Eye's to the Sky's Fr. Malachi Martin

No, but that's not the point I was replying to. The point is was how, when and why he got to read the third secret, and he explained it many times both in his interviews with Bernard Janzen and Art Bell.

As for him having been made a Cardinal, that's only been revealed in Marro's new book.

Yes, he did.

Yes, he did. He hinted (the only thing he could do due to his oath) many times in the interviews posted above about the contents of the third secret. About the loss of faith in many nations, about the apostasy in the church, about the calamities that would aflict mankind, etc, and even about the Marian sign in the sky and what we now know to be the so-called illumination of conscience.

Fr. Malachi Martin sometimes went into specifics, some of which have already been materialized.

"The Papal outlook at the present moment -- the general outlook of those who are considered to be traditional Catholic believers -- is that there is a rought time ahead for all humanity, particularly for the Church, because of the weakness in the Church's structure.

And there will be a time of trial and diminished numbers, and of apostasy -- open apostasy -- replacing the present imminent apostasy which is affecting many bishops and many priests.

And that this will all culminate at a certain moment, because geopolitical or sociopolitical calamities aflicting the world will combine to make life very difficult for everybody, including Catholics.

And that in one given moment, when things are very desperate, there will be a sign in the heavens. Physical, visible, in the heavens. And it will be Marian. Authentically Marian and authentically Christian, and it will strike the consciousness of every man and woman alive. It won't necessarily convert them, but it will confirm where they are. And that out of it will come a solution, a temporary solution, for the world's ills. And there will be a temporary peace.

That is a skeletal outlook of it in itself. And there's no assurity of the date or time, although one can have a guess here and there. But the central function of the Virgin Mary is essential to that outlook.

(...)

This idea comes from Fatima."

Source: https://www.youtube..com/watch?v=eiThkRDEImY&t=1915s

Crediting details that ended up being revealed in Garabandal to Fatima, supporting all the claims (including from some popes like Paul VI and John Paul II) about Garabandal being part of, and a continuation of, Fatima.

"Suppose I'd tell you that Florida was going to float away. And that there was going to be three days of darkness. And that one whole nation would be wiped out, completely wiped out. And that the sun would be darkened for another five days. And that most of the earth would be afflicted with an epidemic they couldn't cure but could live with. Suppose all these volcanoes would erupt all together. What would you call that?"

Source: https://www.youtube..com/watch?v=3Qf7khkDXSI

Paraphrasing JPII at Fulda, although revealing a bit more than what he actually said.

I can't go into all the little hints he drops in his hours of interviews with Bernard Janzen, but he mentions (besides what I mentioned above) the Virgin Mary as saying in the third secret how many churchmen are falling like leaves into Hell, how Russia and Kiev are mentioned, how the smoke of Satan will reach the sanctuary (implying that's the source of Paul VI's famous statement), and many other things.

They are worth listening to, irrespective of this discussion.

No. He only ever referred to one sheet of paper with a direct, straightforward message of Our Lady. Not a vision. And it was comprised of two parts: one referring to the papacy, and the other to the world.

That there was also a vision is something that he never mentioned, and personally I'm being charitable with the belief that the vision published in 2000 is real. The fact remains that for decades the third secret of Fatime was a message of Our Lady.

You're referring to what she was told regarding the second secret? This is the actual quote from Jesus:

"My daughter, write what they ask of you. Write also all that the most holy Virgin revealed to you in the Apparition, in which she spoke of this devotion. As for the remainder of the Secret, continue to keep silence."

She listed it in her memoires when the Virgin Mary told her the secrets:

That sentence is part of the third secret, a direct message that's been omitted (and still is to this day). That's what's always been understood by the third secret, that's what those who read it have always referred to, not just Fr. Malachi Martin.

That's all the evidence needed. A partial quote of Our Lady, after the second secret, that's been omitted.

What the Vatican published is a vision. Which even if true, doesn't include any words of Our Lady.

There's a sin by omission, which I believe the Churchmen responsible are guilty of.

You've researched what JPII and BXVI said and don't see what's inconsistent about what's been published and what they said? It's a non sequitur. It begs the question.

"We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete." - Pope Benedict XVI, 2010

P.S: Here's another long interview with Rob Marro where he addresses some of the questions also presented in this thread:

 

Here are the specific actions:

1. Confession: Go to confession within eight days before or after the First Saturday.
2. Holy Communion: Receive Communion on the First Saturday itself, in a state of grace.
3. Rosary: Pray five decades (a full Rosary).
4. Meditation: Keep Our Lady company for 15 minutes by meditating on one or more mysteries of the Rosary.
5. Intention: Perform all these acts with the intention of making reparation to Mary's Immaculate Heart for offenses against it.
6. Consecutive Months: Complete these acts on five consecutive First Saturdays.

The devotion is rooted in the apparitions at Fatima and is seen as a way to console Mary and bring peace to the world.

