The Great Amnesia
The third edition of Fatima Priest has just been released. One of the new chapters speaks about the Great Amnesia that many people today are suffering. The roots of this spiritual forgetfulness are examined in this article. (Note: Subtitles added by Editor of The Fatima Crusader.)
By Francis Alban and Christopher A. Ferrara
The annals of this century are filled with babble about "human rights" — the right to this and the right to that, declared in numberless treaties, charters, declarations and speeches by the movers and shakers of the incomparably pretentious "modern world." Since Our Lady appeared at Fatima in 1917, the men who ignore Her heavenly message have been regaling themselves with an earthly symphony of "human rights." The symphony has built to a deafening crescendo, while the noise from the orchestra pit has drowned out the cries and muffled screams of hundreds of millions of victims being led to slaughter in the gulags and abortuaries which are the monuments to this age of unrivaled human depravity.
Even the fathers of the Second Vatican Council were impressed by all this modern noise about "human rights," having declared in Gaudium et spes that "man is on the road to a more thorough development of his personality, and to a growing vindication of his own rights ..."27 The mad orchestra plays on, the musicians delight in their loud but lifeless music, and even the members of the Church applaud.
Not so long ago men commonly understood that "human rights" have no meaning unless they originate with an omnipotent and avenging God, Whom men must obey under pain of eternal damnation. For once the notion of "human rights" becomes detached from God as the author of life and the ultimate judge of all wrongs, on what ground can one stand to say that there is a "right" to anything even a right to life? Can one stand on "the dignity of the human person"? What does "human dignity" mean without God? Nothing more than what men agree that it means. Without God there are no true rights, but only agreements. And whenever the agreements become inconvenient, the doors to the gulags and the abortuaries swing open.
Who is this God who gives us our rights and secures them with His divine authority? He is the God Who hung on the Cross and died for our sins. He is Christ the King:
He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. For which cause God also hath exalted Him, and have given Him a name which is above all names: That in the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those that are in heaven, on earth, or under the earth: And that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2: 8-11)
Christ the King
Here one encounters yet another sector of The Great Amnesia: the Church's constant teaching before the Council on the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ. Father Gruner is one of the dwindling number of the faithful who still remember that on December 11, 1925, His Holiness Pope Pius XI proclaimed the Feast of Christ the King in the encyclical Quas Primas. The date was only eight years after Our Lady's final apparition at Fatima, and literally one day after Our Lord came to Pontevedra to ask for the Five First Saturdays of Reparation for the sacrileges against His Mother's Immaculate Heart. It was also a mere thirty-seven years before the first session of Vatican II. Yet this great 20th Century encyclical would seem centuries removed in the amazing time-warp of the post-conciliar period.
In Quas Primas Pius XI warned the world that "human society was tottering to its fall" because it had rejected the Social Kingship of Christ over all men and all nations. His Holiness declared to the world's rulers that if they "wish to preserve their authority, to promote and increase the prosperity of their people, they will not neglect the public duty of reverence and obedience to the rule of Christ."28 His Holiness was affirming the teaching of all his predecessors,29 who in turn were affirming what Our Lord Himself had declared just before His Ascension into Heaven:
All power is given to Me in Heaven and on earth. Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you ... (Matt. 28:18-20)
What the Church has always taught about the Social Kingship of Christ is, like all the rest of her teaching, completely consonant with common sense. For if Christ be God, then reason itself demonstrates that not only individuals, but the societies they form, owe duties to Christ the King. To hold that individual men ought to be Catholic, but not their societies, is nothing less than an insult to God, Who is the Author of both man and society. This is why Pope Leo XIII did not hesitate to declare to "the modern world" what the Church has always believed about her rightful place in the social order:
Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the State, that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be recognized without difficulty, especially in Catholic states, because the marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it.30
It was to remind all nations of their public duty to obey and reverence Christ that Pius XI composed an act of Consecration of the whole human race to the Sacred Heart, ordering that it be included in the Roman Missal and performed in every parish church annually on the new feast day. The words of that Consecration evince all of the fearless Catholicity of the pre-Conciliar Vatican:
Be Thou King, O Lord, not only of the faithful who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children who have abandoned Thee ... Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry and Islamism, and refuse not to draw them into the light and kingdom of God. Turn Thine eyes of mercy toward the children of that race, once Thy chosen people. Of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior, may it now descend upon them a laver of redemption and life.31
New World Order
But the "modern world" has become ever so much more modern since the bronze doors closed on Vatican II. Seventy-three years after the promulgation of Quas Primas, men all over the world are putting the finishing touches on that great global ant-heap known as the New World Order. When it is finished, it will be modern man's greatest achievement: a global economy controlled by a global government which knows no national boundaries. Of course, the new order will not be Catholic, or even nominally Christian. It will be utterly godless in its laws and institutions.
