HOWARD P. KAINZ REPLIES
An Epilogue for the Disappointed

April 2013By Howard P. Kainz

Howard P. Kainz is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Marquette University and a former executive coun­cil­­member of the American Catholic Philosophical Association. A widely published author, his most recent book is The Existence of God and the Faith-Instinct (Susquehanna University Press, 2010). His website is http://academic.mu.edu/phil/kainzh.

I certainly agree with John Martin about the overarching importance of Fatima during the twentieth century. It was an extraordinary intervention by the Mother of God, warning the faithful of impending threats and offering the means to obviate or mitigate those threats. The late theologian and physicist Fr. Stanley L. Jaki also agreed. He traveled to Portugal to undertake a thorough scientific investigation of eyewitness accounts and depositions regarding the “miracle of the sun,” resulting in a massively researched book, God and the Sun at Fatima (1999). He concludes that Fatima is arguably the most important event of the twentieth century, a providential sign for an era that was to witness so many incredible acts of inhumanity and immorality.

Martin summarizes some of the detective-like sleuthing carried out by Fr. Nicholas Gruner and his associates at the Fatima Center, who are concerned that Catholics, and the Vatican in particular, have fallen far short of fulfilling Our Lady’s requests. One glaring fault, in their opinion, is the alleged truncating of the third secret when the contents of the revelations were revealed by Pope John Paul II on June 26, 2000, and the omission of a veritable “fourth secret” that was supposedly withheld from the public. As Martin mentions, Fr. Gruner and his cohort believe that “the third secret spoke of apocalyptic horrors and high-level apostasy in Rome itself.” So they have concluded that it was in the interest of the Roman hierarchy to keep this part of the secret out of publication. It was, says Martin, “not exactly the kind of thing one wants spicing up the conversation.”

Another, perhaps even more glaring fault, they allege, is the failure of John Paul II, after soliciting the cooperation of the bishops of the world to make the requested consecration on March 25, 1984, to use the correct wording. The Pope did not mention Russia by name, but only in a diplomatic circumlocution that would be understood by the participating bishops and those familiar with the Fatima message, but would not arouse the ire of the belligerent U.S.S.R. The Pope presumably wished to avoid contributing to heightened persecution and martyrdom of Catholics behind the Iron Curtain at that time, especially in his native Poland, where the Solidarity movement was being threatened with destruction by Soviet forces.

I have discussed both of these allegations, and the evidence proffered by the Fatimists for them, in my November 2011 NOR article, “On Fatima & the Private Interpretation of Private Revelation.” I have no new insights or rebuttals to add, nor have I come across evidence since then that would cause me to revise my position.


You have two options:

  1. Online subscription: Subscribe now to New Oxford Review for access to all web content at newoxfordreview.org AND the monthly print edition for as low as $38 per year.
  2. Single article purchase: Purchase this article for $1.95, for viewing and printing for 48 hours.

If you're already a subscriber log-in here.



Back to April 2013 Issue

Read our posting policy Add a comment
"The 'Fatimists' are grasping at straws when they insist that Russia must be consecrated by name. Nowhere does the Virgin Mary - or Sr. Lucia - specify any such thing." Is Howard Kainz serious? "I shall come to ask for the cosecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on First Saturdays. If my requests are granted, Russia will be converted and there will be peace ....." (Our Lady of Fatima, July 13 1917). "The moment has come in which God asks the Holy Father, in union with all the bishops of the world, to make the consecration of RUSSIA to my Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means." (The Blessed Virgin to Sr. Lucia, Tuy, Spain, 1929).
Sr. Lucia told Prof. William T. Walsh, (1946)and Fr. Thomas Glynn, (1949) That Our Lady had never asked for the consecration of the world, but only RUSSIA.
"Make it known to the Holy Father that I am always awaiting the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart. Without the Consecration, Russia will not be able to convert, nor will the world have peace." (Our Lady to Sr. Lucia, 1952). In May 1982, Sr. Lucia confirmed to Salesian priest Fr. Umberto Pasquale that Our Lady never asked for the consecration of the world, but only RUSSIA.

In March 1982, Pope John Paul II directed the Nuncio to Portugal, Most Rev. Sante Portalupe, to travel to Coimbra to ask Sr. Lucia precisely how the consecration should be done. Sr. Lucia informed His Holiness via the Nuncio that the Pope must select a particular date, and that he must command all the bishops of the entire world, each in his own cathedral and at the same time as the pope, to conduct a solemn and public ceremony of Reparation and Consecration of RUSSIA. Sadly, on May 13th. 1982 at Fatima, the first anniversary of his attempted assassination, His Holiness merely renewed the consecration of the world. The reason he later gave was that, "We did everything possible in the concrete circumstances." The only person with the authority to direct the pope in these circumstances is the Secretary of State, who at that time was Agostino Casaroli. If his reason was fear of provoking Russia, did he not know that our God, and the Woman clothed with the sun are infinitely more powerful that the Infernal Enemy? Or did he have other reasons? Who knows?
In a September 1985 interview with Sol de Fatima magazine, the official publication of the Blue Army in Spain, Sr. Lucia confirmed that the 1984 consecration by Pope John paul II had NOT been accepted because Russia had not been the object of the consecration, and because many bishops attached no importance to this act. It was undoubtedly fruitful, as was the 1942 consecration by Pope Pius XII, but it has not resulted in the conversion of Russia, and the world is now in a more precarious condition than it was thirty years ago. Sr. Lucia confirmed to Prof Walsh in 1946 that before the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, evey country on earth would fall under communism. Every country, including the United States! Shortly before her death in 1955, Portuguese mystic and victim soul Bl. Alexandrina da Costa, having been shown a scene of immense devastation, was told, "The devsatation you have just seen will come about after Marxism will have taken over the WHOLE WORLD!"
IN 1936, Sr.Lucia's spiritual dircetor, Fr. Jose Goncalves, asked her why Our Lady had specifically requested the consecration of Russia. In answer to her prayerful petitions, Jesus told her: "Because I want My whole Church to acknowledge that consecration as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary ....." The two requirements for world peace, which are in reality two facets of the same thing, are the collegial consecration of Russia, and the formal definition of the dogma of Mary, Mediatrix of all Grace, Co-redemptrix and Advocate. Heaven is now demanding that the Church make known to the world everything that has been revealed to her about Mary. The conversion of Russia will be an event that will astound the whole world. It will result from the greatest outpouring of the Holy Spirit in 2000 years. And the whole world will then understand by whose mediation this miraculous event has come about. This is the definitive Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Who could possibly associate this astounding converion of Russia with an act, largely unknown by the world, performed by Pope John Paul II more than three decades previously? The answer, of course, is; absolutely no-one.

Stewart Davies
Posted by: Lepanto1571
April 15, 2013 05:49 AM EDT
Add a comment