Is the Abomination of Desolation the same thing as Antichrist?

by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 24, 2021 | New Blog

+Our Lady of Ransom+

Some have objected that the term abomination of desolation does not necessarily refer to Antichrist and therefore the use of this phrase by Pope Paul IV in his bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio is not a true interpretation of this Scripture phrase. In the next few blogs that will be posted here, the importance of understanding the meaning of these distinctions will be demonstrated. Catholics cannot be ignorant of the truths so necessary to understanding the current world situation today and its relation to their faith. As we draw closer to the culmination of the events that surely must be precipitating either the end proper or some worldwide disaster, no one can afford to any longer believe the fairy tales that some earthly force will deliver us; we alone are the captains of our own souls. Below please find the answer to this important question according to Catholic sources.

St. Jerome

The best source of information on this topic is St. Jerome, who according to the Catholic Encyclopedia “was very careful as to the sources of his information… The Biblical knowledge of St. Jerome makes him rank first among ancient exegetes.” St. Jerome wrote as follows on the abomination: “It is possible to apply this text easily to either the Antichrist, to the statue of Caesar which Pilate placed in the Temple or even to the equestrian statue of Hadrian, which down to this present day stands on the very site of the holy of holies. In the Old Testament, however, the term abomination is applied deliberately to idols. To identify it further, ‘of desolation,’ is added to indicate that the idol was placed in a desolate or ruined temple. The abomination of desolation can be taken to mean as well every perverted doctrine. When we see such a thing stand in the holy place, that is in the Church and pretend it is God, we must flee…,” (Breviary Lesson for the 24^th and Last Sunday after Pentecost).

The value and the amazing utility of this phrase, as explained by St. Jerome, is that it expresses several meanings, all of which correspond to the behavior and person of Antichrist and fit the actions of Paul 6 to a “T.” Other commentators concur with St. Jerome. Commenting on the term abomination of desolation in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Francis Gigot writes: “While most commentators regard the first ‘shíqqû,’ usually rendered by ‘abomination,’ as designating anything (statue, altar, etc.) that pertains to idolatrous worship, others take it to be a contemptuous designation of a heathen god or idol. Again, while most commentators render the second ‘shômem’ by the abstract word ‘desolation,’ others treat it as a concrete form referring to a person, ‘a ravager,’ or even as a participial known meaning ‘that maketh desolate.’

“After studying the picture of Antichrist in St. Paul’s Epistle to the Thessalonians, one easily recognizes the ‘man of sin’ in Daniel 7:8, 11, 20, 21, where the Prophet describes the ‘little horn.’ A type of Antichrist is found in Daniel 8:8 sqq., 23, sqq., 11:21-45, in the person of Antiochus Epiphanes. Many commentators have found more or less clear allusions to Antichrist in the coming of false Christs and false prophets (Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:6, 22; Luke 21:8), in the ‘abomination of desolation,’ and in the one that ‘shall come in his own name’ (John 5:43; Catholic Encyclopedia, A.J. Maas). Both these articles make it clear that the abomination has been identified with Antichrist, and who else has ravaged the Church, propagated heresy and made Her desolate if not Paul 6 and the V2 usurpers?

St. Bernard

In the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Antichrist we read that: “Antichrist simulates Christ, and the Pope is an image of Christ, [so] Antichrist must have some similarity to the Pope, if the latter be the true Vicar of Christ.” This was certainly expressed in the writings of St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Doctor of the Church, and this allusion to a false pope as the abomination and Antichrist pre-dated Pope Paul IV. St. Bernard, a Doctor of the Church, was the champion of Pope Innocent II. Innocent later recovered the papacy from antipope Anacletus, who for several years occupied the papal see in Rome.  We find in St. Bernard’s letters the following:

“Whether we like it or not, the words of the Holy Ghost must sooner or later have their fulfillment and the revolt predicted by the Apostle (2 Thess. 2:3) must come to pass. ‘Nevertheless, woe to that man by whom it cometh; it were better for him if that man had not been born,’ (Matt. 18:7; 26:24). Who is this antipope but the ‘man of sin’ (2 Thess. 2:3)… That beast of the Apocalypse, to whom has been given a mouth speaking blasphemy and power to wage war against the saints (Apoc. 13:5-7) “He has seated himself in the Chair of Peter…The holy place…he covets, not for its holiness, but for its height. He has, I say, got possession of the holy place [but]…not through the merit of his life. The election whereof he boasts is buta cloak for his malice. To call it an election at all is an impudent lie…”

In another letter he writes: “Behold, Innocent, the Christ, the anointed of the Lord, is ‘set for the fall and resurrection of many’ (Luke 2:34). For they that are of God willingly adhere to him, while opposed to him stand Antichrist and his followers. We have seen the ‘abomination of desolation standing in the holy place,’ (Matt. 24: 15), to obtain which the antipope ‘burned with fire the sanctuary of God’ (Psalm 73: 7). He persecutes Innocent and hence all innocence…”   (The Life and Teaching of St. Bernard, Ailbe J. Luddy, O. Cist., 1927). Clearly St. Bernard identifies the Holy Place with the See of Peter, nothing else. In this he simply follows St. Jerome. Why would Paul IV deviate from these two great doctors?

The Council of Florence

The following was taken from the Council of Florence, held in Florence, Italy from 1438-1447, a little over 100 years before the reign of Pope Paul IV. The Council was a continuation of the Council of Ferrara, and that council in turn was a continuation of the Council of Basel, in Switzerland. It was convoked in 1431 by Pope Martin V and in 1440 condemned the reign of Antipope Felix V (Duke Amadeus of Savoy). Clearly the idea of an antipope or false pope as the incarnation of Antichrist was not limited to the letters of St. Bernard, as evidenced by excerpts from the council below.

“With the approval and help of this sacred ecumenical council, avenge with condign penalties this new frenzy which has become inflamed to your injury and that of the holy Roman church, your spouse, and to the notorious scandal of the whole Christian people. By the authority of almighty God and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul and by your own authority, remove and separate from God’s holy church, by a perpetual anathema, the aforesaid wicked perpetrators of this prodigious crime and their unfortunate heresiarch and veritable antichrist in God’s churchtogether with all their supporters, adherents and followers and especially his execrable electors or rather profaners.

“For our part, as soon as we were aware from the reports of trustworthy people that so great an impiety had been committed, we were afflicted with grief and sadness, as was to be expected, both for the great scandal to the church and for the ruin of the souls of its perpetrators, especially Amadeus that antichrist whom we used to embrace in the depths of charity and whose prayers and wishes we always strove to meet in so far as we could in God.Already for some time we had it in mind to provide salutary remedies, in accordance with our pastoral office, against an abomination of this sort.

“That within fifty days immediately following the publication of this letter, the antichrist Amadeus should cease from acting anymore and designating himself as the Roman pontiff and should not, in so far as he can, allow himself to be held and called such by others, and should not dare hereafter in any way to use papal insignia and other things belonging in any way to the Roman pontiff; And that the aforesaid electors, or rather profaners, and adherents, receivers and supporters should no longer, either in person or through others, directly or indirectly or under any pretext, aid, believe in, adhere to or support the said Amadeus in this crime of schism…”

Pope Leo XIII

Then we have the prayers written by Pope Leo XIII, reportedly following a frightening vison of demonic activity throughout the world; this happened sometime before 1886.  On September 25, 1888, Pope Leo XIII approved a prayer to St. Michael the Archangel with a 300 days indulgence that was at some point included in The Raccolta. The passage from this prayer pertinent to what is being discussed here reads: “In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.”

Two years later, Pope Leo XIII approved a new, longer prayer, “Exorcism against Satan and Apostate Angels,” including the 1888 prayer, which served as a sort of preamble to a series of exorcism prayers. These prayers were later appended to the Roman Ritual. This prayer eventually disappeared from the Raccolta and some Traditionalists claim it referred not to any infiltration of the Holy See, but to political events occurring at the time. It was removed, they said, because the pope was in negotiations with certain political powers and hoped to resolve the matter. While this could be true, no sources are cited to verify it. Nor can it be denied that it could just as easily have referred to a danger to the pope and his retinue, with Mariano Rampolla then Pope Leo XIII’s secretary of state. Why else include this prayer in an exorcism, of all things, if this was not a serious matter? A pope would not allow some transient political events to influence the content of a sacramental rite.

Pope Paul IV merely confirmed the idea of a false pope as Antichrist and Antichrist as the abomination, following St. Jerome and St. Bernard. Pope Leo XIII utilized the same language to describe what was happening to the Church during his pontificate. We cannot dispute the outcome; what they described is precisely what we have witnessed.

