Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: RomanCatholic1953 on November 22, 2017, 10:54:29 AM

Title: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: RomanCatholic1953 on November 22, 2017, 10:54:29 AM
Do you agree if this is the real Sister Lucy at age 73?

http://traditioninaction.org/Questions/B999_M013_Lucy.html
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Marlelar on November 22, 2017, 11:04:17 AM
Nope. 
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Miseremini on November 22, 2017, 11:06:25 AM
I don't believe this is the real Sister Lucy but I do agree the woman pictured to be 73 years old.

Living in a convent all her life she would be free of stress lines on the face.  Many 73 year olds are still free of facial wrinkles or very shallow ones at best.
Also the fullness under the chin indicates loss of elasticity of the skin.
The habit hides all the other visible signs of age.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Ladislaus on November 22, 2017, 11:13:47 AM
Agreed.  This Sister Lucy looks nothing like the real Sister Lucy.  It's obvious that she was replaced.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 22, 2017, 02:46:37 PM
Do you agree if this is the real Sister Lucy at age 73?

http://traditioninaction.org/Questions/B999_M013_Lucy.html
(http://traditioninaction.org/Questions/Images/B_999_M013-Lucy.jpg)
.
Not only the face of the sister but the background -- can anyone verify that this is the Carmelo of Fatima in Portugal?
.
The steeple in the background looks a lot like a side view of the old Fatima basilica. 
.
(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.travel-in-portugal.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fphotos%2Ffatima-portugal.jpg&sp=1eb661560d7e482ec40e68af287964c2)
.
Curiously, all the images I found on the Internet show the basilica from the front or slightly from one side or the other, but none of them are from a 90-degree left or right side view, like the one in the top picture shows.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Clemens Maria on November 22, 2017, 02:50:25 PM
http://radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2017/11/it-begins-sister-lucy-truth.html
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: sean1846 on November 22, 2017, 04:38:34 PM
Absolutely not!
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: 2Vermont on November 22, 2017, 05:16:07 PM
Agreed.  This Sister Lucy looks nothing like the real Sister Lucy.  It's obvious that she was replaced.
You'd think they'd try a little harder to find someone that actually looked like her.  It's pathetic really.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Recusant Sede on November 22, 2017, 05:24:23 PM
I don’t put it past the NO establishment to substitute a double, but I always found the argument about the teeth not very compelling. It seems very obvious that the picture of her with straight teeth shows that she has a poorly made immediate denture.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Ladislaus on November 22, 2017, 07:16:27 PM
I don’t put it past the NO establishment to substitute a double, but I always found the argument about the teeth not very compelling. It seems very obvious that the picture of her with straight teeth shows that she has a poorly made immediate denture.

I agree that the teeth pictures prove nothing ... but the facial structures of the two women are radically different.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: RomanCatholic1953 on November 22, 2017, 08:05:05 PM
According to the Wikipedia the colonnades of the Basilica of our Lady of Fatima were completed in 1954 so this photo is just
impossible.  Notice all the terrain, the trees were also non existent since the construction begun in the 1920's.
Lucy 2 must be standing in front of a large photograph  that was designed to deliberately confused and deceived people. 
The message here is in the minds of the of the deceivers. A false view of the Basilica of our Lady of Fatima, a False
Lucy.

On 13 May 1928, the first foundation stone was laid in the construction of the basilica and colonnade of Fátima, a process that continued until 1954. The construction of the colonnade, by architect António Lino began in 1949 and extended to 1954.  
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Clemens Maria on November 22, 2017, 10:16:05 PM
The personality appears different too.  Pre-1958 Lucy looks serious.  Post-V2 Lucy looks gay and light-hearted.  The last interview that Pre-1958 Lucy indubitably gave was the 1957 Fr. Fuentes interview in which she talked about the end-times.  That interview was very controversial and it cost Fr. Fuentes his position.  So maybe that's when they decided to replace Sr. Lucy?  Why are there no pictures of her between 1946 and 1967?
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Cantarella on November 22, 2017, 10:44:41 PM
You'd think they'd try a little harder to find someone that actually looked like her.  It's pathetic really.
I agree that they could have done a better job.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: cindy gibson on November 22, 2017, 11:10:18 PM
I agree this nun is not the real Sister Lucy , but the same one that is in all the new books on Fatima, including the one
Bishop Fellay held up in his recent " Fatima center Russian Talk". This women most definitely looks 73 some women don't 
wrinkle but just sag and you can see the hanging jowls and chin line on this sister Lucy. I think they have replaced sister Lucy  around 1960,
And this fake Lucy has just grown old but is the same women.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: 2Vermont on November 23, 2017, 06:38:34 AM
I agree that they could have done a better job.
Hi Cantarella!  I was just wondering whatever happened to you a few days ago.  
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Miseremini on November 23, 2017, 12:04:37 PM
Everyone might like to look back when this was discussed in 2014.

