Sister Lucy's behaviour does make me question Fatima. The veracity, or otherwise, of the three secrets depends entirely on the testimony of Sister Lucy, and no-one else.  Why should I believe the words of someone who spent over thirty years as a Novus Ordo nun?

You also said,

Quote

..... But if Fatima is true and conciliardom is despicable in His eyes, then why would God have let His instrument for the Fatima message to march into conciliardom?  I claim not to know the mind of the Lord, nor to have counseled Him......

My problem is that I find it almost impossible to believe that God would have let His instrument march into conciliardom.  Therefore my logic tells me that Sister Lucy cannot have been God's instrument.  I could be wrong, of course.  But I cannot reconcile Sister Lucy being God's instrument with her embracing of conciliardom.


ggreg said,

Quote

Imagine if Sister Lucia had joined Marcel Lefebvre in 1973.  Or written to the Media about the critical deadline in 1961 and the earth-shaking implications of the Pope's disobedience.  That would have caused a HUGE focus on the problem.

Exactly.  Just imagine if Sister Lucy had walked out of her Novus Ordo convent and joined Archbishop Lefebvre.  What a message that would have sent.

Alas, she didn't.  

The notion of your thread, "If Fatima is real; and if Sister Lucy followed then NO; then we too should follow the NO," attributes to such an instrument of the Lord used at Fatima as being God-like, omniscient, sinless, and infallible.  I used the term saint-like as a rough summary.  But this even goes beyond saint-like.

The whole notion that you posit is that if Fatima is real, then Sister would not have, or could not have, marched into conciliardom if doing so was wrong.  This does not follow.  But why would God have let it play out like this?

Consider Romans 11:33-34

[33] O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God!  How incomprehensible are His judgments, and how unsearchable His ways!  [34] For who hath known the mind of the Lord?  Or who hath been His counsellor?