Paul IV’s usage of the abomination of desolation

“Whereas We consider such a matter to be so grave and fraught with peril that the Roman Pontiff, who is Vicar of God and of Jesus Christ on earth, holds fullness of power over peoples and. kingdoms, and judges all, but can be judged by no one in this world — (even he) may be corrected if he is apprehended straying from the Faith. Also, it behooves us to give fuller and more diligent thought where the peril is greatest, lest false prophets (or even others possessing secular jurisdiction) wretchedly ensnare simple souls and drag down with themselves to perdition and the ruin of damnation the countless peoples entrusted to their care and government in matters spiritual or temporal; and lest it befall Us to see in the HOLY PLACE the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, We wish, as much as possible with God’s help, in line with our pastoral duty, to trap the foxes that are busily ravaging the Lord’s vineyard and to drive the wolves from the sheepfolds, lest We seem to be silent watchdogs, unable to bark, or lest We come to an evil end like the evil husbandmen or be likened to a hireling.”

Given the content and recurring condemnations of Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, Pope Paul IV’s intent in issuing this bull is unmistakable. We see above that no less than St. Jerome interprets “the holy place” as the Church itself. And St. Jerome is the ultimate authority on scriptural interpretation. As for the abomination of desolation, the Catholic Encyclopedia has confirmed that commentators understand it as referring to Antichrist, although as St. Jerome also says it can mean “every perverted doctrine,” as well as idol worship. This would include:

“Bread idols, bread of lying, bread of wickedness, wheat bringing forth thorns, profitless wheat, vine without grapes, wine of iniquity, bitter wine, the wine of the condemned, the two iniquities [bread and wine], a strange god, idols without life, an idol moving the God of the Eucharist to jealousy, altars unto sin, a sin graven on the horns of the altar, sin of the sanctuary, unacceptable holocaust, a conspiracy, vain sacrifices, throne of iniquity, sin of the desolation (Dan. 8:13), falsehood personified, a lying vision, the abomination of desolation, (Dan. 11:31)” (Fr. Kenelm Vaughn’s Divine Armoury)” So both the person and the idol worshipped is included in the same phrase used by Daniel as biblical usage elsewhere demonstrates.

Paul IV is concerned with the persons perpetrating the crime. The reason for this is clear — he realizes that souls will be dragged down into hell if these people are not recognized as imposters and removed from office. He clearly sees that the best way to prevent perversion of the faithful is to remove the wolves from the sheepfold before they can devour the sheep. There can be no idol worship ever set up if there is no one to institute it. It is obvious that he believes the abomination to be heresy, and only a heretic could introduce idol worship. Pope Paul IV is careful to explain that a pope could never become a heretic but could only appear to become one owing to commission of it prior to election, invalidating the election.

The exception would be that a pope [erring in his private capacity] could be corrected, as the pope says above, (but not removed unless he refused to accept correction). But one who publicly spoke or otherwise disseminated heresy is a different matter. Paul IV distinguishes as follows: “Further, if ever at any time it becomes clear that any Bishop, even one conducting himself as an Archbishop, Patriarch, or primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, even as mentioned, a Legate; or likewise any Roman Pontiff before his promotion or elevation as a Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has strayed from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy, then his promotion or elevation shall be null, invalid and void.”

So here we see that one appearing to be a Roman Pontiff who was a heretic before his elevation or had strayed from the faith in some way is considered never to have obtained the office. If we now consider the abomination of desolation as the pope uses it, we can observe the following. 1) This is a definition of that term, since the Protestants at that time were contending a validly elected pope could become a heretic, i. e., Antichrist. It is not conceivable that Paul IV was not aware of this or did not have it in mind when writing the bull. In the preamble to his bull, the Pope states he intends to drive away “those who [are] corrupting the sense of the Holy Scriptures with cunning inventions.”2) It is a definition because prior to that time the holy place had been designated by some commentators to mean the Temple in Jerusalem and by others the Church.

The abomination had also been primarily interpreted as a false sacrifice or idol worship, not heresy per se. 3) Certain commentators limited application of the abomination to the time of the Jewish antichrist Antiochus, not extending it to the time of Antichrist as prophesied in the New Testament. Pope Paul IV definitely extended it to our own time. A papal definition is rendered, according to Msgr. J. C. Fenton and Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma, when some matter that has been in dispute is addressed by the pope; that matter is then no longer up for discussion. We must remember how the doctrines regarding the Holy Mass and the papacy both were being attacked by Luther and other Protestants during Pope Paul IV’s reign. The pope had good reason to believe that if a heretic of the Lutheran persuasion ever secretly ascended to the papacy, the Mass could be endangered. And as we see today, Paul IV had good reason to fear that just such a thing could happen.

When in doubt, consult Can. 18

In a case of doubt, for those questioning Pope Paul IV’s intention regarding his mention of the abomination of desolation, Canon 18 requires that Catholics first resort to parallel passages of the Code, if any; to the end and circumstances of the law and to the mind of the legislator. Here it is most important to consult the end and circumstances of the law. Therefore, it is necessary to delve into the history behind the bull, Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, which we have done before but which will be useful to repeat here.  Pope Paul IV suspected Cardinal Giovanni Morone of heresy, something to do with the misinterpretation of Scripture and his sympathies with the Lutherans. Morone also reportedly had been holding meetings behind the pope’s back to promote himself as Paul IV’s successor even prior to the pope’s death.

This prompted Paul IV to write Cum ex. Morone was tried for his heresy and imprisoned. But when Paul IV died, he was back in the running for the papacy. He ran full force, however, into Cardinal Ghislieri, the future Pope St. Pius V. The historian Hergenrother, in his “The History of the Popes” reports that Morone’s campaign as papabili was “quashed by the intervention of Cardinal Ghislieri, who pointedly remarked that Morone’s election would be invalid owing to the question mark hanging over his orthodoxy,” (emph. mine). And this is the opinion not only of a great Pope, but of a great saint.

We also have the following quote from Paul IV himself, provided by author Glenn Kittler: “If I discovered that my own father was a heretic, I would gather the wood to burn him,” Paul IV said. During the trial of Cardinal Morone, Kittler says that Paul IV “decreed that any cardinal accused of heresy could not be elected pope,” (The Papal Princes, pg. 254). And there is to be no exception concerning those who deviated from the faith “secretly” before their election; that is, some heresy that was committed pre-election but became public only after the election. They too are automatically deposed. Here we have a perfect reflection of the mind of the lawgiver concerning an election, which today is worth its weight in gold.

In response to Morone’s attempt to promote himself as pope, Paul IV also penned the apostolic constitution Cum secundum Apostolum sometime in 1559. The constitution decreed extreme penalties against those who discuss the election of the future pope, behind the back and without permission of his predecessor while he is still alive, a crime now visited by Pius XII with the highest possible excommunication on the books: a latae sententiae penalty reserved in a most special manner to the Holy See. (This bull is listed in the footnotes to Pope Pius XII’s 1945 constitution Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis.) This means that only the pope can dispense from such a censure.

As explained in a previous blog, Pope Paul IV was a very strict disciplinarian. He gave no quarter where heresy or the honor of the Church was concerned. Pope Paul III appointed him to head the Roman Inquisition after Paul IV himself suggested it be convened. His whole career seems to have been devoted to stamping out heresy at all costs, and given the terrible toll exacted by the Protestant Reformation, who can wonder that this would be so? His legacy on this topic is enshrined in Canon Law, with Cum ex… cited as a footnote in several canons, nearly all involving heresy. The articles below in the Archives section of the site chronicle this.

1. Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio: Infallible & Retained in the Code (PDF)
2. How “Cum Ex…” Is Retained In the Code (PDF)
3. “Cum Ex…” and Ecclesiastical Discipline
4. Doctrinal Conclusions Drawn From “Cum Ex…”

Finally, there is this regarding the interpretation of the law from Rev. Amleto Cicognani’s Canon Law:

1. Clear words admit no interpretation nor conjecture of the will.
2. General words are to be generallyunderstood, (“excommunicated”).
3. Where the law does not distinguish, neither are we to distinguish.
4. An indefinite expression is equivalent to one that is universal.
5. The words of law also should be considered in their context, (“except,” “any just reason”).
6. Any argument made should not be made outside the heading of the statute, (i.e., it should remain within the bounds of the subject being discussed under the heading of each section insofar as is possible. The heading for the statutes derived from Pope Paul IV’s bull involves censures and excommunication for heresy.)
7. Where the words are not ambiguous, they need no interpretation.

(For more on this topic visit https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/articles/a-catholics-course-of-study/canon-law/who-interprets-the-law/)

Nothing in Pope Paul IV’s law is unclear or ambiguous; ergo, it needs no interpretation. As proofs go, Canon Law tells us it is absolute and no other proof against it is admissible. We have no reason whatsoever to believe Pope Paul IV would not follow the teaching of St. Jerome and St. Bernard, also the Council of Florence and other councils, in his bull. The abomination of desolation is any high-ranking heretic who purports to hold an ecclesiastic (or even secular) office and publicly teaches heresy. This includes the pope. We know he is speaking, however, of the pope in this passage because he refers to him standing in the Holy Place, that is the See of Peter, as St. Bernard teaches. And this can be gleaned from the circumstances of his law regarding Cardinal Morone.