https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/)

Remember in the 1990's her convents death records were on line but when people saw that she had died in 1949, it was quickly removed.  Look at Reference #265
http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png (http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png)
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Ladislaus on November 23, 2017, 06:10:34 PM
Everyone might like to look back when this was discussed in 2014.

https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/)

Remember in the 1990's her convents death records were on line but when people saw that she had died in 1949, it was quickly removed.  Look at Reference #265
http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png (http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png)

Hmmmm.  Was the Father Fuentes interview also conducted with the imposter?
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 23, 2017, 11:42:36 PM
Hmmmm.  Was the Father Fuentes interview also conducted with the imposter?
.
Fr. Fuentes was the postulator for the cause of Jacinta and Francisco, as well as the author of the mutli-volume compendium of the Fatima story with numerous interviews and eyewitness testimonies. I highly doubt he could have been fooled by any imposter.
.
But his work was done in the mid to late 1950's, as I recall.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 23, 2017, 11:57:33 PM
Everyone might like to look back when this was discussed in 2014.

https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/)

Remember in the 1990's her convents death records were on line but when people saw that she had died in 1949, it was quickly removed.  Look at Reference #265
http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png (http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png)
.
That's an interesting page. Most of the decedents are dated 2005, and nearly as many are 2004. There is only one in 2002 and one in 2000, then one in 1964, but Sister Lucia (# 265) is the oldest death, Def: 31/05/1949. If so, then she actually died May 31st, 1949 -- unless somehow that's a mistake.
.
Why would they have her listed among so many others who died in 2005?
.
The others (#s 252 - 271) are arranged in chronological dates of death, and Sr. Lucia's 265 is between #264 Def: 04/02/2005 and #266 Def: 15/02/2005. I'm wondering if Sr. Lucia might be stuck in there because her double died between those two dates -- They say she died Feb. 13th, 2005 which would be Def: 13/02/2005.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 24, 2017, 12:55:05 AM
Everyone might like to look back when this was discussed in 2014.

https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/)
.
Okay, I just read that whole thread. The link for the TIA screenshot of the list of nun deaths is only provided near the end of the thread, and no one goes into detail on the data contained in the list. It's just a link, and the image of the list itself is not provided on the thread.
.
It appears to me there may very well be some important clues in the dates provided for the other sisters.
.
Quote
Remember in the 1990's her convents death records were on line but when people saw that she had died in 1949, it was quickly removed.  Look at Reference #265
http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png (http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png)
.

We should look at Reference #265, for sure, but we should also look at the others, perhaps ALL the others!
.
There are several death dates that appear out of order, like the one for Sr. Lucy's out of order. 
.
I have a hunch that Sister Lucia is not the only one whose record was falsified, or perhaps she is not the only sister in that cloister whose identity was faked. They might have done this in several cases just to get practice at the deception, or maybe the Vatican or some cardinal or whatever had confidence that it could be kept under wraps with Sr. Lucia because they had already done this with other nuns previously.
.
Regarding the question of "Why bother?" -- Keep in mind they managed to keep the Lucia #2 alive until 2005, and they released the quasi-Third Secret in 2000 just after the death of Malachi Martin (+1998 ), who, if he had been alive in 2000 he could have gone public with denouncing it as a fake because he had read the real Third Secret (but he was sworn to secrecy). He explained that he could not reveal its contents but whenever someone gave him a proposed text he was quite willing to say whether it was accurate or not.
.
The fake Sr. Lucy had never seen the real Third Secret so she would have no idea whether the 2000 version was real or not.
.
So the point is, they could have kept the fake Sr. Lucy alive so she would not rat them out with the 2000 deception -- simple.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Ladislaus on November 24, 2017, 09:06:08 AM
.
That's an interesting page. Most of the decedents are dated 2005, and nearly as many are 2004. There is only one in 2002 and one in 2000, then one in 1964, but Sister Lucia (# 265) is the oldest death, Def: 31/05/1949. If so, then she actually died May 31st, 1949 -- unless somehow that's a mistake.
.
Why would they have her listed among so many others who died in 2005?
.

