More Problems with Fatima accounts (Remnant article)

Started by Gerard, June 15, 2017, 11:37:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Michael Wilson

Not a Modernists but acting like one: Here is Cardinal Ratzinger (following the lead of Dhanis), who all the while "not doubting the sincerity of the seers", nonetheless accuses Sr. Lucy of fabricating her version of the visions:
QuoteThe theological critique of Dhanis, never questioning the good faith of the seers, raised, among other issues, the problem of "filtering" the person of the seers (with their characteristics, human experiences and limitations) of "private revelations" and messages that the Church admits of supernatural origin. This issue is developed by Ratzinger in his above cited "Theological Commentary," when he speaks of the anthropological structure of apparitions and of the capacity for representation and knowledge on the part of the seers, to conclude that the subject of apparition (the seer) "plays an essential part in the formation of the image of what appears."[xxvi] Elsewhere, Ratzinger said that the third part of the "secret" of Fátima "uses images which Lúcia may have seen in devotional books and which derive from ancient intuitions of faith."[xxvii] One cannot help but see these passages of theological critique from Ratzinger as a link with the laudatory mention that he makes of Dhanis. Also this last passage recalls in 1944, for example, that the vision of hell reported by Lúcia would correspond to an idea strongly seized by the child seers about the horror of sin and eternal damnation and that, little by little, this notion would have evoked a "vision in their imagination."[xxviii] This reference of Ratzinger to Dhanis, we insist, is a form of recognition of the totality of the work of the first Catholic theologian who critically addressed the content of the Fátima message.
So Sr. Lucy uses images seen in devotional books....evoked a "vision in their imagination" in reference to Fr. Dhanis. What is left of the veracity of Sister Lucy?
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: spasiisochrani on June 22, 2017, 03:19:42 AM
There is no evidence that Fr. Dhanis was a "modernist", and he was, in fact, a staunch defender of the physical resurrection of Our Lord against the "He is risen in our hearts but His body remained dead" crowd of the 1970s.  His only involvement with the Dutch Catechism was that, on behalf of the commission of cardinals appointed to examine it, he co-authored a "supplement" designed to resolve its ambiguities in an orthodox direction.

Indeed, and I have verified this myself as well.  The claim that Fr. Dhanis was a modernist is a LIE and a calumny. In fact, he was noted for dismissing modernists in the Jesuits (of which there were plenty) from their positions prior to Vatican II.  The weasel words "contributed to" (rather than "authored") the Dutch catechism raised my suspicions and they turned out to be correct.  Using this kind of m.o. makes the Fatimists (where everyone who disagrees is a "modernist" or "rationalist") no better than the modern political Left (where everyone who disagrees is  "racist", "sexist", "xenophobe", etc.)

Fatimists, consider yourself busted and you get no more credibility and no more time from me whatsoever until and unless this LIE about a priest is retracted.  This is disgusting and pathetic.

Michael Wilson

More on Fr. Dhanis:
QuoteIt is true, however, that the cautious "Theological Commentary" of Ratzinger that accompanied the public disclosure of the "third secret" works around a concrete fundamental point made by Dhanis, namely the "enrichment" of the message of 1917 with elements coming from the further experience of the seer, including allusions to Communist Russia – allusions responsible for much of the brilliant international trajectory of the cult of Fátima from the 40s, starting after the war with pilgrimages of the statue of the Virgin across Europe and the world. In this matter, in fact, the official media of the Catholic Church do not seem even today to be willing to make public and explicit concessions to critical theology, not even to its more moderate wing, emblematically represented by Dhanis, who never questioned as a whole the authenticity of the message of Fátima.
Fr. Dhanis operated via-a-vis Fatima in the same way as Fr. Raymond Brown operated in his exegesis of Sacred Scripture; never openly contradicting the same, but at the same time incessantly introducing "doubts" and "difficulties" all through the texts, letting the reader draw their own conclusions 
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Michael Wilson on June 22, 2017, 12:00:23 PM
Not a Modernists but acting like one:

Not anywhere near good enough.  Disagree with Fr. Dhanis all you wish, but there is not a scintilla of justification for calling him a modernist.


Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Michael Wilson on June 22, 2017, 12:06:12 PM
Fr. Dhanis operated via-a-vis Fatima in the same way as Fr. Raymond Brown operated in his exegesis of Sacred Scripture; never openly contradicting the same, but at the same time incessantly introducing "doubts" and "difficulties" all through the texts, letting the reader draw their own conclusions

Yeah.  But Fatima isn't Sacred Scripture.  So a comparison of Fr. Dhanis to Fr. Brown is not anywhere close to justifiable.

Michael Wilson

Alright Q, I don't have any more evidence to back up the charge, so I take it back and apologize to anyone who I have scandalized.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

PerEvangelicaDicta

#276
MW, in fairness, we are all subject to what is actually available to read about Fr. Dhanis.  His critics are the primary authors of information about him, as I quoted in a previous post.
excerpt:
QuoteThis is not the place to try to explain, even summarily, the set of critical observations of Dhanis, especially developed in his original text of 1944-45, published in Flemish, strangely still inaccessible to most potential readers, never having been published in translation. Thus, of his thesis there are only known today summaries and excerpts in several languages, released mainly by its critics. According to what was rumored among the Belgian Jesuits, Dhanis would have written and published the article in Flemish "pour éviter de trop bruyantes reactions [to evade too noisy reactions]."[vii] What followed, however, was that his text will not be wider and more faithfully known, without avoiding, until now, those "too noisy reactions."

This would explain why it's so difficult to find objective information about him, not influenced by the understandable emotions surrounding the cult of Fatima.  Either one must read Flemish and have access to the originals, or wait for a proper translation.

Fwiw, I assumed the party line that he is a modernist, until I read some translations he wrote about Fatima (on a very pro Fatima site that is not friendly to this priest), wherein he 1) expresses his belief in the apparitions, as approved  2) has great trouble with Sr. Lucia's post approval information and tries to figure out why.  His theories may or may not be accurate, but he struggled for years to understand the discrepancies.

I thank the good father for his F1 / F2 explanation, otherwise I'd have abandoned all belief in Fatima.  I still cling to the narrow date window of Church approval (F1) and in the light of modernist Rome, the promotion of F2 is clearer, and how it serves their purposes.

Sr. Lucia's later revelations (F2) reminds me of the St. Philomena story (for the record, to whom I'm greatly devoted, and fascinated with the actual archaeological data discovered at her tomb). 
As I noted in the 3DD thread about St. Philomena:
" ...I looked into the background and, while on the one hand, I was moved to learn about how she/her tomb was actually discovered, on the other hand, I was appalled at how the sister (Mother Maria Luisa di Gesu) who conveyed her very simple private revelation re: date of death and the Saint's relics journey to Mugnano, was ordered to return to the statue of St. Filumena and get more details.  Imho, the tone of Mother Maria Luisa's description of her first locution was different than the lengthy, fleshed out story that followed, and that she apparently protested having to do.  Heck, she was concerned herself that the 1st locution was merely an illusion."
They shall not be confounded in the evil time; and in the days of famine they shall be filled
Psalms 36:19

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Michael Wilson on June 22, 2017, 12:17:04 PM
Alright Q, I don't have any more evidence to back up the charge, so I take it back and apologize to anyone who I have scandalized.

Thank you and fair enough.  It isn't your fault, really, but the fault of those who publish such slanders.

jmjZelie



Cardinal Burke referencing many of the things being discussed in this thread...

A LifeSiteNews video
Swam the Tiber 2010
Discovered traditional Catholicism 2014
Please forgive my ignorance or apparent impertinence.

awkwardcustomer

Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on June 22, 2017, 01:10:36 PM
Quote from: Michael Wilson on June 22, 2017, 12:17:04 PM
Alright Q, I don't have any more evidence to back up the charge, so I take it back and apologize to anyone who I have scandalized.

