Who Is To Blame For The Failure To Consecrate Russia: You…Me…Popes?

For some time, now,  I have queried the claim (widely spread around these days, not least in the Blogosphere) that the Consecration of Russia has not been done because not enough of us are doing our bit by carrying out the Fatima requests to make the First Saturdays, pray the daily Rosary, wear the Brown Scapular etc.  In my humble opinion, that doesn’t make sense.  It doesn’t make sense to me that Our Lady would ask the Pope and Bishops to do this Consecration, in a precise manner, with no mention of any such conditions involving the rest of the faithful, and then, some years later, find the Fatima “experts” are blaming us for the failure of the Pope/Bishops to carry out the Consecration.  At our recent Conference, Father Nicholas Mary C.SS.R mentioned this claim, and when I queried it, he promised to find the origin of it. Today, I received the following email from him providing the source.  Father wrote:

Many sound authors quote Sr Lucia’s assertion that the consecration of Russia would take place “when a sufficient number are fulfilling the requests” of Our Lady of Fatima. There are also other passages from her writings and interviews where she says something similar. Nonetheless the origin of the precise quotation you questioned me about in public recently is as follows:

In 1946 Sr Lucia told John Haffert in an interview that “the Holy Father and all the Bishops will unite to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.” He then writes:

“‘And do you think the conversion of Russia and peace will follow?’ I asked, catching my breath. ‘Yes,’ she said deliberately. ‘Yes, that is what Our Lady promised.’ ‘But when, Sister,’ I asked, ‘when will it happen?’ ‘It will happen,’ she replied. ‘There might be much more suffering (we had been talking of the awful civil war in Spain), more nations may be afflicted, but it will happen when a sufficient number are fulfilling the requests.’” [John M. Haffert – Russia will be converted, Washington, New Jersey, 1956 (2nd ed.), AMI Press, p. 246]

Although John Haffert (of Blue Army fame) later went astray, at the time of the above writing, he was regarded as a reliable Fatima source, so this quotation surprised me. Still, I noted that Sr Lucia does not claim to be quoting Our Lady; arguably, then, it is possible that she was giving her own opinion. In any case, I sent the above text to a friend in the south of England, who is something of an expert on Marian apparitions in general and Fatima in particular.  He replies:

It does seem difficult to refute [that quote]. But in 1929 at the Tuy vision, Our Lady said that the moment had come (emphasis mine) for the Pope & bishops to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart.  I wouldn’t have thought it was entirely dependent on how many were living the Fatima message, because at that time, only 12 years after the initial events occurred, the full message wasn’t widely known then.  As I understand it, the message of Fatima applies to all humanity – for the laity, religious and priests to live the Fatima message:- i.e. the daily rosary, brown scapular, consecration to the Immaculate Heart, First Saturdays etc, and for the Pope and the Bishops in union with him to do all those things as well, but in their case also to specifically consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  The Fatima Network seems to say that there must be some co-operation from the laity in the Fatima message, obviously, but it doesn’t seem to make the consecration absolutely dependent on  it.  Source

Self-evidently, it can only be a good thing if more and more Catholics make the First Saturdays, pray the Rosary, wear the Brown Scapular and make sacrifices for sinners etc.  That’s not the issue.  The issue is, IS the fulfilment of those of Our Lady’s requests which apply to the faithful at large, a condition of the Pope’s/Bishops’ fulfilment of Our Lady’s request to them to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart?  I can’t see it.  Can you?

Note: in the original post, submitted earlier today, I omitted Father Nicholas Mary’s name and mention of the Conference, but he has asked me to amend the post to make the context entirely clear: thus, I have restored that part of his email which states that I “questioned him in public”.  Those bloggers/readers who attended the Conference and witnessed the exchange will recall that it was polite and respectful. Some may consider that I, as a mere laywoman, had no right “questioning” Father “in public”, but I did so merely to correct what I believe to be a misleading opinion about where responsibility for the Consecration of Russia, lies.  If I am proven to be wrong, I will gladly apologise for questioning Father Nicholas Mary.  I am always grateful for necessary correction myself, so feel free to speak your minds, one and all.

Comments invited…

76 responses

  1. There might be much more suffering (we had been talking of the awful civil war in Spain), more nations may be afflicted, but it will happen when a sufficient number are fulfilling the requests.

    I’m the furthest thing in the world from being knowledgeable about Fatima, but that quote doesn’t seem as though it is referring to the faithful, but to the nations – ??? But that doesn’t make sense either. Our lady didn’t say Russia would be converted when a critical mass of the world’s faithful do the Five First Saturdays and perform enough penance, nor did she say that Russia would be converted when a sufficient number of individual nations are consecrated to her Immaculate Heart.

    So I’d have to say, in my ignorance, that this is a mystery to me.

    Meanwhile, Editor, good old Steve Skojec continues to insult Father Gruner, this time referring to him as “a polarizing figure”: – yet it was the Fatima Center that posted this article on their Facebook page!
    https://onepeterfive.com/is-fatima-a-distraction.

    In these dark days, the truth certainly is polarizing, but Father Gruner is hardly to blame for that. At least Skojec could have given him due honor and respect for the unwavering fidelity of his life’s work.

    • RCA Victor,

      I totally agree. If the rest of us doing “our bit” was to be a condition of the graces given to the Pope to consecrate Russia, Our Lady would surely have said so. She didn’t.

      Also, when Our Lord appeared to Sr Lucy (at Tuy, I think?) he said “Tell my ministers that if they follow the example of the King of France, and delay executing my command, they will follow him into misfortune.” He didn’t send the laity a message of warning for not doing the First Saturdays etc, because our devotions were not a condition of the graces which he, Jesus, would give the popes to execute his commands.

