Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Fighting Errors in the Modern World => Topic started by: cassini on April 13, 2024, 04:10:52 PM
-
https://novusordowatch.org/2024/04/fatima-center-fake-sister-lucy-truth/
-
Glad they're finally waking up and seeing what has been obvious to everyone for decades.
-
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
-
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.
-
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).
-
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
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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)
-
I don’t believe she died naturally but was likely murdered. I also believe she was still alive in 1957.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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
.
Yes, this strange event was discussed on this site a few years back here (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/more-evidence-on-the-two-sister-lucy's/) and here (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/sister-lucy-attended-the-novus-ordo-mass-for-decades/). The photo of the entry of Sr. Lucy in the convent records and being listed as having died in 1949 does seem to me to be real, but I'm not sure what to make of it. The controversy surrounding it is pretty complicated.
-
A lot of the objections to the imposter idea state that "No one would want to live the life of a Carmelite nun for their entire lives just to work out a deception." This presumes the people behind the hoax hired some sort of spy or professional actress or con artist to be the fake sister Lucy.
I really don't think that's the case at all. I think they got some Carmelite nun, who had already become comfortable in that life and had decided to spend her life in such a manner, and asked her to be the faker, offering her some small rewards that would mean a lot to someone living in a convent, such as maybe better food, or freedom to do what she wanted, or simply exemption from duties she didn't like.
But I definitely don't think they hired someone from the world to be the imposter; I agree that seems implausible.
-
I don’t believe she died naturally but was likely murdered. I also believe she was still alive in 1957.
Yes- the Fr Fuentes interview was in line with the real Sr Lucy
-
One theory about this entry is that it was a sort of mistake, that her day of death was listed as the day of her profession, or maybe the day of her profession into the order keeping this necrology. At first I thought that was absurd, but if you look in the left column, towards the top, #232 is listed as having died in 1962, so there does seem to be some practice of recording the dead nun by a different year from her actual death. Sr. Lucy doesn't seem to be the only one with an anomalous year given for her death.
On the whole I don't think it's that convincing, but it sure is a tantalizing piece of evidence.
-
Exactly when she died, I do not know, but the Sr. Lucy who claimed the consecration was done was NOT the same person. Even accounting for aging, new dentures, etc, the entire bone structure, shape, and size of a person’s head and face doesn’t change!
-
Exactly when she died, I do not know, but the Sr. Lucy who claimed the consecration was done was NOT the same person.
.
No kidding. The whole point of the fake Sr. Lucy was so she could say a lot of things the real one would NEVER have said, including about the consecration of Russia, approving the fake "3rd secret", approving of JP2, the Novus Ordo, and so on. Basically they wanted to use someone who saw Our Lady to give a fake heavenly approval to the new church, and since the real one wouldn't do such a thing, they had to create an imposter.
-
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7g-E3M615sE
I was searching for a video" ..the smoke of satan has entered..." because of a new post, and in this short video at the 1:31 Time, there is a wonderful picture of Sister Lucy of Fatima. Old picture - young face. Is this the REAL Sister Lucy.?? Pictures of the fake lucy visiting with JP II is when she was quite old,( born in 1907) but she has a young face. ??? That detail in itself cries out Fraud!
-
2017 / 2018
https://fsspx.news/en/news/interview-bishop-bernard-fellay-fatima-centenary-church-crisis-18544
...Maike Hickson:What is, in your own view, the reason for the continued hesitancy of those people in the Church who could disclose, for the greater good, much more information? What do they still have to fear or to lose? Would such a disclosure not be an act of mercy toward the suffering Church in this deep crisis?
+Fellay: " I remember that Sr. Lucy, in an interview with a cardinal from India in the mid-1990s, was very afraid that the Pope would publish the Secret. She said, if she were to give the Holy Father advice, she would caution great prudence. If, for instance, the text contained something like the coming of the Antichrist or something else quite serious that would cast grave doubt on the authority of the Church, it could be a reason the same authorities are hesitant to publish this. I don’t pretend these examples are the case; I am simply speculating as to what some possible reasons might be for not releasing it. "
Never heard of this before, but just one more example of what the "Fake sister Lucy" would spout. We all know that BVMary/ Sister Lucia wanted the secret opened by 1960 !!!
P.S. Did the newSociety say that the Fatima Apparitions were private??? Oh yeah, just greatest miracle witnessed by 70,000 souls. !! ● • ● ○
Talk about the letter of the law that killeth.
BTW we are the Church M ilitant! Pray!