Thank you and fair enough.  It isn't your fault, really, but the fault of those who publish such slanders.

And what slanders they publish, as any quick Google search will reveal. One Trad Catholic site desctibed the writings of Fr Dhanis as 'diabolic'.
And formerly the heretics were manifest; but now the Church is filled with heretics in disguise.  
St Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 15, para 9.

And what rough beast, it's hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
WB Yeats, 'The Second Coming'.

nmoerbeek

Quote from: Michael Wilson on June 22, 2017, 12:00:23 PM
Not a Modernists but acting like one: Here is Cardinal Ratzinger (following the lead of Dhanis), who all the while "not doubting the sincerity of the seers", nonetheless accuses Sr. Lucy of fabricating her version of the visions:
QuoteThe theological critique of Dhanis, never questioning the good faith of the seers, raised, among other issues, the problem of "filtering" the person of the seers (with their characteristics, human experiences and limitations) of "private revelations" and messages that the Church admits of supernatural origin. This issue is developed by Ratzinger in his above cited "Theological Commentary," when he speaks of the anthropological structure of apparitions and of the capacity for representation and knowledge on the part of the seers, to conclude that the subject of apparition (the seer) "plays an essential part in the formation of the image of what appears."[xxvi] Elsewhere, Ratzinger said that the third part of the "secret" of Fátima "uses images which Lúcia may have seen in devotional books and which derive from ancient intuitions of faith."[xxvii] One cannot help but see these passages of theological critique from Ratzinger as a link with the laudatory mention that he makes of Dhanis. Also this last passage recalls in 1944, for example, that the vision of hell reported by Lúcia would correspond to an idea strongly seized by the child seers about the horror of sin and eternal damnation and that, little by little, this notion would have evoked a "vision in their imagination."[xxviii] This reference of Ratzinger to Dhanis, we insist, is a form of recognition of the totality of the work of the first Catholic theologian who critically addressed the content of the Fátima message.
So Sr. Lucy uses images seen in devotional books....evoked a "vision in their imagination" in reference to Fr. Dhanis. What is left of the veracity of Sister Lucy?

You can read similar things about mystical prayer, images, apparitions and so forth in other works that were written before the 20th century. Saying that something is a vision in the imagination is not saying that the vision was phony or even not guided by the Holy Spirit, but something that was impressed upon the minds eye.  Now, I have never thought of the children's vision of hell as something that they saw in their minds eye, but something seen with their physical eye, but some visions and locutions of the Saints are in the mind's eye not the physical one.

I think it is unfair to attribute Ratzingers conjectures on imagination and Hell to Fr. Dhanis, but more to the fact that it is somewhat trendy in the later part of the 20th century to speculate that Heaven and Hell are really just souls experiencing a consuming divine fire in different ways, an opinion that I reject, but I have encountered from time to time.   Authors such as Isaac the Syrian  and modern authors like the Eastern Orthodox Fr. Alexander Schmemann I believe advocate for this viewpoint of Hell.  JPII may have articulated a point of view not necessarily in the same Divine Fire opinion but never the less critical of Hell as we might see it as portrayed classically in Holy Scripture as a place of Hell, Torture and Demons "The thought of hell — and even less the improper use of biblical images — must not create anxiety or despair, "  Pope John Paul II
http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2heavn.htm

Such a vision of Hell in my opinion is at odds with the Fatima children's vision of Hell, and if one were to subscribe to this view a person would need to reconcile their version of Hell, with how the Fatima children could see something different.

"Let me, however, beg of Your Beatitude...
not to think so much of what I have written, as of my good and kind intentions. Please look for the truths of which I speak rather than for beauty of expression. Where I do not come up to your expectations, pardon me, and put my shortcomings down, please, to lack of time and stress of business." St. Bonaventure, From the Preface of Holiness of Life.

