| Home - Latest News | Introduction | Bayside Prophecies | Directives from Heaven | Shopping Cart | Testimonies | Veronica Lueken | Miraculous Photos | Bible | Radio Program |

FatimaGate 
An open letter to Michael Hessemann...

"My child, they converse of the secret that I gave at Fatima.  It is a simple explanation. It could not be fully revealed because of the drastic nature of My message.  How I warned and warned that satan would enter into the highest realms of the hierarchy in Rome.  The Third Secret, My child, is that satan would enter into My Son's Church." - Our Lady, May 13, 1978

INTRODUCTION:

(We present the following report in reply to Michael Hessemann, a noted UFO expert and science writer, who recently wrote a short article contesting our findings regarding the alleged third secret released on June 26, 2000). Read more on our previous report showing that the June 26th document is a forgery.

In our investigation into the alleged third secret, we have delved into three separate areas: forensics, Fatima, and Our Lady of the Roses apparitions, seeking expert advice in all three of these areas: (1) forensics – Robert Kullman of Speckin Forensic Laboratories; (2) Fatima apparitions – various Fatima scholars, including Fr. Joaquin Alonso (official archivist of Fatima) and Bro. Michael of the Holy Trinity; (3) Our Lady of the Roses apparitions – witnesses, close friends, and workers of the late Veronica Lueken, the seer of the apparitions. In this category we include ourselves; not in pride do we say this, but in fact. We have worked full time for the promotion of the apparitions for many years, have been eyewitnesses to the seer Veronica Lueken in ecstasy during the apparitions, have personally witnessed what we would affirm under oath are miracles on the Shrine grounds, have many times talked with Veronica Lueken herself, and have been in frequent contact with Veronica's long time friend and personal secretary, Ann Ferguson. 

We challenge Mr. Hessemann’s presumptuous claim to a triple-tiara as self-appointed expert in Fatima, Bayside, and forensic science. Under scrutiny, we will show that he has competence in none of these areas. We ourselves have sought expert counsel in these matters, lest we fall into the intellectual delusion that we have all the answers, or that we can pontificate infallibly. We seek qualified advice, and then we proceed. The issue of the alleged third secret is admittedly an ongoing investigation, and more facts continue to come to light in what one author has coined “FATIMA-GATE”.  We are already morally certain that the June 26^th release is a forgery, but we continue to provide more pieces to the overall picture, that the public may view the preponderance of evidence that continues to build verifying that the alleged third secret released on June 26, 2000 is not the authentic text but is indeed a forgery. 

Hessemann – “Even the most legitimate objection, the alleged length and format of the third secret, is just based on the statement of an auxiliary bishop…”

ACTUALLY, Mr. Hessemann, you have read our articles and know that our principle witness is Sister Lucy and her letter of January 9, 1944, to Bishop da Silva: "I have written what you asked me; God willed to try me a little, but finally this was indeed His will: [the text] is sealed in an envelope and it is on a piece of notepaper..."  She explicitly says “a piece of notepaper,” not a double-sheet of paper having four sides. Furthermore, Cardinal Ottaviani is a witness as well. At a press conference on February 11, 1967, Cardinal Ottaviani stated: "And then, what did she [Sister Lucy] do to obey the Most Holy Virgin? She wrote on a sheet of paper, in Portuguese, what the Holy Virgin had asked her to tell..." Cardinal Ottaviani is a witness to this fact, as he has read the Third Secret: "I, who have had the grace and gift to read the text of the Secret—although I too am held to secrecy because I am bound by the Secret...." Also, Fr. Alonso verifies the truth of both of these statements: "Lucy tells us that she wrote it on a sheet of paper. Cardinal Ottaviani, who has read it, tells us the same thing: 'She wrote it on a sheet of paper.'" (Father Alonso, VSF, p. 60)

The “statement of an auxiliary bishop” is not our principle authority to the fact that the Third Secret is on one page, and you Mr. Hessemann know this.  You have misled your readers by omitting the fact that Sister Lucy herself and Cardinal Ottaviani, who are both witnesses to the length of the real Third Secret, both affirm that it is on one sheet of paper. 

Furthermore, the most powerful objection against the alleged third secret is not the reported length of the genuine Third Secret, but rather our objection that the known first line, "In Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved..." and the explanation of this theme are ENTIRELY MISSING from the alleged third secret released on June 26th. 

