One does not know whether to indulge anti-Fatimists in their anti-Catholic Protestant behavior or to leave them at it. Even Protestants may not be so reckless in attributing Fatima to the devil as you are.
Ah…right…to be anti-Fatima is to be Anti-Catholic. Amazing how you don't actually explain that and when people ask you simple questions about the deposit of faith being closed, you don't respond.
Gerard, why don't you try answering these questions: and I note you and those who agree with you are the only persons who argued with and did not believe what the Popes, Saints and Doctors said about approved apparitions and public miracles, not Mikemac or anyone else.
Find me one infallible and binding statement that I've contradicted and I'll retract my position. Otherwise, saints and doctors have made statements that just because the majority is wrong doesn't change the fact that they are wrong. They don't' become right by fact of their authority or titles.
You adduce so many captious objecions and such absurd alleged problems with Our Lady of Fatima's apparition and requests that one has to seriously wonder whether you actually believe them or not!
They exist in and of themselves whether I believe them or not. I didn't make anything up. The fact that no one has actually made a substantive rebuttal in lieu of ranting is telling.
Bogus objection #1 - Our Lady of Fatima made a "threatening" request at Fatima to Sr. Lucia. Therefore, it was not Our Lady.
Response/rebuttal: Our Lord made an equally "threatening" request in France to St. Margaret. So, according to you, the Sacred Heart was not Our Lord either, or you are mistaken in captious objection #1.
A Pope is not a King. A King is a man-made office on earth. The Pope is the only Divinely instituted office in the World. Huge difference. So, your analogy fails.
Second, Do I have to point out that no Catholic is obliged to believe in the apparitions of the Sacred Heart nor the visions of St. Margaret Mary. And even if they do believe in the one, they aren't obliged by their belief in any one apparition to believe in Fatima.
Third, the letters of St. Margaret Mary do not contain a threat if the King of France did not do the consecration. It is Sr. Lucy who uses the consecration of France as a threat against the papacy.
Fourth, If I'm wrong and it turns out that there is a threat against the King of France similar to that of Fatima. I'll conclude that it was also a false apparition.
Bogus objection #2 - kings are obliged to obey God because God is the source of their authority. Popes, however, are not because, er...
Response/rebuttal: This ridiculous objection, which is really the heart of your whole novel claim, unknown for some 90 years while the whole Catholic world accepted Fatima, rebuts itself! Firstly because (1) everybody is always obliged to obey God, and secondly (2) the Pope is even more obliged than others to consult God and discern His will and do it than ordinary people are. Who has received more must give more and the Pope has received more than kings have from God. And that answers fatuous objection #2.
Like all Catholics, Catholic Kings are not obliged to obey apparitions.
You're rebuttal automatically assumes that God and not the Devil or a mental illness is the source of the apparitions. This is not only foolish but dangerous.
We don't start by assuming that every and any apparition is automatically true or that it in any way has the authority to usurp a Divinely established hierarchical chain of authority.
When it comes to the Church on earth, the Pope, not an apparition is Supreme. He is the holder of the Keys. It would constitute a new revelation to claim that Popes are bound to put their power into the service and subservience of new revelations from Heaven (or anywhere else)
For all you know, any number of the Popes have discerned God's will and decided NOT to bow to the threat and do the consecration as demanded.
You go on about Popes and theologians believing in Fatima all you want, I agree with the Popes who for whatever reason ultimately decided NOT to do the consecration. Who are you to know better? I can play that game if you want.
Bogus objection #3 - but, but if something happens only in an internal apparition to a seer, the Pope cannot verify that it was from God.
Response/rebuttal: (1) the Pope verified it was from God. (2) Pope Pius XII personally witnessed again the miracle of the sun from the Vatican, and credited Our Lady of Fatima. (3) And the original miracle was visible anyway. Therefore, you are going against the Popes. Not us.
The Pope can't bind anyone to the belief that it's from God. It's his personal opinion. Pius XII was a good Pope who did a number of good things and a number of bad things. Whether he really saw anything or was deceived or mistaken is anybody's guess. I'm not obligated to believe any vision of Pius XII just as nobody is obliged to believe in Leo XIII's vision.
Bogus objection #4 - but, but Our Lady of Fatima asked for reparation and uncovered Her Immaculate Heart covered with thorns.
Response/rebuttal: this objection, also repeated by AC, has to be the most impious and Protestant of all the objections. It would logically end in the destruction of all Catholic piety and the complete loss of awareness of the necessity of reparation.
That's not one of my complaints about Fatima, but if I recall, the discussion was about the state of souls who are beholding the beatific vision. Catholic doctrine teaches that souls in Heaven are in a state of eternal and perpetual happiness.
So, the contradiction is in the images of ticked off Jesus and weepy, miserable Mary. They are either perpetually happy or not. I'll stick with Catholic doctrine over contradictory imagery.
And again I ask: the Sacred Heart spoke in almost identical terms about how His Heart was suffering because of the lukewarmness and the coldness of men toward His Sacrifice. And asked for reparation. So, are you prepared to discard that as well? Either answer this, or you give the impression that you are indeed ready to reject the Sacred Heart as well.
Show me the quotes and I'll let you know. I have no problem jettisoning any optional apparition (which means any apparition) if it contradicts the deposit of faith. Even if I'm wrong on a detail, it's still safer to ignore the apparition and stick with the faith and taught by the Church.
Bogus objection #5- but anyway, what has happened just because people prayed the Rosary?
This final question/objection also betrays a lack of a supernatural spirit and also Protestant and even worldly naturalistic thinking. But in real point of fact, beside many other tangible benefits, whole nations - like Poland and the Philippines - have demonstrably been freed from Communism by devotion to Our Lady of Fatima, Her Rosary and Her Immaculate Heart. There was hardly a serious anti-Communist in recent times in the Church who was not also a devotee of Our Lady of Fatima.
Now, question to the anti-Fatimists: what good fruits have come from your crisis-itis and from your 5-10 year old anti-Fatimist movement?
[/quote]
Whole nations are freed from Communism? That's great! Seems we didn't need the threat against the papacy for a consecration after all to defeat communism.
Last time I checked, Fatima didn't invent devotion to the BVM, it didn't establish the Rosary and our Lady had a long track record of intercession before Fatima.
I don't know anything about a "movement." In May 2017, I simply noticed something. I pointed it out and other people have agreed and reinforced the position with their arguments and presentations from their research.
Pope St. Pius X and Leo XIII and billions of others in history lived saintly lives and were devoted to the Catholic faith and Fatima didn't exist, so it is possible to live a good Catholic life, be devoted to the BVM without Fatima, with its hand-wringing and threats and this-world political promises and false dilemmas and demands.
Maybe we should do a Rosary Crusade for our Lady of Lourdes to free the Church from the grip of the Fatima deception.