Conclusion

Many of the controversies concerning the times in which we live can be answered by asking the following question: Who is prophesied to take away the Continual Sacrifice? Daniel tells us it is the Antichrist of our day. Will anyone deny that the Sacrifice has indeed been taken away by John 23 and Paul 6? It would be difficult to find even a Traditionalist who would deny this. But as is so tellingly the case with all these Traditionalists and Novus Ordo types, they fail to complete the logical consequences of what they believe and follow them to the very end. Only Antichrist could have abolished the Sacrifice. It is the unanimous opinion of theologians, as stated by Henry Cardinal Manning, that the Sacrifice will indeed cease:

“The Holy Fathers who have written upon the subject of Antichrist and the prophecies of Daniel — all of them unanimously — say that in the latter end of the world, during the reign of Antichrist, the Holy Sacrifice of the altar will cease.” And the Council of Trent has determined that when the Fathers unanimously agree on a point of Holy Scripture, as explained above, they cannot be mistaken.

We find in St. Paul that Antichrist will be dispatched as follows: “And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming, (2 Thess. 2: 8).” In other words, as Rev. Haydock explains, it will be an easy thing to take out the Son of Perdition. It is no coincidence, then, that Montini died on the day that he did. According to the reports of the Swiss guards, as related by John Parrot in the 1990s, he was tormented days before his death, and cries of despair were heard coming from his room; his face reportedly became so contorted no one could bear to look at him. His agony was ended on the feast of the Transfiguration. Holy Scripture describes the appearance of Christ during the Transfiguration as follows: “His face did shine as the sun, and His garments were white as snow” (Matt. 17: 2). This fact is examined at length by Francis Panakal in his work, The Man of Sin. It is something at least to ponder, for often the dramatic fulfillments we seek today can be explained in less obvious ways. We need only think of the Apostles, who missed so many of the meanings of Christ’s parables. Yet regarding the abomination of desolation Christ advises, “Let him who reads understand.”

The Fatima Peace and Antichrist’s Reign

by T. Stanfill Benns | Jul 6, 2020 | New Blog

+St. Maria Goretti+

While many insist we cannot be living in the times of Antichrist, there are few infallible indicators of what that time would look like. Unfortunately, what has been left to us by those who had no real idea of what Antichrist’s reign and the Latter Days would look like is little more than a welter of opinions and speculation. And most of these come from the predictions and visions of holy people which is not equivalent whatsoever to the teachings of the Church. One thing these seers seemed to miss entirely was the age of technology and the effect it would have on the faithful. Only a few of the lesser-known seers mention this.

As noted before, very little is certain about the coming of Antichrist, and what is certain doesn’t tell us much at all. Rev. Fahey, quoting Rev. Lehmann’s Le Antichrist, lists the following as certain in his work, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation:

Things that are CERTAIN is that Antichrist will:

– be a trial for the good;

– be a human person;

– not be Satan in human form but only a man;

– have great powers of seduction;

– begin his career in a lowly manner;

– increase in power and make conquests;

– rule the entire world;

– wage a terrible war against God and the Church;

– claim to be God and will demand exclusive adoration (secular humanism);

– seek to prove he is God by false miracles (“canonization” of antipopes)

– reign only temporarily (and this certainly gives the lie to Traditionalists who insist we cannot be living in the times of Antichrist because he could only reign for three and a half years.)

It is only probable, Lemann states, that he will reign for three and a half years.  And while Lemann says it is undecided whether he will reign from the Church or the (restored?) temple in Jerusalem, Pope Paul IV seems to have solved this difficulty by writing in his 1559 bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio that the abomination would be a usurper reigning as a true pope. This also was the opinion of Dom Gueranger, who on his commentary on the liturgy for the feast of Sts. Marcellinus, Peter and Erasmus wrote: “Antichrist, with his usurped power and vain prestige, will be but the common product of political lodges and of this sect which proposes to bring back, under a new form, the ancient mysteries of paganism.” And there is little doubt both John 23 and Paul 6 were both advocates for and high-ranking members of Freemasonry.

The outstanding German priest, the Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser wrote a quasi-inspired commentary on the first fifteen chapters of the book of the Apocalypse in about 1640. The following excerpts are taken from his writings and describes almost to the “T” our present circumstances.

“The fifth period is one of affliction, desolation, humiliation, and poverty for the Church. Jesus Christ will purify His people through cruel wars, famines, plagues, epidemics, and other horrible calamities. He will also afflict and weaken the Latin Church with many heresies. It is a period of defections, calamities and exterminations. Those Christians who survive the sword, plague and famines, will be few on earth. Nations will fight against nations and will be desolated by internecine dissensions… During this unhappy period, there will be laxity in divine and human precepts. Discipline will suffer. The Holy Canons will be completely disregarded, and the clergy will not respect the laws of the Church. Everyone will be carried away and led to believe and to do what he fancies, according to the manner of the flesh…

They will ridicule Christian simplicity; they will call it folly and nonsense, but they will have the highest regard for advanced knowledge, and for the skill by which the axioms of the law, the precepts of morality, the Holy Canons and religious dogmas are clouded by senseless questions and elaborate arguments. As a result, no principle at all, however holy, authentic, ancient, and certain it may be, will remain free of censure, criticism, false interpretations, modification and delimitation by man.”

In summing up 30 years of studies into private prophecies, Australian Yves Dupont summarized them as follows:

1. Civil wars, revolutions, breakdown of authority everywhere.
2. Military coups even in Western Countries.
3. An anti-pope in Rome; the developing apostasy becomes universal.
4. Persecution of the Church by Communist governments, abetted at first by many of the hierarchy and Clergy.
5. Complete destruction of the Church’s structures at the hands of the Communists and even those who collaborated with them.
6. Natural disasters, earthquakes, floods, drought, famines, epidemics.
7. Cosmic phenomenon, three days of darkness, collapse of Communism.
8. More military coups (followed by the rise of the Great Monarch).
9. Rebirth of the Catholic Church. New Ecumenic Council, restoration of former disciplines in the Church. A Holy Pope occupies the Chair of Peter.
10. Period of peace, faith, plenty.”

(In Rev. R. Gerald Culleton’s The Prophets and Our Times, Venerable Madeline Porzat (died 1850) announces seven crises in 168c. that seem to tally with the La Salette message and Dupont’s predictions:

1. inclemencies of seasons and inundations;
2. diseases to animals and plants;
3. cholera over men;
4. revolutions;
5. wars;
6. a universal bankruptcy and
7. confusion.)

Dupont comments on the prophecies he mentions above:

“The Empire of the Mohammedans will be broken up (by him).”

(Ven. Holzhauser, 17th Century)

“Greece he will invade and be made King thereof. He will conquer England.”

(Cataldus, 5th Century)

“Invade Greece” and “conquer England” must not be understood with the modern and unpleasant connotation that these terms now have.  This Emperor will be anything but “imperialist”.  It means, in effect, that he will go to England to help the English people out of their Communist enslavement, and he will land in Greece to expel the Mohammedans.  All this will be made clear later in this article… At this stage, may I caution against dismissing the idea of a Mohammedan invasion in Europe as extravagant.  I discussed this point in my first book: the Mohammedan invasion is mentioned in an exceedingly large number of prophecies, and the prophecies are true.  The invasion will be made possible because,

“(a) Soviet Russia, the Beast of the Earth, will give Mohammed, the Beast of the Sea, all the military support she can, hoping thereby to avoid a direct involvement of herself in Western Europe;

“(b) because Western Europe will be in a state of utter chaos at the close of murderous civil wars.

“It was just as “extravagant” to speak of the “Revolt of the Algerians in 1938 when Algeria was regarded as being an extension of metropolitan France, but the revolt did come to pass in the sixties, and Algeria is now independent.)

“This Prince shall extend his dominion over the whole world.”

(St. Caesar, 6th Century)

“Is this the One World government which is currently advocated by Leftist elements?  Most definitely not.  The One World government will not come about until the revelation of the Man of Sin who, with the Jewish nation fawning at his feet, will impose his tyranny upon the whole world.  The “dominion” in question here will not take the form of a centralized autocratic government. Centralization is the very opposite of the principle of subsidiarity which the Church and every genuine Catholic monarch has always supported. Subsidiarity, to be sure, does not exclude supreme authority, or arbitration, but it is undoubtedly the antithesis of autocratism.  The word itself is comparatively new but the principle has always been upheld by the Church” (end of Dupont quotes.)

The reason that this one world government is not more noticeable is because it is entirely secret. Its effects are now being felt everywhere, and yet most people believe that their own leaders in their own nations are in control. The puppet masters select the music and the puppets dance to their tunes. Just as the true status of the rulers of the church in Rome are hidden from the eyes of all, so it is also with their civil leaders. What happened to the Church in the 1950s is now being played out all across the world, but particularly in the United States. We are on the eve of everything predicted above and more, and most especially we seem to be on the brink of civil war and possibly martial law and a military coup. Some have even speculated that Trump could be the last of the truly patriotic presidents.