One of the reasons Father Gruner has been in the cross hairs of certain Vatican bureaucrats for so long is that the apostolate (unlike the neutralized Blue Army) has been willing to publish the truth about the Vatican's response to the emergence of the New World Order. And the terrible truth is this: The Vatican supports it in principle, and has supported it since the Council. To be sure, there are Vatican statements from time to time condemning the new order's universal regime of abortion and contraception, and cautioning against the creation of "inequalities" in the new global economy. But the idea of a New World Order — a one-world government, economy, and system of justice — meets with no objection from the post-conciliar Vatican. On the contrary, Vatican bureaucrats are assisting in its formation.
This comes as no surprise to anyone who has studied Gaudium et spes and the pertinent pronouncements of the post-conciliar popes. Gaudium et spes is, in fact, a virtual charter for Church support of the emerging world government. In one of its many opinions outside the realm of faith and morals, the document declares that the "outlawing" of war:
" ... undoubtedly requires the establishment of some universal public authority ... endowed with an effective power to safeguard, on the behalf of all, security, regard for justice and respect for rights".32
It did not seem to concern the Council that any such "universal public authority" would not be Catholic in its principles, but would be controlled at all its key points by atheists or non-Christians who reject Christ and His Church. The Council did not address the obvious problem. But Paul VI did.
On October 4, 1965, during the Council's final session, Pope Paul went to New York City to pay tribute to the emerging "universal public authority" at its very center: the United Nations. To the delight of the U.N. delegates, the Vicar of Christ praised their 20th Century Tower of Babel as "this lofty institution" and the "last great hope for concord and peace."33 The last great hope? What, then, of the Holy Catholic Church, founded by none other than the Prince of Peace Himself to bring peace on earth to men of good will? And what of the Message of Fatima, Heaven's own plan for peace in this epoch, delivered personally to the world by the Mother of God within the lifetime of Paul VI? Paul VI did not speak of Fatima that day at the United Nations. Instead, to the thunderous applause of the General Assembly, he placed the Vatican's seal of approval on a godless world government to be administered from the glass and steel temple of the New World Order:
"Let unanimous trust in this institution grow, let its authority increase ..."34
And so it has. Ever since the Council the Vatican has been a permanent observer to the United Nations. The same Vatican bureaucrats who administer Ostpolitik have negotiated the Vatican's signature to a number of U.N. treaties, including the deplorable Beijing Conference agreements and the "U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child," which makes no mention of the right of the child to be born. The Vatican signs these humanistic manifestoes with certain "reservations"; but sign them it does, thereby legitimating the awful notion that the U.N. is a valid moral body which ought to exert authority over the whole of mankind.
The further Our Lady's warnings at Fatima recede from the memory of the Vatican, the firmer its embrace of the structure (if not the moral excesses) of the New World Order. Thirty years after Paul VI paid homage to the U.N., Pope John Paul II took his turn. Addressing the General Assembly on October 5, 1995, he proclaimed the "esteem of the Apostolic See and of the Catholic Church for this institution" and pronounced the U.N. — worldwide promoter of abortion, contraception and godless humanism — "a great instrument for harmonizing and coordinating (!) international life."35 To which an average member of the faithful might instinctively reply: "God forbid!"
