|
 |
2. Grave Shortcomings
of the
Upper Hierarchy
 The opinion of
Father Alonso, expressed on many occasions and with increasing firmness right
up until his death on December 12, 1981, must hold our attention here. In 1969,
he thought that the third Secret of Fatima predicted the crisis of Faith within
the Church. But in 1976, in The Secret of Fatima: Fact and Legend, he
added another element of the highest importance to his exposé:
«It is therefore completely probable that the text (of the
third Secret) makes concrete references to the crisis of faith within the
Church and to the negligence of the pastors
themselves.»9 He speaks further of «internal
struggles in the very bosom of the Church and of grave pastoral
negligence by the upper hierarchy,»10 of
«deficiencies of the upper hierarchy of the
Church.»11
Surely Father
Alonso did not put down such serious words in black and white without carefully
considering the whole impact. On this point the evolution in his thinking is
noteworthy: he can hardly be accused of being an a priori
“integralist”. In 1967, he had gone along with the declaration of
Cardinal Ottaviani concerning the third Secret:
«It is a Secret addressed to the Holy Father,» (he
wrote at that time), and it would be «impertinent and useless to
hypothesize about its content.» He added: «Moreover, everything
leads us to believe that this final Secret does not contain any new themes but
simply a pressing appeal along with a grave admonition to today’s world to
practice penance and interior conversion through the powerful intercession of
the Immaculate Heart of Mary.»12
In 1976, he had
totally changed his mind. Now we are sure that in the meantime he had seen
Sister Lucy often; we know that during his work on the critical edition of the
documents on Fatima, he had opportunities to question her on several occasions.
As the official expert appointed by Bishop Venancio, would he have adopted this
new position on such a burning question without being certain of at least the
tacit accord of the seer? He gives us reason to believe that he knows much more
about the subject than he is able to say:
«. . . Does the unpublished text speak of concrete
circumstances? It is very possible that it speaks not only of a real crisis of
the faith in the Church during this in-between period, but like the secret of
La Salette for example, there are more concrete references to the internal
struggles of Catholics or to the fall of priests and religious. Perhaps
it even refers to the failures of the upper hierarchy of the Church.
«For that matter, none of this is foreign to other communications Sister
Lucy has had on this subject.»13 These lines have a
precious value for us, for two reasons. For in addition to the solid induction
of Father Alonso, which he established using numerous bits of evidence —
«I have the texts,» he declared — they indirectly reveal to us
the thoughts of the seer herself, such as they appeared in all clarity to a
theologian without any prejudice. Indeed if Father Alonso had been mistaken
about the content of the final secret, we can be sure that Sister Lucy —
who had no qualms about refuting fantastic theories on several occasions —
would have found a way to let him know.
Now Everything Is Explained
If
the third Secret predicts not only a near universal apostasy, but also reveals
the grave shortcomings of consecrated souls — priests and religious —
but especially the highest members of the hierarchy and the Sovereign Pontiffs
themselves, giving concrete but easily understood details — this would
suddenly explain an impressive collection of diverse and independent facts
concerning the mysterious Secret. Without this key, these facts would remain
for us as so many incomprehensible enigmas.
Three Months Of Insurmountable
Agony
In the first place, we see how the very contents of the Secret
held back Sister Lucy’s pen, preventing her for several months from
writing down the text in spite of the express order of her bishop.14
«Moreover (Father Alonso writes), how are we to understand
Lucy’s great difficulty in writing the final part of the Secret when she
has already written other things that were extremely difficult to put down? Had
it been merely a matter of prophesying new and severe punishments, Sister Lucy
would not have experienced difficulties so great that a special intervention
from Heaven was needed to overcome them.15 But if it were a
matter of internal strife within the Church and of serious pastoral negligence
on the part of high-ranking members of the hierarchy, we can understand how
Lucy experienced a repugnance that was almost impossible to overcome by natural
means.»16
As a matter of
fact, Sister Lucy surely realized that by writing these twenty or so lines, she
was inaugurating an event which would have a formidable impact in the history
of the Church and the world. For in the school of the Most Blessed Virgin, Lucy
was used to judging all things in the light of God: thus in her eyes war,
cataclysms and famine, the spread of the communist Gulag to the whole planet,
the annihilation of several nations — all these things are infinitely less
serious than the apostasy within the Church herself and the apostasy of her
Pastors.