Apostolate:
http://www.alleluiaaudiobooks.com/
Contributor:
http://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/
Lay Association:
http://www.militiatempli.net/

mikemac

Quote from: PerEvangelicaDicta on June 21, 2017, 02:41:12 PM
Quaremerepulisti, you summarized my thoughts on this precisely, especially the piggybacking of all kinds of things on a narrow approval window.

To this end, WHY has the novus ordo hierarchy supported and promoted Fatima, especially the areas referred to as Fatima II?  This has nagged at me for years. 

What's in it for the modernist wrechovators?   

WAF is the World Apostolate of Fatima, formerly Our Lady's Blue Army:
QuoteThe WAF/Blue Army has long broadcast the Vatican's Party Line on Fatima. Now an International Public Association of Pontifical Right, it claims it's "the only Fatima organization in the world which speaks 'in the name of the Church' and 'with the authority of the Church' on Fatima."

Its "charisma" is "the New Evangelization of the world through the authentic Message of Fatima." Its "responsibility" is to "guard the purity of the message."

The WAF summarizes the Vatican's corrupted Message of Fatima (evident in Card. Burke's talk) as follows:

"A new effort is needed to save the world and make possible a new era of peace and hope, promised at Fatima. To achieve this, the New Evangelization of the world is the main pastoral objective of the Universal Church for the XXI century and the new millennium."

"... the Message of Fatima continues to be crucial in the building of a better world, 'a civilization of love, a new springtime for the Church, a New Marian Pentecost.'"



The official post-V2 Church Fatima mouthpiece conveys that they are using the (primarily F2) messages for world wide equalization of religions.  Of course, we've all seen this coming for decades, but now it's so proudly proclaimed.

You ask "WHY has the novus ordo hierarchy supported and promoted Fatima, especially the areas referred to as Fatima II?"  Fatima is not just a Trad thing.  Millions of Catholics that go to the NO are devoted to Our Lady of Fatima.  They are Catholics too.  During the 37 years when 99% of Catholics had no access to the Latin Mass millions of Catholics as well as many in the hierarchy were still devoted to Our Lady of Fatima.

Why do you say "The official post-V2 Church Fatima mouthpiece conveys that they are using the (primarily F2) messages for world wide equalization of religions."?  Where do you get the "world wide equalization of religions" from.  I found the article where your quote comes from.  It does not say anything about "world wide equalization of religions" in the article.  Could this be what you are referring to?

Quote"Perhaps now is the time to invite our Russian Orthodox brothers to join in a consecration in order to please Our Lord who told Sr. Lucia, 'I want my whole Church [WAF's emphasis] to acknowledge that consecration as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary....'"

Asking the Russian Orthodox to join in the consecration hardly equates to "world wide equalization of religions".

To tell you the truth I think it is a good idea to ask the Russian Orthodox to join in the consecration.  I posted in the other Fatima thread that the reason why Russia has not been mentioned in any of the consecrations since the Second Vatican Council is because of the Vatican-Moscow Agreement.  For some reason Rome still thinks they are bound by the Vatican-Moscow Agreement.  By asking the Russian Orthodox to join in the consecration it would over ride the Vatican-Moscow Agreement.

See more on the Vatican-Moscow Agreement here.
http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=17803.msg396132#msg396132

The lady that wrote the article that you quote the WAF/Blue Army stuff from PerEvangelicaDicta is Cornelia R. Ferreira.  Cornelia R. Ferreira often was a speaker at Father Gruner`s Fatima for Life conferences.  This is the article that you are quoting from, is it not PED?
https://akacatholic.com/fatima-through-the-lens-of-vatican-ii-as-illustrated-by-raymond-cardinal-burke/

