A New Booklet,
Allegedly by Sister Lucy,
Raises Serious Questions
by John Vennari
A June 2 Zenit report relates that a small book of unpublished writings by Sister Lucy was to be released in Italy. The date for publication was scheduled for June 10.
Described as a 64-page booklet entitled “The Message of Fatima”, it was edited by the Carmel of Coimbra and issued by the “Little Shepherds’ Secretariat.”
The report says Sister Lucy had worked on the writings as far back as 1955, at the request of the then Superior General of the Order. The text was sent to the Vatican by the order of Pope Paul VI, but remained “forgotten in the Vatican Archives”, says Father Vechina, Sister Lucy’s confessor, in the book’s Introduction.
In 1982, this same Father Vechina, then-Provincial of the Order of Discalced Carmelites, invited Sister Lucy “to write all the details that refer to the Message of Fatima from the beginning.” The Zenit report did not make clear how Sister Lucy’s post-1982 writings were merged with the 1955 text for this latest publication.
The beginning of the book, according to Zenit, seems to be a conventional recap of the story of Our Lady’s visitations to the children at Fatima in 1917.
But if the Zenit report is true, the book strikes a jarring note when it treats of a certain aspect of World War II.
True, on July 13, 1917, Our Lady of Fatima predicted the outbreak of a new war “worse” than World War I, which would begin during the reign of Pius XI. But in commenting on World War II, reports Zenit,Sister Lucy is allegedly to have written that history witnessed, “the outbreak of an atheist war against the faith, against God and against the People of God. A war that sought to exterminate Judaism from which Jesus Christ, the Virgin and the Apostles came, who transmitting to us the Word of God and the gift of faith, hope and charity, a people chosen by God, chosen from the beginning: ‘salvation is from the Jews’.”1
This preoccupation with Jews and today’s Jewish religion is foreign to anything we find in Sister Lucy’s previous writings. It is the rhetoric of post-conciliar ecumenism, not that of Fatima in Lucia’s Own Words. It suggests that another hand — other than Sister Lucy’s — scribed this part of the text.
The Jewish religion as practiced today has virtually nothing in common with the religion of the Israelites of the Old Testament, the religion practiced by Jews during the time of Christ. This religion of the Israelites came to an end with Our Lord’s death on the Cross by which He established His New Covenant that made obsolete the Old.
The alleged passage from Sister Lucy thus muddies the waters between the religion of the Israelites of the Old Testament, and the present-day Jewish religion which is primarily based on not the Old Testament, but on man-made works called the Kabbalah and the Talmud. Worse, the Talmud contains unspeakable blasphemy against Our Lord and Our Blessed Mother.
“A Systematic Deformation
of the Bible”
Since many Catholics may find this hard to believe, we will provide quotations from authoritative sources regarding the contents of the Talmud and the centrality of the Talmud in today’s Jewish religion.
Msgr. Landrieux, Bishop of Dijon, France, in his L’Histoire et les Histoires dans la Bible, calls the Talmud “a systematic deformation of the Bible.”2 The ex-Rabbi Drach, a 19th Century convert to Catholicism, who was highly honored and decorated for his learned works by Popes Leo XII, Pius VIII and Gregory XVI, provides a fascinating insight into the Talmud:
“For a long time it was my professional duty to teach the Talmud and explain its doctrines, after having attended special courses for many years under the most renowned of contemporary Jewish Doctors ... The judicious reader of the Talmud is often saddened by the presence of many of those strange aberrations into which the human mind falls when bereft of the true faith, and very frequently rabbinical cynicism makes him blush with shame. The Christian is horrified by the insane and atrocious calumnies which the impious hatred of the Pharisees hurled at everything he holds sacred. ... In the Ghemara (part of the Talmud) there are at least a hundred passages which are insulting for the memory of Our Adorable Savior, the more than angelic purity of His Holy Mother, the Immaculate Queen of Heaven, as well as the moral character of Christians, whom the Talmud represents as practicing the most abominable vices.”3
Regarding the long-established Jewish reverence for the Talmud, Msgr. Landrieux quotes the Jewish organ L’Universe Israelite: “For two thousand years the Talmud has been and remains an object of veneration for the sons of Israel whose religious Code it is.” He also mentions Archives Israelitesaccording to which: “The absolute superiority of the Talmud over the Bible of Moses must be recognized by all.”4
Testimony of a
Concentration Camp Survivor
Before anyone falsely accuses the above-quoted Catholics of alleged “anti-Semitic” ravings, we offer the important testimony of one who is not Christian at all.