      I find it puzzling that people go round about the houses to excuse the popes who have disobeyed Our Lady and Our Lord on the consecration.

  2. Well, of course, the obligation- objectively- for the Pope and Bishops to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary remains, no matter what the faithful do or omit to do. I don’t think anyone means to question this. However, the subjective awareness of, and carrying out of, that obligation on the part of the Pope and Bishops may well depend on human cooperation.

    The promised gift of peace, brought about by the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, is a gratuitous grace. In the Providence of God, some lights and particular graces for governing the Church may be withdrawn from her leaders, if the faithful do not respond.

    It also remains true that in the mysterious transfer of graces which is the Communion of Saints, one soul can merit for another soul (including a Pope and Bishops) an extra grace to see the particular needs of the Church at the time and to respond to that need.

    So, yes, perhaps our leaders are unaware, without malice, of their objective responsibility to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. OR, more seriously, perhaps through cowardice or sheer malice, some of them don’t WANT to obey Our Lady.

    Yet, in the economy of salvation, if all Catholics were holy…..we would get the pastors we deserve. And yes, if all Catholics were saints, we would not have been visited with Vatican 2, the New Mass etc., so it appears reasonable to say that there has been a lack of correspondence to grace on the part of all the faithful.

    A very big “but” comes next though- this kind of argument has occasionally been used (not by the likes of Sr Lucy or Fr Nicholas Mary, of course) as a stick to beat the faithful with when they used their God given responsibilities to call on their pastors and urge them to fulfil Our Lady’s requests. This kind of reductionist-Fatima approach tells the faithful to shut up and pray, with the accent on shutting up. “If you were holier the Pope would be grand ….so shut up.”

    Of course it’s true. But part of the holiness is …..speaking up!

    • Sentire Cum Ecclesia

      I agree that our prayer and speaking up can help win graces and make the pope more aware of his obligation but that’s different from saying that our devotions are a condition of the graces God will give the pope to carry out his will in this matter. When will there be “enough” people doing the First Saturdays etc? I don’t think Our Lady would have been vague in such an important matter. She said the Holy Father will consecrate Russia but it will be late – she didn’t say why it would be late, that it would be late because the people, laity, priests, religious, popes and bishops were not making the First Saturdays and praying the daily rosary etc.

  3. I have no doubt it is the failure of the pontiffs. God has withheld the grace they require to fulfil Our Lady’s command. This is a punishment for their capitulation to the modernist regime… vernacular liturgy and the acceptance of homosexuals are particularly repugnant to Our Lord. However, once the consecration of Russia has happened, homosexuality will disappear and the traditional rite of Mass will be restored. I have no doubt men become homosexual on account of the confusing messages they receive in the modern world, for example women wearing trousers, and the introduction of female altar boys.

    I am consecrated to Our Lady according to the de Montfort and Kolbean methods. I do the five first Saturdays and the nine first Fridays devotions, I also pray the fifteen decades of the rosary daily, and the Divine Office and the Little Office. I receive Holy Communion daily. I am also enrolled in and wear the five fold scapular. I also fast and practice corporal mortification assiduously, such as taking the cilice and whip. Yet I still do not consider that I do enough for Our Lady. I have taken to hourly daily devotions in the presence of the Most Blessed Sacrament in reparation for the sins of the world, particularly sodomy. Yet I still do not consider that I do enough. I am considering selling my bed, and sleeping on the floor for the salvation of sinners. The more we do, the more suffering we take on for ourselves, the more sinners will be saved. Each mortification has the power to save a soul from hellfire. Another spiritual practice I wholeheartedly recommend is meditating on the fires of hell. This has been very beneficial to me. So many people go to hell because of the sins of pornography and self-interference. It is the best argument for banning the internet.

    • NWOIC,

      You hit on a key problem with this claim that it is up to the Church at large, the laity, clergy, religious etc, to fulfil their part of the Fatima Message before God releases the graces required for the Pope to consecrate Russia in the prescribed manner – that is, how many constitutes “…a sufficient number [who] are fulfilling the requests.” (Sister Lucy, as quoted by John Haffert – see blog intro).

      Would Our Lady really have omitted to mention such an important condition for the Consecration of Russia? Would she really have left us wondering “how many” constituted “a sufficient number”? She was very precise when instructing Sr Lucy on the release of the Third part of the Message – specifying 1960. So she was good with numbers!

          • So from teletubbies and chemtrails, we have now moved onto claims that women wearing trousers turns men into homosexuals.

            I must say NWOIC, you have quite the imagination!

            What about Scotsmen wearing kilts? Who gets turned into what from that scenario? 😛

            • You obviously think I am some kind of liar, or nutter. This is absolutely not true and not the case. As for my mortifications, I am just trying to be a good Catholic. I do not understand what I have done wrong.
              Editor: what you have done wrong is to boast about what you claim are mortifications. That is NOT the behaviour of “a good Catholic” – and it’s really not your call to make, whether or not you are “a good Catholic” – that’s pride. Your list of alleged penances is a tad too lengthy (the rest of us live in a 24 hour day) and far too extreme. I don’t believe it. However, even if I’m wrong, YOU are wrong to boast about such things. I’ve deleted the rest of this comment which is about teletubbies – we’re all a wee bit too old to be bothered watching that sort of stuff. Anyone interested in following up the issues, should Google ‘teletubbies’ and ‘demonic’ and then go to videos. We’re not giving house room to the material here. Finally, if you think I’m going to edit and correct a string of comments from you in moderation, think again. This is the first and last – no comments from you will be released that are attempts at self defence. You either participate sensible and sanely in our discussions or you go away and be “a good Catholic” elsewhere – before the rest of us turn into very BAD Catholics, to put it mildly.