United Nations Biggest
Threat to Sanctity of Life
As Father Gruner's apostolate has noted, the United Nations, rather than promoting a "qualitative leap in international life," is subsidizing a worldwide regime of abortion and contraception, foisting population control programs upon even the Catholic peoples of Bolivia and the Philippines. Father Paul Marx, the founder of Human Life International, has also been fearless in his condemnation of the U.N.: "By far — with the sole exception of Satan himself — the single biggest threat to the sanctity of human life and the family today is the emerging agenda of the United Nations/World government ... the United Nations is already laying the groundwork for worldwide population control through any means possible."36 Even Cardinal Ratzinger, in the twilight of his career, would break ranks with his Vatican confrères and publicly admit the simple truth that Father Gruner and the apostolate had been publishing all along: The United Nations is an evil organization with an evil agenda. In his prologue to a book entitled The Gospel in the Face of World Disorder, Ratzinger warned that the U.N. is promoting "a new world order", "a new man", "a new world" and "a new anthropology". And what is so dangerous about the U.N., observed Ratzinger, is that its agenda is not some utopian dream but a nightmare which could easily become reality: "(T)he Marxist dream was utopian. This philosophy (of the U.N.), on the contrary, is very realistic."37
Why two Popes would express such high esteem for an institution which is promoting worldwide genocide in the womb remains a matter of considerable mystery a mystery the apostolate has not been unwilling to explore. Perhaps the conciliar popes have supported the U.N. because their advisors in the Vatican Secretariat of State have convinced them that papal influence could somehow turn an evil institution to the good.
Do Not Be Deceived by Communism
In like manner, Cardinal Casaroli convinced Paul VI that he should abandon the Church's fierce opposition to Communism in favor of Ostpolitik, even though Paul was reportedly torn by that decision.38 Yet the notion that the members of the Church should participate in evil organizations to make them "better" was the very notion condemned by Pius XI in his encyclical Divini Redemptoris. Recognizing that a bad tree will never produce good fruit but will only poison those who partake of it, His Holiness forbade any Catholic participation in the seemingly benign social movements spawned by Communists:
"Under various names that do not suggest Communism ... they invite Catholics to collaborate with them in the realm of so-called humanitarianism and charity; and at times make proposals that are in perfect harmony with the Christian spirit and the doctrine of the Church ... See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow themselves to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically evil, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever."39
Like Communism, the U.N. is an incomparably bad tree, irremovably rooted in the secular humanist soil of 20th Century civilization. The principal draftmen of its charter, including Algar Hiss, were Marxists, yet the Vatican's pursuit of a "civilization of love" under its branches seems to have become relentless. Vatican representatives chase the illusion not only at the U.N., but at innumerable Vatican-sponsored conferences and prayer meetings with what it now calls "the respected leaders of the world's religions."40
Father Gruner is hardly the only one who has noticed that the post-conciliar Vatican no longer speaks to the world of the Social Kingship of Christ over the whole human race, including Muslims and Jews. Whereas Pius XI decried Islam as darkness from which souls needed to be rescued by the light of Christ, some 72 years later the "Pontifical Council on Interreligious Dialogue" would declare in 1997 that Catholics and Muslims must "share their faith" and that the "Call to Islam" and "Christian Mission" should be conducted "in a spirit of collaboration (!), and as a service to mankind." The faithful could be forgiven for asking how a religion of darkness, whose errors the Church had been battling for thirteen centuries, had suddenly become a "service to mankind" with which Catholics must now collaborate.
Consecration to Jesus and Mary
Replaced by Human Rights Dialogue
Father Gruner and the apostolate have not hesitated to point out the alarming development that the Consecration of humanity to the Sacred Heart of Jesus has disappeared from the Vatican's agenda, along with the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. The Hearts of Jesus and Mary are not among the talking points of the Vatican emissaries who travel the gleaming byways of the New World Order and walk the halls of the U.N. Today the main items for discussion are "human rights", "dialogue", and something called "the civilization of love."
The Vatican's new approach to the world is strikingly evident in a keyword search of the Vatican Internet archive: one will find no fewer than 52,000 entries on "dialogue", 2,000 on "human rights" and 1,000 on "the civilization of love" — but not a single entry on the Kingship of Christ, or, for that matter, the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart.41 There is no longer any mention in Vatican pronouncements of the divine imperative "that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend (and) every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father." That teaching has vanished without a trace. The new vocabulary has completely obliterated the old.