Repeating this summary to ingrain it in our hearts. Not that we are super Catholics here on the Forum, but I am a child of a Mother who has requested the above. May I not disappoint her.

 

Thank you for posting!

 

Upon further investigation, you are correct. Thank you for your persistence in this.

This is true. I was incorrect.

Agreed, thank you for providing sources and specifics as they help me to learn. I know this likely took you a lot of work which I appreciate.

Ok, thank you for clarifying this. Upon further investigation on my part this does appear to be the case. It also appears to be that not once did Malachi reference anything in the disclosed 3rd secret. This is becoming a whole lot more clear for me.

No, this is from an apparition to Sr. Lucia from Our Lady which was given on January 3, 1944. The same day she wrote the 3rd secret.

"Write that which they command you, but not that which is given to you to understand of its meaning."
«Escreve o que te mandam, mas não escrevas o que te é dado entender do seu significado.»

Sr. Lucia also publicly verified that she said this several times.
https://www.arautos.org/tesouros-da-igreja/semana-de-fatima-terceira-parte-do-segredo-302379
the quote is also attributed to Our Lady on wikipedia

I agree that this is the consensus of those who claim to have read the third secret.

True

What the Popes said could be interpreted many different ways and without a proper framework of knowing what actually was going on we can jump to false conclusions. Which is why I really appreciate this conversation, because it is giving me a clearer idea of what happened. I already make too many assumptions.

I will check this out later.

After all of this back and forth I have a theory as to what happened. I mentioned part of it earlier in another post. I think Sr. Lucia initially wrote only the vision aspect of the third secret on January 3rd, 1944, according to what Our Lady had told her that day. Which was to write the vision but not the translation of the vision. Later on, Sr. Lucia was pushed to write the translation of the vision under obedience and she was also told to keep silent about it under obedience. So there were in fact two letters and an envelope for each letter. Fr. Martin likely only saw the letter of translation and not the vision letter, because he never referenced anything regarding the vision in all his years in the public eye.

As well, because the third secret according to public accounts is limited to the vision, the Popes can say they released everything according to the third secret. Because they can claim that the vision translation letter is a 4th secret.

 

Sr. Lucia also told us to read revelation 8-13 in relation to the third secret. In revelation stars also mean leaders of the church. So when a third of the angels are thrown down in Revelation 12, this could mean a third of the clergy. As well in revelation 9 a falling star was given a key to the abyss, which could be a Pope. The grasshoppers of Revelation 9 could also be the migration of peoples. So we could in fact be seeing this currently play out.

 

This video by Anthony Stine may have been post somewhere before but not on this thread. I think it gives a good summary of what Fr. Malachy actually said in various places about the 3rd Secret.

 

I think Father Malachi was quite careful about his oath of non-disclosure and should not be comsidered to have 'leaked' the Secret. That term is modern journalese; he was astute enough to know what to divulge about the issue without stepping over the line. That is why it's still the subject of debate.

 

Fair enough, I agree. I merely post this to give more clarity about what Fr. Malachi did say concerning the secret.

 

Correct me if I am wrong but I think what Pax Prima meant by 'translation' was an explanation or understanding of the meaning of the vision in the 3rd Secret. And as Pax Prima says, she was clearly given an understanding of the meaning, as she says in her letter when she set down the 3rd Secret.

Obviously, the 1st Secret (vision of hell) was accompanied by the explanation of the meaning by Our Lady. So one argument for the existence of another undisclosed part of the 3rd Secret is that it is reasonable to assume that the vision of the 3rd Secret would be accompanied by an explanation. It does seem strange for Our Lady to tell her to keep the explanation of the vision a secret.

I understand that seers in Marian apparitions in general can be given personal messages which are not for disclosure. Indeed, this was the case when Our Lady appeared to Sr. Lucy for the 7th time on the 16th June, 1921. On that occasion she gave her a personal message on the eve of her departure for boarding school, which was not subsequently revealed. But in the case of the 3rd Secret which clearly concerned the whole Church and indeed the world, it does seem strange for Our Lady to ask her to withhold it.

The Carmelites at Coimbra later wrote that "She never gave a word of personal opinion as to the meaning of these visions, affirming always - the interpretation belongs to the Church". And that seems to me to be an unusual statement because we know that Sr. Lucy's understanding of the vision was not her own personal opinion but that given to her by Our Lady.

So Pax Prima's 'theory' of two parts and two enveopes aligns with the proposal of The Fatima Centre that Sr. Lucy wrote a second part of the 3rd Secret after she wrote the vision on the 3rd Jan 1944, and that this contained the explanation of the vision given to her by Our Lady. They claim that this second part was written and placed in a separate envelope, sometime on or before 9th Jan 1944. The Carmelites of Coimbra do say that Sr. Lucy wrote a second letter to the Bishop of Leira on 9th Jan but that it contained a personal message from Heaven for him due to his illness.

