Sister Lucy Enhanced, the ‘Third Secret’

Dear TIA,

Reading this article, I wonder what year the true Sister Lucy died? How long was the imposter impersonating her? It makes me wonder how the sisters in that convent could continue a lie year after year. It makes me wonder how the conscience of the Sr. Lucy II was formed. Lastly, did Sr. Lucy II take time to repent at least before she died?

     In Our Lady,

     P.J.


TIA responds:

Dear P.J.,

These are good questions, indeed, whose answers we will probably only know at the Final Judgment.

We also share your perplexity.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

TIA,

Regarding the Two Sisters Lucy:Police departments around the world use age enhancement programs to see what a person will look like years later. Just curious to see if anyone out there has tried to age enhance the real Sister Lucia, also known as Sister Lucy I.

God bless you

     M.J.P.


TIA responds:

M.J.P.,

We have looked into the possibility of having age enhancement on a picture of Sister Lucy I, and age regression on a picture of Sister Lucy II, using a private investigation service. It would be around $600 for both. If you could help with this, it would be greatly appreciated.

In any case, one of our writers recently made a good comparative study that confirms the analysis of Dr. Horvat. Her analysis is similar to a forensic study. You may read Margaret Galitzin’s article here.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

TIA,

I am reviewing some documents regarding the messages of Fatima and the third secret. Here I am looking at the 'Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith' - The Message of Fatima.

The following paragraph appeared in a section headed 'Conversation with Sister Maria Lucia of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart (a conversation that took place on Thursday, April 27, 2000):


“Before giving the sealed envelope containing the third part of the “secret” to the then Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, Sister Lucia wrote on the outside envelope that it could be opened only after 1960, either by the Patriarch of Lisbon or the Bishop of Leiria.

Archbishop Bertone then asked: “Why only after 1960? Was it Our Lady who fixed that date?” Sister Lucia replied: “It was not Our Lady. I fixed the date because I had the intuition that before 1960 it would not be understood, but that only later would it be understood. Now it can be better understood. I wrote down what I saw; however, it was not for me to interpret it, but for the Pope.”

As many things are questionable about everything surrounding the release of the third secret, was it always known and believed that Sister Lucia relied on her intuition about 1960 and that it was not part of Our Lady's message, perhaps an intervention of Our Lady?

I have always heard it stated that the consecration was to take place in 1960, but never heard anything about this.

Also, if this was the case, has anyone cited Sister Lucia for her keen prophecy with regard to the 1959 turning point in the Vatican?

Your input is appreciated.

May the TIA and its followers remain in the protection of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

     A.E.


TIA responds:

A.E.,

This is another discrepancy between what the pre-1960 Sister Lucy said and what the post-1980 Sister Lucy said. As you can check in the carefully documented 3-volume book by Frere Michel on Fatima, he demonstrates that it was Our Lady who requested the secret be revealed in 1960, and not simply on the whim or intuition of Sister Lucy. For confirmation check here.

It was perfectly consistent for Our Lady to give this command because of the coming crisis in the Church that would be generated by Vatican Council II.

If, instead of convening the Council, John XXIII were to have disseminated the content of the Third Secret, the history of the Church would have been entirely different. A warning could have alerted Catholics to its dangers, as pointed out here.

We hope this answers your question.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

Hi,

I think your site is good to expose some of things that have went on in the Church, what has been said and how it opposes the true teachings, but I feel you will not gain very much respect by still having that phony third secret of Fatima on it.

The are a lot of forgers out there, and this is clearly the work of a forger, missing a lot of the details described by people who knew. Also it does not begin "In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved".

I hope you will remove this clearly new, white piece of paper soon, because it is only going to promote more falsities if people get spreading this around, and this is Satans aim.

Quite frankly I could make up a better one myself, if I was not a God fearing Catholic!

     E.B.

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your excellent website and the reporting that you do for the Church. I read it with greatest interest.

Very well indeed is that document holding up - the one you published April 2010 for the prayerful consideration of the faithful that this letter may in truth be the suppressed Third Secret of Fatima.