In 1994, a book was published by Israel Shahak, an Israeli Jew, born in Poland, incarcerated for four years in Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp during World War II. He lived in Palestine from 1945 until his death in 2001. His book, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, speaks openly about the Talmud’s anti-Christian teachings. I apologize ahead of time for the disturbing sections of the Talmud the author relates. Mr. Shahak writes, “It must be admitted at the outset that the Talmud and Talmudic literature ... contains very offensive statements and precepts directed specifically against Christianity. For example, in addition to a series of scurrilous sexual allegations against Jesus, the Talmud states that His [Jesus’] punishment in hell is to be immersed in boiling excrement — a statement not exactly calculated to endear the Talmud to devout Christians.”
Mr. Shahak continues, “... The Edito Princeps of the complete Code of Talmudic Law, Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah [is] replete with the most offensive precepts against all Gentiles but also with explicit attacks on Christianity and on Jesus (after Whose name the author adds with agreement, ‘May the name of the wicked perish) ...’5”
One of these explicit attacks on Our Lord claims that Jesus ”learned witchcraft in Egypt.” (Shabbos 104b)6 The vile names that the Talmud calls the Blessed Virgin Mary will not even be repeated here.
The fact that the Talmud contains these disturbing teachings was also confirmed by the eminent American theologian Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, who was trained in Rome’s Angelicum under the revered Father Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., and for over 20 years, was editor of the prestigious theological journal, The American Ecclesiastical Review. In his superb 1942 apologetics book, We Stand With Christ, Msgr. Fenton cited Talmudic teachings to demonstrate:
1) that Christ truly existed, otherwise the Talmudic writers would not have written of Him,
2) the historic truth of Christ’s miracles. Fenton writes: “They speak of Jesus as a magician who went about performing wonders, and thereby indicate the reality of His miracles.”7
Catholic author Craig Heimbichner, who has made a special study of the Talmud and the Kabbalah, explains that a recently published version of the Talmud now contains these offensive passages that some previous editions had edited out.8
It is clear that the words attributed to Sister Lucy on the subject of the Jews are false. As much as one deplores the systematic persecution of any group of people, Jews or not, it is not theologically accurate to speak of World War II as a war that “sought to exterminate Judaism from which Jesus Christ, the Virgin and the Apostles came ...”, since today’s Talmudic Jewish religion is not at all the religion of the Old Testament from which Our Lord, Our Lady and the Apostles came.
These alleged writings of Sister Lucy do not correspond to her own earlier style, nor do they correspond to our received Catholic Faith. They do correspond, however, to the new, post-conciliar ecumenical religion that falsely implies that today’s Jews have their own existing covenant with God, and that they need not convert to Our Lord’s one true Catholic Church for salvation, which is contrary to the teaching of Sacred Scripture and the authentic Magisterium of the Church. This alone makes the posthumous publication attributed to Sister Lucy highly suspect.