Well, the official date they give for her death is 2005.  So that's why she's in the list but someone slipped up and, looking in some other record, accidentally put down the real date?
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: RomanCatholic1953 on November 24, 2017, 10:23:52 AM
If Sister Lucy died in 1949, who was the Sister Lucy that Father Fuentes interviewed in 1957?
She must have died on a latter date perhaps before 1960 because God knew that the Pope would not
release the secret and the election of Pope John XXIII and successors would plunge the church into utter chaos
in which its inward and outward forms is unrecognizable since the death of Pius XII.
The photo behind Lucy 2 in which many followers of Fatima would know is false and must be giving a
sort of message!
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 24, 2017, 01:01:44 PM
Well, the official date they give for her death is 2005.  So that's why she's in the list but someone slipped up and, looking in some other record, accidentally put down the real date?
.
If the real date was posted by mistake in her case, perhaps the real date for other sisters was posted by mistake in their case(s) too.
.
This old list of vital statistics could be compared to a new list, to see whether any of the dates for the other sisters are different. But where do you find the new list?
.
There are a number of oddities about this old list. They have two sisters dying on the same day in two places (total of 4 nuns, 2 dates) and there are two times when several died in the same week: the last week of November, 2004 shows three sisters dying (#241, #242, #243); two sisters died on December 5th, 2004 (#244, #245).  From Dec. 19th, 2004 through Jan. 12th, 2005 (4 weeks) they have 10 sisters dying, ages 88, 84, 77, 85, 91, 77, 98, 80, 67 and 81 -- the last 4 dying in the same week. Unless the population was in the thousands, this seems almost impossible. The next group of 8 deaths is shown between Jan. 16th, 2005 and Feb. 4th, 2005 -- they have a total of 25 sisters dying all within 14 weeks (#240 - #264). THEN, 9 days later following that last one (Feb. 4th) is when they claim Sister Lucy died, Feb. 13th, 2005.
.
The 6 deaths following Sister Lucy all happened within 3 weeks.
.
Overall, this one page depicts a tremendous increase in frequency of deaths. The first 3 deaths are shown over a period of 3 years. Two years from the first death to the second, and one year from the second death to the third. The 5th death listed (#232) is entirely out of order, like Sister Lucy's is. Maria de San Jose (#232) is shown as dying in 1962 at age 26. Why is Maria de San Jose listed as number 232 if she had been dead for 42 years in 2004?
.
Overall, there were 4 deaths prior to Feb. 2004 (if you include #232 being out of place), then 40 more in the next year (Feb. 2004 to March 2005). That's a FORTY-FOLD INCREASE in one year (4 deaths over 4 years to 40 over one year). Why the sudden increase? Something isn't right. These deaths occurred in many different places all over the world, and Sister Lucy's is the only death in Coimbra, Portugal.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on November 25, 2017, 09:32:08 AM
Were the sisters killed off because they knew too much. 

Body doubles, murder, lies are not Catholic.  So many sins is destroying the Catholic Church.  
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 28, 2017, 03:07:27 PM
Were the sisters killed off because they knew too much.

Body doubles, murder, lies are not Catholic.  So many sins is destroying the Catholic Church.  
.
There isn't anything to tell us that the other sisters listed as dying had ever known Sister Lucy. Why would they want to kill off particular sisters that lived hundreds or thousands of miles away, even in other countries from where Sister Lucy lived? They are being described as having lived and died in various places all over the world (Europe - France, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Netherlands, Germany, Ireland, England - South and North America, Philippines, India), while Sister Lucia is the ONLY ONE listed as having died in Portugal, between 1949 and Feb. 2005. It's curious that the suspected "real death date" of Sister Lucy is at one extreme end of the list (the first death date listed) and the date when her double is suspected of dying is at the opposite end of the list.
.
Several of these sisters were born in the same small town where they would later die, and others were born and died within a small area of one country. One sister (#258, born in London, died in Quidenham, Great Britain at age 92) has the name "Joyce" and birth name "Parker Joyce." Apparently that means Joyce Parker. But in my experience all sisters take a new name when they take final vows. Joyce is not a new name. Perhaps this is another typo. So it could be a list rather unreliable in its details.
.
All in all, there must be something missing. This one page is not enough information to go by. But it seems to be enough to raise suspicions.
.
I don't see anything there that alludes to evidence of anyone being murdered because they knew too much.
But at the same time, neither is there shown anything indicating that no one was murdered because they knew too much.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 28, 2017, 03:26:58 PM
.
Here we are talking about this list and I just realized maybe it will copy here so everyone can see what we've been talking about.