Civilization of Love
The "civilization of love" is a phrase reputedly coined by Paul VI. In practice this notion appears to involve a U.N.-administered utopia in which people of all religions, and no religion at all, somehow reach agreement through "dialogue" to respect "human rights" and "the dignity of the human person." This universal flowering of selfless humanitarianism is evidently supposed to occur without the supernatural grace of conversion to the Catholic Faith or any recognition by societies of the reign of Christ the King. Pope John Paul II summed up the new notion in his 1995 address to the United Nations:
The United Nations has the historic, even momentous task of promoting this qualitative leap in international life ... by fostering values, attitudes and concrete initiatives of solidarity ... The answer to the fear which darkens human existence at the end of the 20th Century is the common effort to build the civilization of love, founded on universal values of peace, solidarity, justice and liberty ...42
"Unity" with False Religions
At the "World Day of Prayer for Peace" at Assisi in 1986 Catholics witnessed perhaps the most ambitious of the Vatican's post-conciliar attempts to manifest a non-existent "unity" between the members of the Mystical Body and the adherents of false religions — the same religions deplored by Pius XI in his consecration of the world to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Hewing perfectly to the Vatican's new agenda, Cardinal Arinze, head of the Vatican Secretariat for Non-Christian Religions, declared that "for building world peace we need the United Nations." Cardinal Arinze praised the Pope's "unprecedented step" in calling "leaders of all world religions, Christian and otherwise, to Assisi to pray for peace in the world."43 The Cardinal did not explain what sort of "peace" he hoped to obtain through the prayers of "religions" which condone the very sins that bring down God's wrath upon the world. War is a punishment for sin, Our Lady told the three children at Fatima. But the New World Order promotes sin while claiming it is for peace. Today it is no longer even suggested by the Vatican that these "leaders" of the "world religions" are false shepherds who preach abortion, contraception, divorce, polygamy, the ordination of women as "priests", the reincarnation of humans as animals, the worship of idols, and innumerable other lies, superstitions and abominations in the sight of God. Instead of warning men to flee false shepherds, the Vatican invited as many of them as it could find to "pray for peace" at Assisi.
Toward the conclusion of the scandalous events at the "World Day of Prayer for Peace", the Pope, holding a potted plant, stood in a kind of chorus line with Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Animists, Amerindians, Confucians, Shintoists, and Zoroastrians, all arrayed in a great semicircle outside the Basilica of St. Francis. The Vicar of Christ was depicted for the cameras as just one of many "respected representatives of the world's religions" on equal footing before God in the "search for peace". Eleven years later the Basilica was rocked by three earthquakes, which collapsed the dome of the Basilica and crushed its altar. For those who do not suffer from The Great Amnesia, the crushed altar was a sign easily understood.
When the empty gestures of Assisi were done with, the "respected representatives of the world's religions" returned to their own nations and promptly resumed their age-old opposition to the Reign of Christ the King. In India, Hindu fanatics have been killing priests and nuns almost every year since the "World Day of Prayer for Peace", while Muslim militants of Pakistan shoot Christians on sight. When the Hindu nationalist government of India exploded three atomic bombs underground, people in New Delhi danced in the streets, shouting praise to their Hindu gods.44 (Perhaps at Assisi the "respected representatives" of the Hindu religion were praying to Shiva, the Hindu god of destruction.) A few days later Pakistan exploded its own atomic bombs, announcing an arms race with India. Meanwhile, in Israel, Jews are still routinely stripped of their citizenship for the "crime" of becoming Christians.
Indifference to Christ the King
And so goes "the civilization of love." Yet anyone who remembers the teaching of Pope St. Pius X on such notions could have predicted the failure of this dismal modern substitute for the Kingship of Christ. It was St. Pius X who condemned in a fiery apostolic letter the very idea of a brotherhood of the different religions, calling it "a miserable effluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church ..." And it was he, the only canonized pope in the past 450 years, whose body lies incorrupt in St. Peter's Basilica, who forcefully reminded the world of an essential fact of history which the Vatican of today seems to have forgotten: that the only "civilization of love" the world will ever know "is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City."45
How could it be otherwise? For it was Our Lord Himself Who told us that He had come to bring not peace, but the sword. The sword of Christendom would mark out an ineradicable dividing line across the world and down the ages between those who would follow Him and those who would not. Being deprived of the grace of Holy Baptism (or having rejected it once received), the men who will not follow Him inevitably destroy the peace of the world through their malice or indifference to Christ the King: "He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who is against Me scattereth." This is why Pius XI declared in his encyclical Ubi Arcano Dei that "Because men have forsaken God and Jesus Christ, they have sunk to the depths of evil ... The only remedy for such a state of affairs is the peace of Christ since the peace of Christ is the peace of God, which could not exist if it did not enjoin respect for law, order and the rights of authority."
In light of Fatima and the constant teaching of the Church before the Council, a few obvious questions will present themselves to any Catholic who ponders the current Vatican program: How could there be a "civilization of love" without the Social Kingship of Christ and obedience to the teaching authority of His Church? As the Council of Trent defined infallibly: "If anyone says that Jesus Christ was given by God to men, as a Redeemer in Whom to trust, and not also as a legislator Whom to obey; let him be anathema."46 And how could this civilization possibly arise without the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the conversion of Russia? Without the grace of baptism, and the supernatural virtues of faith, hope and charity which are the gifts of Christ through His Holy Church, how could men be good for any length of time, much less good enough for long enough to build a "civilization of love"? After all, if men could build a "civilization of love" without the grace of Christ and membership in His Church, then what need was there for Him to hang upon that wretched cross?
But men cannot live in true justice and peace except through the grace of God won for us on Calvary by Jesus Christ's death on the cross. Against the semi-Pelagian heresy of goodness without Christ's grace, Trent infallibly decreed: "If anyone saith that the grace of God through Jesus Christ is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly and to merit eternal life, as if by free will without grace he were able to do both though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema."
Culture of Death
What should have been obvious all along to the proponents of the new agenda is that without Christ and His Church, the "civilization of love" can only devolve into the very "culture of death" decried by the Pope. The "civilization of love" and the "culture of death" are, in fact, one and the same thing, no matter how mightily Pope John Paul II has tried to separate them. A civilization which refuses to submit to Christ and the Church is a civilization which has insured its own death.
Catholics who raise these points in private communications to the Vatican receive no answer. Their inquiries are shunted aside with a polite acknowledgment of receipt, forwarded to a different Vatican office or simply ignored. In the face of the Vatican's monolithic silence, Father Gruner and the apostolate have raised the same questions publicly. They too receive no direct answers. But the implicit reply of the Vatican bureaucrats who oppose Father Gruner and his work is this: You and your apostolate will be silenced.
Are Modern Bishops Ashamed of Fatima?
Thirty-eight years after the Kingship of Christ was replaced by the "civilization of love", certain conclusions suggest themselves: Is the post-conciliar Vatican apparatus embarrassed to tell the world any longer that poor souls are saved from hell through the intercession of Mary's Immaculate Heart, and that without Her intercession souls will be lost forever? Has the Vatican become ashamed of the childlike piety of the Message of Fatima in all its sheer Catholicity? Is the story of Fatima to be put away on a shelf like a child's bedtime book, no longer to be read aloud to the adults of "the modern world" exactly as it was written, lest our modern Churchmen appear ridiculous?
To the "modern world" and the Churchmen who pay it human respect, Fatima may indeed seem a thing for children. And so it is. For every man is a child before God, and all of salvation history tells us that God's children suffer dire consequences whenever they begin to fancy themselves adults most especially in "the modern world". For this reason did Our Lord teach us that Heaven is a place reserved to those who understand precisely that they are children, who must accept with a child's humility the simple, unalterable language of heaven: "Amen I say to you, whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall not enter into it." (Mark 10:15) For this reason, too, was the Message of Fatima confided to children for the edification of adults.
The three little children who knelt by the holm-oak tree at Cova da Iria that summer, not so long before Vatican II, received from Mary Immaculate nothing less than immaculate simplicity the simplicity of the Faith Our Lady knew would soon be obscured in an age whose hallmark is a false and deadly sophistication. The great irony of our age will be that its legions of sophisticates, believing themselves to have achieved the adulthood of mankind, were not even children but only squalling babies who pushed away the spiritual nourishment of Holy Mother Church.
