The lie

In the context of the consecration of Russia, the Roman authorities go further than the above-mentioned ambiguities, tendentious selections of texts, and manipulation of people and events.

Their opposition to Fatima extends so far as to have recourse to the immorality of a double lie: the statement that, according to Sr. Lucia “The consecration is done according to the will of Heaven”, and the presentation of fake letters as writings of Sr. Lucia. The statement puts Sr. Lucia in flagrant contradiction with herself, as, up to 1989, she always and in all circumstances repeated the above-mentioned conditions as essential for the validity of this consecration. Then, suddenly, in 1989, she supposedly considers the consecrations as fully accomplished, though their failure to fulfil the conditions remained exactly the same. In other words, the statement implicitly accuses Sr. Lucia of being either a notorious liar or a mentally disordered person. Furthermore, from the last above mentioned arguments (8 – 11) we can conclude, that the quoted letter cannot be authentic. Such a use of letters to prove one’s theory need not be examined, as both from the historical and the moral point of view such procedures disqualify themselves entirely.

The question that faces us is the following: How can the highest representatives from the ‘seat of truth’ reduce themselves to using such duplicitous means?

We must not judge them, but we have to ask ourselves with anxiety what Our Lady wants to teach us through such pitiful moral conflict. Once you enter into the system of the enemy, the day comes when “the father of lies” reveals himself. In other words, once you renounce the sincere seeking of objective truth and trust only in your own intelligence, you fall more and more into blindness. The first moral principle to be overthrown is “the end can never justify the means”! Even if you have a good goal to achieve, you are never allowed to use immoral means to obtain your goal. Even if the modernists are convinced that Fatima is an illusion and that many of Sr. Lucia’s statements are not true, they nonetheless do not have the right to use immoral means to achieve their goals.

Another thing is that lies always bring you into contradiction. This is very visible here: If they think that Lucia is a victim of her illusions and ‘visions’ throughout, and all that she said is to be “handled with care and not taken literally”, including this consecration, why then not say so frankly and honestly, instead of covering the whole issue with lies? They cannot say it, because of the innumerable historical facts and the marvellous effects of Fatima, and because they would scandalize the whole Catholic world. What cannot be eliminated has to be definitively silenced. How? By declaring that now “all is accomplished and the Fatima event belongs to the past”.

Is not the definition of modernism the idea that the past belongs to the past, and especially that Tradition belongs to the past and no longer has anything more to do with our times nor with the future? In conclusion, the whole story of the “consecration of Russia” is like a mirror in which we can detect a pattern of modernism and the way it works. This sad aspect of the history of Fatima is also a revelation by Our Lady, in that it shows her children what they should avoid at all costs. And the easiest way not to fall into such traps is to be faithful to HER.