Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer  (Read 2170 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cassini

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3311
  • Reputation: +2093/-236
  • Gender: Male


Offline Yeti

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 3492
  • Reputation: +2009/-447
  • Gender: Male
Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2024, 04:24:34 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Glad they're finally waking up and seeing what has been obvious to everyone for decades.


    Offline Marulus Fidelis

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 638
    • Reputation: +295/-83
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #2 on: April 13, 2024, 04:29:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Glad they're finally waking up and seeing what has been obvious to everyone for decades.
    As far as I'm aware it only became obvious to people after the Dimond brothers broke the story, for which no one gives them credit just like so many converts to the true faith came through them but won't acknowledge it after they reject EENS dogma.

    https://youtu.be/VB_hUdRKi4o?si=hn46xg3tfxOKj2tU

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5771
    • Reputation: +4624/-481
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #3 on: April 13, 2024, 06:16:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • As far as I'm aware it only became obvious to people after the Dimond brothers broke the story, for which no one gives them credit just like so many converts to the true faith came through them but won't acknowledge it after they reject EENS dogma.
    You are right here.  The first time I heard this was from the Dimond Brothers.  My initial gut reaction was that it was a kooky conspiracy theory--like all the others.  It was actually after realizing that the difference between a conspiracy theory and the absolute truth so often time that I relooked at their presentation and decided that they were making some really good points.  I have never heard why Chojnowski decided to get involved in the matter, but his organization has pretty much definitively proven the case.

    As a side note, the time between "conspiracy theory" and "truth" seems to have shrunk over years from decades to weeks and sometimes even days.

    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1107
    • Reputation: +688/-128
    • Gender: Female
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #4 on: April 13, 2024, 07:48:00 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
  • As far as I'm aware it only became obvious to people after the Dimond brothers broke the story, for which no one gives them credit ...

    https://youtu.be/VB_hUdRKi4o?si=hn46xg3tfxOKj2tU

    I don't think so.  I don't know when that video was made, but I think it became obvious to people after Marian T. Horvat did her photo analysis, and that was ~2006.  The Dimonds might have figured it out before she did, but I don't remember people speaking of this nor becoming convinced until after the Horvat article, and it still took years for some folks to become convinced.  Maybe it was some combination of the two (i.e. Horvat & Dimonds).  


    Offline gemmarose

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 175
    • Reputation: +41/-86
    • Gender: Female
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #5 on: April 13, 2024, 11:05:15 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • My grandparents found out about the description issues of Lucia in the book Our Lady of Fatima by William T. Walsh (published 1954). Mr. Walsh met with Lucia in 1946. They also found about it more from Horvat.

    https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/g12htArt2_TwoSisterLucys.htm


    Offline Miseremini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3765
    • Reputation: +2803/-238
    • Gender: Female
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #6 on: April 13, 2024, 11:35:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I've always wondered about the entry of her death in her orders records (#265) inserted amongst the deaths for 2005.  The name and the birthdate are correct. Was someone trying to reveal the truth?
    Click to enlarge
    https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png
    "Let God arise, and let His enemies be scattered: and them that hate Him flee from before His Holy Face"  Psalm 67:2[/b]


    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3311
    • Reputation: +2093/-236
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #7 on: April 14, 2024, 04:24:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So, where does that leave the Church with regard to Fatima?
    Where does that leave the Catholic Church in the eyes of the world?
    Will they say its a made up religion that needs frauds like that?
    Read the comments to the Fatima centers.


    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10068
    • Reputation: +5260/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #8 on: April 14, 2024, 06:46:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I've always wondered about the entry of her death in her orders records (#265) inserted amongst the deaths for 2005.  The name and the birthdate are correct. Was someone trying to reveal the truth?
    Click to enlarge
    https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_741_LucyDeath.png
    That is strange given that otherwise the list is for people who died in the early 2000's. I'd like to see the original source.
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)

    Offline SimpleMan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4402
    • Reputation: +1635/-194
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #9 on: April 14, 2024, 08:01:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It all seems pretty much open and shut. 

    Best case scenario, the real Sister Lucia died naturally, and for whatever reason, they enlisted another woman to play the part of Lucia, either (a) to have a convenient shill for Newchurch, (b) as good public relations, to be able to trot out a living Lucia on demand, or (c) both.  Worst case scenario, they either imprisoned or, God forbid, killed the real Lucia, to be able to have the kind of shill I described above, to keep the "real Lucia" from denouncing Newchurch, and/or to keep wraps on what the Third Secret really was. 

    Being able to have "Lucia" say that the consecration of Russia had taken place, and had been accepted by Our Lord and Our Lady would have just been icing on the cake.

    Offline josefamenendez

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4433
    • Reputation: +2953/-199
    • Gender: Female
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #10 on: April 14, 2024, 08:31:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's about time!
    Thanks to Dr Chojnowski for docuмenting the unrefutable evidence needed to convince the Fatima Center. Now it begins!

    (Always wondered why Fr Gruner never "went there" in a more investigative manner)


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41950
    • Reputation: +23984/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #11 on: April 14, 2024, 10:24:01 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don’t believe she died naturally but was likely murdered.  I also believe she was still alive in 1957.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41950
    • Reputation: +23984/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #12 on: April 14, 2024, 10:25:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's about time!
    Thanks to Dr Chojnowski for docuмenting the unrefutable evidence needed to convince the Fatima Center. Now it begins!

    (Always wondered why Fr Gruner never "went there" in a more investigative manner)

    Fr. Gruner, unfortunately, was very big on fundraising, and was a bit of a grifter that way, and so he avoided controversial stuff that might shrink his subscription base.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41950
    • Reputation: +23984/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #13 on: April 14, 2024, 11:55:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So, I don't believe she was still alive.  Why?  Because Our Lady would not have subjected her to the Novus Ordo Mass, etc. ... a consideration lost on them at Fatima Center.

    His objection that it would be hard to get an imposter to become a cloistered nun and live that life 24/7 is weak.  They could have just enlisted someone who already was a nun, or else not had her actually living in the convent except for those occasions when she needed to appear.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41950
    • Reputation: +23984/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ‘Sister Lucy’ Was Not the Real Fatima Seer
    « Reply #14 on: April 14, 2024, 12:03:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • They provide a bad link on their fatima.org site to the full talk on rumble.com, but I found it using their search.

    https://rumble.com/v4nq6mb-a-false-sister-lucia-by-david-rodrguez-fc24-dallas-tx.html