In this article Cornelia R. Ferreira clearly shows that her nose is out of joint because Cardinal Burke`s request for a consecration of Russia to Mary`s Immaculate Heart is not a vindication of Fr. Gruner.  She has good reason to have her nose out of joint.  Father Gruner dedicated his whole life as a priest to the message of Our Lady of Fatima.  Yet he was attacked from left, right and center by WAF/Blue Army, the Wanderer, many Catholic writers, priests, bishops and cardinals and even Father Richardson (or whatever his name was) right after Father Gruner died.  The rector at St. Peter`s in Chains Basilica in Peterborough, Ont where I was Baptized told me that he didn`t want anything from Father Gruner`s Fatima Center in his church, unless it was sacramentals like Rosaries and prayer cards.  All of this because Father Gruner was persistent in the fact that a 10 minute prayer still needed to be done by the pope in union with the bishops.  Yet next to nothing was done for years about the pederast priests and their bishop enablers.  I have agreed with Father Gruner and still do.

It wasn`t until I read this article by Cornelia R. Ferreira that I realized that Cardinal Burke`s request for a consecration of Russia to Mary`s Immaculate Heart is not because he believes that the consecration has not been done properly yet.  In the article Cardinal Burke is quoted as saying the following,
"Certainly, Pope Saint John Paul II consecrated the world, including Russia, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on March 25, 1984. But, today, once again, we hear the call of Our Lady of Fatima [to whom did She speak?]  to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, in accord with her explicit instruction."
And this,
"Once more this act is being done. Mary's appeal is not for just once. Her appeal must be taken up by generation after generation, in accordance with the ever new 'signs of the times'. It must be unceasingly returned to. It must ever be taken up anew."
Cornelia R. Ferreira is saying that Cardinal Burke is requesting the consecration now because the WAF/Blue Army is.

What this looks like to me is that the WAF/Blue Army and possibly many in the hierarchy of the Church are realizing now with the ongoing crisis in the Church and the world that the 1984 consecration of the world did not fulfill Heaven`s request, and to say that it should be done generationally now (but this time using the word Russia) is their way of saving face.

I don`t think Cornelia R. Ferreira needs to get her nose out of joint too much though.  Father Gruner would not care whether he was being vindicated or not.  All Father Gruner would care about is that the consecration was done properly, using the word Russia.

I look at this as a good thing.  It doesn`t matter now whether they think the 1984 consecration fulfilled Heaven`s request or not.  All that matters is that they are requesting a proper consecration now, using the word Russia.  The WAF/Blue Army claims to have 20 million members world wide.  That is 20 million more added to the millions that have been requesting a proper consecration all along.

Ironically Father Ladis J. Cizik, the person that wrote the article in Gerard`s opening post of this thread served as the National Executive Director and Vice President of the Blue Army of Our Lady of Fatima, USA (World Apostolate of Fatima) from January 1, 2000 to mid-2003.  During that time, he was also the Editor of SOUL magazine, the official publication of the Blue Army USA.  Father Cizik now writes for the Remnant and for Catholic Family News.  Like many that have been devoted to the Fatima Message turn to tradition, Father Cizik began saying the Traditional Latin Mass in 2013.  To see Father Cizik`s bio scroll down on this page.
http://marianconference.weebly.com/speakers.html

The Church has been given the commission to take His Word to all peoples and nations.  That includes all Catholics, not just the priests, bishops and cardinals.  At this point in history, 2,000 years later we are still a long way away from the fullness of the Gentiles coming in (Romans 11:25) and the Gospel of the kingdom being preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations (Matthew 24:14).  Is Gerard willing to take the Word of God to Saudi Arabia?  Will awkwardcustomer convert the Hindus of India?  Of course not.  Me neither.  So what`s the solution?  How do we get to that point in Romans 11:25 and Matthew 24:14.  It has to be through Divine Intervention.  Can someone else please quote John Vennari this time for a change?
Like John Vennari (RIP) said "Why not just do it?  What would it hurt?"
Consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary (PETITION)
https://lifepetitions.com/petition/consecrate-russia-to-the-immaculate-heart-of-mary-petition

"We would be mistaken to think that Fatima's prophetic mission is complete." Benedict XVI May 13, 2010

"Tell people that God gives graces through the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Tell them also to pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for peace, since God has entrusted it to Her." Saint Jacinta Marto

The real nature of hope is "despair, overcome."
Source

Sojourn

I'm going to have to review these last few pages carefully but can we stop with the "Fatimist" label? It's inappropriate, inaccurate and divisive.
O felix culpa quae talem et tantum meruit habere redemptorem!

mikemac

Quote from: jmjZelie on June 22, 2017, 01:31:01 PM


Cardinal Burke referencing many of the things being discussed in this thread...