Hessemann – “But under examination it [alleged third secret] turned out to be a double page of copy-book paper, 16.7 x 12.6 cm in size, with 16 lines on each of its four pages.”

We got a chuckle out of this comment. As shown above, the real Third Secret is on one sheet of notepaper, but the alleged third secret that has been put forward by the Vatican clearly has four pages.  How to reconcile the difference? Call it a double sheet! We can honestly say that we have never seen a notebook in which there is such a thing as a double sheet having four sides to write on. Such is clearly not “an ordinary sheet of paper” as described by Bishop Venancio.  Double sheet is more double talk than anything. What a stretch!  Hessemann gives a convoluted explanation, that changes “one” magically into “four.” What is it about the word “one”, Mr. Hessemann, that you don’t understand?

These verbal gymnastics are an attempt to explain away the fact that Bishop Venancio clearly counted approximately 23 lines when he held the sealed genuine Third Secret up to the light. Now let’s follow what Hessemann is alleging. His version is that it was written on a double-sheet folded once again and put in an envelope. Hessemann’s statement that “there was no way for Bishop Venancio to see any details” is not true. Whatever way the Third Secret was folded, Bishop Venancio would have been able to read the lines that were exterior to the fold. By Hessemann's own scenario, the 16 lines per side in the alleged third secret, once folded, would now appear as only 8 lines if held up to the light. Yet Bishop Venancio clearly saw approximately 23 lines.  How do you explain this, Mr. Hessemann?  

ACTUALLY, Mr. Hessemann, "In Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved…" is the first line of the genuine Third Secret. You seek to deflect the real question: since this line is part of the genuine Third Secret, why does it fail to show up in the text of the alleged third secret released by the Vatican on June 26th? Let us attend to those who are competent to speak authoritatively on the Third Secret. Again, we turn to Fr. Joaquin Alonso, the official archivist of Fatima, who had access to Sister Lucy for many years to assure his objectivity and accuracy:

“In the period preceding the great triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, tremendous things are to happen. These form the content of the third part of the Secret. What are they? If in Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved, it can be clearly deduced from this that in other parts of the Church these dogmas are going to become obscure or even lost altogether. It is quite possible that the message not only speaks of a ‘crisis of faith’ in the Church during this period, but also, like the Secret of La Salette, that it makes concrete references to internal strife among Catholics and to the deficiencies of priests and religious. It is also possible that it may imply deficiencies even among the upper ranks of the hierarchy.” (Fr. Joaquin Alonso, The Secret of Fatima: Fact and Legend, p. 80)  

Fr. Schweigl was entrusted by Pope Pius XII with a mission to discover more about the Third Secret, and journeyed to Coimbra to interrogate Sister Lucy on September 2, 1952. Upon his return to the Russicum in Rome, Fr. Schweigl relates:

"I cannot reveal anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the third secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one concerns the Pope. The other, logically–although I must say nothing–would have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved." 

And also the enlightening words of the Fatima scholar, Bro. Michael of the Holy Trinity:

"Along with the many historical facts and positive criteria already pointed out, in effect we are aware of a little sentence which is, in all certainty, an element of the authentic third Secret. It is this sentence which gives us the key: 'Em Portugal se conservara sempre o dogma da fé, etc. In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved, etc.'

"This little sentence which, curiously, has gone unnoticed by the majority of Fatima historians, is obviously of vital importance. Since Lucy's Memoirs were published in their integral text, in effect we can make a decisive critical remark: in her third Memoir, written in July - August 1941, Sister Lucy had been content to mention the existence of a third part of the Secret, but as yet she had said nothing about it. A few months later, in her fourth Memoir, written between October - December 1941, she decided to say more. She recopied almost word for word the text of the third Memoir, but adding after the final words—'... and a certain period of peace will be granted to the world'—the new sentence: 'Em Portugal se conservara sempre o dogma da fé, etc.'

