Fatima message is secret no more

[whitetho]

Cecil’s recently posted column from 1981, What happened to the secret message of Fatima? (which also appears on page 37 of The Straight Dope) needs to be updated, because a couple of years ago Pope John Paul II released the text of the “third message”, and said it was a reference to his 1981 assassination attempt.

The Vatican website has posted the full text of the messages at The message of Fatima. According to this site, the third message, translated from the original portuguese, reads:

The third part of the secret revealed at the Cova da Iria-Fatima, on 13 July 1917.

I write in obedience to you, my God, who command me to do so through his Excellency the Bishop of Leiria and through your Most Holy Mother and mine.

After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!’. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it’ a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father’. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.

Tuy-3-1-1944”.

[Tenar]

Even more revealing than Fatima’s third vision is the massive egotism shown by John Paul II’s interpretation of it.

[Omnivore]

OK. So what does it mean?

[minty_green]

JP says it’s all about how he got shot in '82.

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_747000/747312.stm

Saturday, 13 May, 2000, 12:34 GMT 13:34 UK
Fatima’s ‘third secret’ revealed

It said the secret - revealed by the Virgin Mary to three young children in a series of visions - related to the failed 1981 assassination attempt against Pope John Paul II.

Cardinal Angelo Sodano said the third part of the secret involved martyrdom and suffering, including a man “clothed in white” who “falls to the ground apparently dead, under a burst of gunfire”.

So, does it say that?

[scrolls back up]
[attempts to read message]
[gives up]
[loads up WordPad]
[copies and pastes it into WordPad]
[paragraphs it a bit]
[tries reading it again]

Erm…Actually, what it says is that the Holy Father dies. Period. Along with everybody around him

After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand:

pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!’.

And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it’ a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father’.

Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark;

before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way;

having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him,

and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions.

Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.

So, what, she saw the wrong vision? She was issued the “Massacre” vision, instead of the “Assassination Attempt” vision?

[Irishman]

Nope, it’s interpreting the words to mean whatever they want them to. Just like they do with everything in the Bible. (Tell me again where the bible says birth control is wrong?)

There’s the “holy father” and some gunshots. Close enough for government work, hand grenades, and religious interpretations.

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

<< Tell me again where the bible says birth control is wrong? >>

Saint Peter’s letter to the Obstetricians, 4:13: “For the condom shalt thou not use, neither any interuterine devices, for they are unnatural in the sight of those who manufacture coat hangers.”

[Cecil_Adams]

You will forgive me. I was pressed for time, and figured someone would dig up the link for me. Behold, it has come to pass. The column has been updated. Thanks to all for your help.

[Chronos]

Tell me again where the bible says birth control is wrong?

How about the part about “Go forth, be fruitful, and multiply”?

[Happy_Lendervedder]

I interpret the third Fatima message to be a foretelling of the fall of the Catholic Church.

having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him,

Replace the word “soldiers” with “former alter boys and parishoners,” and “bullets and arrows” with “lawsuits and sexual abuse accusations” and I think you’ll see what I mean.
:rolleyes:
stv

[Marley23]

Does “be fruitful and multiply” really equal “say no to birth control?” It doesn’t say how many children you should have, or how to have them…just says to reproduce. You can use birth control all but a handful of times and still reproduce. Scripture or no, I still don’t see why this hang-up has presisted for so long.

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

No one has commented on the fact that Cecil his own Self has posted here??

[Nametag]

I believe that Cecil’s post was predicted in the “Really, Really Secret Fourth Message of Fatima,” Dex.

[ZenBeam]

How about the part about “Go forth, be fruitful, and multiply”?

And here I just thought it meant God wanted more gay mathematicians.

[Jojo]

Hey, Cecil’s coming up to the big “100 posts” mark. Do we throw a party or something?

Mind, I spose it’s not like he has anything worthwhile to say or anything. Just another newbie.

[Happy_Lendervedder]

Oh Dex, I noticed. I was just trying to be all nonchalant. I’m not a big believer in ass-kissing.

I was surprised, however, that my post was almost five hours after his, and the only post in the interim was Chronos.

stv

[JRDelirious]

Yep, this looks like re-interpretation at work.

The passage looks pretty much like a foretelling of a massive persecution and destruction of the Church. You combine it with the contents of other messages, specially the stuff on the conversion of Russia, and you could see how some people would have assumed it was about a final battle with dem godless commies overrunning the Christian world and destroying the Church hierarchy. And when it came to pass that the Evil International Communist Menace went kaplooie circa 1989, they figured, hmmm… maybe there was a less-scary explanation?
Sort of of like how some fundamentalists claim the Book of Revelation is a still-pending prophecy about the future of the world, while others believe it’s an already-fulfilled one about the persecution of Christians in Rome and the eventual triumph of Christianity as the eligion of the Western world.
Of course, the thing is: the person writing talks about a Bishop in white, and “we had the impression that it was the Holy Father”. What if… just maybe… they were wrong, and it was NOT the Holy Father in the sense of being the Pope, Temporal Head of the Holy See? Who knows if it is about a persecution that befalls the really holiest prelates in Christendom, who may NOT be the people in official positions?
Also, even granting the reality of the visions, you’d have to question if by 1944 the memory of the “witnesses” was no longer as reliable, having since since 1917 become skewed in a particular direction by too many conversations, discussions and interrogations – specially with WWII going on around them, I can see them getting carried away towards the gloom-and-doom side.

[Nametag]

Try this one on for size: the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador (I mean, if you wanna believe this stuff).

[Chronos]

[quote]
the person writing talks about a Bishop in white, and “we had the impression that it was the Holy Father”. Yes, you see, the Catholic Church is nicely color-coded in this regard. Abbots wear black, regular bishops wear (I think) blue, cardinals wear red, and the Pope wears white. The abbot of the monastery that ran our high school told us that this was so they’d know how to line up for parades :).

So, given that this is a reference to the Catholic church, a “bishop in white” would pretty much have to be the Pope. Of course, which pope is still open to interpretation.

And for the record, I noticed who I was posting after, too, but didn’t see the need to mention the fact. What good does it do to mention in this thread that Cecil posted? His name’s right there next to his post.

[Nametag]

*Originally posted by Chronos *
**…you see, the Catholic Church is nicely color-coded in this regard. Abbots wear black, regular bishops wear (I think) blue, cardinals wear red, and the Pope wears white. **

This isn’t true; the colors of vestments are seasonal. It’s true that priests and monsignors are mostly seen in black, that red the “the color of cardinals,” and that the Pope wears white very often, but at various times of the year, any priest might be required to wear white or red vestments. Blue is not a liturgical color at all, although it’s popular for christenings.

At any rate, I’ve seen pictures of Archbishop Romero in white vestments.