There’s more from Bob Sungenis now. Lots more. (Sorry, but I can’t link directly to the article entitled “Fatima: Consecration or Cover-up” Bill Cork has a nice take on it here..)

First introductory note: Mickey Kaus, to my knowledge the last honest member of the Democratic party in the US, did the world a service with his invention of the Series Skipper. Kaus would read the long pieces of “important journalism” and offer synopses with highlights on his website, saving his readers the time and drudgery of slogging through whatever the New York Times finds to be so important. This is, more or less, a Series Skipper of Mr. Sungenis’ latest post (which weighs in around forty-seven thousand words).

Second introductory note: Mr. Sungenis has in the past talked in terms of conspiracy theories. Physicists talk about a Grand Unified Theory that explains all behavior of sub-atomic particles. Today we see Mr. Sungenis introduce his Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory. I think the recent post is also the one hinted at throughout September and October directed to people who are concerned about current scandals in the Church.

Mr. Sungenis opens by mentioning the Fatima well-known request: “I shall come to the world to ask that Russia be consecrated to my Immaculate Heart, and I shall ask that on the First Saturday of every month Communion of reparation be made in atonement for the sins of the world. If my wishes are fulfilled, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, then Russia will spread her error throughout the world..." He then mentions several current unsavory news items regarding Russia and concludes that, since he does not find sufficient evidence of conversion on the part of Russia, the consecration must not have taken place. Never mind that most of the problems and errors facing Russia today are quite different than those facing Russia during Stalin’s times.

Instead, we move into sensationalism. The first “money quote”: “In the Third Secret is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.” There’s a big problem with the quote. It’s attributed to Luigi Cardinal Ciappi (who is no longer alive) and reached through a putative article by a Fr. Gerard Mura in a magazine simply entitled Catholic. I can find only two references to Fr. Mura. One repeats this exact assertion in the same words. It’s on the website of John Vennari, a noted sedevacantist. The other reference to Fr. Mura is an attack on the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre. I can find no corroboration of the quote attributed to Cardinal Ciappi, nor can I find independent reference to a magazine simply entitled Catholic.

Another major source is a lengthy quote from a radio interview of the late Fr. Malachi Martin, a laicized priest noted for sympathies leaning toward the SSPX and away from unity with the Church. The quote implies that a pope will come under the control of Satan and that Bl. John XXIII fainted on hearing this, further implying which pope would then be the ultimate anti-pope. Mr. Sungenis also seizes on the fact that there had been an anti-pope named John XXIII.

Next “money quote”: “If we are not getting the whole story about Fatima, then we must be willing to admit that the Vatican has not been telling us the whole truth about Fatima. It also means that, if true, whoever is behind the disinformation campaign has a devious agenda. And what does that mean? It means that popes, cardinals and bishops in high places have sinned grievously against God and the church. If true, it puts a black mark on the Church that would surpass any scandal in its past history.”

Even without addressing the logical fallacies and wild leaps of speculation, the above is seriously deficient. The first reason given by Sungenis for the “disinformation” is a so-called “Pact of Metz” in which the Vatican allegedly agreed to refrain from condemning communism during Vatican II in exchange for Russia allowing visits to Rome by Russian Orthodox bishops. Those who posit the “Pact of Metz” must never have read Gaudium et Spes, which denounces each of the fundamental building blocks of communism, while omitting the word “communism” from its condemnation (See especially sections 68 ff.). The second reason given for diverting attention from Fatima is ecumenism. The theory goes that Church authorities, in an effort to make Protestants more comfortable, were de-emphasizing the role of Mary.

Sungenis goes on to say that Bl. John XXIII wanted to end the council, but that Cardinal Montini was elected by his promise to continue to the council. (Wait a minute, wasn’t Bl. John XXIII supposed to be a bad guy in all this? Then wouldn’t the continuation of the council be a good thing?)

We then swing back to Fatima-specific allegations. The first allegation is that the release of the Fatima secret in 2000 is incomplete. The second is that the consecrations by Pius XII are found “inadvertently” insufficient, as is the 1984 consecration by the current Pope. An interesting note: the “consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary” seems to go against the definition of consecration: “to make or declare sacred; especially : to devote irrevocably to the worship of God by a solemn ceremony“. The Pope is criticized for questioning the idea of a consecration to someone other than God (and, for so questioning, accused of being under the baleful influence of “liberals”), but no reason is given how there could be a “consecration” that isn’t directed to God Himself.