    • NWOIC,

      You seem not to have heard the Gospel injunction to not let your right hand know what your left hand is doing in the matter of almsgiving, self-sacrifice, mortification etc. In fact, IF you are telling the truth about your life of self-mortification (which I seriously doubt) then you are doing what no monk or nun, even in the strictest religious Orders, would be permitted so to do.

      In a religious Order, including the most strict religious Orders, a nun or monk has to seek permission to do any penances which go beyond the norm in that Order or House.

      I, frankly, don’t believe your claims. The only thing I’m not sure about is whether you are making these ridiculous claims out of malice, to make our blog look like an extremist’s paradise, or whether you are a few sandwiches short of a picnic, a can or two short of a six-pack, which, to put it simply means, I’m not sure whether or not you are a nutcase.

      Whatever, if you want to boast of your elevated spiritual life and extreme bodily penances, do so elsewhere. We are not remotely interested.

  4. Laura,

    One of the major parts of the Fatima message was that many souls go to hell because they have no one to pray and make sacrifices for them. This was a stunning emphasis which I certainly can forget. Our Lady was not only focusing in on the damage that sin does to souls but also on our amazing, breath taking possibility…..and responsibility…..to save them.

    Now, when Our Lady said this, did she mean that it was not their own fault (that they went to Hell?) Not at all! Of course not! But, someone could have averted their fall or raised them up- through prayer and sacrifice.

    In the same way, the Pope may well be to blame for not consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary – of course as lack the knowledge of his state of soul- but it may ALSO be the fault of the bishops, priests and the faithful, of course only in proportion to their knowledge of Our Lady’s requests.

    To take an analogous case, the devil said that if the earth contained three such men as the Cure of Ars, his, Satan’s, kingdom on earth would be broken.

    Lucy said that all their prayers and sacrifices contained invocations for the Holy Father.

    Yes, the Holy Father will consecrate Russia, we know that, but we need to multiply our prayers and sacrifices for this intention. In 1936, Sr Lucia reported that she mentioned to Our Lord that the Pope would only consecrate Russia if He himself were to move the Pope by a special inspiration. Our Lord’s response was “The holy Father! Pray much for the Holy Father. He will do it, but it will be late.”

    I cannot fail to see here an implication that the final grace of the Consecration of Russia will come through the prayers and sacrifices of the faithful- although the Pope will have to correspond and actually carry out the act.

    • SCE,

      “I cannot fail to see here an implication that the final grace of the Consecration of Russia will come through the prayers and sacrifices of the faithful…”

      That is quite a different matter – I completely agree that we must pray, make sacrifices, and work for the graces necessary for the Pope to do God’s will in this matter. I pray for that intention myself every day. Sacrifices are a different matter – a gal needs her chocolate! But our prayers for this intention are necessary because successive popes have disobeyed Our Lady in this matter and that is quite different from claiming that Our Lady made it a condition of the Consecration from the outset. She didn’t. Or if she did, it’s not been included in any of the primary source literature that I’ve read, nor was it mentioned in any of the talks on Fatima I’ve heard over the years.

      When Our Lord said, at Tuy, that “the moment had come for the Pope & bishops to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart” He clearly meant that – the moment had come! That He wanted that Consecration then, at that time.

      • I agree that it was not an explicit condition of Our Lady from the beginning. It became, perhaps, a necessary condition when members of the clergy began to pull against Our Lady’s request…This happened even before Vatican 2.

        That’s how I’ve always understood this statement from Sr Lucy and the other ones published from time to time )no references available haha)

    • Sentire Cum Ecclesia,

      Regarding your opening paragraph – that is not new. The saints have, for centuries, given us the example of praying to save souls. That’s not a new concept, brought to us at Fatima. Our Lady was reinforcing that age-old custom of the Church, to pray for souls to save them from hell.

      I agree with others, though, that that is different from putting the onus on us to bring about the consecration of Russia. That was a command given to Sr Lucia to deliver to the Pope. He alone can arrange for this to happen, and he could have made it happen in 1929 when it was first commanded.

    • Another great post.

      To take an analogous case, the devil said that if the earth contained three such men as the Cure of Ars, his, Satan’s, kingdom on earth would be broken.

      What is the reference for this please?

      • Therese,

        Many biographies of St John Vianney mention this and it is commonly referenced online, too. Sadly I don’t have a biography to hand but any online biography should be able to be traced for this very common quote, if you have the time.

  5. Somehow I cannot see this Pope consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart. There is a very interesting post just out which claims that the Pope is very popular with the Faithful but that he is far from populsr with most of the bishops of the Church. I am here referring to the latest posting by Sandro Magister on Settimo Cielo. I am sure that many who post here will already have this latest posting by Sandro Magister. He claims that the bishops of Africa are particularly opposed to this Pope. However he has very carefully set up the College of Cardinals in such a way as to ensure that there will be no going back to the kind of Popes we used to have! He has set up the College to ensure that the next Pope will be something of a clone of himself!
    Hence, I do not see any likelihood of a consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart in the near future. It is going to take a lot of doing to pull that off!

  6. The claim that the consecration of Russia by the Pope and the bishops is dependent upon the numbers of faithful living the message of Fatima doesn’t add up.

    What becomes of free will, for example? Is Our Lady saying that the Pope and the bishops are not culpable in their refusal to obey heaven’s request because their free will is somehow hampered by a lack of prayers on the part of the faithful?