"Thus we now know the first sentence of the final Secret. This addition is definitely significant. For it is certain that Sister Lucy did not insert it here out of levity, but in the specific intention of showing us, in a veiled manner, the essential contents of the third Secret. Indeed in 1943, when Bishop da Silva had asked her to write down the text, and she was encountering insurmountable obstacles in obeying this order, she declared that it was not absolutely necessary to do so, 'since in a certain manner she had said it.' [VSF, (Spanish Edition), Alonso, p. 64]  Undoubtedly she was alluding to the ten words discreetly added in December, 1941, to the text of the great Secret—but added so discreetly that almost nobody noticed them. However, they are very enlightening when we stop and think about them." (The Whole Truth About Fatima, Vol. III, Bro. Michael of the Holy Trinity, pp. 683-684) 

The plot thickens, Mr. Hessemann. The alleged third secret released on June 26th is devoid of the known first sentence of the REAL Third Secret.  It is devoid of one of the REAL Third Secret's identifying marks. 

The key word is can and not must.  The handwriting expert we consulted, Robert Kullman of Speckin Forensic Laboratories,  stated that he found it remarkable how consistent Sister Lucy’s handwriting remained, in documents he examined representing a 62-year time span. So our handwriting expert affirms that it is amazing how little her handwriting had changed. EXCEPT, of course, the small time frame around 1944, when mysteriously her writing style changes completely, and RESUMES TO HER ORIGINAL WRITING STYLE AFTER 1944.  How interesting. Truly, this must be a remarkable incident in the records of handwriting analysis, for such radical changes to occur in such a small window, and then disappear. It is almost as if she was another person. Such is yet another red flag pointing to the presence of forgery.  

Samples of Sister Lucy's writing compared to the 
alleged third secret

December 17, 1927	May 29, 1930	November 17, 1935	alleged third secret January 3, 1944	April 13, 1980	July 13, 1989

 In a phone conversation on August 15th, 2000 with our handwriting expert, Robert Kullman, we asked several questions concerning forensics. He replied to us: "Correct me if I'm wrong: what you are saying, 'does someone's writing go along at a certain time frame, say for a ten-year period and they write a certain style. And then say, for a two year time period they change and write a different style and then they pick up two years after that and start writing to the previous style?' NO THAT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, LOGICALLY.  See, writing may progress somewhat.  It doesn't regress to what you wrote years ago." We then asked him what he would check into if he saw an example of this phenomena occurring in a series of handwriting samples (a consistent handwriting style changing radically for a short period and then resuming to the original handwriting style), what questions he would ask.  He replied, "Well, first off I would check into seeing if the radical change was true known writing. That's the first thing."  He then went on to say, "There's one of two things: either it's not that person's known writing or something happened to that person. Either they broke their writing arm and they had to write with a different arm, or they went through some medical problem that caused them not to write their normal writing at that particular time, because writing is affected by physical and mental items.  So something could happen to you to make your writing change." We then mentioned to him that such a handwriting change would generally be for the worse in this scenario. Robert Kullman replied, "Oh, definitely. Oh yeah, it doesn't get better. You can never—you can't write better than you can write." 

Please be aware that not only is the writing style of the alleged third secret totally different from Sister Lucy's consistent writing style of a known 62-year period, it is also of a higher writing quality than anything Sister Lucy has ever demonstrated. As another handwriting expert observed:

The hand that penned the presumed forgery appears to have left traces of the effort in the writing. Great care was taken in that article in that the 'weight' of the stroke is almost flat, relative to the plane of the paper, throughout the whole document. Humans don't as a rule write that way. As an expert on legibility (among other things), I can state with some confidence that except for persons trained in the ritual art of copying or calligraphy, humans leave impressions in the act of writing which betrays things like how the body was held at the time of writing. Such things as whether there is something to act as a wrist brace and how far away from the writing surface, all leave impressions in the act of writing.
     The offered document has none of these apparent. In fact the absence of normal human writing 'quavers' (as they are known in the trade) suggests with some certainty that this person was trained to penmanship as an adult. Such people are rare these days, except in the catholic and orthodox (russian/greek) churches. I discount calligraphers even amateurs as their styles are not so clearly Roman. 

All of this makes perfect sense when we continue our study of the alleged third secret, and see that it fails on every single litmus test for authenticity.

