Aviso adamantly insists that there is no fake Sister Lucy and that her family is practically insulted that people think there was. I am reminded of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
It may be noteworthy that in the 1960s when the alleged switch was made no one, absolutely no one would ever imagine that one day there would be such technology available as face and speech recognition etc. Today we use face id to unlock our phones and this technology is, I believe, 100% accurate. Even tape recorders were scarce then. They probably thought no one would ever suspect. Another interesting fact from the interview is that the fellow who interviewed alleged Sister Lucy 2 in the 1990s (forget his name) actually went to the Portuguese police to report that that woman he`d just seen was not the same woman he knew.
Incidentally heres Return to Traditions video on the same subject. And just for fun: do we spell IMPOSTER or IMPOSTOR? I was in doubt myself. Try to figure that one out. No Google peeking for a few seconds.
The thought of this being true makes me feel very uneasy. I suppose that it is a reminder that we can really only trust in God.
Blizzard, You’re too funny! If only it were that easy. Imagine that someday authorities find the grave of the real sister Lucy assuming that this is true, of course. Yikes! I am interested in going through theses posts more thoroughly today but again it leaves me with such an uneasy feeling that part of me is afraid that I will find myself convinced of this.
I understand how you feel and yet, the truth is the truth. If (emphasis on if) this is true what happened to the real Sister Lucy? Was she killed? Did she die of natural causes and the Vatican saw that as an opportunity to bury the secret even further? Was she locked up in a cell, unable to communicate with anyone, except maybe a few "reliable" persons? Reminds me of Alexander Dumas classic novel Man in the Iron Mask. I sure hope you add your thoughts to this thread. And check my post above. I added a little picture.
You’re absolutely right, the truth is the truth. And I love the picture! Thank you, you made my day, lol!
While we are quoting the Bible, I thought of this one out of the mouth of Jesus himself (Matthew 7): 13 Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. 14 How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it! 15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them. Sounds like Jesus was saying that staying on the "narrow path" might be related to recognizing and avoiding the deceptions of "false prophets." And how do we recognize the "false prophets?" Definitely not by their appearance as "sheep." Rather, Jesus tells us that many of those apparent "sheep" will, in fact, be "wolves." So we recognize the "false prophets" (false Church hierarchy) by their "fruits," that is, by whether what they tell us agrees with the perennial teachings of Jesus or not. What does the pre-1960s Sister Lucia talk about? What does the post-1960s Sister Lucia talk about? Which one sounds more like Jesus when he is discussing end times prophecy? The evidence that Sister Lucia was replaced is overwhelming. We should all take some "time" to examine the "research" presented by Dr. Chojnowski.
Agree. Not trying to convince anybody but here's how he addresses the problem that her family allegedly recognized her: Wouldn’t Sr. Lucy’s family or relatives or the nuns of her convent have known that she was an impostor? Firstly, we don’t know what Sr. Lucy’s family, relatives, or nuns “knew” about her, and barring the revelation of some unknown confession, we may never know. However, there are some truths we do know. The scientific and medical evidence we have is irrefutable. All the logistical difficulties of how an impostor could be introduced are secondary details that remain to be discovered. However, we know that the relatives were never allowed to see Sr. Lucy face-to-face but always behind the grille and in the presence of other sisters of the community. Hence there was no opportunity for intimate or in-depth conversation. If it is true that the Church replaced Sr. Lucy with an impostor, if it is possible that the Church was overrun by Communists and Freemasons, is it not also reasonable to believe that these thugs acting in the name of the Church exerted pressure on Sr. Lucy’s relatives to remain silent and pretend as if nothing were happening? This isn’t proof that there was an impostor. It is simply stating that we should not be surprised that a cover up would involve tying up the loose ends with whatever threats or means necessary.
