Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


LUCIA - THE SURVIVING FATIMA WITNESS LIES IN HER MEMOIRS

Lucia, Francisco and Jacinta were the visionaries of Our Lady of Fatima. These three children claimed they saw Mary on a number of occasions in 1917. Francisco and Jacinta died.

She reported having had visions of angels before that.

Lucia became a nun in 1921. The story comes to us through Lucia and she was not a trustworthy source and the Bible itself says that God wanted all things established by three reliable witnesses.

She wrote her memoirs years after the event and had an interesting way of telling how her imagined memories could be separated from the "real" ones: "I must thank God for the assistance of the Holy Spirit, which I can feel suggesting to me what I should say or write. If sometimes my own imagination or my own understanding suggest something to me, I sense immediately that it is lacking the divine unction, and I stop my work until I am sure, in the deepest recess of my soul, of what God wants me to say in His place." Such gross arrogance!

The book, Fatima In Lucia’s own words, is a must for the person who ventures to expose Fatima for the malignant fraud it really is. The book was edited by Fr. Louis Kondor and published by the Postulation Centre of Fatima, Portugal. Approval for the book was given by the Bishop of Leira in 1976.

Page 5 tells us that the book is made up of the original manuscripts in which Lucia recorded her alleged experiences.

Lucia claimed that everything to do with the apparitions of the Virgin was clear in her head and unforgettable to her (page 13, page 99).

The children agreed to be discreet about the first apparition. However, Jacinta broke this promise (page 29). Lucia tries to convince us that it was because her joy was so intense that she could not restrain herself from telling. The reason for silence would have been in case they were stopped from seeing the Lady again by the grown-ups so Lucia lied about Jacinta’s motives. Jacinta was not such an innocent child after all for she would not have put telling before risking not seeing the Virgin unless she saw no Lady at all.

Lucia and Francisco contradicted each other over whether or not the Lady had gold edges on her dress. Lucia said it was a trick of the light that make him think there were gold edges on it (page 175). She said it was caused by the glowing of the dress. That cannot be true for she would have thought there were lines too if the boy saw them. And the trick of the light would not have had the same effect on everything the Lady wore. When the Lady moved it would have been evident that the gold edges were not there.

How could something that God causes and which is not like natural light lead to tricks of the light? God causing miraculous tricks of the light? No that is too much!

Lucia contradicted herself about the Virgin’s earrings (page 175). She said that she had said the Lady was wearing ones because of a momentary illusion caused by the light bathing the Lady. Is that really believable? You don’t say a brown coat is green because the light made it go green for a second.

Lucia forbade Jacinta to even say that the Lady asked them to make sacrifices for sinners for people would then ask what kind of sacrifices they were making (page 34). This stuff about the need for reparation is a late addition to the story and this is merely an excuse for it being unheard of in the early days. The children knew they could have refused to answer. And when people knew they were seeing the Virgin they would have expected a request from her to the children to do penance for that was commonly requested in apparitions. The children hypocritically told one another their sacrifices (page 42). In Catholic theology that would be the sin of boasting.

Jacinta knew that dirty water which clothes were even washed in could make her very ill yet she drank it as a penance (page 86). She could have imagined her Lady when she was that fanatical. She wasn’t thinking about the people who would have to look after her.

Lucia was a good teller of religious stories (page 24). She could have invented her experiences. Lucia did actually decide to say that the story of the apparitions was a lie (page 69). This is as destructive of her evidence as it would be if she had lied. She could not have thought that the lie would make her life easier for it would not and would in fact get her into bigger trouble and the other two would contradict her were the retraction a lie. Her parents would have warned her what would happen to her and them if she lied. Mark this well, here is a child who would lie no matter how much bother or scandal it would stir up. Even Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who was practically the real pope during the reign of John Paul II and is now Benedict XVI declared on June 29th 2000 that Lucia might have read too many devotional books and these led her imagination astray and coloured the reports of her vision. Lucia has been guilty of driving people into savage and terrible penance through letting them think that the Third Secret was about an apocalypse that only the penitent could escape. A friar who knows her well said that she suffered from religious hallucinations and false memories. His name is Mario de Oliveira.

Jacinta and Francisco could not have seen a Lady at all when they believed that Lucia would be killed (page 72, 77) even though Lucia later claimed that the Lady had promised them that she would outlive them. Lucia thought her end was nigh on one occasion though the other pair were alive (page 79, 89).

The idea to make the people see the sun spinning would have been suggested to Lucia by the fact that over a month before that miracle many people were claiming to have spotted signs in the sun (page 76). The child knew that some would insist they had seen the sun spin if she prompted them just before the famous miracle of the sun of October 13.

Lucia admitted that there were things about the Lady and her sayings that she never revealed until 1941. The idea of a girl claiming that she seen the Virgin and keeping things back during the investigation directed by the Church some years previous which resulted in the visions being accepted by the Church as authentic is strange unless she is lying. It was deceit for everything has to be looked at to see if the vision was real or not. What else did she lie about? There was nothing in her visions that should have been hidden until then.

Lucia says she was mistaken when she said that the Lady promised that the war would end on the day of the solar miracle, October 13th. That was the very first thing she said on the matter and it is more likely to be what she was told than what she now says: that the Lady did not say that. The only reason it is denied now is because it turned out to be wrong. Lucia said she was trying hard to remember what the Lady said about graces so that she forgot what was actually said about the war (page 170). Yet she boasts of her memory – in the next line! (as well as on page 99. She says that supernatural events cannot be forgotten and it is no wonder – forgetful visionaries of Medjugorje take note!) – and how could she forget something that is more interesting than promises about grace? And worse, what the Lady said that day about grace and reparation was brief and repeated the content of the earlier messages. Lucia is certainly telling a big lie. The visions of Fatima were not supernatural.

Lucia claimed that the aurora borealis that she said was a sign from God was probably not an aurora borealis but a miracle (page 109). That was dishonest. Science did not support her in this and so it was not a real sign. The Lady said the sign would be an unknown light (page 162). This means a supernatural one. The obscurantist Lucia claimed that science did not bother investigating it to find out that it was not an aurora borealis (page 25, Queen of Peace, Fall 1995). Can we trust Lucia with her visions and her whirling sun? She is the only witness left for the others died before they could convince anybody. I wouldn’t trust her.

The Aurora Borealis

There is no evidence at all that Lucia or her vision predicted the aurora borealis before the night of January 25, 1938, when it happen. Fr Dhanis thought she imagined this prophecy after the event. He wrote, "Would it then be bold to ask if perhaps the natural impressions of Lucia before the aurora borealis were not integrated into the secret, if they did not introduce the words on the unknown light, as the herald of the great chastisement? The announcement of the aurora borealis in the secret is grounds for suspicion." Worse she linked it to a chastisement - thus she referred to World War II as a chastisement from God which was cruel for 99% of those who suffered and died were wholly innocent and nobody deserves to have to face war. She never mentioned that the Virgin predicted Pius XI until there actually was a Pius XI! She thought war would happen during his papacy. But it happened some months after his death under Pius XII. The reason she erred was probably she did guess before the event. But it is certain that she lied that the Virgin mentioned Pius XI in 1917.