More Consecration Disinformation
Not surprisingly, the new booklet has Sister Lucy saying that the March 25, 1984 consecration of the world fulfilled the conditions for Our Lady’s request of the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
As indicated repeatedly in The Fatima Crusader, this contradicts Sister Lucy’s previous testimony that 1) Our Lady never asked for the consecration of the world, but of Russia; and 2) the 1984 consecration did not fulfill Our Lady’s requests. Here’s a brief recap:
• On July 15, 1946, author William Thomas Walsh asked Sister Lucy if Our Lady ever asked for the consecration of the world? Sister Lucy made clear that Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of the world, but “what She demanded specifically was the Consecration of Russia.”9
• Around 1980, Father Umberto asked Sister Lucy if Our Lady ever asked for the consecration of the world. “No, Father Umberto, Never!”, responded Sister Lucy, “At the Cova da Iria in 1917 Our Lady had promised: I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia ... In 1929, at Tuy, as She promised, Our Lady came back to tell me that the moment had come to ask the Holy Father for the Consecration of that country (Russia).”10
• As for Pope John Paul II’s consecration of the world in 1982, Sister Lucy said, “In the act of offering of May 13, 1982, Russia did not appear as being the object of the consecration. And each bishop did not organize in his own diocese a public and solemn ceremony of reparation and Consecration of Russia ... The Consecration of Russia has not been done as Our Lady had demanded it ...”11
• On Thursday, March 22, 1984, three days before Pope John Paul II’s Act of Offering, the Carmel of Coimbra was celebrating Sister Lucy’s seventy-seventh birthday. As was the custom, her old friend Eugenia Pestana visited with her. “Then Lucy”, said Mrs. Pestana, “Sunday is the Consecration?” Sister Lucy, who had already received and read the text of the Pope’s consecration formula made a negative sign and declared “That consecration cannot have a decisive character.”12
• In a 1985 interview in Sol de Fatima, Sister Lucy was asked if the Pope fulfilled the request of Our Lady when he consecrated the world on March 25, 1984. Sister Lucy replied, “There was no participation of all the bishops and there was no mention of Russia.” She was then asked, “So the consecration was not done as requested by Our Lady?”, to which she replied, “No, many bishops attached no importance to this act.”13
• Father Rene Laurentin, a comrade of the progressivists, admitted in 1986, “Sister Lucy remains unsatisfied ... Lucy seems to think that the Consecration has not been made.”14
There are other demonstrations that could be quoted, but the above will suffice for our purpose.
Why, then, do reports circulate that Sister Lucy suddenly reversed herself and claimed the Consecration is done?
1988: A Crucial Year
It is important to pay attention to dates in this controversy, since in 1988 an important event occurred that seldom receives the attention it deserves. In 1988, the Vatican ordered all Fatima Apostolates to claim that the 1984 consecration fulfilled the requests of Our Lady of Fatima.
Frère François writes that in 1988, “an order came from the Vatican addressed to the authorities of Fatima, to Sister Lucy, to diverse ecclesiastics, including Father Messias Coelho, and a French priest very much devoted to Our Lady, ordering everyone to cease pestering the Holy Father with the Consecration of Russia.” Fatima devotee Father Caillon writes, “An order came from Rome, obliging everyone to say and think: ‘The Consecration is done. The Pope having done all that he can, Heaven deigned to agree to this gesture’.”15
It was around this time, 1988-89, that various Fatima apostolates that had not recognized that the Consecration of Russia was done — including Sister Lucy’s convent – suddenly began to claim that the 1984 consecration fulfilled the desires of Heaven. Sadly, even Father Caillon succumbed, changed his tune and started to say that the 1984 consecration fulfilled the requests of Our Lady of Fatima.
It was also around this time that the curious typewritten letters, allegedly of Sister Lucy, began to circulate. Clearly, Sister Lucy cannot be the author of these letters which not only contradict what she had always said about the Consecration of Russia, but also contain gross errors that Sister Lucy never would have written.
For example, one of these typewritten letters, allegedly from Sister Lucy, was written to a certain Mr. Walter Noelker, and dated November 8, 1989. In this letter, the author (allegedly Sister Lucy), refers to a consecration made by Pope Paul VI during his 1967 visit to Fatima. The problem is, there was no such consecration. Sister Lucy would know this, for she was at the 1967 event.
In the same letter to Mr. Noelker, the author (supposedly Sister Lucy) declared that the Consecration of Russia could not be done during the course of a Council. This is a flat contradiction to earlier statements made by Sister Lucy, and by Fatima experts, who have said that the gathering of the world’s bishops is an ideal setting for the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart.