To be sure, the Church has the promises of eternal life, and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against her. The infallibility of the Pope will never be
compromised. For it is certain that never will any Pope be able to teach error
in the exercise of his infallible magisterium, whether ordinary or
extraordinary. Nevertheless, the shortcomings of the Pastors in the areas where
they are not infallible can still have the most disastrous consequences.
Through their fault, the faithful can lose their Faith, resulting — along
with the frightful injury done to God by this collective apostasy — in the
eternal loss of millions of souls. This is where the third Secret is connected
with the first one, concerning the vision of hell. And in this aspect, in its
insistence on the responsibilities of Church leaders, the third Secret
undoubtedly seemed to Lucy the most terrible one, and above all the most
difficult to transmit. For Lucy was a humble religious, accustomed at all times
to looking on her superiors as the authentic representatives of God. Now that
she found herself suddenly ordered by Heaven to communicate such severe
warnings to them, such sharp reproaches regarding their conduct, it was an
extremely painful mission for her.
We have already seen how on June 12, 1941,
Our Lord commanded her to pass on a similar message to the bishops of Spain.
For more than a year, Sister Lucy hesitated, and could not bring herself to
inform the Bishop of Tuy. As we recall, it was a severe admonition concerning
the internal disorders of the Church in Spain, for which the bishops were
responsible. They were expected to apply the remedies and use firmness in doing
so. If they failed to do this, they would draw down a chastisement on their
country once again.17
We ought to reread this whole chapter of the history of
Fatima, which undoubtedly places us in the atmosphere of the third Secret. For
we know that the numerous revelations and divine communications received by
Sister Lucy throughout her life were always in close connection with the great
prophetic Secret of 1917, only they came at the providential hour to make more
explicit a particular request of Our Lady. Thus it is clear that the message to
the bishops of Spain was directly related — being an application to a
particular instance — of the themes developed in the third Secret on the
subject of the universal Church.
Some Revealing Admissions
We
know that the third Secret explicitly concerns the Pope, from several
indications in the writings and statements of Sister Lucy.
On March 2, 1945, she
wrote to Father Aparicio, her former confessor, who was then a missionary in
Brazil:
«Do they pray for the Holy Father over
there? It is necessary to pray unceasingly for His Holiness. Days of great
affliction and torment still await him.»18
Father A.M.
Martins, who quotes this text, notes down judiciously: «An unconscious
reference to the crisis in the Church?»19 Indeed we see in
this a proof that the sufferings of the Holy Father mentioned by the Secret
cannot be identified — as many commentators think — with the
afflictions of Pius XII during the Second World War. No, in 1945 Sister Lucy
shows us that the great tribulations of the papacy are still to come. If the
third Secret is precisely the prophetic announcement of these tribulations, the
reflection of Sister Lucy and her pressing invitation to pray unceasingly for
the Holy Father is perfectly understandable.
Here is another echo
of the private disclosures of Sister Lucy: we know that Father Schweigl, once
he decided to go to Portugal to conduct a detailed investigation on Fatima, was
entrusted by Pius XII with a secret mission concerning the seer. On September
2, 1952, he interrogated Sister Lucy at the Carmel of Coimbra. Although the
Holy Office did not authorize the publication of this
interrogation,20 on his return to the Russicum Father Schweigl
confided this to one of his colleagues who questioned him on the Secret:
«"I cannot reveal anything of what I learned at Fatima
concerning the third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one
concerns the Pope. The other, logically (although I must say nothing) would
have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal, the dogma of the
Faith will always be preserved." Regarding the part that concerns the Pope,
I had asked (our witness continues): “The present Pope or the next
one?” To this question Father Schweigl made no reply.»21
If
Pope Pius XII already had, through Father Schweigl, a veiled indication of the
subject matter of the third Secret, this would explain many things. Among other
things, it would explain the mission of Cardinal Ottaviani in May 1955, his
meeting with Sister Lucy and the fact that he questioned her on the third
Secret. Perhaps it would also explain why in 1956 or the beginning of 1957,
Rome demanded the transfer of this document to the Holy Office. It would also
explain why Pius XII, already knowing enough to surmise the gravity of the
events predicted in the Secret, preferred to wait, putting off till later on
the awesome decision to read it.
We might also reread the declarations of Sister Lucy to
Father Fuentes in December, 1957.22 We will not find a single word
there which does not fit perfectly well with everything we have said about the
most probable content of the third Secret. On the contrary, the anguished
thought of the crisis of the Church which was approaching, and the grave
defects of the Shepherds, seems to be underlying everything she said in this
con- versation, from beginning to end.
