Burke Calls for Consecration of Russia to Immaculate Heart of Mary

I am sure Basto will appreciate the importance you put on accuracy.
Accuracy was the point to his Email to me.
So his conclusion is the main point due to the lack of evidence and accuracy of the translation.
My conclusion, that video, as it is now, is worth nothing, but we are in a time where everyone believe in whatever they want and I suppose this matter is not going to be different.

And while you are right to point out the error in what I posted, I am sure Basto would not want me to point out the lesser matter of the ''To late'' message which comes from Our Lord.Not Our Lady. But I will,since we are after accuracy.

 

I'm glad you reminded me (and anyone reading this thread) that the message came from Our Lord. That actually occurred to me when I was typing but I was too lazy to check it out and should know by now not to trust my dodgy memory.

I suppose it's a bit of a stretch thinking that a lip reader would be able to tell whether the video's subtitles are accurate even if Sr. Lucia always had her face to the camera while speaking. It's hard to disagree with Basto's conclusion.

 

Mac,
I know that the sins of this world in which we live, cry out to God for vengeance and so it will be! In this respect it is too late for the world, True!

But I also know Our Lord, the God of all, hears our measly prayers!

Today Jesus still crys at the doors of our Hearts!

So let us also respond to this great longing of God and satiate, His thrist for souls at this time in History!

This great love of God is beyound our understanding! but it continues today! Why and how do we know this? ................We know this, only because, this evil world continues today!

One Day Justice will come!

But until then we must respond in union with Him and Love the unlovable!

 

Josephite, you are correct, God is not finished with us yet. But that chalice is to the brim! I retain hope, like you, and continue my prayers, some days I feel like a wimp, and other days I feel emboldened by the Holy Spirit.
Soldier on!

 

The significance of the video is clear. Even that the meeting where Sister Lucia was filmed speaking about the Consecration was being questioned!

The short section shown on the YouTube video (now removed) was taken from a DVD documentary. Kevin Symonds has the DVD and has transcribed the relevant section from it:

“The Holy Father has granted the consecration. It is done. He did it in such a way that we all would be able to recognize it. Because he fulfilled the conditions that were missing. Russia’s consecration had been practically done since Pius XII. Pius XII had done the consecration of the world, and in that consecration we can already notice that he had had the intention of consecrating Russia when he said ‘those peoples who most need this consecration.’* He** said: ‘Russia will spread its errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church, many will be martyrs, the peoples will be tormented, some nations will be destroyed. After all this, the Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me’. But she didn’t say how. ‘…will consecrate Russia to me, and Russia will be converted and there will be granted an era of peace.’ But this was Our Lady’s way to refer to the wars and persecutions and the mistakes that atheist communism was causing all throughout the world.”

“The word ‘conversion’ shows a change. So a conversion is a change from evil to good. It doesn’t mean that all evil will disappear but there’s a conversion from evil to good. That’s what the word means.”​

It is worth reading Mr Symonds' web page on this matter at https://kevinsymonds.com/2017/01/09/lucia-1984-consecration/

The bottom line with respect to the video is that it confirms Sister Lucia's interview, the report of which can be read at: http://motheofgod.com/threads/burke...culate-heart-of-mary.10655/page-7#post-173811

 

Josephite,

For me, this was one of your most memorable posts. It was difficult to focus on any one line, but the above struck me the most! It was His thirst to save us and enter into a relationship with us, that took Him to the Cross.

To satiate His thirst, we must willingly and lovingly embrace our Crosses, too! The temptation to avoid inconvenience, ridicule, and suffering is so powerful! Resist!

Yesterday, I was with my spiritual director. He is getting older and experiencing health issues. It is precious to see his holiness shine because he is so able to grasp what matters in life. He shared with me the importance of entering into and offering up the suffering that comes into my life (Personally, I would also include the vicarious suffering we experience because of our loved ones' crosses). He emphasized how marvelously Jesus entered into the suffering of His own life, and yes, took ours upon Himself in the Passion. Recall the line from Philippians 2:

8 He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. 9 For which cause God also hath exalted him...

So my spiritual director said not to flinch from suffering, but embrace it, for it will lead to enduring Glory where:

Rev 21: 4 ...he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away.

Jesus has embraced suffering and died already. What a privilege it is to satisfy His thrist for souls by following His example:

Colossians 1:24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church...

1 Peter 4:13 But rejoice in so far as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.

Thank you, Fr. Kermit!

Safe in the Flames of the Sacred Heart!

 

Thanks Mac (and Basto),

I think Basto gave us a very balanced and unbiased assessment from someone who actually speaks the language and follows the subject matter. I have come to the conclusion that, while interesting, this video is probably too degraded and the clips too small and out of context for me to give it the credence I did at first. On top of that, as Basto pointed out, we are left solely at the mercy of Mr. Evaristo who did the initial translation, not the person who put the subtitles up. Translation is a funny thing. Words from one language don't often correspond to exact words in other languages, so there is often room for interpretation there for good or ill. I am not slamming Mr. Evaristo. I don't know him at all, but this whole video has too many question marks around it.