A LifeSiteNews video

Cool.  I hadn`t listened to this yet.  That is when he first requested the consecration of Russia, at the May 19, 2017 Rome Life Forum.  This is a really good talk.  Father Gruner would have got goose bumps listening to this coming from a cardinal.  Cardinal Burke even talks about the third secret, diabolical forces even in the Church and references Frere Michel de la Sainte Trinite`s Fatima trilogy, The Whole Truth About Fatima.
Like John Vennari (RIP) said "Why not just do it?  What would it hurt?"
Consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary (PETITION)
https://lifepetitions.com/petition/consecrate-russia-to-the-immaculate-heart-of-mary-petition

"We would be mistaken to think that Fatima's prophetic mission is complete." Benedict XVI May 13, 2010

"Tell people that God gives graces through the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Tell them also to pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for peace, since God has entrusted it to Her." Saint Jacinta Marto

The real nature of hope is "despair, overcome."
Source

PerEvangelicaDicta

thank you Mikemac.

"You ask "WHY has the novus ordo hierarchy supported and promoted Fatima, especially the areas referred to as Fatima II?"  Fatima is not just a Trad thing.  Millions of Catholics that go to the NO are devoted to Our Lady of Fatima.  They are Catholics too.  During the 37 years when 99% of Catholics had no access to the Latin Mass millions of Catholics as well as many in the hierarchy were still devoted to Our Lady of Fatima."


Yes, I'm aware of that.  I was raised in the novus ordo and lifelong devoted to OL of Fatima.  In my conversion to tradition though, it seemed as though Fatima was raised to a super status, which provoked me to begin researching.

"Why do you say "The official post-V2 Church Fatima mouthpiece conveys that they are using the (primarily F2) messages for world wide equalization of religions."?  Where do you get the "world wide equalization of religions" from.  I found the article where your quote comes from.  It does not say anything about "world wide equalization of religions" in the article.  Could this be what you are referring to?"

Over the years I've read countless old newsletters of the Blue Army, in an SSPX library, so I know the history, and it did not proselytize 'the new evangelization', which is the worldwide Protestanization  of the Catholic Church, and equalization of the one true Church with the other cults.
From the WAF site - the official Vatican Fatima mouthpiece-

Quote
Mission
The apostolate's mission is to help people learn, live and spread the message of Our Lady of Fatima in communion with the Church and in concert with The New Evangelization.

Fwiw, I wasn't addressing the Orthodox element.

Also, I'm very familiar with Cornelia Ferreira - I think I've subscribed to every possible traditional Catholic newsletter possible :) and I've profited from those many writers.

As to her concern with Card. Burke, and the serious criticisms of Fr. Gruner (RIP),  it adds to the many problematic Fatima arguments. (pls note that I attended Fr G's requiem Mass and burial). I'm just conveying that there is chaos in Fatima circles on various fronts, and have been for decades.

"So what`s the solution?  How do we get to that point in Romans 11:25 and Matthew 24:14."

The way the Church has always implemented the Great Commission which was given to the Apostles and successors.  Nothing essential has changed from that day of Our Lord's command.  He knew all that would unfold.  Fatima's message may add to the piety of the clergy in their Commission, and the lay faithful in our state in life, but cannot supersede it. 

Sojourn, I've seen the term Fatimist used for years, not as a perjorative, just a descriptive.  I never thought of it as divisive.  I guess it's all in the context and intent?
They shall not be confounded in the evil time; and in the days of famine they shall be filled
Psalms 36:19