.
(http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png)
.
I tried to make it show up larger but it automatically shrank down smaller.
Apparently if you click on it, the list shows up larger.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: RomanCatholic1953 on November 30, 2017, 07:07:40 PM
Mysteries surrounding the two Sister Lucys, article by Homer Sweeney


http://traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/g27ht_Lucys.htm

Our Lady of Fatima and the Battle with Freemasonry

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/our-lady-of-fatima-and-the-battle-with-freemasonry-part

I am still looking for an article that I read a long time ago that a lady claimed she overheard a conversation between people talking about Sister Lucy claimed she had knowledge that she was murdered by the masons in 1959.  If this is true, the Vatican most likely was complicit in her murder.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 30, 2017, 08:12:40 PM
Mysteries surrounding the two Sister Lucys, article by Homer Sweeney


http://traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/g27ht_Lucys.htm

Our Lady of Fatima and the Battle with Freemasonry

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/our-lady-of-fatima-and-the-battle-with-freemasonry-part

I am still looking for an article that I read a long time ago that a lady claimed she overheard a conversation between people talking about Sister Lucy claimed she had knowledge that she was murdered by the masons in 1959.  If this is true, the Vatican most likely was complicit in her murder.
.
by Deacon Nick Donnelly (https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/author/deacon-nick-donnelly)  •  ChurchMilitant.com  •  February 25, 2017

2017 marks the 100th anniversary of Our Lady's visits to the three shepherd children at Fatima, Portugal. 2017 also marks the 300th anniversary of the foundation of Freemasonry with the establishment of the Grand Lodge in London in 1717. From the perspective of the Catholic Church the two anniversaries couldn't be further apart in their significance for humanity.

Michael Voris is speaking on the topic of Freemasonry

The Marian apparitions at Fatima signify the supernatural intervention of God to call a lost humanity to repent from the evil of apostasy and war through the motherly solicitude of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Queen of Heaven. The foundation of the first Lodge, and the subsequent history of Freemasonry, signifies the idolatrous adulation of man, the luciferian rejection of God and an implacable hostility towards Our Lord Jesus Christ and his Church.

The year of the Marian apparitions at Fatima, 1917, was also the 200th anniversary of the foundation of Freemasonry. It was marked by violent Masonic attacks against Our Lady at Fatima and the Pope at Rome.

1917 Masonic Attacks Against Our Lady of Fatima

Father John de Marchi's account of the miraculous events at Fatima, personally verified by Sr. Lucia, recounts the hostility of local freemasons towards Our Lady and the three visionaries at Fatima. Arthur Santos, the mayor of Vila Nova de Ourem, who persecuted and psychologically tortured the three children, was a member of the Masonic Lodge of Leiria, and founded a new lodge in his native Vila Nova de Ourem.

The Masonic Lodge at Santarem, a neighboring town to Fatima, became the rallying point to atheistic opposition to Our Lady of Fatima. In September 1917, men from Santarem joined up with men from Vila Nova de Ourem and marched to the site of the apparitions at the Cova da Iria. They proceeded to attack the make-shift shrine with axes. A local newspaper gave the following account:

With an axe they cut the tree under which the three shepherd children stood during the famous phenomenon of the 13th of this month. They took away the tree, together with a table on which a modest altar had been arranged, and on which a religious image (of Our Lady) had been placed. They also took a wooden arch, two tin lanterns, and two crosses, one made of wood and the other of bamboo-cane wrapped in tissue paper. These prize exhibits, including, as a footnote explains, a bogus version of the tree, were placed on exhibit in a house not far from the Seminary at Santarem, and an entrance fee exacted from those who wished to enter and be entertained at the widely advertised religious farce. One disappointment to the sponsors was the fact that not everyone, even among the Church's active critics, agreed it was amusing. The profits from the exhibit were to be turned over to a local charity, but the beneficiaries said very politely, "Thank you; no."

Later, in the evening, a blasphemous procession was held. The parade was headed by two men thumping on drums (a newspaper account reveals), while just behind it came the famous tree on which the Lady is said to have appeared. Next came the wooden arch, with its lanterns alight, then the altar table and other objects which the faithful had placed upon it at the Cova da Iria. To the sound of blasphemous litanies, the procession passed through the principal streets of the city, returning to the Sa da Band Eira Square, at which point it broke up.

Lucia, one of the child visionaries, later expressed relief that the Masons attacked and destroyed the wrong tree.