Further, the bogus typewritten letters of 1989 were criticized by Caroline, Sister Lucy’s blood sister, who in 1990 told Father Gruner personally, “Father Gruner, do not pay any attention to such typed letters. Sister Lucy does not type.”16
(L) Father Gruner and (R) Father Paul Kramer and Father Berube are shown here receiving personal interviews with Sister Lucy’s blood sister, Caroline. On October 11, 1990 Caroline told Father Gruner that Sister Lucy does NOT type on a computer or a typewriter. Furthermore, she said that Sister Lucy to that day still wrote letters (even 4 pages) to her and others in longhand. The typewritten letters also contain gross errors Sister Lucy never would have made. These important facts demonstrate that those typewritten letters allegedly from Sister Lucy claiming the consecration is done are indeed FAKE.
Until 1992, Caroline (pictured above) frequently visited her youngest blood sister, Sister Lucy of Fatima, in her convent in Coimbra. To answer current questions, we note that Caroline never suggested that Sister Lucy was dead and that someone else had been substituted in her place. Caroline herself died by 1993.
Thus since 1988-89, when the orders came from the Vatican, obvious falsehoods have been circulated in the name of Sister Lucy regarding certain aspects of the Fatima Message in general, and of the 1984 consecration in particular. The new booklet released in June falls into the category of the literature, allegedly coming from Sister Lucy, that should be viewed with great reserve.
And here I will touch briefly on a subject I would have preferred not to discuss. I have received numerous requests to comment on a current claim that the true Sister Lucy may have died or been killed in the late 1950s (after the famous Father Fuentes interview) and that a fake Sister Lucy has been presented to the world ever since. This allegation is argued by comparing pre-1950 photos of Sister Lucy with post-1960 photos of Sister Lucy, claiming that they could not be photographs of the same person.
My own opinion is that I would prefer the case to be studied by reputable forensic experts. I think the case also demands a multitude of interviews of lifelong friends and family members of Sister Lucy in Portugal in order to demonstrate this claim beyond reasonable doubt.
Frankly, it does not make sense to me that a fake Sister Lucy, installed around 1960, would say things that would obviously rankle the post-conciliar Vatican and hierarchy. We must recall that it was between 1969 and 1971 that Sister Lucy, in her letters to friends and relatives, repeatedly used the term “diabolical disorientation” to explain what has happened to the Church since the Council, and to state that persons with much authority in the Church are under this diabolical disorientation. It seems to me that a fake Sister Lucy would have rather employed the “New Pentecost” jargon of post-conciliar enthusiasts.
Further, Sister Lucy’s testimony regarding the specific need for the Consecration of Russia, not the world, continued without alteration all the way up until 1988-89, when the Vatican [reportedly, the Secretary of State] ordered Fatima apostolates to stop “pestering the Holy Father” about the consecration, and to now say that the consecration has been completed. As for the “written evidence”, the change in what we have observed from Sister Lucy began around 1989, not 1960.
Facts Speak for Themselves
Back to the alleged letter from Sister Lucy to Mr. Noelker. We must, sadly, remind the reader that the typewritten letter to Mr. Noelker, which has all the indications of being a clumsy forgery, is the only evidence given by Msgr. Bertone in his June 26, 2000 commentary on the Third Secret that the Consecration has been done. The June 26 Vatican document said:
“Sister Lucy personally confirmed that this solemn and universal act of consecration corresponded to what Our Lady wished ... ‘Yes it has been done just as Our Lady asked, on 25 March, 1984’ (letter of 8 November 1989). Hence any further discussion or request is without basis.”17
Msgr. Bertone was careful not to footnote this letter. The uninformed reader would have no idea what letter he refers to. The truth is that this November 8, 1989 document is the Walter Noelker letter that contains obvious falsehoods.
Sad to say, this is the level of slipshodedness and dishonesty that modern Vatican document contains about Fatima.18 It is no wonder that even the Los Angeles Times said of the June 26 Ratzinger/Bertone Fatima document, “The Vatican’s Top Theologian Gently Debunked the Fatima Cult.”19 With members of the Vatican acting in such a disreputable manner regarding Fatima, can any of us be blamed for being extremely wary of writings, allegedly from Sister Lucy, that contradict what she said before 1988?
