Updated: "Australia's #1 Super Recogniser Concludes TWO Different Women Present In the Sr. Lucia Photographic Evidence"
The report concerns an examination of pictures of Sister Lucy A (child); B (adult 1940s), C (1967) and D (1982-2005).
 |
| Sister Lucy A |
 |
| Sister Lucy D |
 |
| Sister Lucy C |
 |
| Sister Lucy B |
Why is the Fatima Center so quiet?
ReplyDeleteYes, I just don't understand why none of the traditional blogs and news sites are reporting this. Not one. Not the Fatima Center, not AKA Catholic, not Barnhardt, not Canon212, no one that I've seen. I've even checked the traditional forums. If someone posts information from this site, few to no one responds to it. There is no lively discussion for which Trads are known. Why? If anyone has seen posts or discussions, please tell about them here. I'd be interested to read them.
ReplyDeleteThe reason why the "traditional" blogs like the Fatima Center are not reporting this is because they want to continue believing everything that they published in the past about the fake Sister Lucy. If they admitted they were wrong regarding "Sr. Lucy", then it would be like admitting they were also wrong on insisting that Russia still had to be consecrated. This also ties into why they don't follow Church teaching on a heretic "pope" automatically losing office as per Vatican I. Their whole apostolate hinges on having a pope for this consecration.
ReplyDeleteThe consecration could have been done in the past by Pope Pius XII. The Sister Lucy of the 1940's expressed her own private opinion that she was not sure whether heaven would accept it or not. Her mission was just to relay the message, which was done.
Anonymous' - you are absolutely correct and justified in posing these observations.
ReplyDeleteLast year I tweeted - at the same time - 1Peter5, The Remnant, Canon 212, Fatima Center, Catholic Family News and Rorate Caeli, calling them out on their silence. Not one response, except the somewhat emotional, effeminate individual who runs the latter blog blocked me. Miss Barnhardt mentioned Dr. Chojnowski's Sister Lucy Truth investigation a while back, but has remained silent since.
But the biggest disappointment has been Christopher Ferrara, whose apparent peruse-the-cold-hard-facts-and-confront-the-awful-truth-head-on-no-matter-what-approach to Fatima, has turned out to be just that... apparent.
Given the prominent/influential nature of these persons in the English speaking Catholic world (allegedly "Traditional"), and coupled with their utter silence on this aspect of Fatima - which is truly cosmic in nature - they will one day answer for their silence. For they are acting... or should I say, not acting, just like the Neo-Catholics, i.e. nothing to see here, happy clappy, got to keep those dollar$ rolling in, don't ruffle feathers too much, 3rd Secret not fully revealed and make noise about it, but no further than that, and so forth.
This silence - especially by these "traditional" internet hotshots - is a bloody travesty, a heart-sinker, but at the same time points to a very great mystery that is happening here and, paradoxically, further justifies Dr. Chojnowski's investigation.
In this grave crisis in which the Catholic Church now find itself, we so-called "conspiracy nutjob" Catholics have to expect silence, cowardice and betrayal to come from anywhere, from anyone, at any time, from the most unexpected persons, those whom you may think trustworthy - but, in the final analysis, are not. Truly, the floor is collapsing.
Dr. Chojnowski - I am hoping and praying that the Lord of History is writing straight with crooked lines (if that is the appropriate phrase) by using you to lead this investigation into the real truth about Sr. Lucia.