1917 Masonic Attacks Against the Pope
One month after the final apparition of Our Lady at Fatima in October 1917, Freemasonry openly declared war on the Catholic Church through a series of protests in Rome. The freemasons littered Rome with posters showing the Archangel Michael defeated on the ground trampled beneath a triumphant Lucifer. In their protests against the Catholic Church, the freemasons also displayed the black flag of the heretic Giordano Bruno, a Dominican friar who promoted materialistic pantheism, a central belief of Freemasonry. Bruno also denied fundamental doctrines of the Faith, including the Most Holy Trinity, the Incarnation and the perpetual virginity of Our Lady. As a student in Rome at the time, St. Maximilian Kolbe witnessed the violently anti-Catholic celebrations of Freemasonry's 200th anniversary. The first of his accounts was published in the November 1935 issue of the Japanese Militia of the Immaculate magazine:


Years later, the freemasons in Rome began to demonstrate openly and belligerently against the Church. They placed the black standard of the "Giordano Brunisti" under the windows of the Vatican. On this standard the archangel, St. Michael, was depicted lying under the feet of the triumphant Lucifer. At the same time, countless pamphlets were distributed to the people in which the Holy Father was attacked shamefully. Right then I conceived the idea of organizing an active society to counteract Freemasonry and other slaves of Lucifer.

The freemasons littered Rome with posters showing the Archangel Michael defeated on the ground trampled beneath a triumphant Lucifer.

Saint Maximilian Kolbe's second account was published in 1939:

In the years leading up to the war, the masonic "clique," disapproved of on several occasions by the Sovereign Pontiffs, governed in Rome, the capital of Christianity, with ever greater impudence. It did not even hesitate to brandish in the streets of the City during the festivities in honor of Giordano Bruno, a black flag showing the Archangel St. Michael beneath the feet of Lucifer; still less did they hesitate to brandish masonic insignia beneath the windows of the Vatican. A reckless hand felt no repugnance in writing: Satan will rule in the Vatican and the Pope will serve him in the uniform of a Swiss Guard, and other things of that kind. This mortal hatred for the Church of Jesus Christ and for His Vicar was not just a prank on the part of deranged individuals, but a systematic action proceeding from the principle of Freemasonry: Destroy all religion, whatever it may be, especially the Catholic religion.

As a consequence of witnessing the freemasons' hostility towards the Church in 1917, St. Maximilian Kolbe decided to found the Militia Immaculatae [The Knights of the Immaculate] to counteract the actions of Lucifer.

Timothy Tindal-Robertson, an expert on Fatima, is certain that the Marian apparitions in 1917 were a manifestation of the conflict between Our Lady and the forces of evil at work in the world. In a recent correspondence he told me:

Our Lady's apparitions were heaven's answer to the furious attack on the Church in Portugal unleashed after the Masons murdered the king in Lisbon in 1906, and then a totally secular anti-Catholic Republican government was installed in 1908, which seriously persecuted the Church. A few years later, a government minister declared in their assembly that in two generations they would have eliminated Catholicism in Portugal.

However, word spread all over Portugal and Our Lady's apparitions at Fatima, and despite the efforts of the government to prevent it, 70,000 people came to the Cova in October 1917.  Overjoyed at the stupendous Miracle of the Sun, the people went home and complied with our Lady's request for the Rosary to such an extent that it brought about the resurrection of the Church, while the republican party simply withered away. The same thing happened in Austria in 1955, and again in Portugal when there was a threat of a Communist uprising in 1975.

In the second part of this article we'll examine the reasons why Freemasonry is violently hostile against Our Lady and the Catholic Church, the warnings against Freemasonry from various popes, and current concerns about the infiltration of the Catholic Church by freemasons.
.
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: RomanCatholic1953 on December 01, 2017, 10:57:10 AM
Photograph studies confirmed two Sister Lucys:

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B652_Lucys.html
Title: Re: Unknown Photo of Sister Lucy 2 said taken in 1980
Post by: Neil Obstat on December 04, 2017, 04:30:32 PM
Photograph studies confirmed two Sister Lucys:

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B652_Lucys.html
.
Excerpt from linked page:
.
(http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/Images/B_652_Comp02.jpg)
.
Quote:
.
At left, we see a simple peasant, but with a rich personality. She is serious, profound, rock firm in her decisions, and acutely aware that she has a great mission to accomplish. There is no trace of vanity or worldly thoughts in her way of dress or demeanor.
.
At right, we see a sentimental girl, entirely turned toward pleasing others. Her weak personality makes her susceptible to do whatever she is instructed by her friends. She is vain, coquettish and mediocre. She enjoys intruding into other people's lives in order to discover trifling details and become involved in intrigues.
.
.
.
The age regression service did not ask for samples of clothing, nor is there any hint that projecting styles of dress is a part of their service.
.
How does a viewer of a single photo arrive at conclusions regarding sentimentality or pleasing others or susceptibility to follow directions, of vanity, coquettishness and mediocrity? How does one arrive at knowledge the subject's enjoyment of intrusion into the lives of others to discover trifling details and becoming involved in intrigues? One gets the impression the author was Arthur Conan Doyle.
.