Further ,we know the Consecration was not accomplished because of three fundamental points:
1. Our Lady asked for Russia specifically, and Russia was not mentioned;
2. Our Lady promised the conversion of Russia as a result of the consecrating and Russia is not converted. In fact, as I have documented in previous articles, Russia is now teeming with immorality, including a divorce rate that equals that of the United States; a capital city [Moscow] wherein homosexuality is raging; live X-rated reality TV; rampant child pornography; and one of the highest abortion rates in the world.20
3. Our Lady promised that as a result of the Consecration of Russia, a period of peace would be granted to the world. We have had not peace, but constant wars since 1984, and worse is yet to come.
In March of this year, the United States government issued its National Security Strategy in which it virtually declares, more or less, a state of permanent war.
The document says, “It is the policy of the United States to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.” It goes on,” Achieving this goal is the work of generations. The United States is in the early years of a long struggle, similar to what our country faced in the early years of the Cold War.”
As noted Catholic author Gary Potter observed, the Iraq War is only the beginning, and the United States government is increasingly abandoning the phrase “War on Terror”, and substituting it with the term “the Long War” — a state of permanent war that will be the “work of generations”.21
To conclude, since at least 1988, there have been dirty-dealings regarding the Message of Fatima, writings that supposedly come from Sister Lucy that demand our prudence and reserve, and attempts to “debunk Fatima” by those who should be its most faithful protectors. Hence, Catholics would do well to treat any posthumous writings of Sister Lucy with extreme caution, especially when they contradict her previous lifelong testimony, and contradict bedrock truths of the Catholic Faith.
And in light of the proposed “Long War” that is slated to last for “generations”, the need for the proper Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the result of which will be a period of peace promised by Our Lady, is greater than ever.
1. “Sister Lucy’s Unpublished Writings Released”, Zenit, June 2, 2006.
2. The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation, Father Denis Fahey (First printed by Regina Publications, Ireland, 1953. Republished by Omni Publications, Palmdale, 1987), p. 86.
3. Ibid., pp. 88-89.
4. Ibid., p. 92.
5. Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Israel Shahak, (London: Pluto Press, 1994), pp. 20-21.
6. Quoted from “The Talmudic Touch: The Real Story of the Offertory’s Replacement,” Craig Heimbichner,Catholic Family News, March, 2003.
7. We Stand With Christ, Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, (Bruce Publishing Co., 1942), p. 107.
8. “The Talmudic Touch ...” To make this point, Mr. Heimbichner quotes Talmud scholar Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz and his book, The Essential Talmud.
9. Our Lady of Fatima, William Thomas Walsh, (Image-Doubleday, New York, Imprimatur 1947), p. 221.
10. L’Osservatore Romano, May 12, 1982.
11. The Fatima Crusader, Issue 13-14 (Oct.- Dec., 1983), p. 3.
12. Fatima: Tragedy and Triumph. (Vol. IV of Fatima: Intimate Joy, World Event). Frère François de Marie des Anges, (English translation by Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY 1994), pp. 167-168.
13. Sol de Fatima, September 1985.
14. Cited from Fatima: Tragedy and Triumph, p. 189.
16. See The Fatima Crusader, Issue 35, pg. 8 and Issue 38, pg. 35. Besides, the falsehoods of 1989 and beyond have been responded to thoroughly by The Fatima Crusader at that time. It should be noted that photos of Sister Lucy sitting at a word processor only surfaced recently. There were no such photos in the late 1980’s, early 1990’s.
17. Document from the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “The Message of Fatima”, June 26, 2000.
18. See two books that examine the June 26, 2000 “release” of the Third Secret in great detail: The Devil’s Final Battle, edited by Father Paul Kramer; and Fatima in Twilight by Mark Fellows. Both are available from The Fatima Crusader.
19. Los Angeles Times, “Catholic Church Unveils Third Secret: The Vatican’s Top Theologian Gently Debunks a Nun’s Account of Her 1917 Vision That Fueled Decades of Speculation”, June 27, 2000.
20. For more details, see “It Doesn’t Add Up”, John Vennari, The Fatima Crusader, Issue 70, Spring, 2002,. On the web at www.fatimacrusader.com/cr70/cr70pg12.asp.
21. Gary Potter, “Documents Put Americans on Notice: Iraq is Just the Beginning”, Catholic Family News, July, 2006. This article is also on the web at www.cfnews.org/TwoDocs.htm