Hessemann's  INATTENTION TO ACCURACY:

We present the following glaring errors that we found in Michael Hessemann's short article contesting our exposé of the alleged third secret. We do this not to belittle him, but rather to demonstrate that Hessemann's knowledge of Fatima and Our Lady of the Roses apparitions is quite limited, as demonstrated by his many factual errors. His ignorance of many basic facts of the Fatima apparitions may also explain why he has not attempted to answer our objections that the real Third Secret concerns apostasy in the Church and mentions a specific date. Such facts are not generally known, unless one has been a student of the Fatima apparitions to some moderate degree. 

Hessemann – “She wrote her memoirs, four volumes, in the year 1941..."

The facts are, Sister Lucy completed her Memoirs on the following dates:

• First Memoirs – completed December 25, 1935.
• Second Memoirs – completed November 21, 1937
• Third Memoirs –  completed August 31, 1941
•  Fourth Memoirs – completed December 8, 1941.

Your lack of accuracy, Mr. Hessemann, dims your credibility as an authority on the Fatima apparitions.

Hessemann – “… Veronika Lueken, a New York housewife who claims regular apparitions of the Holy Virgin since 1975.” Three mistakes in one line, Mr. Hessemann:  (1) misspelled her first name, (2) apparitions of Our Lady of the Roses began in 1970 (with St. Theresa appearing to Veronica beginning in 1968 as a prelude to Our Lady's apparitions), and (3) Veronica passed away on August 3, 1995. Don’t feel bad. The Brooklyn chancery that allegedly performed a “thorough investigation” on the apparitions likewise failed to discover how to spell her name correctly (1975 statement by the Brooklyn diocese erred in the spelling of her last name). 

Hessemann – “The New York Church authorities of the late Cardinal O’Connor investigated the events…”

Cardinal O’Connor was never responsible for investigating the Bayside apparitions,  Mr. Hessemann.  The diocese of Brooklyn, NY, (not New York, NY), is where the apparitions occurred. The now deceased Bishop Francis J. Mugavero of the Brooklyn diocese was the bishop responsible for failing to investigate Veronica and the apparitions according to the specifications of Church law (examination of seer and principle witnesses, thorough inquiry and documentation of all reported miraculous cures, conversions and manifestations, etc.).  He was succeeded by Bishop Thomas V. Daily, who in all likelihood is the bishop destined to receive the miraculous sign predicted in the Bayside message (that of Our Lady appearing in full view over the old St. Robert Bellarmine church in Bayside).  Whoever this bishop will be, we know that he will believe in the apparitions after he is given this unquestionable miraculous sign: "One day, My child, the waters will come up at Bayside, and I will appear over the old church building. Your Bishop then cannot deny My Appearances." (Our Lady, May 17, 1986). The Bishop will receive this sign in shock: "Graces shall continue to be given in abundance while you await the sign to your Bishop. Know that he will receive this sign in shock." (July 15, 1975)

The priest delegated by Bishop Mugavero to investigation the apparitions was Msgr. King.  On May 13, 1975, New York channel 11 news interviewed Msgr. King, and he stated, "She's a good devout person, I would say nothing about her character at all." From statements by Veronica and many people who had firsthand knowledge of the apparitions during these early years, it is apparent that the diocese avoided interrogating Veronica and promoters of the apparitions, and also ignored reports of miraculous cures and conversions (Read more...). The diocese of Brooklyn was fully aware of these reports of miraculous cures but would not attempt to verify the claims, as confirmed by Msgr. Otto Garcia, Chancellor of Brooklyn Diocese: "If the amount of cures that are claimed were true, Lourdes and Fatima are nothing, compared to Bayside." Furthermore, a startling phenomena termed "miraculous pictures" has been evident since the beginning of the apparitions, and still continues to this day even though the seer Veronica Lueken has since gone to her eternal rest. Most of these pictures have been received with Instamatik cameras, so the claim of tampering with photographic negatives has been ruled out. 