The true version (or interpretation) of the La Salette Secret places Antichrist’s coming (in all its many phases) prior to the chastisement and the promised Fatima peace following the chastisement. (This is assuming we have not forfeited that peace by our wickedness; it seems both the Fatima and La Salette promises were conditional, depending on whether Catholics amended their lives and did penance. Clearly they did not.) This chastisement could well be all we have experienced in a spiritual manner since Pope Pius XII’s death in 1958, although the seers explain it is a spiritual chastisement first, followed by a physical chastisement along the lines of an asteroid/meteor strike or possibly an EMP event. La Salette seer Melanie Calvat said the ensuing peace after the physical chastisement would last only 35 years, just long enough for the Church to triumph over her enemies before the final assault launched by Satan.

But again, this and the others quoted above are only private prophecies. We can rely only on Scripture to anticipate what lies ahead, and once Antichrist has come, and the withholding power, also the Continual Sacrifice, has been taken away, then all that remains is the end of Antichrist’s reign and that perpetuated by his system and “successors.” (This is why it is absurd, on so many different levels, for those seeking to “unite the clans” to be able to do this while evil reigns on this earth, for what possible foundation could they find on which to re-establish their “Church”?!) While some commentators allow for the period of peace and restoration of the Church, others do not. So who are we to believe and how should we conduct ourselves if we do not know for certain that there will ever be such a peace? Reverend E. S. Berry tells us in his The Apocalypse of St. John that there will be such a peace and restoration, and he wrote before the message of Fatima was received. Several others tend also in this direction, including Holshauzer, also writing before Fatima. The bulk of Catholic prophecies seem to suggest it. But Holy Scripture does not specifically mention any such event.

Ancient history is filled with examples of the anticipation of savior kings allied with holy priests, both in pagan and pre-Christian literature. But it was the Jews who in Christ’s time looked for a glorious earthly king and therefore rejected Him, even though he was of the Davidic line as Scripture foretold. This is because they preferred the “second Messiah” of their own understanding to the true Messiah sent by God. “For the Jews believed that Zacharias 1:20 foretold two Messiahs, one a suffering Messiah, descended from the tribe of Joseph, Elias and the priest Zadok, and the other a glorious messiah, son of David (How Christ Said the First Mass, Rev. James Meagher). The Jews of Christ’s time were a carnal people who had little use for suffering; they believed they already had suffered enough. The Jewish people longed for a return to the time of the kings of earlier Israelitic centuries — not unlike the medievalism of the German people — and their leaders obliged them by creating a projection of a second Messiah to satisfy this longing. Therefore they denied Christ as Eternal High Priest in favor of this earthly king yet to come.

Christ warned us He would come as a thief in the night. He told us no one would know for certain when the Final Judgment will take place. We must be ever mindful of believing only what we wish to believe and not what may actually be the truth of the matter. True Catholics must prepare for either eventuality — the imminent Second Coming or a terrible physical chastisement followed by a miraculous restoration of the Church and a brief peace. But in insisting on the Church’s rescue and return without also acknowledging that Antichrist has come and only the resounding victory of his destruction will result in this restoration is not supported by Holy Scripture. Reverend Berry places the peace after the death of Antichrist as all those holding this position do, and it is only logical that this is what may well take place. But it is just as logical to believe Christ will come suddenly without warning.

And rather than distress the remnant, they should instead be resigned to His will and reason that if there is no period of peace, it is better by far to be worshipping at the heavenly altar than any restoration of that altar on earth. For although the Holy Sacrifice on earth has inestimable value, no earthly sacrifice could ever compare to the offering of Christ to God His Father at the Eternal Altar in Heaven.

Some thoughts on Sr. Lucia’s vision of the Blessed Trinity

by T. Stanfill Benns | Jun 16, 2025 | New Blog

+Feast of the Holy Trinity+

Introduction

In the past, I have expressed serious doubts about the Fatima message as concerns Russia, simply because Pope Pius XII himself expressed these same doubts in his final years, and with good reason. All that we know is that at some point Sr. Lucia dos Santos was replaced with an imposter, but exactly when is not known. Nor can we be certain she was not the victim of coercive persuasion (brainwashing) even before her replacement was installed, presumably upon her death, which might explain some inconsistencies in her statements. It seems best, then, to trust her earlier statements, some of which have either been altered, minimized, misrepresented or never properly assessed. Among these is her vision of the Trinity at Tuy, Spain. Little has been written on the possible meaning of this vision, even though it is striking in three respects. But before addressing these, we want to clear up some possible objections to the vision itself.

Some might object that the image in Sr. Lucy’s vision suggests that the Holy Ghost proceeds only from the Father and not the Son, a heresy condemned by the Church. But this 1455 painting above by Francesco di Steffano (Pesselino), situated over the high altar of the Church of the Holy Trinity in Pistoia, a small city north-west of Florence, Italy, is proof that the Church did not condemn the illustration of the Holy Trinity represented in this fashion. Other such illustrations in Catholic church art worldwide attest to this. And some will object the wound of the lance was inflicted on Christs’ left side, but Holy Scripture does not tell us which side the lance pierced. The right side is more often portrayed, since  Ezekiel 47 speaks of water flowing from the right side of the temple. From a tiny trickle of water it increases to become a mighty stream, healing all in its path. The Church treats this as a prophecy of the blood and water issuing from the pierced side of Christ, the true Temple, as it is expressed in the Easter liturgy.

The chalice and the Host

Having addressed these objections, we move on to the three notable qualities of the vision. The first of these, and what will stand out most to those seeing it for the first time, is the Host and chalice suspended under the wound in Christ’s side. From our Lord’s side issues the Sacred Blood and the water (bodily fluids) which symbolizes His union with the Mystical Body, the Church. Sister Lucy does not mention this fact, (stating that she sees only blood from Christ’s head and side dripping on to the Host), but there is most certainly a mingling of the water with the blood. For it is a teaching of the Church, as seen below, that both blood and water flowed from the wound of the lance.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, in his Summa Theologica, (III pars q 74, 6-8): “Water ought to be mingled with the wine which is offered in this sacrament. First of all, on account of its institution: for it is believed with probability that our Lord instituted this sacrament in wine tempered with water according to the custom of that country: hence it is written (Proverbs 9:5): ‘Drink the wine which I have mixed for you.

“Secondly, because it harmonizes with the representation of our Lord’s Passion: hence Pope Alexander I says (Ep. 1 ad omnes orth.): ‘In the Lord’s chalice neither wine only nor water only ought to be offered, but both mixed because we read that both flowed from His side in the Passion.’

“Thirdly, because this is adapted for signifying the effect of this sacrament, since as Pope Julius says (Concil. Bracarens iii, Can. 1): ‘We see that the people are signified by the water, but Christ’s blood by the wine. Therefore when water is mixed with the wine in the chalice, the people [are] made one with Christ.’

“Fourthly, because this is appropriate to the fourth effect of this sacrament, which is the entering into everlasting life: hence Ambrose says (De Sacram. v): ‘The water flows into the chalice, and springs forth unto everlasting life.'”

And from St. Cyprian: “For because Christ bore us all, in that He also bore our sins, we see that in the water is understood the people, but in the wine is showed the blood of Christ. But when the water is mingled in the cup with wine, the people [are] made one with Christ, and the assembly of believers is associated and conjoined with Him on whom it believes; which association and conjunction of water and wine is so mingled in the Lord’s cup, that that mixture cannot any more be separated.

“Whence, moreover, nothing can separate the Church — that is, the people established in the Church, faithfully and firmly persevering in that which they have believed — from Christ, in such a way as to prevent their undivided love from always abiding and adhering. Thus, therefore, in consecrating the cup of the Lord, water alone cannot be offered, even as wine alone cannot be offered. For if any one offer wine only, the blood of Christ is dissociated from us; but if the water be alone, the people are dissociated from Christ; but when both are mingled, and are joined with one another by a close union, there is completed a spiritual and heavenly sacrament.”

St John Chrysostom wrote: “There flowed from his side water and blood.” Beloved, do not pass over this mystery without thought; it has yet another hidden meaning, which I will explain to you. I said that water and blood symbolized baptism and the holy Eucharist. From these two sacraments the Church is born: from baptism, “the cleansing water that gives rebirth and renewal through the Holy Ghost and from the holy Eucharist.” The people were made one with Christ on the Cross, when the lance pierced His side, not just daily in the Holy Sacrifice when receiving Holy Communion, the renewal of Christ’s sacrifice. If actual Communion is what the vision was referring to, why didn’t Sr. Lucy’s vision take place above an altar where Holy Mass was being celebrated, with a priest and communicant at the altar rail?  But no, the altar in the vision is bare, in all but a very few artistic depictions.