This is according to the Fatima Centre: One text, spanning 62 lines on four pages of notebook paper, presents the vision the Vatican will publish in 2000. The other, comprising 25 lines on a single page, as attested by Bishop Dom João Venancio, and much later by Cardinal Ottaviani, has yet to be revealed. The Secret in toto is contained in two sealed envelopes of differing dimensions, on each of which Sister Lucia writes: “By express order of Our Lady, this envelope can only be opened in 1960 by the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon or the Bishop of Leiria.”

In an interview with Cardinal Bertone on 27th April, 2000, before the release of the official 3rd Secret, 'Sr. Lucy' says the 1960 date for opening of the envelope was her own initiative. Yet this clearly contradicts her diary account of how she was told by Our Lady on Jan 3rd 1944 to be at peace and write at least part of the 3rd Secret. Here she recounts Our Lady's words as, "... After writing it, place it in an envelope, close and seal it and write on the outside that this can be opened in 1960 by the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon or by the Bishop of Leira". Why would Sr. Lucy contradict herself all those years later?

 

The explanation that The Fatima Centre gives is that Sr. Lucy was clearly daunted by having to disclose the 3rd Secret and that she did not know where to start. Therefore, Our Lady told her to write the vision but not what was given her to understand the meaning of the vision, in order to break it down and get her started.

 

Not that it means much, but my soul is entirely at peace with the two letters and two envelopes theory. Primarily because it fits everything. The response of Fr. Malachi, the responses of Popes JPII and BXVI, and the responses around everyone who read the message for themselves. I don't see it contradicting anyone's accounts.

So it becomes apparent that the next step, at least for myself, is to discern what the letter containing the translation of the third secret contains. Many here have likely already gone through this. I have heard different things over the years, but never really pieced anything together for myself. So it is good to check out different videos, including the one you posted earlier. I feel like it is possible the Holy Spirit is guiding this conversation, keeping everyone engaged and on target.

 

It also contradicts what The Fatima Centre says was actually written on the envelopes. It would be good to verify what was written on the envelope(s). Is there any photographic evidence that "By express order of Our Lady ..." was on the envelope(s)?

 

Except of course it contradicts the Vatican's account and also that of the Carmelites of Coimbra who published it in their Biography of Sr. Lucy in 2013.

 

I understand the dilemma. The 1960 date of opening is either Sr. Lucia's initiative or it is the command of Our Lady. Personally, I lean to what Sr. Lucia wrote and confirmed. I have not encountered any photographic evidence.

 

"She never gave a word of personal opinion as to the meaning of these visions, affirming always - the interpretation belongs to the Church"
There are several ways to interpret this. She never gave her personal opinion, but could have written the translation of the vision she received which is not her personal opinion. So there is a differentiation between what she was given to understand the 3rd secret and what her personal opinion on what the meanings could be.

 

But that's the problem. She wrote that it was Our Lady's initiative to be opened in 1960 but confirmed later that it was her own initiative.

 

Yes, she may have had her own opinion but that is unlikely if Our Lady gave her the definitive understanding of the vision. The Carmelite of Coimbra's interpretation ignores that so that Sr. Lucy's opinion is seen to give way to the interpretation of the Church. Rather than acknowledging that Our Lady gave her the understanding of the meaning and that the Church should seek to yield to that meaning. If Sr. Lucy's understanding was completely completely aligned with Our Lady's then it is strange that that opinion should not be sought. Unless of course Our Lady really did intend to keep it a secret (and that has been discussed above).

 

Yes, in a private interview with Cardinal Bertoni, which I do not believe Sr. Lucia ever confirmed what Cardinal Bertoni recounted. But I haven't looked into it.

 

That is where I go back to this quote which Sr Lucia was given just before she wrote down the 3rd secret.

"Write that which they command you, but not that which is given to you to understand of its meaning."

For me, it is clear that Sr. Lucia was given both a vision and a meaning of the vision from this quote of Our Lady. So when Sr. Lucia is quoted as saying "the interpretation belongs to the church", it could hold a triple meaning. One where she is affirming that the interpretation of the vision that was given to her is in the hands of the church authorities. Also, this gives her a truthful way out of answering questions related to the meanings of the visions. She also did not want to give any opinions regarding the vision of the 3rd secret that ventured outside of the scope of what she was given to understand it.

Also, IIRC, she was commanded by Our Lord to keep silent about the third secret and only wrote it down under obedience to her bishop.

 

Alright. So we are both prepared to entertain the possibility that Cardinal Bertone's account is incorrect in saying that it was Sr. Lucy who said it was her own initiative to place the 1960 condition on the opening of the letter containing the 3rd Secret. Because if we don't then she is contradicting herself. And we also entertain the possibility that an undisclosed part of the 3rd Secret exists. As for Sr. Lucy not confirming later that the 1960 opening condition was her own, it gets a bit furher complicated. Which I will go into when I get time.