Why The Secret Was Not Disclosed
«The content of the third Secret must account for why it was not
disclosed by Popes John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II.» This is one of
four certain facts which we have solidly demonstrated at the beginning of our
investigation.23
Since none of the hypotheses expressed up to now really
satisfies this requirement, there is hardly any need for insistence to
understand why the Popes, since 1960, have always obstinately refused —
for different reasons which we will examine in a special chapter — to
disclose this prophecy announcing . . . their own shortcomings and the tragic
consequences which were to follow for the Church.
It is equally easy to
understand why Cardinal Ottaviani, who tried in the name of Pope Paul VI to
justify, for better or worse, the failure to disclose the Secret, declared
insistently that the famous Secret «was intended for the Holy
Father.»24 It was a half-truth . . . or a half-lie: intended
exclusively and explicitly for the Pope? Certainly not! But directly concerning
the Pope? Without any doubt.
Father Alonso understood quite well to what extent the
content of the Secret, and this alone, prevented the Popes from revealing it.
In his last article on the Secret of Fatima, written just a few weeks before
his death, while he prudently gave the appearance of justifying Rome’s
silence, he wrote these remarkable clairvoyant lines:
«An inopportune revelation of the text would only have
further exasperated the two tendencies which continue to tear the Church apart:
a traditionalism which would believe itself to be assisted by the Fatima
prophecies, and a progressivism which would have lashed out against these
apparitions, which in such a scandalous manner would seem to put the brakes on
the conciliar Church’s forward progress . . . Pope Paul VI judged it
opportune and prudent to delay the revelation of the text until better times.
Pope John XXIII declared that the text did not refer to his pontificate . . .
And the following Popes did not consider that the moment had come to lift the
veil of mystery, in circumstances where the Church has still not overcome the
frightening impact of twenty post-conciliar years, during which the crisis of
the Faith has installed itself at every
level.»25 Stupefying words: revealing Our Lady’s prophecies,
the Fatima expert explains to us, would come to clearly vindicate the defenders
of tradition and uphold them in their struggle, and on the contrary, restrain
and disavow the supporters of the “Conciliar Reform” to the point of
infuriating them against Fatima.
Now the question arises: how long will our Pastors
choose to please the enemies of the Blessed Virgin by remaining faithful to the
“conciliar orientations” on which they fall back — and which
have led the Church to her ruin — rather than humbly place their trust in
the Queen of Heaven’s prophecies, which are unquestionably opposed to the
innovators? How long will they put off obeying such urgent requests of their
Mother and Mistress, the Queen of Apostles, all-powerful Mediatrix of grace and
mercy for the Church and the world?
FOOTNOTES:
(9) VSF, p.
80-81. (10) Literally: «. . . de altos Jerarcas», VSF (Span.) p.
75. — (11) Ibid., p. 73. (12) Broteria, 1967, p. 22. Cf. História
da literatura sobre Fátima, (p. 25) where Father Alonso repeats the same
expressions. (13) VSF, p. 80. — (14) Cf. supra, p. 37-48. (15) We have
related how on January 2, 1944, the Blessed Virgin Mary came Herself, through
an apparition, to finally dispel the seer’s darkness and put an end to her
sorrowful trial. — (16) VSF, p. 82. (17) Cf. supra, p. 7-30. — (18)
Documentos, p. 497-499; cf. supra, p. 233-234. (19) In 1974, Father Antonio
Maria Martins had publicly adopted Father Alonso’s thesis — which is
also the thesis of almost all the Portuguese experts — on the third
Secret. He wrote in the preface to one of his works: «Two thirds of the
Secret are found in this Volume. The third part, which has not yet been
published, deals only with what is called “the crisis of the Church”.
It is time to put an end to the unhealthy fantasies, the irrational doubts . .
.» (O Segredo de Fátima nas Memorias da Irma Lúcia, p.
XVIII). Later on, subsequent to an interview with Cardinal Seper, Father
Martins rallied to the thesis of Father Friere, (cf. Appendix II, p. 735-743).
(20) Cf. supra, p. 337-339. (21) Letter to the author, November 30, 1984.
— (22) Cf. supra, p. 503-508. (23) Ibid., p. 425-429. (24) Cf. infra, p.
488. Father Richard relates, «Cardinal Ottaviani told me himself that
this Secret is very important, but that it is for the Sovereign Pontiff.»
(Appel de Notre-Dame, January 1982). (25) “De nuevo el Secreto de
Fátima”, p. 93. Ephemerides mariologicae, 1982.
Return to
Table of Contents
|
|
 Printer friendly
|
|