He refers to a speech by the Pope in 1980 that allegedly refers to warnings of global catastrophe including massive floods. The only independent source I can find with the same quote is a presumed visionary who has been excommunicated for proclaiming himself to be “bishop of the Eucharist”.

It gets better in this third “money quote”: “Indeed, the vision of the Fatima children does not suggest the rosy picture of the future that liberal theologians predict. The cry of the angel to do ‘Penance, Penance, Penance,’ as the vision is opened, and the fact that the ‘Bishop dressed in white,’ along with ‘other bishops, priests, religious and lay people’ are killed, suggests that the sins to which the angel alluded come from within the Church itself and that repentance from the Church is not forthcoming, resulting in God's judgment and the scattering of dead bodies all over the land. These possibilities, though somewhat incriminating, are not far-fetched, since anyone familiar with the goings-on in the Catholic Church for the last 50 years knows quite well of the war between its various factions. . . . . Although some may claim that the murder of Catholics means that they were martyrs, it is also possible that they were rightful victims of God's judgment due to the apostasy they generated in the Church - a judgment that God brought upon them using the atheistic nations of the world from which they sought friendship and ecumenism.”

One of the great crises in the Church is the degree to which we don’t preach hellfire and damnation. No, really. Despite centuries of experience in finding that people respond more to mercy than to condemnation, we are expected to preach damnation at every opportunity. The article then goes to great lengths in efforts to discredit the Vatican’s interpretation of the Third Secret – finding the Vatican interpretation insufficiently literal. Near his conclusion, Mr. Sungenis claims that Pope John Paul I was murdered by the curia.

This piece in general is less organized than most things I’ve read by Mr. Sungenis. It also contains inconsistencies both in logic (see above re: Bl. John XXIII) and in data – in one place he claims that the noted miracle of the “dancing Sun” lasted for eight minutes, in another place he mentions it lasting twelve minutes. The article gives the impression of being hastily slapped together from a few sources. That technique is usually used not to find truth, but to make an argument in support of pre-existing positions.

Mr. Sungenis apparently finds the allegations of various dissenters (like those who accuse the curia of the murder of Pope John Paul I) to be more credible than the clear statements of legitimate ecclesiastical authorities. How can this be in a Church against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail? Does it imply that when Jesus promised to be with his disciples always, he meant only to be with a small remnant while allowing most to fall away? Is the Church not protected from error regarding faith and morals despite the sins of her individual members?

Here’s what I perceive to be the key elements of Mr. Sungenis’ Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory:

1. Bl. John XXIII desired to push for ecumenism to such a degree that he forbade the disclosure of the Third Secret.
2. Bl. John XXIII also entered into a secret agreement with Russia because his ecumenism is, like communism, a creation of the Masons.
3. The ecumenists and Masons set the goals of Vatican II, which were not in keeping with Catholic Tradition.
4. The Church was already in serious trouble at the start of Vatican II, due to the failure of previous Popes to use the precise formula for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This led to Pope Pius XII having to hide Jews in the Vatican (which Mr. Sungenis apparently finds to be sacreligious).
5. Bl. John XXIII wanted to end Vatican II early, but died before he had the chance. Pope Paul VI was elected based on his promise to keep the council in session.
6. Pope Paul VI appointed evil men to the curia and promoted heretical theologians.
7. The evil and heretical men appointed by Paul VI were behind the changes in the liturgy.
8. Pope John Paul I was a good man who was killed by members of the curia.
9. Pope John Paul II made a deal with the communists (and the Russian Orthodox) rather than taking them on, continuing in the spirit of the “Pact of Metz” in the “Declaration of Balamand”.
10. The Vatican’s messages about the Fatima secrets are not as credible as are the comments of those who doubt the Vatican’s messages.
11. The evils visible in the word today, from homosexuality to abortion and then some, are attributable to the influence of heretics and evil men in the Church.
12. “The great apostasy in the Church has begun at the top.”

The whole focus of the article is disturbing. The Fatima visions are, after all, private revelation. They add nothing to the deposit of faith. The message of penance and prayer is good and valuable. Specific apocalyptic speculations, though, can be harmful if they draw us away from what is truly important. In one mention of the “dancing sun” miracle, Mr. Sungenis calls it “one of the greatest miracles ever recorded”. Meaning no disrespect, sir, the greatest miracles make that look small. The greatest miracles are things like the Incarnation, the Atonement, the Eucharist and the conversion of sinners. Astronomical anomalies are visually impressive, but they are nothing compared to the inestimable riches of the mercy of the living God. May we all focus more on Him and less on our own agendas.