There are a couple of little tidbits of interest at this link https://www.messengersaintanthony.com/content/sister-lucia-fatima . My second thought about all of this is even if I’m convinced by the evidence presented, so what? It’s not going to change anything, correct? I remember reading recently that the pope will release the full 3rd secret when Russia acts first but I can’t remember where I read that. Did anyone else here read that recently also? Personally, I doubt that too many people would have been made privy to a switch, if one occurred. People eventually talk, they love to talk. If a switch was made one of the best times to do it would be after they pulled all of her teeth. They could wrap her face up for awhile etc. That’s the only possibility that makes some sense to me, no? If you read that link that I posted here above, she was under stricter orders than any of the other nuns there. So, it is quite possible that not too many nuns or anyone else were interacting with her regularly anyway. We are so close to disaster at this moment, I think that our time is best spent praying. I believe that these other things will get sorted out eventually.
I was thinking about this topic as youtube served me that video of Anthony Stine's on the possibility of an imposter Sr. Lucy. I watched a documentary on this a few years back (I don't have a link for it). My first impression was that the idea of an imposter Sr. Lucy is preposterous (to use Anthony's word). However, when looking at pictures of Sr. Lucy (i) when she was young and (ii) when in the presence of Pope St. John Paul II, my clear impression was that they were two different people. I did not know why I thought that, just that it seemed quite obvious to me. On further inspection led by the documentary it was clear at least to me that the 'two Sr. Lucys' had different bone structure, particularly the chin and jaw structure. When I saw the handwriting analysis, that was it - I was convinced. The teeth are completely different but that can be explained by total extraction. Then came the challenging counter argument mentioned by Padraig, that Sr. Lucy had been visited often by family who never raised any concerns. To deal with that the documentary said that those meetings took place with Sr. Lucy behind a grill, that 'Sr. Lucy would have been in a dimly lit room, and that she may not have spoken very much. I am a bit sketchy in my memory of it, but I concluded that it still could have been possible that those family members might not have twigged a replacement. I was not aware until now that someone had reported the suspected anomaly to the police. I have not studied the topic extensively but if I had to bet, I would vote for the replacement theory.
I would recognize my brother behind a grill and would know his voice. So would probably everyone this forum if they were being honest with themselves. I would even recognize my next door neighbor behind a grill.
I read this in a report years ago. Must see if I can look it up. It would be strange if the family went along with a deceit to bury a relative, especially on like Sr Lucia. It would be encouraging people to tell big lies. I am not sure these simple Portugese Catholic peasants would go along with such a thing, or even be capable of it. They would not be used to telling huge tales. Or any good at it. Although I admire John Henry Western enormously. But even so.
I think in one instance at least they were even suggesting that her own mother did not know she was facing an imposter. But a mother will always know her own. Always. I can't believe otherwise.
Now, I can’t stop thinking about this. Oh well… I thought of another way that they might have pulled this off and that would be if she and her family were in on it. Maybe they were told that this is the only way for her to not be bombarded with inquiries forever and ever. She would either have to live as a cloistered nun or they would find a lookalike to do that and she could live closer to her family under another name. Put her in some other clothing something other than black and a hat and call her Theresa etc and no one would be the wiser. She was able to hide like this in the first boarding school she was sent to, no one knew that she was Lucia of Fatima. Her family could have been told that it was for the better of mankind etc.
Please take a look at the following page, which shows just how much the two Sister Lucia's differed in their interpretation of the Fatima message: https://sisterlucytruth.org/the-1992-1993-interviews/ If you don't want to listen to that long interview, for a quick summary of the controversy, see the LifeSiteNews interview starting at timestamp 24:05:
I can't imagine how anyone could look at the evidence and think they are the same person. It's so obvious. There are celebrity look-alikes, and even the closest looking ones, can easily be spotted as the imposter. These 2 people are nothing alike and yet some people think they are the same. I don't get it. The big evidence that they are the same person is a reference to some family members supposedly insulted at the insinuation they are different is about as weak as evidence gets. There should be countless volumes of evidence easily proving them the same, not the other way around!!
