What about the book “Fatima in Twilight”?

Regarding the book Fatima in Twilight, the description of the events of Fatima were very well written and very interesting, as well as many of the facts dealing with the spread of Communism.  I found those parts of the book to be very good.  But many of the author’s conclusions about Sister Lucia, John Paul II, etc. are false and dangerous.  For instance, the author unhesitatingly accepts this “Sister Lucia” as the real one, when anyone who saw the 2000 “Beatification” ceremonies of Jacinta and Francisco by Antipope John Paul II (as we did), could see for himself that this “Sister Lucia” must be an imposter, for she is fully in favor of John Paul II and the version of the Third Secret released by John Paul II.  When “Cardinal” Sodano announced at the “Beatification” ceremony that the Third Secret deals with the assassination attempt against John Paul II, this “Sister Lucia” was waving enthusiastically with approval, confirming without a doubt that she agrees!  Thus, it is a fact, clear to anyone who saw this, that this “Sister Lucia” agrees with the Vatican that the Third Secret speaks of the assassination attempt against John Paul II.  Anyone who denies this, such as basically all of the false traditionalists, is either mistaken or a liar.  And this fact (her behavior at the 2000 “Beatifications” of Jacinta and Francisco) blows away the entire Nicholas Gruner myth, which is very deceptive and misleading – that this imposter is actually the real “Sister Lucia” and that she really holds that the Consecration of Russia has not been done, but that she just isn’t allowed to speak.  In fact, in Fatima in Twilight, the author acknowledges “Sister Lucia’s” exuberant approval of John Paul II and the Vatican’s version of the “Third Secret” at the 2000 “Beatifications.

Mark Fellows, Fatima in Twilight, p. 327: “In fact, her [Sister Lucia’s] exuberance at Fatima in 2000 was almost disquieting.  Surely the cause of her radiance, and her new graciousness towards John Paul, was her happiness over the beatification of her two cousins.  Yet she remained exuberant even in the face of Cardinal Sodano’s version of the Third Secret, going so far as to make large, awkward gestures to the crowd.”

Behold the death-blow to the false traditionalist explanation of Fatima! Mr. Fellows admits that “Sister Lucia’s” gestures at Fatima confirming the Vatican’s version of the third secret were “almost disquieting.”  No, they were quite disquieting!  They can’t explain this one away.  They can’t explain away “Sister Lucia’s” clear, undeniable approval of the Vatican’s version of the Third Secret, because it was clear for all to see.  Mr. Fellows doesn’t seem to realize that this undeniable fact renders all of their efforts, page after page, to prove that Sister Lucia doesn’t really hold the Vatican line on Fatima worthless and false.  They are just wasting their time and misleading their readers.  They should just tell their readers the truth: that there is no way that this “Sister Lucia” can be the real one.  But this would raise questions about John Paul II himself which I don’t think they want to get into.  This is where people show whether or not they are truly devoted to Fatima.  They can talk and talk and talk, but if they can’t tell people the truth simply because they fear that the people would think it is too radical – the truth that any logical, honest person who saw this event can identify – namely, that this “Sister Lucia” clearly endorses the Vatican’s line on Fatima – they show themselves to be not devoted to Fatima, but, in fact, phonies.  The proof is in one’s actions, whether he will tell the truth about Fatima, no matter how shocking, disturbing or upsetting it may be to people. Further, the reason that this “Sister Lucia” isn’t allowed to speak freely is because the Vatican knows that she would be caught in lies and contradictions and exposed for the imposter that she is.  It is not because she would confirm the Nicholas Gruner line on Fatima.  The 2000 “Beatification” ceremony drives a big stake into that false and very misleading Fatima deception, which accepts this “Sister Lucia” as the real one and the Third Secret released by the Vatican as “part” of the Third Secret. There are many notes and thoughts that we had about this book, which perhaps we can expand upon more at a later date.  But one example of the problems occurs with regard to Antipope John XXIII.  On page 180, the author says:

“Pope John was the Pope who single-handedly rehabilitated Communism, discredited Fatima, and used deceitful methods to bury the Third Secret…In light of Fatima, he was the Pope of the Apostasy.”

Yet, on page 161, the author says: “None of this speculation – and that is what it is – is intended to disparage Pope John.  That he was a goodhearted man is beyond dispute.” Okay, so one can single-handedly rehabilitate Communism, discredit the Message of Fatima, bury the Third Secret, be the “Pope” of the Apostasy, and have a good heart?  This is simply the same kind of mélange [mixture] of truth with error, so characteristic of Nicholas Gruner and those who advance a similar position on Fatima and the post-conciliar apostasy.  They bring out many interesting truths, and they mix them in with all kinds of false conclusions about the evil men who are foisting this apostasy upon us. The book also proves again that John Paul II is a total apostate and an enemy of Fatima, by giving many facts and instances to prove this.  For example, on page 307, Fellows quotes a letter written to the editor of a magazine by a man named Elichar Alesne.  Alesne can see that John Paul II has lied to the world about Fatima.  He writes:

“And it is because I have the courage to state the truth that I speak.  And I affirm, before God who will judge me, that never has any Pope, until our own day, uttered so great a lie as that of His Holiness John Paul II concerning the Third Secret of Fatima.”

This man is absolutely correct, and hopefully he will come to realize the truth that John Paul II is not the Pope, but a non-Catholic apostate.  But why don’t you hear this from the mouths of the false traditionalists?  Why do them blame Sodano, Ratzinger, et al. and not the real enemy of Fatima – Antipope John Paul II.  It is because it is easy to attack the others and accuse them of lying, but it is not as popular for them to tell the blatantly obvious truth, that Elichar Alesne can see so clearly, that John Paul II is lying to the entire world about Fatima.  Fatima in Twilight is also filled with proof that John Paul II is a wicked apostate, a Communist supporter, an adherent of universal salvation and that all religions are true, etc.  Yet, after quoting something conservative that John Paul II said at the May 2000 “Beatifications, ” the author makes a statement such as this:

Fatima in Twilight, p. 274: “How easy it is to love the Holy Father when he feeds the faithful with solid spiritual food.”

This is what I call a puke page, because it really makes one want to puke.