    Before Vatican II the entire Catholic world believed in Fatima, with doubtless many more souls living its message than in today’s pagan setting. The numbers of priests and religious, for instance, were a hundredfold on today’s numbers and these were formed in the Traditional Catholic spirituality with emphasis on Marian devotion. Indeed, the numbers of churches built between 1930 and 1960 honouring Our Lady of Fatima and the Immaculate Heart of Mary is huge, which demonstrates how devoted the Church was at that time to the Immaculate Heart and to Fatima.

    And let’s not forget the great travels of the “Pilgrim Virgin” around the world in the 1950s when Pius XII declared “there are so many miracles Our eyes cannot believe what they are seeing”. Surely, then, if it were down to the numbers of those living the message of Fatima and offering prayers and sacrifices to ensure graces for the Pope and the bishops to obey heaven, the 1950s was the ideal time for it to happen.

    If it didn’t happen then when the Church was healthy, what is the chance of it ever happening now during the great apostasy? No, the Pope and the bishops are entirely responsible for their obedience or lack thereof to God and Our Lady, as we are also for our failings. If Russia remains unconsecrated it is because the Pope and the Bishops had their own agenda, not heaven’s agenda, namely, the Second Vatican Council and appeasement with a hostile world.

    It benefits us to remember that when God’s just wrath was about to fall on Sodom and Gomorrah, He declared a willingness to relent on the multitudes of sinners in those cities if only He could find ten just men. Note that God did not make His mercy dependent upon the greater number living the Commandments. Ten just men would have been enough to convert the rest. In our day we can transfer that burden onto the high clergy. A humble and obedient hierarchy prepared to put aside all human respect and fear of persecution in order to grant the Blessed Virgin’s request is all that heaven asks to win the conversion of Russia and an outpouring of graces on the world.

    This by no means excuses the faithful from praying for the Pope and the clergy and from living the message of Fatima, upon which their own sanctification and that of others depends. But the conversion of Russia and the time of peace promised by Our Lady is not dependent upon the fidelity of the masses. Indeed, it is intended to convert the masses back to God!

    • Editor, Athansius and Josephine;

      To sum up the issue, it appears that you think it improbable that the prayers and sacrifices of the faithful were a necessary requirement for the Pope to receive the necessary grace to consecrate Russia.

      My thought on that is the following: It is true that God will give the Pope all the necessary graces to save his own soul and to do his duty as he sees it. It is by no means guaranteed that God will preserve him from errors of judgement re the government of the church, or that the Pope will even cooperate with God’s grace on all points. This is where the reparative prayers and sacrifices of the rest of the hierarchy and of the faithful come in. By God’s Infinite Mercy we can, as it were, WREST from Him extra graces for the Pope. Obviously only God knows how much prayer is needed before the scales of Justice and Mercy are balanced and God sees fit to remove from us the punishment of a blind hierarchy. Does anyone remember studying the difference between sufficient and efficacious grace? That’s what I’m talking about.

      Re the question of free will, I mentioned above that, just like a soul can freely choose to damn itself, and therefore can have nobody to blame, so the hierarchy can- hypothetically speaking since I have no window into their souls- freely choose to ignore Our Lady’s message, with all the terrible consequences that entails. No, they cannot blame the faithful for their choices.

      Yet, just like the reprobate soul, it is entirely possible that the hierarchical mess up could have been avoided by more cooperation from the faithful in the way of prayers and sacrifices. This is just a natural consequence of the doctrine of the Mystical Body of Christ. This was my point in referring to the possibility of saving souls- I did not mean to infer that it was new, but only to draw attention to the emphasis of Our Lady on this point.

      Now, to know to what degree our omissions and negligence have held back the Consecration of Russia- well I expect to find this out at my Particular Judgement. It would have been nice to have some more statements from Sr Lucy on the point. But I can’t see how anyone has a problem with the idea since it is a natural consequence of the Communion of Saints. Only God knows HOW much the hierarchy, HOW much the faithful are to blame…..but to suggest there is blame owing to both is reasonable!

      I totally agree, Athanasius, that it is much more difficult to find a great number of faithful to pray and make sacrifices NOW for this intention than it was in the 1950’s. Surely the prayers and sacrifices of priests and people for the last hundred years are building up into a great treasury- and if we take into account the very likely martyrdoms to come, some great day the treasury will overflow and the Pope will receive perhaps an efficacious grace to consecrate Russia.

      So it’s not ok for the Pope to ignore Our Lady’s request, but yes the whole Church may well have a share in the blindness (culpable or inculpable) of Peter!

    • Athanasius,

      A perfect comment. How very clear that is. I totally agree with you. The idea that the majority of the people need to be living the Fatima Message before the Pope gets enough grace to consecrate Russia, is just ludicrous. You have explained why that is, perfectly. Thank you!

      • Lily

        I just hope that the Rosary Crusade of the SSPX, specifically intended to win graces for the Pope and the bishops to finally obey Our Lady, will change the present refusal to do so.

        That it has become necessary in these dark and desperate days for the lowly faithful to pray for the fidelity of the Pope and bishops to a simply request of Our Lady, which they should have granted immediately and unhesitatingly, is, to my mind, a sign of the pride of the times. I think Our Lord always intended that His consecrated souls always lead the way in humble trust and obedience!

  7. Sentire Cum Ecclesia

    I do not disagree with any point you make concerning the communion of the faith and the efficacy of their collective prayers and sacrifices, especially for other souls. My disagreement is with the notion that the consecration of Russia by the Pope and the bishops of the Church is dependent upon this.

    I have already referred to the Church at the height of the Fatima devotion, the time of the pilgrim virgin travels when many millions across the globe were open to Our Lady’s message and responded accordingly. As for the martyrdoms you speak of, the Church has already witnessed countless millions of them at the time of Communist rule in the USSR, China, revolutionary Spain, etc., so I don’t think there is a deficiency in that department either. My point, then, is that if the Pope and bishops were not sufficiently graced and persuaded at that time to obey heaven’s requests there is little hope now that it will ever happen, assuming dependence upon the numbers of faithful living the message of Fatima.