I have been listening to the videos "Fatima Your Last Chance Conference 2013" - especially Fr Gruner's address on the Third Secret. In that address he puts in place all the facts of matter and evidences we have around and about the Third Secret. It is like a puzzle - what emerges is the shape of the Third Secret.

Now if you drop the April 2010 document you published into that puzzle space as the missing piece - it fits. And it fits in surprising ways.

The structure is: "In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be kept."

What follows in terms of subject matter is the contrast of Portugal with "Rome of the abominations" where the dogma of the faith will not be conserved. This goes back to the subject matter of Our Lady's words at La Salette: "Rome will lose the faith".

The Third Secret you have published agrees with Cardinal Ciappi: "the great apostasy will begin at the top". And this is the subject matter of the April 2010 TIA text.

Then, is clearly set out the Rome of the "abominations" and the loss of souls following the hierarchy swept down by the tail of the dragon. Pope John Paul II alluded to this.

The Rome of the abominations (the Metz Pact, the one world religion exercise at Assisi, the alteration of the Mysterium Fidei in the novus ordo missae and all the corruption in dogma, worship and morals) would explain why the consecration of Russia to our Lady's Immaculate Heart was not done - indeed could not be done given the reign of the Masonic sects within the hierarchy of the Church

Thus, the directive to remove the cornerstone from St Peter's grave as a sign that Rome's authority is removed and given to Fatima, where "the dogma of the faith will always be kept".

Then there is the matter of the pope with the devilish eyes who is not a true holy father. He is dressed in the robes of the holy father and acts in the office of the holy father, but he is not a true holy father. Possibly this ties in with the bishop dressed in white seen as "appearing as in a mirror" - a mirror image of the official 'third secret'.

It is the prophecy of St Francis of Assisi "Christ will send them [Rome of the abominations?] not a true pastor but a destroyer" that I think is the most congruent with the idea of a bishop dressed in white who is not a true holy father.

Then a time was set upon "Rome of the abominations" - Daniel's 69 weeks that would count from the time of the announcement of the Third Secret. This aspect of the content would completely explain Sr. Lucia's anguish over the communication of the Third Secret. For that is when the 69 weeks would begin to count.

Let us say that John XXIII acted upon our Lady's request and published the Third Secret in 1960. Conceivably the result might have been that an expectant Church would have continued in prayer, penance and reparation, and millions more stirred by our Lady's message would have joined the Fatima apostolate.

Let us say that the confessionals filled up with people wanting to make the Five First Saturday reparations. Of course, no effort from the hierarchy to change the dogma of the faith through the suicide of changing the liturgy would have been complied with in false obedience. The global Fatima apostolate would have redoubled their efforts to have Russia consecrated. If that secret had been published to the Catholic world that was prepared and waiting to hear it in 1960. The Third Secret would have landed in force upon the enemies of Christ working apostasy within the Church.

So, now that the rotten fruits are gathered in with more to come, it is clear why the Vatican did not / could not publish the text you have published, if it is in truth our Lady's Third Secret. They did not want a clear prophetic time frame that would clearly demonstrate to the Church and the world that the Queen of Prophets had their number. Because they never published the Third Secret, the question will continue to hover over the April 2010 text - as to the timeline. Or will it?

The announcement. An announcement need not be public. The greatest announcement in the history of the world was the Annunciation - a private communication from an angel to a person. In the case of the April 2010 document (if it is indeed our Lady's Third Secret), it is possible to think that the 69 weeks begins to count in 1944. Bishop da Silva commanded Sr Lucia to write it down in 1943. After a period of much anguish she was able to comply through special graces from our Lady in 1944.

She told Bishop da Silva at the time that he could read the Third Secret for himself. In other words, she had announced it to him in 1944 by way of a letter. She later lamented that he had not read it nor wished to read it. Also, conceivably if the secret had been announced in 1960 as our Lady clearly wished, then the 69 weeks may have begun to count at that time.

As the Rome of the abominations has never announced the Third Secret, then I think the April 2010 text could be interpreted that the 69 weeks begins to count from the year 1944.