See a small sampling of other miraculous pictures

Clergy who have done their homework and have not been intimated from objectively investigating the Bayside apparitions have come to the same conclusion as Fr. Bernard Nunes, O.C.D., a Carmelite priest from India:

FIRSTLY, is it possible to have an official inquiry conducted into a reported apparition and arrive at a conclusion without a close and careful interrogation of the seer of the apparitions? In the matter of inquiry into a private revelation or apparition, we are aware how much weight of the investigation the Church throws on the interrogation of the seer, even before scrutinising the reported messages or the evidence of miracles. Strange as it may see, this basic factor has been brushed aside with regard to the Bayside apparitions. From Veronica's own affirmation we have it, that not once was she ever summoned for interrogation by the investigation committee; and for that matter in the five years since the beginning of the apparitions, never was she summoned for cross-questioning either by the clergy of the parish or by her bishop, though, on her part, she has never failed to make the approach. With such a basic flaw in the official inquiry, does the conclusion of the so-called investigation not leave one groggy with disbelief. (Fr. Bernard Nunes, O.C.D., 1975)

 In 1974 Veronica phoned the Brooklyn chancery office for an appointment with Bishop Mugavero (this was on her own initiative). Msgr. King answered the phone and told her the day and time to be at the office.  She went with her husband Arthur and brought her photos and testimonials. Msgr. King greeted them and requested them to wait. Veronica said that in the office there was a large picture of Bishop Mugavero, but no crucifix on any of the walls. They waited for a time but were then informed that Bishop Mugavero would not be able to see them.  In a March 3, 1992 interview with Veronica Lueken, a Shrine worker asked her about this attempted meeting with Bishop Mugavero. Veronica said that Msgr. King was always very nice to her. When she went with her husband Arthur to see Bishop Mugavero she believed that the bishop went out the back door. She thought Msgr. King's kind treatment of her was why he was demoted (Msgr. King was replaced as Chancellor shortly after this attempted meeting with Bishop Mugavero.)

A second meeting with Bishop Mugavero was attempted by Veronica's husband, Arthur.  Again, the attempt to meet Bishop Mugavero met with disappointment. 

But certainly not all the clergy have been deaf to Our Lady's message at Bayside. Fr. Robert Skurla, former international chaplain of the Blue Army, gave an inspiring sermon on the Bayside apparitions at St. Peter's Cathedral in Scranton, Pennsylvania on April 4, 1982. He asserted, “The messages of Bayside restored my confidence in the Catholic Church once more. I will stake my reputation, if that means anything, on the doctrine contained in the messages. The doctrine is the same as I was trained in over the years.” (Read more...)

"Learn a simple lesson, My child. You will meet with rejection by many for by rejecting My Message they can place it as far from mind as possible. When one does not wish to accept a truth they try to disprove and sully this truth." - Our Lady, July 25, 1973

Hessemann contests the statement, “The Third Secret, My child, is that Satan would enter My Son’s Church.” (May 13, 1978)

Let us first examine the truth of the statement, "satan would enter My Son's Church." Is there any evidence or statement to verify that this is true? There certainly is! None other than Pope Paul VI stated that "From some fissure the smoke of satan had entered into the temple of God." (June 29, 1972)   Furthermore, the approved Akita, Japan apparitions affirm, "The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops." (October 13, 1973) 

At a Rome press conference in 1996, the exorcist Archbishop Milingo was asked, “Are there men of the Curia who are followers of satan?” The prelate replied, “Certainly there are priests and bishops. I stop at this level of ecclesiastical hierarchy because I am an archbishop, higher than this I cannot go.” Il Tempo and other major daily papers in Italy reported that Milingo used a statement by Pope Paul VI to back up his charges. (Italian newspaper articles)  In 1972, Pope Paul VI surveyed the wreckage to the Church after the Second Vatican Council and was widely reported to have said, “From somewhere or other, the smoke of satan has entered the temple of God.” Milingo added, “I have not heard that anyone has seen him leave. We must pray that he will go away."

Malachi Martin, a scholar, Vatican insider, and best-selling author, confirmed Archbishop Milingo's claim: “... his contention that there are satanists in Rome is completely correct. Anybody who is acquainted with the state of affairs in the Vatican in the last 35 years is well aware that the prince of darkness has had and still has his surrogates in the court of St. Peter in Rome.”