    Further, I would argue that when the bishops of Portugal and Spain consecrated their respective nations to the Immaculate Heart of Mary it was against a backdrop of turmoil and uncertainty in those countries, not because the faithful were living the message of Fatima in huge numbers. I just do not accept that the Pope and the bishops of the Church are deprived of sufficient grace by God to carry out His wishes because the laity are not winning it for them by their prayers. In fact, it seems to rather turn things on their head a little since it is through the clergy that graces primarily come down on the people. I know it’s a two-way street but the clergy have the lead, not the laity. Do you see the point I’m trying to make here?

    • Athanasius,

      “I would argue that when the bishops of Portugal and Spain consecrated their respective nations to the Immaculate Heart of Mary it was against a backdrop of turmoil and uncertainty in those countries, not because the faithful were living the message of Fatima in huge numbers.”

      Exactly! Another great post from you.

  8. Issue 113 (Winter 2015) of The Fatima Crusader sheds some light on this discussion, though I can’t say it sheds any light on my understanding! The first article in this issue, by Coralie Graham, ends with this:

    Saint Augustine said: “Being a Christian, I rejoice with you. being a bishop, I tremble – the responsibility I have is much greater.” He very much appreciated the help that he got from priests and lay people to fulfill his job. I’m sure all good bishops would feel the same way. That is why we must not forget to pray and sacrifice for all good bishops and priests and especially for the Pope, that he will receive the graces necessary to fulfill the mission given him by Our Lady of Fatima….”

    In an article further on in the same issue by Suzanne Pearson, “New Light on the Consecration of Russia,” she states this:

    To reach our greater goal, the conversion of the enemies of Fatima, let’s recommit ourselves to the personal side of Our Lady’s plan for peace….[live in the state of grace, do penance, daily Rosary, Communion of Reparation on the Five First Saturdays]….when these requirements for the personal consecration are lived by each person, concluded Sister Lucy, the Consecration by the Holy Father will be realized….we know that at some point He will take pity on us and give the Holy Father the grace he needs to consecrate Russia.

    These two writers from Fr. Gruner’s shop indeed make it sound as though (a) the Holy Father(s) is lacking enough graces to obey Our Lady’s command, and (b) that these graces can be won by the efforts of the faithful. Yet Athanasius’ argument is very convincing: how, in an age of almost universal apostasy and getting darker by the day, can these graces be won by apostates?

    Also, does anyone know where Sister Lucy concluded this (second quote)?

    • RCA Victor,

      I’m afraid I do not take these quotes allegedly from Sr Lucia at face value. I know that the quote from John Haffert (who was I think the first to make this point) later became one of the false friends of Fatima, and actually made up quotes from Sr Lucia which he said she’d said in interviews with him. So, I’m sorry, but I wouldn’t put it past him to have made up that original quote, the one in the blog intro. If he could do this later in his life, why not earlier?

      I can’t see how Our Lady would make it a condition of the Pope getting the grace to do the consecration, and forget to mention it when she said “the moment has come for the Pope & bishops to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart.” That was very soon after the first apparitions at Fatima (1929, which makes it 12 years) so there couldn’t possibly have been a majority of Catholics doing all the Fatima devotions. They weren’t known yet, most of them.  

      It’s a pity people involved with Fr Gruner fell into this error, because the Fatima Center is already criticised plenty enough. It could be that Sr Lucy said this because the popes were ignoring the request from Our Lady and she was urging prayers to put an end to their disobedience, but that’s an “add on” – it’s clearly not a condition given by Our Lady. We pray for an end to sin and disobedience, but the fact remains that the Pope should have done as Our Lady asked in 1929. If he had, we wouldn’t be having the conversation and the world would be at peace.

  9. I don’t think that anyone is trying to say that it was a condition of Our Lady from the beginning.

    Those who say that Russia will be consecrated when there enough prayers and sacrifices mean, I always understood, that because the hierarchy are not cooperating, more powerful graces are needed for them to see and fulfil their duty in this regard.

    That was always how I understood it.

    • Sentire Cum Ecclesia

      If what you understand is correct, and I don’t question that it may well be, then surely the present Rosary Crusade of the SSPX, a very great thing in these days of universal apostasy, I speak in relative terms, will win those graces for the Pope and the bishops at last? We can but hope (and pray)!

      • Athanasius, I surely hope it (the SSPX Rosary Crusade) will. I hope it will be enough. At any rate, it’s all we can do to prepare for what lies ahead.

        (How good of God to give us that reassurance “It will never be to late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary.” How incredibly beautiful, and how just like the Sacred Heart of Jesus, that He could, in the 20s or 30s, look ahead through all the terrible treachery of Church members in the 20th and 21st century, all the way to the poor Pope who will finally consecrate Russia, and say “It will never be too late.” It reminds me of Our Lord on the night of His Last Supper, looking ahead and past His own Passion, past the betrayal and flight of His own Apostles and ahead to their suffering “In the world you will have distress: but have confidence, I have overcome the world.”)

        I suspect, though, that even more martyrdoms are ahead. For the very reasons that you mentioned. If the great tide of martyrdom in Communist Russia and the Spanish Civil War- just to take two examples- were not enough, alone, to halt the spread of the errors of Russia, what punishment can we now expect from God?

        To speak in terms which might be a bit simplistic with regards to the Divinity, but which I think convey well the point: God had a plan A, which was that the Pope would consecrate Russia in 1929. When this plan was blocked by the refusal of people to cooperate (for an account of some scary ecclesiastical politicising around Fatima, read Mark Fellowes’ excellent Fatima in Twilight, if you haven’t read it already) God has a second plan, call it Plan B. I think this Plan A and Plan B idea actually comes from Fr Gruner, I seem to have read it in his Crusader. I think it’s a very good explanation.