It wouldn't be a big deal if the video simply stated things Sister Lucy had said many times or even if there was a slight difference from what she had said in the past. The big problem for me is that it goes 180 degrees in the opposite direction and apparently contradicts many things she has been on record as saying over and over again in interviews for over 70 years. That is a lot of faith to put into a few short clips from one degraded video about something this problematic.

Again I find myself drawn back to my original point, if this video actually was so compelling it would be touted as final proof to put the nail in the coffin of any opposition.

For the life of me I don't know why they never put Sister Lucy in front of a camera and had her state these things clearly once and for all. Why not do it at the 2000 "unveiling" of the Third Secret? This thing has been hanging like a cloud over the Church since 1960.

 

Praetorian, I do find your response to the information appearing on this thread over the past week or so very surprising. I do accept however that the information which has emerged conflicts hugely with the narrative that has been coming from Fr Gruner's matrix of websites.

However, the new information conflicts with only one or two previous claimed statements from Sister Lucia and I have little doubt that those claimed statements can not be well sourced.

The limitations or otherwise of the video are irrelevant. I would have thought that the report at http://motheofgod.com/threads/burke...culate-heart-of-mary.10655/page-7#post-173811 plus the 1989 letter from Sister Lucia would be clear enough for most people and difficult to ignore.

 

I love the Scripture from Colossians 1:24

I remember awhile back I referred to that Scripture when conversing with a Protestant and they strongly objected, saying that Christ's sufferings were all that were necessary for salvation. I do agree with that, but that is not the whole breadth of what the Catholic Church teaches. There is a huge redemptive value to our sufferings if we offer them up in union with Jesus. That sanctifies our sufferings, and makes them holy. We are all part of the Mystical Body of Christ, and if we are in a state of grace, we are actively participating in the life of Christ, the Church, and grace.
I am not sure who it was, but I think it was AED who mentioned that we are now in a state of permanent Lent. There is always one thing after another going on in our lives to cause us suffering and inconvenience, and discomfort. I agree, Mario, when our loved ones are "going thru", we are "going thru" with them. Some of this stuff is hateful. It is difficult. It is wearing. I think the Lord and blessed Mother need all of these daily offerings now more than ever.
Sometimes I find myself clenching my teeth from the stress of it all.

 

Just out of curiosity what have I said that has surprised you?

I don't know which particular statements you are referring to that you feel are the only ones contradicted by this "new" information, but there are many interviews etc. and reports by lawful authorities such as Fr. Fuentes that show Sister Lucy stated these things again and again. Many more than two times.

I am just looking for what she actually said though and I hate that on either side of the argument we have to rely very often on what others report that she said. This was a major event in the Church and I would have thought it would have been covered better. Especially since it was so controversial.

I wanted to know the truth here because to me this issue is of penultimate importance. It may shape what we are headed into next. The Chastisement is a conditional prophecy. The Antichrist is not. If the Chastisement was somehow avoided, even narrowly, then according to approved prophecy we may be headed into something much, much worse.

So I am still open to the truth whatever it may be. It is true I cut my teeth on Fr. Gruner when I came back to the faith a couple of years ago, but I fully understand that no one is seeing the current situation perfectly. I think to one degree or another we all suffer from disorientation. Even though I am on the traditional end of the spectrum I pretty much avoid most trad forums as I find them uncharitable. Just like I avoid most liberal forums because I find them arrogant and deluded. I much prefer the company of a well balanced group of people.

The interview you linked I find disturbing and even confirms to me that something is off. In the interview Sister Lucy is reported to have said:

The interview asked is was still having apparitions of Our Lady. Sister Lucia responded, " How curious . . . . I cannot say."

What? What is that supposed to mean?

About the Third Secret so she is supposed to have said:

"Our Lady did not say it was in the Book of Revelation."

This may be true, but Sister Lucy said on more than one occasion that the Third Secret was essentially in chapters 8-13 of the Book of the Apocalypse. So even if it is true Our Lady didn't say it, the interview seems to allude that the Third Secret isn't in the Bible, which is not what Sister Lucy has said.

I can accept her understanding and views changed over time, but it is hard to swallow that the basics changed.

Anyway, what seems apparent to me is that this is a big mess
I don't think that is surprising information though.
As before I have to be content to know that I don't know for sure.

Thank you though (and everyone else) for contributing to this discussion.

 

Thank you for this reply Praetorian as it clarifies, for me, your position. You ask, "what have I said that has surprised you?" Actually it was not what you said but what you did not say that surprised me!

Your post here clarifies things. You say, "I don't know which particular statements you are referring to that you feel are the only ones contradicted by this "new" information, but there are many interviews etc. and reports by lawful authorities such as Fr. Fuentes that show Sister Lucy stated these things again and again. Many more than two times."