The key to the 69 weeks may well lie in the prophecies (not approved by the Church) made by our Lady of Mt Carmel at Garabandal. Remember these words, "Cardinals, bishops and priests and going into perdition and taking many souls with them." When John XXIII died and the visionary Conchita heard the bells of her village tolling for his death, she remarked to her mother: "there will be only three more popes and then no more time." Her mother, alarmed, asked if she meant no more time because of the end of the world. Conchita said, "no, not the end of the world, but there will be no more time after three more popes." That was all. She didn't know or couldn't say exactly what she meant.

So the next question is no more time - until what? As in three more popes, then the 'time's up.' What time exactly. Well. It could be interpreted "three more popes and then the 69 weeks will be up." She didn't say in the reign of the pope after the three popes. She didn't mention a fourth pope. But then the April 2010 text refers to someone acting in the office of the holy father "who is not a true holy father".

There has been no end of critiques of Our Lady's prophecies at Garabandal because, on the face of it, Conchita's prophecy would seem to be false. But let us suppose the true reference to her prophecy is Our Lady's Third Secret - which was supposed to be announced in 1960. Let us suppose the TIA text of April 2010 is that Third Secret.

Then, Conchita's prophecy would make perfect sense. The end of the 69 weeks would fall after the reigns of the next three popes. Therefore, our Lady gave a year for a week. The 69 weeks are 69 years. Because the Third Secret was not announced to the public in 1960, the count of those years begins in 1944 when it was announced to Bishop da Silva by way of a letter.

This is a clear and testable hypothesis. If the April 2010 document is indeed the Third Secret of Fatima, then there will be clear signs in the year of our Lord 2013 that the time given to the abominations of Rome has expired. And the 'time's up' occurs in the pontificate of Benedict XVI - whose eyes are so devilish that it is virtually the no 1 search for him on the NET.

Just type Pope Benedict XVI devil's eyes into Google Images and see what pops up.

Furthermore, the TIA April 2010 text opens up all of the Garabandal prophecies which now make perfect sense. So you have a triptych - Our Lady of Good Success (Quito), Our Lady of the Holy Rosary (Fatima), Our Lady of Mt Carmel (Garabandal).

More Five Saturdays of reparation to our Lady's Immaculate Heart, anyone?

     Yours in Christ

     L.B., Australia


The Editor responds:

Dear L.B.,

Thank you for your initial amiable words about our work.

I can see that you have a great interest in studying the Fatima Message with the many implications it has. Your letter also testifies to your great dedication to the topic, for which I compliment you.

Your considerations on the “Third Secret” we posted in April 2010 are interesting and I am passing them on to our readers as an encouragement to further discuss the topic.

There are two reservations, however, that I would like to make before any discussion:

1. The first is the credit you give to the apparitions of Garabandal. I respect your position. I have to confess to you and our readers, however, that I have not had the time, nor has any writer of TIA that I am aware of, to study in detail the pros and cons of the controversy over these apparitions in order to present a well-founded conclusion. Accordingly, until this time comes or the Church issues her judgment, I hold them in a provisory prudential reservation. This is the reason why at TIA we do not place the apparitions of Garabandal on the same level as those of Our Lady of Good Success and Our Lady of Fatima.

2. I followed with interest your interpretation of the 69 weeks of Daniel mentioned in the “Third Secret” as a deadline for a chastisement to come. This prophecy of Daniel in the Bible was one of the most difficult texts to interpret until it was finally fulfilled in the Birth, Crucifixion and Death of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the subsequent destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 AC. In his Adversus Judaeos (chap. 8), Tertullian gives us a precise calculation of dates to show that those 69 weeks were meticulously correct when we apply to each day of those weeks one year.

Supposing true that “Third Secret,” I am not suggesting that we should wait 483 years for that deadline to arrive. I am just saying that we should not rely on our human calculations to decode those 69 weeks mentioned by Our Lady and know the precise date of the awaited chastisement. Instead, we should be prepared for it to come at any time. We should look at the general condition of the Church and understand that this situation cannot continue for much longer without the disappearance of the Catholic Church, and conclude that God will not allow this to occur.

I hope these clarifications will help you and our readers to better know our position.

     Cordially,

     A.S. Guimarães