        Plan B is unfolding before our eyes: the Church as a whole has refused God’s merciful plan for steering through these times: devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. God is not mocked. The pride of the anti-Fatima clergy and laity will be punished, is being punished now, by the unfolding of the natural consequences of refusal to obey. To save the faithful and the clergy from the misery of Russia’s errors would have required a miracle, which God was ready to perform at the cost of trust and humility, as someone mentioned on the blog.

        The Pope will respond, eventually, consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart. Will be and the Bishops in union with him have to be brought to their knees by sheer fear, by hunger perhaps, like the little Jacinta foresaw? Or by the terrible attacks of false religions, on the rise worldwide? I think it’s very likely.

        Repeated sacrilege,the increase of abortion, unspeakable filth in the lives of clergy and faithful have not caused many or most of the clergy to say “Wait a minute. Did we all go horribly wrong somewhere?”

        What will God permit to wake them up? Perhaps we can at least shorten the time and lesson the consequences through our prayers and sacrifices.

        • Sentire Cum Ecclesia

          To remove any remaining doubt that the Pope and the bishops are entirely responsible for the non-consecration of Russia, we only need remind ourselves of the lament of Our Lord to Sister Lucy when He compaired their obstinacy to that of the King of France (the King who refused to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart when requested by Our Lord through St. Margaret Mary). This, I believe, amply demonstrates that the burden is on the hierarchy and not the faithful.

          The martyrdom you speak of is presently on-going and massive in terms of the count, but it’s not today a bodily martyrdom, it’s a spiritual and moral one. The “errors of Russia”, primarily its atheistic materialism, has spread like a cancer to every country in the world, to the extent that all the former Christian nations have fallen one after the other into hatred of God and His Divine laws. This same spirit of rebellion has spread throughout the Church, particularly at the higher levels, leading to unprecedented apostasy disguised as ” a New Pentecost”.

          I have always insisted, and will continue to insist, that the Third Secret chastisement is not about material punishments but rather concerns a supernatural punishment, a loss of souls on such a scale as to make nuclear holocaust look like a slap on the wrist.

          I believe it will be the sudden realisation of this tragedy of tragedies that will convince a Pope to finally submit to Our Lady’s request. How that will come about I don’t know, the prayers and sacrifices of the laity, few as they are in these times, will certainly help, but it will not be solely as a result of this..

    • SCE,

      If they are not claiming that it was a condition of Our Lady from the beginning, then they are using the claim (that the Church at large isn’t praying hard enough) as a means of letting the popes and bishops off the hook, as Petrus says.

      There IS no excuse. The request from Our Lady was as clear as it was simple. The Church hierarchy has failed to carry out her wishes. We are suffering the dire consequences. It’s not my fault, or your fault. It’s the fault of successive popes and bishops. It is a strand of papolatry, in my view, that holds certain people back from placing the blame firmly where it belongs – at the feet of these modern popes.

      And now we ARE having to pull out all the stops, and pray specifically for the intention that the Pope will do as Our Lady requested, all those years ago. God help them at their judgment.

      • Editor,

        With respect, I don’t see how it is letting the Pope or Bishops off the hook.

        When Our Lady of Fatima said “Many souls go to hell because they have no one to pray and make sacrifices for them” was she letting these souls in hell off the hook? Absolutely not.

        If someone says “The Pope is not making the Consecration because not enough faithful are praying and sacrificing for him” that is a comparable statement, and it surely does not let him off the hook. It just reminds us that we can do something about it….however small.

        • Sentire Cum Ecclesia

          I do not want to undermine in any way the importance of prayers and sacrifices for the Pope on the part of faithful, but I do think your comparison is inaccurate.

          We have it as documented and indisputable fact that Our Lady placed a burden on the faithful in respect to “poor sinners” and their avoidance of Hell. We only have John Haffert’s word that a second burden was placed on the faithful to secure fidelity from those at the highest levels in the Church who we would presume to be in a state of grace and the principal conduits by which all others are sanctified. Am I missing something here?

          • Well, the comparison was in relation to the issue of whether the Pope was being let off the hook. I made a comparison of two statements, one real and one imaginary, but analogous in syntax, in order to show that there is no evidence for the allegation that the Pope is somehow being excused.

            It is absolutely true that we have no recorded statements of Our Lady, that I know of, that place the second burden, as you describe it, on the faithful. Those who argue that this burden (or rather beautiful and meritorious invitation to cooperate) is indeed placed on the faithful argue, I imagine, not solely from Sr Lucy’s words but from the doctrine of the Communion of Saints as well as from the striking insistence of the young seers on the importance of prayers and sacrifices for the Pope.

            • Sentire Cum Ecclesia

              I should first clear up a misunderstanding. When I wrote of the “burden” placed on the faithful by Our Lady I did not mean it in the way you appear to have interpreted it. That’s my fault, I should have chosen a better word.

              Of course you are absolutely correct in describing the prayers and sacrifices of Catholics for the Pope and the clergy as a “beautiful and meritorious invitation to cooperate” in the Communion of the Saints. Indeed it is more than an invitation, it is a duty of charity that I would hope every Catholic practices.

              The point I am making is that Our Lady, as far as I know, did not cite this everyday duty of charity as key to the fidelity of the hierarchy to her request.

              My belief is that little Jacinta in particular had visions of what was to come as a result of the Pope’s failure to obey Our Lady. That’s why she was so insistent on prayers for the Holy Father. She saw just how much he would suffer for not complying with heaven’s request.