No, Praetorian, there are actually not many interviews and reports that contradict the new information. The one you quote by Fr Fuentes is certainly authentic but does not contradict anything in the new information. Sister Lucia, in this interview from 1957 does complain no one was paying attention to the Fatima message but for the life of me I cannot find anything to contradict the new information.

I would invite you (or Mac!) to present sourced evidence of Sister Lucia saying anything in the past which contradicts the new information.

The situation has indeed become a mess. I believe two parties are largely responsible. One is the Vatican for its secrecy on these matters. The other is, of course, Fr Gruner and his network of misinformation. He may have had good intentions but I believe he got carried away with trying to persuade the world of his mistaken view on the whole matter of the Consecration.

 

Would this suffice David?...http://www.fatima.org/consecrussia/srlucy1946.asp

 

You've left me with the task of finding the point where Sister Lucia said something in 1946 that she reverses in the new information. I am assuming that you are referring to Professor Walsh's statement: ‘What Our Lady wants is that the Pope and all the bishops in the world shall consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart on one special day."

And so, because the 1984 Consecration did not include 'Russia' in the wording, Fr Gruner and friends reject everything Sister Lucia said subsequently!

But Our Lady, like Jesus, is not a legalist! Our Lady knew perfectly well the intention of Pope John Paul's 1984 consecration and his desire to fulfil, in detail, the request of the Virgin. She knew he fulfilled it and that it was accepted by Our Lady. If Sister Lucia had remained silent about the matter after 1984 then people could validly conjecture as to whether the consecration had indeed been fulfilled. But we now know without any doubt the thoughts of Sister Lucia on the matter.

 

Sister Lucy’s Statement to Professor Walsh (July 15, 1946)
On July 15, 1946, Catholic historian William Thomas Walsh interviewed Sister Lucy at her convent of the Dorothean Sisters at Vilar, Portugal. He recorded the incident in his popular book Our Lady of Fatima. This interview clearly demonstrates that Our Lady’s request for the Consecration of Russia will only be fulfilled when, together, the Pope and the world’s Catholic bishops consecrate specifically Russia:

Finally we came to the important subject of the second July secret, of which so many different and conflicting versions have been published. Lucia made it plain that Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of the world to Her Immaculate Heart. What She demanded specifically was the consecration of Russia.She did not comment, of course, on the fact that Pope Pius XII had consecrated the world, not Russia, to the Immaculate Heart in 1942. But she said more than once, and with deliberate emphasis: ‘What Our Lady wants is that the Pope and all the bishops in the world shall consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart on one special day. If this is done, She will convert Russia and there will be peace. If it is not done, the errors of Russia will spread through every country in the world.’‘Does this mean, in your opinion, that every country, without exception, will be overcome by Communism?’‘Yes.’1
Professor Walsh continued:

It was plain that she felt that Our Lady’s wishes had not yet been carried out. People must say the Rosary, perform sacrifices, make the Five First Saturday Communions, pray for the Holy Father.
In this interview with Professor Walsh, Sister Lucy again set forth the precise requirements for the Consecration of Russia, performed in accordance with Our Lady’s request: the Pope, together with all of the world’s bishops, must publicly and solemnly consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Also, it is telling that Sister Lucy did not comment on Pope Pius XII’s 1942 consecration of the world: by her silence on the subject, and by once again repeating the specific requirements for the Consecration, she affirmed that a consecration of the world would not suffice to fulfill Our Lady’s request.

Notes:

1. William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima 4th printing, (1947) p. 226.


This book is available free online.
https://archive.org/stream/OurLadyO...ima - William Thomas Walsh#page/n227/mode/2up

Here is a screenshot of the relevant passage in the online book:

View attachment 6434

 

There is still plenty of doubt!

 

However many times you quote the 1946 Professor Walsh article, already given us by Mac, in different forms , it tells us nothing that conflicts with Sister Lucia's later statements.

 

Really?
What about this?

It certainly conflicts with the following statements in that video you mentioned:

 

Where is the conflict? Sister Lucia is merely pointing out that Pius XII was already thinking of Russia in his consecration but the requirements she specified to Professor Walsh had not been fulfilled.

 

Huh? What do you mean?

The conflict is that in the 1946 interview, Sr Lucia said that the consecration still needs to be done, because the conditions were not fulfilled.

However in that video you mentioned, she says: "The Holy Father has granted the consecration. It is done. He did it in such a way that we all would be able to recognize it. Because he fulfilled the conditions that were missing. Russia’s consecration had been practically done since Pius XII."

 

I don't think we are going to make any progress with this kind of to and fro. Sister Lucia has said repeatedly that the earlier consecrations did not fulfill Our Lady's request. Only the 1984 consecration fulfilled her wishes. You are misunderstanding what she said in the video.

When I have more time I will copy the whole 1989 letter from Sister Lucia that confirms the above.