Father Martin had first made reference to a diabolic rite held in Rome in his 1990 non-fiction best-seller about geopolitics and the Vatican, The Keys of This Blood, in which he wrote:

"Most frighteningly for [Pope] John Paul [II], he had come up against the irremovable presence of a malign strength in his own Vatican and in certain bishops’ chanceries. It was what knowledgeable Churchmen called the ‘superforce.’ Rumors, always difficult to verify, tied its installation to the beginning of Pope Paul VI’s reign in 1963. Indeed Paul had alluded somberly to ‘the smoke of Satan which has entered the Sanctuary’. . . an oblique reference to an enthronement ceremony by Satanists in the Vatican. Besides, the incidence of Satanic pedophilia—rites and practices—was already documented among certain bishops and priests as widely dispersed as Turin, in Italy, and South Carolina, in the United States. The cultic acts of Satanic pedophilia are considered by professionals to be the culmination of the Fallen Archangel’s rites." (p. 632)

It is curious that in Sister Lucy's writings in the late 60s and early 70s, she has a constantly recurring theme: diabolical disorientation. On September 16, 1970, Sister Lucy wrote to a friend in religion, Mother Martins, who had been her companion at Tuy, in the novitiate of the Dorothean Sisters: 

"It is because the devil has succeeded in infiltrating evil under the cover of good, and the blind are beginning to guide others, as the Lord tells us in His Gospel, and souls are letting themselves be deceived...This is why the devil has waged such a war against [the Rosary]! And the worst is that he has succeeded in leading into error and deceiving souls having a heavy responsibility through the place which they occupy...! They are blind men guiding other blind men..."

That satan has entered the Church and is now wrecking havoc is beyond dispute. But the next question is: was this fact forewarned by Our Lady of Fatima in the Third Secret? Let us examine Pope John Paul II's sermon at Fatima on May 13, 2000: "The message of Fatima is a call to conversion, alerting humanity to have nothing to do with the ‘dragon’ whose ‘tail swept a third of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth.’ (Rev. 12:4)”  Where in the known Fatima did Our Lady ever mention the "dragon" or the Apocalypse? Nowhere, at least in the revealed Fatima message. So where did the Holy Father get this, unless it is in the Third Secret? Would not this explain all the questions about why the Third Secret was suppressed since 1960, why eyewitnesses state that the Popes were horrified upon reading it, and why now there is such a coverup by the Vatican? 

Truly, for any critically thinking person, it is not hard to see that there is an unbreakable chain of testimony asserting that satan has entered the Church. Not only is this assertion not ridiculous, it is supported by the widest range of authoritative evidence. It would be the most logical conclusion that the Third Secret of Fatima essentially warned us of this present crisis: “The Third Secret, My child, is that Satan would enter My Son’s Church.”

In our critique of the alleged third secret, we have not rested with examining merely the writing style, but have sought to examine it against every angle of known information concerning the contents of the genuine Third Secret. We have considered: (1) content; (2) length; (3) first line; (4) handwriting style; (5) reference to apostasy; (6) seriousness of content and reaction of those who have read it; and (7) mention of a specific date. Its content is so drastic that previous Popes were afraid to reveal it. There are even reports that Pope John XXIII fainted upon reading it. When Cardinal Oddi asked Pope John XXIII during an audience in 1960 why he had not made public the last part of the message of Fatima, the Pope responded with a weary sigh, "Don't bring that subject up with me, please..."  On July 11, 1977, Cardinal Albino Luciani, the future Pope John Paul I, celebrated Mass at Sister Lucy’s convent chapel in Portugal. Then, upon Sister Lucy’s request, he conversed with her for almost two hours. He appeared visibly shaken from the conversation. He was later heard to say, “The Secret, it’s terrible.” Also, The late Fr. Malachi Martin, who had read the Third Secret, said that the Third Secret is your worst nightmare, multiplied exponentially. Truly, the REAL Third Secret is drastic in content. The content of the alleged third secret released on June 26, 2000 certainly does not meet this criterion.

We account Mr. Hessemann's error in judgment not to malice but rather to an incomplete sifting of evidence, which would explain why Hessemann: (1) does not know when the First Memoirs were published; (2) does not know when the Second Memoirs were published; (3) misspells Veronica’s first name; (4) gives the wrong starting year for Bayside apparitions;  (5) errs in the diocese in which the Bayside apparitions are located.  Hessemann may likewise be unaware that there were five forgeries discovered previous to the forgery of the alleged third secret, one of which is referenced in the Vatican's June 26th, 2000 commentary on the alleged third secret (Sister Lucy has been the victim of forgeries before). We do not deny that there may be more forgeries discovered in the future as well. And we point out again: there are characteristic writing features in Sister Lucy's authentic handwriting that have remained consistent for 62 years, except in the time period of the alleged third secret document. Furthermore, the alleged third secret document lacks "quavers," as stated by another handwriting expert who examined the document:

The hand that penned the presumed forgery appears to have left traces of the effort in the writing. Great care was taken in that article in that the 'weight' of the stroke is almost flat, relative to the plane of the paper, throughout the whole document. Humans don't as a rule write that way. As an expert on legibility (among other things), I can state with some confidence that except for persons trained in the ritual art of copying or calligraphy, humans leave impressions in the act of writing which betrays things like how the body was held at the time of writing. Such things as whether there is something to act as a wrist brace and how far away from the writing surface, all leave impressions in the act of writing.
     The offered document has none of these apparent. In fact the absence of normal human writing 'quavers' (as they are known in the trade) suggests with some certainty that this person was trained to penmanship as an adult. Such people are rare these days, except in the catholic and orthodox (russian/greek) churches. I discount caligraphers even amateurs as their styles are not so clearly Roman.

How odd.  (Read more on comparison of Sister Lucy's handwriting) This veritable explosion of forgeries may explain the great mystery of why the definitive study of the Fatima apparitions, the 14-volume work of Fr. Joaquin Alonso, remains under an ecclesiastical ban. What it is about this study that the enemies of Fatima have to fear? Perhaps it is known that Fr. Alonso's expert commentary on over 5,000 documents would clearly reveal the true nature of the genuine Third Secret, and would unmask the June 26th, 2000 alleged third secret as a fake.

June 26th alleged third secret document:
CONTRADICTION UPON CONTRADICTION

Msgr. Balducci, a well known theologian and demonologist in Rome, stated to the press in Rome concerning the alleged third secret, "There are too many discrepancies." He went on to say: "And I am asking myself, where are the other parts of the prophecy regarding the doctrinal crisis of the Church and the Third World War?" And Bishop Januario Torgal of Spain has asked, "If the Vatican knew that [the third secret] was not apocalyptic, why on earth did it only make it public now?"  Good question.  

On July 1, 2000, The Washington Post reported that Vatican officials provided contradictory dates for when Pope John Paul II read the Third Secret for the first time:

"On May 13, Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls said the Pope first read the secret within days of assuming the papacy in 1978. On Monday, an aide [Msgr. Bertone] to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said that the Pope first saw it in the hospital after his attack." 
- (Bill Broadway and Sarah Delancy, "Third Secret Spurs More Questions: Fatima Interpretation Departs from Vision," The Washington Post, July 1, 2000)

John Hogue, author and scholar of prophetic traditions: 

"In all of my 30 years as a scholar of prophetic traditions, I have seen some interpretative stretches, but Cardinal Ratzinger's spin of this prophecy is as weak as they come. Indeed, I have seen more imaginative twists of reason made by the National Enquirer. Even the third secret's physical pages, offered as evidence at the news conference, are suspect. Up to June 26, Cardinal Ratzinger officially agreed with other witnesses that Sister Lucy wrote the prophecy in 24 lines on a single page. Now Ratzinger presents a four-page handwritten document of 62 lines! These and many other inconsistencies and prophetic stretches only add support to the growing belief that the highest echelons of the Vatican are involved in a coverup. Why?" (Laura Lee show, August 2, 2000)

WorldNetDaily, the #1 internet news service in the world, states:

"Detractors of the Vatican's official version of the third secret of Fatima point to reported apparitions of the Virgin Mary that occurred in the early 1970s [Akita, Japan] as evidence that the newly released secret could be false, or, at a minimum, incomplete." ("Third Secret compared to Japan apparitions: 1970s messages used to dispute Vatican's Fatima interpretation", WorldNetDaily, July 6, 2000, Jon Dougherty)

Kathleen Keating, best-selling Catholic author and radio personality:

The thing that totally amazes me is that some forces in the Vatican truly believe that heaven has not made the Third Secret known to other visionaries. This is a no-brainer to those of us who have studied visionaries and their messages at length. It is a kind of fail-safe method intended to get the actual contents out, to put us on notice of what is actually contained in the secret. The message itself is so important that there was no way heaven would rely on human nature which has sidelined, sidetracked and now side-stepped the issue.

If you’ll notice in Sister Lucia’s letter, it has a length of about four pages. This totally goes against eyewitnesses who saw actual secret. The whole third secret is somewhere between 24-28 lines long. Comparing the documents allegedly belonging to Sister Lucia, you can clearly see two separate styles of handwriting. It is a given that a person’s writing can change with time, but the differences in the writings are too great with only nominal similarities. (Kathleen Keating, "The Third Secret is still a secret," June 26, 2000) 

Steel on Steel radio show on July 29, 2000 (click here to listen to show) observed the reaction of many to the release of the alleged third secret "which a lot of people are crying 'foul' on now." The talk show host, John Loeffler, personally asked Fr. Malachi Martin (who had been a regular guest on his show) about the reported dedication to satan within the Vatican: "You know Malachi confirmed—the first part of his book, Windswept House—he confirmed the dedication of the Vatican to satan in a secret ceremony that occurred unknown even to the Pope at that time, that he managed to pick up. And I did ask him, 'Was this true? Did it happen?' And he [Fr. Martin] said, 'yes, it did.'" 

"I gave Lucy the Revelation as a temporary secret—as I revealed [the Third Secret] to you on two occasions. Make a concerted effort to bring its entirety to Our children on earth. The hierarchy have not listened to My counsel—thirty-two years lost in indecision and fear of exposure. The Faith is shattered for many." (locution from Our Lady to Veronica Lueken, April 29, 1992)

"I say this evening, as your God, that on that date, as promised at Fatima [1972], satan entered My Church upon earth. He brought with him his agents—and satan himself, the deceiver of all mankind—sat in on Vatican II and maneuvered all the outsiders to come in and distort My doctrines and distort the truth. At Fatima, My Mother tried to warn of this coming event, but who cared to listen? Who was interested in listening? Not those who were years—earth-years away. All Heaven was crying in that time, for the Eternal Father had made it known how His message would be received. To this day, to your earth-year of 1986, you have not been given, My children, the full secrets as given to the children at Fatima. Therefore, I must make it known at this time to you. If you are perceiving and interested in My Church upon earth, I do not have to explain Myself too fully; for you will already know of the chaos that satan has wrought when he entered My Church. And why did he enter, you say? This I want it made known, My child—and you will not be affrighted as you are now—you will speak out for Me and My Mother, and the Eternal Father in the Holy Spirit; you will speak out and say that satan is in the Church, My Church upon earth. He knows his time is growing short. And if you think you have seen carnage now already in the Church, the worst is yet to come, unless you follow the rules, given by My Mother many years ago, of prayer, atonement, and sacrifice. By your example you may be able to save others. For soon there will come upon you the great Chastisement. It comes in two parts, My child and My children: the Third World War and, also, the Ball of Redemption. These can no longer be delayed. For the good seem to go about their way, perhaps pridefully. We do not seek to accuse or place a stigma on any, but some may pridefully sit back and let others go forth and make these sacrifices and prayers and penance. Because they have become smug, or because they have not the grace to understand, that once you receive this grace much is expected of you. You must even work harder to save your brothers and sisters.
     "My child and My children, this message will not be greeted gleefully by your clergy. But since Lucy has been silenced, it is necessary that the world knows the truth. I will also send this message out through one more seer in the world, and if it is not abided by I have nothing to do but to allow the Chastisement to fall upon mankind." (Jesus, June 18, 1986) 

Directives from Heaven:

THIRD SECRET EXPLAINED: PART 1 - 666 in Rome
THIRD SECRET EXPLAINED: PART 2 - Satan entered the Church in 1972
THIRD SECRET EXPLAINED: PART 3 - Satan entered the highest realms of the hierarchy
THIRD SECRET EXPLAINED: PART 4 - There shall be bishop against bishop and cardinal against cardinal, as satan has set himself in their midst.
THIRD SECRET EXPLAINED: PART 5 - The Apocalypse / Revelations

My gift to help spread Our Lady of the Roses' messages to the world.  

Home | Introduction | Prophecies | Directives | Order Form | Testimonies | Veronica | News | Photos | Bible | Magazine | Newsletters | Radio Show |

The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.
Copyright © These Last Days Ministries, Inc. 2016   All rights reserved.
Revised: July 20, 2022