  10. I’ve just read through this thread. My view is that by saying the Consecration hasn’t been done because not enough people are following the Message of Fatima we let successive popes off the hook.

    As others have said, the time for the Consecration was 1929. The popes up until now have all failed to follow Heaven’s request. Certainly our prayers and sacrifices can win graces for the pope, but the blame can only be attributed to the successive successors of St Peter.

  11. Each day I shower in cold water for the intention that the Holy Father will receive the grace to consecrate Russia. I know it is not the lay faithful’s fault that Russia is not consecrated… I just do this out of devotion and kindness to the Holy Father.

    • NWOIC,

      I do not believe you. Not for a second.

      Please read my previous comment about your ridiculous claims regarding personal mortification – and your apparent ignorance of the Gospel injunction not to let your right hand know what your left hand is doing in such matters. In other words, it is completely wrong to boast about personal penances, even those you actually do undertake. For my part, I don’t believe a word of your daft claims. If YOU believe them and even worse, if you are trying to do any of the stuff you claim, then take it from me, you need help. Now, stop talking tosh – if you cannot engage in discussions without talking about yourself and boasting about crazy “penances”, go away and read a book. Try “The Story of a Soul” by St Therese of Lisieux.

  12. What this interjection by John Haffert did, in effect, was make a very simple request of Our Lady very complicated. Did Sister Lucy make this statement, as he claimed she did? We’ll never know for certain, or even if it was made in a different context to that which came to complicate what was a very basic request for humility and trust on the part of the Church’s hierarchy.

    What we do know is that Our Lady specifically placed upon the shoulders of the Pope and the bishops the responsibility of granting or refusing her request. They were given their free will to act or not act, it was not a command but a request enjoined by a promise of conversion and world peace if granted, and a prediction of dire consequences if not. The choice was clear and the hierarchy had to decide one way or the other.

    The faithful were separately requested to pray and offer sacrifices for the conversion of sinners and for Holy Father “who would have much to suffer”, as if Our Lady already knew what the choice would be in respect to her request.

    As I said earlier, the monasteries and convents were full in the days prior to Vatican II, “powerhouses of prayer and penance”, as they were known. Likewise, the faith was strong all around the world and Marian devotion was at its height. If this combined voice of prayer and body of penance was not sufficient to win the necessary graces for the Pope, then what chance now in this modern spiritual desert. It seems to me that this single observation nullifies the claim that Russia’s consecration is dependent more upon the laity’s prayers and penances than the hierarchy’s fidelity to a very clear and simple request of the Mother of God.

    Another point worth considering is that the hierarchy of the Church, in general, has not provided for the laity to “live the Message of Fatima”. A very important part of the Message was that the faithful fulfil the Five First Saturday’s devotion of reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Now, how many parishes established such a devotion in order that the faithful could do their part? A handful in universal terms. And let’s not forget how anti-Marian many of the clergy became in the wake of Vatican II “reform”, a tragedy that resulted in a very great decrease in Marian devotion throughout the world. As I indicated before, it is primarily the role of the priest to sanctify the souls of the faithful, not the other way around. The same applies in the case of the hierarchy. I just can’t help seeing a kind of role reversal in the words John Haffert attributed to Sister Lucy.

    • Athanasius,

      “Did Sister Lucy make this statement, as he claimed she did?

      That’s a very good question. I know that John Haffert was thought to be good on Fatima early on, but he later lied about what Sr Lucy had said, as this extract from the Fatima Crusader shows:

      “The campaign to falsify Our Lady of Fatima’s Message has already been well demonstrated in The Fatima Crusader (Issue 20, 22). In Issue No. 20, it was demonstrated that the “interview with Sister Lucy”, which John Haffert published in Soul Magazine was a hoax and a fraud. Haffert has never denied the charge. In April-May 1987 (Issue No. 22), it was pointed out that Haffert had not retracted the bogus interview, and it was further proved that “Mr. Haffert is guilty of a deliberately perpetrated fraud.”
      http://www.fatima.org/crusader/cr25/cr25pg20.asp

      As Lily said, if Haffert lied later, who’s to say he didn’t lie about that early interview?

      I remember once reading where Sr Lucy corrected claims made by Haffert that the Consecration had been done, and in that statement she was acknowledging that it would take some work of preparation to have all the bishops unite with the Pope for the act of consecration, and she added that we should all pray about it, so that but, as others have said, that is different from saying that it would be down to the laity whether (or when) the consecration would be done. I’ve now found that link http://www.fatima.org/crusader/cr09/cr09pg30.asp

      We should now definitely pray for the Pope to do as Our Lady asked and consecrate Russia because time is obviously running out. As others have said, though, if the pope had done this at time of asking, early in the 20th century, we wouldn’t need to do all this praying! LOL!

      • Margaret Mary,

        The quotes you make and articles you link to must surely cast serious doubt on the reliability of John Haffert as a witness to anything Sister Lucy said. His testimony from 1946 is completely untrustworthy as far as I’m concerned.

    • Athanasius,

      “the monasteries and convents were full in the days prior to Vatican II, “powerhouses of prayer and penance”, as they were known. Likewise, the faith was strong all around the world and Marian devotion was at its height. If this combined voice of prayer and body of penance was not sufficient to win the necessary graces for the Pope, then what chance now in this modern spiritual desert. It seems to me that this single observation nullifies the claim that Russia’s consecration is dependent more upon the laity’s prayers and penances than the hierarchy’s fidelity to a very clear and simple request of the Mother of God.”

      In the proverbial nutshell! Well said.

    • Athanasius,

      More like a Christmas bonus – so “keep up the good work” takes on a whole new meaning!