This is much like the vision of the Sacred Species the children saw when the Angel appeared to them before the Fatima apparitions occurred; the significance is unmistakable. Swiss Catholic author Michael Mottet commented in the 1980s: “The abolition of the Perpetual Sacrifice has clearly been predicted in Fatima in the apparition of the Angel of Peace carrying a Host and a Chalice and giving the Most Holy Communion to Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco. This is the clear prediction that a time will come when the Most Holy Communion will descend straight from Heaven and will only be possible under this form.  The Faith tells us moreover that this communion of desire is not only possible, but highly desirable, which is indeed normal for the most spiritual of all sacraments, (sacrament meaning mystery),” (“Fatima: Apocalypse?,” Sangre de Cristo Newsnotes, Sept. – Dec., 1989).

Isn’t Sr. Lucy’s vision of the Trinity further confirmation of this?

Our Lady and the Rosary

The second aspect is the presence of Our Lady as she appeared at Fatima. In her vision, Sr. Lucy saw the Host, positioned above a chalice, into which the Sacred Stream flows. Under the Host and chalice, suspended in mid-air, stands Our Lady of Fatima, (the Sorrowful) and Immaculate Mother, but not with a sword piercing her heart. Our Lady, however, is standing on the right side of the Cross, just as she stood at the Passion. She is holding the Rosary and her body is slightly inclined, her hand extended, as if offering it for recitation. Again the Host and Chalice are just to the left of Our Lady. She points to her flaming heart burning with love for us and encircled with thorns, begging for reparation, just as the Head of Her Divine Son is encircled. This positioning and gesture are but further proof that the Holy Sacrifice will be suspended and the faithful will only have recourse to the rosary and the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary. The vision came with a request for reparation — the Five First Saturdays — filling up what is wanting to the Passion of Christ (Col. 1:24).

We read in the Catholic Encyclopedia: “By voluntary submission to His Passion and Death on the Cross, Jesus Christ atoned for our disobedience and sin. He thus made reparation to the offended majesty of God for the outrages which the Creator so constantly suffers at the hands of His creatures. We are restored to grace through the merits of Christ’s Death, and that grace enables us to add our prayers, labours, and trials to those of Our Lord “and fill up those things that are wanting…” Just as Christ made reparation to His Father, so also must we make reparation to Him and His holy Mother. We must atone for our disobedience and sin, but first we must understand what it has cost us.

Antichrist was given the power to take away the Holy Sacrifice and to destroy the papacy; this we read in the Book of Daniel. “And the little horn was magnified even unto the strength of heaven and it was magnified even to the Prince of the strength: AND IT TOOK AWAY FROM HIM THE CONTINUAL SACRIFICE AND CAST DOWN THE PLACE OF HIS SANCTUARY. And strength was given him against the continual sacrifice BECAUSE OF SINS: and truth shall be cast down on the ground, and he shall do and shall prosper” (Dan. 8: 9-12). Who is this Prince of strength? In his commentary on verses 10 and 12, Rev. Leo Haydock identifies them as the Jewish high priests: “…Many priests gave way to idolatry…The sacrifices were neglected… Ambitious pontiffs kept not their promises.” It was the sins of the Jewish hierarchy, but also the people, “the strength of heaven,” who Haydock refers to as the “army of the Jews, the people of God.” And so it was the faithless Catholic hierarchy, and those meant to be soldiers of Christ, who in our time likewise brought on the destruction of the Church.

This image is a representation of the Passion of the Church, for any who have eyes to see. Christ entrusted the Church to His mother at the foot of the Cross. Her presence in this vision is a warning that the Sacrifice will be suspended because of sins, unless reparation is made for them. It is a virtual invitation to participate in Christ’s Passion. It is also a warning that if a significant number of the faithful would not make this reparation during Pius XI’s reign, as requested, then the Pope would not consecrate Russia, and Russia would spread its errors. It is my belief that the last sentence purportedly conveyed to the children during the third apparition was later added to the original locution received by the children. Remember, this message was not revealed until Dec. 8, 1941. By then, WWII had already begun, with its ensuing chaos. Enemy agents already had infiltrated the Church.

That message read: “IF MY REQUESTS ARE HEARD Russia will be converted and there will be peace. If not, she will spread her errors throughout the entire world fomenting wars and persecution of the Church. The good will suffer martyrdom; the Holy Father will suffer much; different nations will be annihilated. But in the end my Immaculate Heart shall triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, which will be converted, and some time of peace will be granted to humanity.” This last sentence is suspect, and I believe that Pope Pius XII considered it suspect as well. The time for the consecration and Russia’s conversion ended with the reign of Pope Pius XI, for before his death, already the “night illumined by an unknown light” had appeared on Jan. 25, 1938. The pope died in 1939. Also, the last sentence contradicts what our Lord later told Sr. Lucy in 1943. This will be addressed below.

Graces and mercy

The third aspect of the vision is the graces and mercies descending in crystalline rivulets to the left of the Cross, the water flowing from the right side of the Temple in Ezekiel 47. We also are put in mind of the verse in Apocalypse 21: 6-7: “And he said to me: It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. To him that thirsteth I will give of the fountain of the water of life gratis. He that shall overcome shall possess these things and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.”  Rev. Haydock comments on this as follows: “The state of Christ’s Church on earth and in this world is now finished and the time is come to reward the good and punish the wicked. The living water is God himself of which the Saints shall be inebriated at the source…”  The vision is of Christ’s Sacred Body hanging from the cross following His death. Yet He continues to provide sustenance to His Church on earth through the merits of His Body and Blood — Blood mingled with water.

We find reference to this “inebriation at the source” in Rev. Henry Semple’s Heaven Open to Souls, where he cites Rev. Von Driesch: “To give you confidence in your ability to make acts of perfect contrition, you must be reminded that for many thousand years before the time of our Lord, in the old law, perfect contrition was the only means whereby men could obtain forgiveness of sins and enter heaven. And, at the present time, there are many millions of heathens and heretics, and all of these who are saved will be saved only and entirely by perfect contrition.” Semple then comments: “The great Dominican theologian, Melchior Cano, was present in the Council of Trent and took a leading part in its discussions…He writes: ”In the Sacraments of the old law, there was no other merit but that of faith… [this] by itself was enough for the remission of sins.” The living water is the inebriating symbol of that source.

The graces and mercies we receive can be likened to this image found in a Roman church. Salvation comes from Christ’s sacrificial death on the Cross into the Church, founded on the Rock of St. Peter. And from this Rock flow the rivers of salvation from which the faithful drink. Sister Lucy’s vision of the Trinity reminds us that while the earthly renewal of Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross may be suspended, the means of salvation are yet available to the faithful. In the words of St. Cyprian, “…nothing can separate the Church — that is, the people established in the Church, faithfully and firmly persevering in that which they have believed — from Christ, in such a way as to prevent their undivided love from always abiding and adhering.” The Church’s time on earth is ”done.” It is left to us remaining to be those overcomers mentioned in Apoc. 21 and to drink of the living water of graces and mercy that is now the Perfect Act of Contrition and Spiritual Communion.

The Fatima Consecration was “TOO late”

Sister Lucy related that she also received “an intimate communication” from our Lord shortly after the Tuy vision occurred.  “Our Lord complained to me saying: “They did not wish to heed my request, like the King of France. They will repent and do it, but it will be late. Russia will have already spread her errors throughout the world, provoking wars, and persecutions of the Church; the Holy Father will have much to suffer.” This is the translation of that message printed in every book I have ever examined regarding Fatima and in every Internet translation. In their recent works on Fatima, Robert Sungenis and Taylor Marshall both report that the actual wording is “TOO late” (see HERE). Why after all these years would they report differently? Well there is a very good answer to that question, and it applies to more than one of the Fatima iterations as conveyed by Sr. Lucy. This is just one of the mistranslations referred to above.

The actual reference, however, appears in yet another mistranslated text. The Portuguese words as relayed by Sr. Lucy in letters to Rev. Fr. José Bernardo Gonçalves May 18, 1936, were at one time reported on a website page that is now no longer accessible. They read in Portuguese: [Lucy] Nas cartas para o Rev. P. José Bernardo Gonçalves, S. J. , afirmou ela, em 18-5- 1936: “Mas, meu Deus, o Santo Padre não me há-de crer, se Vós mesmos o não moveis com uma inspiração especial.” [Jesus]: “O Santo Padre: Ora muito pelo Santo Padre. Ele há-de fazê-la, (a consagração da Rússia), mas será tarde.”

The English translation of these letters to Rev. Gonçalves, S.J. reads:

Sister Lucia: “But, my God, the Holy Father will not believe me if you yourself do not move him with a special inspiration.”

Jesus: “The Holy Father… Pray much for the Holy Father. He will do it (the consecration of Russia), but it will be late.”

Yet these Portuguese words, when entered into numerous translation programs, (ImTranslator, Translitz, Translationly, Online translation pro, Translate, Free translations) all translate these last two words as “TOO LATE.” And if anyone would think for one moment about the translation of the words of Our Lord regarding the King of France, they immediately would know that this communication also was deliberately mistranslated. The King of France, Louis XIV, refused to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart, as Christ requested through St. Margaret Mary Alacoque in 1689. King Louis XV also ignored the request and died of smallpox after traveling with his mistress to participate in a hunt. One hundred years after St. Margaret Mary Alacoque’s request, Louis XVI, having never performed the consecration, lost both his kingdom and his life during the French Revolution. It was definitely too late for her kings to save France as a Catholic country. And it boded ill for the kings of the Church as well.

Pope Pius XI died under suspicious circumstances without ever making the consecration. And the purpose of that consecration died with him. Poor Pope Pius XII tried to make good on his predecessor’s omission, but he had much to suffer. He fought Communism up to the time of his death, but the damage had already been done; it was too late. As reported on this site a few years ago, there is very little about Fatima that can be trusted after about the mid-1940s, when it is thought that the real Sr. Lucy passed away, to be replaced by a series of imposters. And even some of her comments before then are suspect. It is most likely that, relatively uneducated and therefore more vulnerable, Sr. Lucy was expertly subjected to coercive persuasion, especially since she was indeed a simple peasant girl and wished only to be obedient to her superiors. And to be fair, it is most likely that she knew nothing of the mistranslations.

Pope Pius XII suspected there was something amiss about the Russia consecration and was most likely poisoned after discovering the imposture and possible additions/alterations to the Fatima message, among other troubling revelations regarding Montini (see HERE). Perhaps, seeing his firm stance against ecumenism, he was alerted by the alleged change in the prayer between the decades. For this too was the victim of mistranslation and, it would appear, deliberate alteration.

Fatima prayer between the decades

This is from yet another website, no longer available for viewing: “We have been alerted to the fact of a troubling alteration in the prayer given by Our Lady to the three seers of Fatima, to be recited after each decade of the Rosary.  The most common form of this prayer today is the following: “O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of Hell, lead all souls to heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy.”

“This form of the prayer, however, is very different from that given in the earliest book on the Fatima apparitions, written by Fr. Manuel Nunes Formigão, under the pseudonym of\Visconde de Montello, Os episodios maravilhosos de Fátima (1921), and subsequently in many novenas and devotional works approved by ecclesiastical authorities through the 1950s. Fr. Formigão was in charge of interrogating the seers, including Lucia dos Santos, who received the prayer from Our Lady on July 13, 1917.  According to Formigão’s account, the prayer should read: “O my Jesus, pardon us, deliver us from the fire of Hell, and relieve the souls in Purgatory, especially the most abandoned.” We have also found a letter, written by Lucia, giving the original text of the prayer below.

“According to this letter, the original words of the prayer are as follows in Portuguese: O meu Jesus, perdoai-nos e livrai-nos do fogo do inferno, levai as alminhas todas para o Ceu, principalmente aquelas que mais precisarem.” In English, this may be translated as: O my Jesus, forgive us and save us from the fire of Hell, lead all little souls toward Heaven, especially those who are most in need.” It is our understanding, that the word “alminhas”, literally, “little souls,” is an idiom in Portuguese for the souls in Purgatory, similar to the phrase in English, “Poor Souls.” This interpretation is supported by the fact that the priest responsible for questioning Lucia, Fr. Formigão, a native speaker of Portuguese, transcribed this part of the prayer as a petition for the relief of the souls in Purgatory (see scan from Formigao book below).

“It is alleged that Lucia, long after the fact, corrected the wording of the prayer to refer to “all souls,” rather than to the souls in Purgatory. The earliest first versions of the prayer with the revised wording, to our knowledge, began to appear twenty to thirty years after the apparitions.”

And of course that would fit in with the timeline for the appearance of the Sr. Lucy imposters. According to his work, Our Lady of Fatima, on July 15,1946, the author William Thomas Walsh interviewed Sr. Lucy in her convent in Vilar and it was at this time that she corrected the prayer to read: “Oh my Jesus, pardon us and save us from the fire of Hell. Draw all souls to heaven, especially those in most need.” Sr. Lucy told Walsh she “corrected” it in her memoirs because it had previously been misreported. But what about her letter then to Rev. Goncalves?! And if that, then what else? Was she persuaded to change it? Ordered? Threatened? Certainly the sudden appearance of her “replacement” suggests something was afoot. Can we still recite the original prayer that she recited to Rev. Formigao?

It seems we can, for it is duly imprimatured and indulgenced, according to this 1947 booklet, available online HERE. Perhaps the question should be asked why, if it was not accurate, that the prayer was ever indulgenced in the first place, and why the author felt  both prayers should be included in his booklet? If Pope Pius XII approved the booklet, wouldn’t that be enough to assure the recitation of the original version? And given that G. B. Montini issued the announcement of the pope’s blessing, might it not have served his own purposes well, seeing that the prayer between the decades was “corrected”?

Now more than ever, it is important that we say this prayer between the decades,  since the most powerful means of freeing the souls in Purgatory in the past, Holy Mass, has been lost to us. It seems right to assume that this is the reason that it was given to the seers in the first place. And since the Rosary is one of the most indulgenced prayers we can offer, it is the best choice for freeing our loved ones from Purgatory or relieving their suffering there.

If we had never known what we know now about Fatima and the destruction of the Church, these discrepancies wouldn’t matter. But we can’t very well “unknow” it. We know what the changing of one word did to the consecration of the wine in the Latin Mass, and what the omission of qualifying adjectives can accomplish. The La Salette message was similarly attenuated, and the seers harangued and harassed for years. Melanie Calvat’s own confessor even added to and twisted her accounts of the message and printed them; at least one of these accounts was condemned by the Holy See. So why should anyone be surprised now, with the enemy fully in control of things, that these deceptions have become so obvious?

Our Lord’s last message

The last known communication of our Lord to Sr. Lucy occurred in 1943. He expressed his joy at Pope Pius XII’s 1942 consecration but said it was not complete. World War II would end, He told her, but Russia would not yet be converted. In this last message He defined exactly what type of penance and reparation Fatima demanded. “The sacrifice demanded of everyone is the fulfillment of his duties in life and the observance of My law. This is the penance that I now seek and require.” Our Lord complained bitterly to Sr. Lucy that so few would be willing to make whatever sacrifices the observance of His law would require. (From the book Fatima or World Suicide, Rt. Rev. Wm. C. McGrath, P.A., 1950). And if this is the true message of Fatima, the real secret to fulfilling Our Lady’s wishes and those of her Son, then it is no wonder we have lost the visible Church. God’s law can only translate as the 10 Commandments and the laws enacted over the centuries by His vicars, for “He who hears you, hears Me.” And of course Christ already knew how few would obey these laws and fulfill the duties of their chosen vocations.

This final message seems to indicate that a rough road lay ahead for the faithful. It almost sounds as though Catholics were being called to white martyrdom, which indeed was the case. This final communication, coupled with the vision at Tuy, has been scarcely mentioned and never explained, unlike the rest of the message regarding the consecration and Russia’s conversion. And of course there is a reason for this — they do not wish to consider the real import of the message or its consequences.

Conclusion

In this author’s opinion, the Holy Trinity is portrayed in the Tuy vision as a pictorial presentation of the third secret. The Trinity will always be with us, just as the Three Persons were with the people of Israel prior to their defection — God the Father, Christ the (coming) Messiah and the Shekinah, or Holy Ghost. If we truly keep the faith, the Holy Trinity will send the streams of grace and mercy we need to save our souls, just as they did in Old Testament times, before there was a pope, a Mass or the sacraments. Sr. Lucy may have been granted this vision because God knew that the message of Fatima would be derailed and corrupted by the enemies of the Church. As St. John Chrysostom says, in the blood and water flowing from Christ’s side, we have Baptism and the Eucharist (Perfect Contrition and Spiritual Communion); these means of salvation cannot be taken from us. Lucy saw only the blood; she did not see (or did not mention) the water. Could it be that this signifies that now only Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross suffices, because there can be no mingling of the water in the absence of Holy Mass?!

I have no idea who the artists were that painted the vision of Tuy. But in one of the older ones, the one that I have included above, something strange can be seen when it is printed out. Just past the graces and mercy on the left side of the Cross, a faint image can be seen of what appears to be a priest dressed in alb and surplice, his head down, leaving the altar. Go in peace, the Mass has ended. The Church’s time on earth is done. The prince of strength’s sanctuary has been cast down; he who withholdeth has been taken out of the way. “I will strike the Shepherd” and disperse the flock, Christ announces in Matt. 26: 31. And after the pattern of Our Lord, the Holy Father, Pius XII, had much to suffer. God has given us so many indications of the times in which we live, if we only read the signs.

Fatima is merely a private revelation, and as such can be taken as true on human faith or ignored entirely. Many have hijacked and perverted its true meaning for decades. But if it is stripped of its dross, this seemingly prophetic representation of the Holy Trinity may yet be able to confirm what we should already know.

Has the conversion of the Jews already taken place?

by T. Stanfill Benns | Jun 8, 2025 | New Blog

+Feast of Pentecost+

June, Month of the Sacred Heart of Jesus — Prayer Society Intention:    “Divine Heart of Jesus, convert sinners, save the dying, deliver the holy souls in Purgatory.” (Raccolta)

In a previous blog on the false accusation against the Jews regarding ritual murder, it was reported that: “Research shows the majority of Jews consider themselves such in ethnicity, but not primarily in religion.” This is backed by Pew Research statistics, as cited in that blog entry. What few realize is that the decline in the practice of Judaism began long before the 20^th century, a phenomena some believed the Church could have used as an opportunity to gain Jewish converts. Those most zealous for the conversion of their people were the Jewish twin brothers Joseph and Augustin, who converted to Catholicism in 1854 at the age of 18.

Little is known generally about these notable Jewish converts, who later became priests. Rev. Denis Fahey quotes Augustin ’s eschatological work on Antichrist at length in his The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation (1953)  but provides little information on the two brothers’ background and proselytizing activities. Fortunately, a recently discovered work by Murray Watson, Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Theology, Huron University College (Western University, London, Ontario, Canada), has shed some much-needed light on the  brothers — their lives, their work, and their interaction with Pope Pius IX and the bishops attending the Vatican Council.

Lémann brothers — early years

Watson relates in his The  Brothers and the Postulatum Pro Hebræis at Vatican I that  the brothers’ conversion was kept secret from their Jewish relatives, and for good reason. Once the family discovered they had converted, the twins suffered physical violence at the hands of their uncles and feared for their lives. Their Jewish relatives appealed to the civil authorities in Paris, but to no avail. The brothers were then disowned and disinherited by their family.

Watson writes: “In Paris, the young men… were put in contact with two other high-profile Jewish converts to Catholicism, the brothers Marie-Alphonse and Théodore Ratisbonne (founders, respectively, of the Fathers and Sisters of Notre-Dame de Sion), who would take the s under their wings, mentor them, and support their newfound Christian faith; Théodore would become a de facto spiritual director to the two young men, as they discerned what path God might be calling them to. Within a few months, the two brothers had both enrolled in the Seminary of Saint-Sulpice, in Issy-les-Moulineaux, where they pursued five years of spiritual and theological formation, before being ordained to the priesthood.

“In December 1861 they received permission from Cardinal de Bonald and Father Reuil to leave parish ministry, and to join Father Théodore Ratisbonne in his work at the Catechumenate he had established in Paris, to educate young Jews who wished to become Catholic, and thus to facilitate the process of their conversion. They would remain there, sharing in Ratisbonne’s work, until the end of 1865. Although (for health reasons) they never become formal, canonical members of the nascent Fathers of Sion, they continued to be closely linked to that congregation, and many people assumed that they were, in fact, Fathers of Sion. In their preaching, they actively raised funds for the work of Father Alphonse Ratisbonne in the Holy Land, and Ratisbonne referred to them in his correspondence with the French superlative “Chérissimes frères” (My most dear brothers).

“In 1866, the two men returned to Lyon, the place of their baptism twelve years earlier, and settled at an institution that cared for the deaf and the mute. They were relieved of normal parish duties, in order to be able to devote themselves more completely to the cause of converting Jews to Christianity… A few months later, it became clear that their efforts were being followed at the highest echelons of the Church: a papal brief (Gratulamur vobis) arrived, dated February 6, 1867, in which the Pope offered his personal endorsement of their evangelistic apostolate:

“We are very gratified by your devotion to this Holy See, upon which Catholic unity finds its solidity, and we ask God that, just as His grace has already shone upon you, so, by means of your zeal and your work, it may similarly enlighten the minds of your brothers, and lead them all to us, as soon as possible, so that, at last, there might be only one flock and only one shepherd. For this reason, as a foretaste of heavenly favours, and as a sign of our fatherly tenderness, we most affectionately grant you the apostolic blessing.”

Declining belief in Judaism

According to Watson: “Augustin  would go on to become a distinguished professor of Hebrew and Scripture in Lyon’s faculty of theology, writing extensively in the fields of theology and Biblical studies, apologetics and history, and publishing nearly 150 books and articles over his lifetime. His brother Joseph would also author a number of theological volumes, although his output did not match that of his twin. Quoting from Joseph and Augustin ’s La question du Messie et le concile du Vatican (Lyon: Pitrat Aîné, 1869; 126-29) Watson includes the words of the famous preacher, Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet:

“There is among [the Jewish people] a type of drought which is unique to the Israelites, a drought which has been kept secret, and resisted for a long time, but which is no longer unspoken today and—what is even more serious—which no one is resisting anymore. In speaking of this drought, we mean to designate the disappearance—which is already very far advanced—of the traditions, customs and practices which essentially make up Jewish life… , just as initially, after the fall of Jerusalem, Mosaism had degenerated into Talmudism, so now Talmudism itself, with its remnants of Mosaism, is degenerating into rationalism or indifference—that is to say, into nihilism …”

“However, let us remember that in the Synagogue there is still a conservative or orthodox faction, which tries hard to battle many of the trends that we are going to enumerate. Generally speaking, however, this party is no longer gaining new members and is weakening, as those who are called “the elders” disappear. If things continue on as they are, it will have ceased to exist within two to three generations.”

The Lémanns then comment on Bossuet’s words, observing there was: “…a growing decadence in European Jewry, largely flowing from the French Revolution’s emancipation of the Jews, and leading to a gradual, corrosive infiltration of “modernist” ideas into traditional Judaism, a slow but inevitable dilution of the truths of its own heritage, such that it was hardly recognizable as the Judaism of earlier centuries. Here they pointed to a number of 19^th-century trends that had, they argued, dramatically and deleteriously changed the very fibre of Jewish life:

• a rejection of the supernatural generally;
• a denial of the divine inspiration of the Jewish Scriptures;
• calls for “free inquiry” in theological questions;
• taking pride in having no altar and no sacrifices;
• a refusal to acknowledge the traditional priesthood;
• contempt for the teachings of the Talmud;
• a refusal to engage in proselytizing or seeking converts to Judaism;
• a lack of respect for the kosher food laws;
• forgetfulness of the obligation to observe Shabbat;
• re-writing (“mutilating”) traditional Jewish prayers, to remove references to the Messiah, to Jerusalem, and to any type of national Jewish hopes.”

Apply changes made during the false Vatican 2 council and the removal of any idea of a true sacrifice by instituting the Novus Ordo Missae and this same formula was implemented to destroy the Church. This after decades of preparation by the enemy working among the laity to diminish the idea of the supernatural, dilute Catholic truth, champion lay rights, minimize dogma, desecrate Holy Scripture and demean the papacy. Similar changes occurred in more conservative Protestant denominations.

The brothers saw this watering down of the Jewish belief system as a perfect opportunity to draw their Jewish brethren to the Catholic faith. After the announcement that the Vatican Council preparations were underway, they wrote a new book, The Question of the Messiah and the Vatican Council. With the encouragement of several bishops and Pope Pius IX, they then attended the Vatican Council and presented their case to request an official appeal from the Church for the Jews’ conversion. They then were tasked with developing the right approach to win converts from Judaism Watson chronicles their efforts as follows.

The tone of the Postulatum

“At a time when Jews were still the object of scorn (and sometimes violence) in many European countries, the s and their supporters proposed a “theological rehabilitation” which, although it obviously presented Christianity as the ideal and superior faith, nevertheless would seek to present Judaism as honourably and respectfully as possible… Here is how they phrased the petition for which they sought the bishops’ endorsement:

‘To the Holy Vatican Ecumenical Council:

‘The undersigned Fathers, in a spirit of humble yet urgent prayer, ask the Holy Vatican Ecumenical Council to deign to address an entirely paternal invitation to the very unfortunate nation of Israel —that is, to express the wish that, finally exhausted by a wait no less vain than long, the Israelites might hasten to acknowledge the Messiah, our Saviour Jesus Christ, truly promised to Abraham and foretold by Moses, thus completing and crowning, not changing, the Mosaic religion.

‘On one hand, the undersigned Fathers possess the very firm confidence that the holy Council will have compassion on the Israelites, because they are still very dear to God on account of their fathers, and because it is from them that Christ was born according to the flesh.

‘On the other hand, the same Fathers share the sweet and intimate hope that this ardent desire of tenderness and honour will, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, be well received by many of Abraham’s children, since the obstacles that have held them back until now appear to be disappearing more and more, the ancient wall of separation now having fallen.

‘May Heaven grant, therefore, that they would as speedily as possible acclaim Christ, saying “Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed be He who comes in the name of the Lord.”

‘May Heaven grant that they would run and throw themselves into the arms of the Immaculate Virgin Mary, who is already their sister according to the flesh, and who wishes likewise to be their mother according to grace, as she is ours’ (end of Postulatum quote).

Watson continues: “In an audience afterward, they presented the Pope with the text of the Postulatum; he read it, pressed it to his heart and gave his enthusiastic blessing to their project. Immediately, the s began a frenetic campaign, crisscrossing Rome on foot, in order to meet with each bishop individually, and to secure their signature—and their support—for the Postulatum… In just over two months… they accumulated 510 signatures on their petition to the council.”

This is a very interesting fact, since In his work The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation, Ch. VII (1955), Rev. Denis Fahey wrote: “When the Fathers  were petitioning the bishops assembled in Rome for the Vatican Council for their signatures to the Postulatum pro Hebræis, many of their lordships smilingly put the objection that, ‘To work for the conversion of the Jews was to bring on the end of the world.’ The two fathers gave several answers to this objection and their argument seemed to go far towards proving that there will be a considerable lapse of time between the conversion of the Jewish nation and the last judgment.” But it appears that regardless of these objections, the large majority of bishops were in favor of the Postulatum.

An uncompleted work

But like other postulatums, it would never receive the council’s final approval. Following the  definition of papal infallibility, war broke out, Pope Pius IX suspended the council indefinitely and the bishops fled back to their dioceses. Two months later, Italian soldiers seized control of Rome. THE Vatican Council was never reconvened, and the false Vatican 2 council, far from inviting the Jews to join the Church, invited them, as well as Protestant clergy, to participate in Her demolition. Watson observes: “By the time Vatican II was called, almost 90 years later, the world had changed dramatically, and the earlier document seems to have vanished from people’s memory and the Church’s consciousness…

“Would the twentieth century, with its history of both bitter and sweet Jewish-Christian relations, have taken a different path in any significant way? … When Vatican II was called by Pope John XXIII, there do not seem to have been calls for a “tidying-up” of all of the conciliar “loose ends” left over from Vatican I—which would presumably have included a renewed discussion of the Postulatum pro Hebræis. Whether by intention or by accident, it had effectively vanished from the Catholic theological radar screen, and I am not aware of efforts, even by groups of traditionalist bishops who opposed Nostra Æetate, to dust it off and re-introduce it. It seems simply to have been forgotten.” Forgotten, yes, after the triumph of Modernism and the false council’s adoption of ecumenism.

Watson concludes his work with an account of the the  brothers activities following the Vatican Council: As for the  brothers themselves: “In their post-Vatican I lives, they continued their pastoral and intellectual efforts, writing, teaching and preaching throughout France. In 1892, the Fathers  jointly founded the “Stella Maris” Carmelite monastery of Our Lady of Mount Carmel (in Haifa), which still exists there today. They were jointly honoured across France, being named honourary canons of the cathedrals of Beauvais, Bourges, Langres, Montpellier and Reims.

“In April of 1908, Pope Pius X conferred on both of them the honorific of “monsignor” (as Domestic Prelates of His Holiness); during the ceremony celebrating their promotion, the dean of the Catholic faculty of Lyon said that the title was the reward for “the generous sacrifices that your courageous passage from the Synagogue to the Church have entailed for you, and the reward for a half-century of distinguished service to your brothers, whom your conscience compelled you to leave, without, however, ceasing to foster love for them”.

“Augustin died on June 16, 1909, and Joseph died on February 8, 1915, but the detailed story of the Postulatum, and of their vision for it, was made public in a 330-page book they had written together, which was published in 1912 — three years after Augustin’s death, and more than 40 years after Vatican I’s unexpectedly abrupt ending.” (End of Watson quotes.)

The Postulatum and the end times

Is it possible that the Lémann brothers’ efforts qualify as the conversion of the Jews towards the end of the world? In our opinion it is not only possible but highly probable. We have explained HERE how there is good reason to believe that Jews who emigrated to Mexico during the Babylonian Captivity and intermarried with the Mexican natives there constituted the eight million converts to Catholicism, over a seven-year period, following the apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Coupled with the efforts of the Ratisbonne brothers but especially the Lémann brothers, it seems that these conversions could well be the fulfillment of Scriptural prophecy concerning the conversion of the Jews.

Could that indicate the Lémann brothers were Enoch and Elias? An interesting quote from Pope Pius IX, cited by Watson, could be suggestive of this. During a visit to France, while hosting a banquet for bishops at which the Lémanns were in attendance, Pius IX said: “These are the antiquities of the ancient Law” (emphasis the pope’s.) But then some believe that Pope Pius IX and Pope St. Pius X were themselves the Two Witnesses. Personally, I have gone back and forth on the subject of Enoch and Elias for decades. The deciding factor for my present (and I believe) final take on this scriptural prophecy is that: given the fact there are no valid bishops remaining to restore the Church — and the in light of the decision by Pope Pius XII on the danger of teaching there will be even a spiritual Millennium — these two men have to be figures who have already come and gone.

The Great Apostasy began with Luther’s Revolt, followed by the King Henry VIII’s apostasy and the Protestant Reformation. When the reformers styled the popes as Antichrist, Pope Paul IV defined exactly who the abomination of desolation standing in the Holy Place would be — a heretic or one suspect of heresy, invalidly elected pope (Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, 1559). Notable events before, during and after the Vatican Council made it clear that the end times were fast approaching. The Council Fathers themselves believed that this was indeed the case, notable among them St. Anthony Mary Claret who warned: “May the Council prove the portal to shelter in the midst of the tempest which, already upon us, is increasing…(otherwise) woe to earth!” But following the Council, the Modernists would successfully erode papal authority and infiltrate the Church.

St. Anthony’s autobiography reveals that he had a wonderful revelation from Our Lord, who audibly informed this holy prophet he would become the eagle with the three woes in St. John’s Apocalypse, (Ch.8, vs.13), and would fly across the world to preach the coming chastisements. Our Lord made St. Anthony understand that these woes would be: 1) Communism and Protestantism; 2) “the four archdemons” — pleasure, money, reason and independence of will and 3) the world wars with all their terrible consequences. In a speech made at the Vatican Council, he proclaimed: “The Supreme Roman Pontiff is infallible…The truth of papal infallibility would be clear to all men if Scripture were understood.” St. Anthony then gave three reasons why it is not understood: 1) Because men do not truly love God; 2) Because they are not really humble; and 3) Because they do not want to understand what God has taught or want to be good.” And is this not precisely what we see today?!

The 19^th century was the last great century of the Church. And already, as Henry Cardinal Manning notes in his The Present Crisis of the Holy See, the Church was in sad shape even then: “When, I ask, was the Church of God ever in a weaker condition, in a feebler state in the eyes of man and in this natural order than it is now? And from whence, I ask, is deliverance to come? Is there on earth any power to intervene? Is there any King, Prince or potentate that has the power to interpose either his will or his sword for the protection of the Church? Not one, and it is foretold that it should be so. Neither need we desire it, for the will of God seems to be otherwise. But there is one Power which will destroy all antagonists, there is one Person who will break down and smite, small as the dust of the summer threshing floor, all the enemies of the Church…”

Conclusion

If the Jews’ identity as a religious faction and a race was already in question in the 1800s, how is it possible that they could be identified and converted today? With the Church in ruins, to what ? As Our Lady of La Salette told the two children in 1846, “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of Antichrist.” Did she mean the pope would lose the faith? Even before the Vatican Council definition it was impossible to believe that this could happen — Pope Paul IV taught such a man could only appear to be a pope. No, what she indicates here is that the Roman clergy, including the cardinals, would lose the faith, making an invalid election possible. This could happen only shortly before the advent of Antichrist. Pope Leo XIII’s long St. Michael’s prayer, to be recited privately by the clergy, confirmed that the abomination had already made inroads into the Holy Place and were preparing to install a false pope. Why else assign its recitation to the clergy if they were not in danger of being recruited by the enemy?

It seems that Enoch and Elias could come only during a miraculous restoration of the Church. But this is not indicated anywhere in Scripture and is contraindicated by Pope Pius XII and nearly all the older Scriptural commentators. It is possible, but only barely, that they could appear briefly during the time assigned for repentance following the chastisement and the physical destruction of Rome, but even this is very unlikely. While we don’t believe in assigning absolutes in such cases, neither can we ignore the fact that certain Scriptural prophecy in Apocalypse has already been fulfilled, such as the wholesale destruction of the Church and the cessation of the Holy Sacrifice. And this of course occurred under Paul 6. Nor has that Sacrifice been “restored” by Traditionalists, who never became clergy to begin with.

Once Antichrist has reigned — and all reading this site know that this author believes Giovanni Battista Montini, Paul 6, was Antichrist — all that remains is the Second Coming. His system continues on in the meantime. How long after his death the Final Judgment will occur is not indicated, but St. Thomas Aquinas believes this interval could amount to a considerable period of time. It appears that we live in that time, when all will believe they have destroyed the Church and no consequences are forthcoming. Here is the faith and the patience of those saints we hope and pray to be, that we may persevere until the very end. On this Pentecost Sunday, we await Christ’s return, for an angel told the Apostles and the Blessed Virgin that he would come again just as He left this earth. Even then, come Lord Jesus!