This much Father Nicholas Gruner has always understood about Fatima. In its heavenly economy of words, the Fatima message is a summation of everything that has been forgotten in The Great Amnesia: the Roman liturgy, which enshrined the reparatory Sacrifice of the Mass offered on the First Saturdays; the Last Things, which reminded men of their eternal destiny; the divine right of the Church to teach the world with the peremptory authority of God Himself; the Social Kingship of Christ; the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in a Catholic civilization.
Millions of Victims
Father Gruner is not alone in understanding what has been lost with the loss of Fatima. Around the world there remain bishops, priests and laity who have not subscribed to the reigning sophistication, who have not succumbed to The Great Amnesia. Yet their number is alarmingly small, for the post-conciliar revolution has claimed many millions of victims. In 1998 the number of priests in the world is 50,000 smaller than it was 39 years ago, despite a huge growth in world population. The seminaries and convents have nearly emptied.47 For the great majority of those who still call themselves Catholic, the teachings of the Magisterium on marriage and procreation are now regarded as nothing more than "the Pope's opinion", and the rate of abortion and divorce among nominal Catholics is the same as that for Protestants and Jews.
The people no longer seem to fear the hellfire which many in the Church no longer mention. But Lucy, Jacinta and Francisco saw the fires of hell for a few moments at Fatima moments of holy terror which made them into saints. And now the world which ignores hell, which is no longer reminded of hell even by the Vatican itself, is clearly entering into the final arrangements for its own destruction.
As Sister Lucy of Fatima said: "Father ... my mission is to indicate to everyone the imminent danger we are in of losing our souls for all eternity if we remain obstinate in sin. Father, we should not wait for an appeal to the world to come from Rome on the part of the Holy Father, to do penance. Nor should we wait for the call to penance to come from our bishops in our diocese, nor from the religious congregations. No! Our Lord has already very often used these means and the world has not paid attention.
"That is why now, it is necessary for each one of us to begin to reform himself spiritually. Each person must not only save his own soul but also all the souls that God has placed on our path."48
These are the facts which impel Father Gruner to continue shouldering an apostolate that has brought down unending persecution on him and those who have the hardihood to support his work. He remembers. And because he remembers, he is an enemy of the Revolution whose aim is the obliteration of memory and the making of a new future a future uninformed by the substance of the past. A future without Fatima.
27. Gaudium et spes n. 41.
28. Quas Primas, n. 18.
29. Leo XIII, Annum Sacrum, Libertas Humana, Immortale Dei; St. Pius X, Vehementer Nos, Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos; Pius X, Adeo Nota, and many others.
30. Libertas Humana.
31. Quas Primas, appended act of Consecration.
32. Gaudium et spes, n. 82.
33. Address of Paul VI to the United Nations, October 4, 1965.
35. Address of John Paul II to United Nations, October 5, 1995.
36. L'Osservatore Romano, May 28, 1997, pg. 11.
37. See Vatican web site at http://www.vatican.va.
38. Catholic World News Report, November 24, 1997, http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=6363
39. Divini Redemptoris.
40. The Wanderer, June 18, 1998, pg. 3.
41. See Vatican web site at http://www.vatican.va.
42. Address of John Paul II to United Nations, October 5, 1995.
43. Assisi: World Day of Prayer for Peace. Pontifical Commission, Justitia et Pax. Vatican City: 1987, pg, 137.
44. Ibid. pg. 39.
45. Our Apostolic Mandate Against the Sillon, Section II, Pope St. Pius X, 1910.
46. Council of Trent, Canons on Justification, Session 6, Canon 21.
47. NY Times, May 17, 1998, Sec. 4, pg. 1.
48. For text of this interview of Sister Lucy with Father Fuentes at Coimbra, see La Verdad Sobre el Secreto de Fatima, page 107. Most Reverend Sanchez, Archbishop of Vera Cruz, gave the imprimatur for the above interview of Dec. 26, 1957.
Also, see Frère François de Marie des Anges, Fatima: Tragedy and Triumph. Pg. 26-32; also, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, The Whole Truth About Fatima Vol. III pp. 504-509.