      I agree with those who have called John Haffert’s credibility into question. I must say, the fact he lied later, to the extent of inventing interview(s) or quotes from interview(s) with Sr Lucia, means that there has to be the possibility that he lied earlier. In my experience, people who think nothing of telling lies, do so routinely. So, there is every possibility that the words which John Haffert put into Sr Lucia’s mouth in the 1946 interview, were not spoken by her at all.

      Whatever the truth of that, I think it is clear from the evidence provided on this thread, that – while it is clear that we need to pray hard for the Pope to do as Our Lady asked in 1929, albeit in a spirit of “better late than never” – the onus was NOT placed on the faithful, the “Church at large”, by Our Lady to win the grace for the Pope and Bishops to do this. They CHOSE to ignore the request of Our Lady to consecrate Russia and THAT is why we must now pray very hard that they repent of their neglect and complete the Consecration asap. Irrespective, however, of our prayers, the grace is (must be) available for the Pope and Bishops to do as Our Lady requested – that has to be a given. God always supplies the necessary graces and He would not have asked, through Our Lady, for this Consecration, were He not making His grace available for its completion. I repeat: that is and must be a given. To ask for this action and NOT supply the necessary graces, would be unjust.

      • Editor,

        If the party line, or one of the party lines, of the false friends of Fatima is to insinuate that it is the fault of the faithful that the Consecration has not been done, then – oops – they are admitting that the Consecration has not been done!

          • Sadly, the main official ‘party line’ outfit – the World Apostolate of Fatima – say that the Consecration of Russia was done in 1984, but it hasn’t been converted because the Vatican hasn’t promulgated the First Saturday devotion and not enough of the faithful do it. That’s where they are coming from.

      • Madame Editor,

        If one looks at the Fatima timeline, June 13, 1929 (13/6/1929 on your side of the pond) was the date of the request for the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. The apparitions were not officially approved by the bishop of Fatima until October 1930 – a difference of 16 months.

        Imho, just as Our Lord invited St. Peter to come to him over the water, Pope Pius XI was being asked to step out of the boat and consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in union with all the bishops of the world.

        St. Peter leaped out of the boat and as long as he kept his eyes on Our Lord, he was able to walk on the water. When he took his eyes off Our Lord and noticed the strong winds, then he began to sink and cried out to Our Lord to save him.

        St. Peter stepped out of the boat. His successors from 1929 to the present have not, imo.

        • Margaret USA

          Yours is a good observation that the consecration by the Pope and the bishops depends on the strength of their faith in God and trust in Our Lady.

  13. RCA Victor

    Unless I am mistaken it’s some genuine, well intentioned Traditional Catholics who are making these claims. These already accept that the consecration has not been done. I wish it were the other way around because you nailed that one pretty succinctly.

  14. Issue 49 of The Fatima Crusader just posted by them on their Facebook page, might give us a clue as to how this “mission creep” happened, and/or was used to distort the message of Fatima. It sounds to me as though the Five First Saturdays of Reparation, acts of penance and sanctification, etc., were meant to avert chastisement and for the conversion of sinners, rather than to fortify the pope with extra graces to do the job requested of him. Unless I missed it due to a mind clouded by excessive hunger (because my latest food bank delivery was late…), I don’t think this has been raised yet on this thread…..?

    http://fatima.org/crusader/cr49/cr49d.asp

    If I’m wrong again, Editor, then….

  15. This video about Fatima refers to another alleged warning from Our Lady that took place on May 4, 2016, at Ourem in Portugal (see about 23:40 for starting context):

    Anyone heard of this?

  16. Madame Editor,

    May I may a plea for my fellow bloggers and lurkers to email the editor at the Sunday Telegraph in London right away (email address: stletters@telegraph.co.uk) proposing that President Trump adopts the non-worldly option for solving his North Korean dilemma by getting Pope Francis to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? Especially as we are approaching the 3rd Apparition at Fatima on 13 July.
    I have already written to the editor, and my chances of being dismissed as a religious crank could be reduced if the editor receives several supporting letters along the same lines.
    Perhaps there may be a few among the Knights of the Militia Immaculatae who would undertake this snippet of Catholic Action out of love for Our Lady?

    • Leprechaun,

      Thank you for that – you have shown imagination in finding a way to promote the Consecration of Russia in the mainstream press so I urge readers and bloggers to email the Telegraph, as Leppy suggests. It’s on my own list of things to do asap.

  17. Madame Editor,

    The Editor of the Sunday Telegraph did not publish my letter suggesting that President Trump could call upon Pope Francis to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary as a means of averting war with North Korea.
    Half expecting that to be the case, I took the back up precaution of emailing the Office for Presidential Correspondence at the White House in readiness for President Trump’s return from the G20 meeting.
    I did forewarn him that Pope Francis would insist that the consecration has already taken place and I gave him counter-arguments to put forward. Meanwhile, I await a response from him.
    However, I have since come across further and seemingly insurmountable objections (in human terms) as to why the consecration is not likely to occur until desperation sets in.
    One is the Collegiality of Bishops whereby bishops no longer report directly to the Pope, one of the fruits of Vatican II, making it difficult for the Pope to directly call upon the bishops to join in unison with him for the recitation of the act of consecration.
    Another is that if the bishops were to accede to his call, it would de facto portray him as the monarchic leader of the Faithful. This is something which collegiality militates against, apart from which he himself has declared that he is merely the Bishop of Rome and is subject to the preferences of the College of bishops.
    So there you have it.
    If your head aches from banging it against the wall, stop banging.
    Instead, let us step up our prayers to the Blessed Virgin Mary for a supernatural intervention, and preferably before North Korea demonstrates that it can land a hydrogen bomb on the White House.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: