| Home - Latest News | Introduction | Bayside Messages | Directives from Heaven | Testimonies | Veronica Lueken | Miraculous Photos | Videos |

The ruling Pope: The Bayside message and Pope Francis


"Peter was My first Pope and your first Pope, and as all others who followed him, they must be accepted. Be they weak or noble, be they with sanctity or unholiness, they must be accepted and followed." - Jesus, June 9, 1979 




What does the Bayside message say? 

Our Lady has warned us that the world and the Church are in such deep darkness, "The only guide you will have now are the messages from Heaven, given through various seers, and other miraculous manifestations from the Eternal Father to man." (Our Lady, November 24, 1979)  Our Lady's guidance is a rich legacy of truth, to help guide us in these very days of apostasy in the Church. 

Our Lady's counsel is perfect. To not avail ourselves of Our Lady's guidance when we can do so, is a serious mistake. She is the greatest of theologians, and Our Lady is never wrong by a special grace from God. 

So for the very important topic of who is the ruling Pope let's look to Our Lady, who cannot deceive us. We agree with Archbishop Vigano that the apostasy under Pope Francis is unprecedented.  

But our primary purpose in this article is to establish whether Pope Francis is the ruling Pope. There is a lot of confusion on this topic, even within traditional Catholic circles and among Bayside believers. 


June 18, 1988 message: "the one who comes after" Pope John Paul II 

In the June 18, 1988 message Our Lady stated, "Please, My children, pray for your Holy Father, the Pope. You must not lose him, for the one who comes after him will destroy if he can—he will attempt to destroy, I should say, My child and My children; he will attempt to destroy Pope John Paul II."  

This is a very important clue Our Lady has left us. In the papal conclave after the death of Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict was obviously elected the new Pope. But who received the second highest number of votes? Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (Pope Francis). 

Our Lady specified what "the one who comes after" would try to do: "he will attempt to destroy Pope John Paul II." What does this mean? Perhaps it means seeking to dismantle Pope John Paul II's legacy, and several areas immediately come to mind: (1) Pope John Paul II's legacy against communism and liberation theology; (2) his legacy of outstanding papal encyclicals on moral theology and religious life (particularly Veritatis Splendor,  Evangelium Vitae and Vita Consecrata); and (3) John Paul II's Pontifical Academy for Life. According to Christopher Ferrara, Pope Francis “demolished John Paul II’s Pontifical Academy for Life by sacking every one of its members and having its new president, the ‘pro-gay’ Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, draw up new statutes for the Academy.” 

The "one who comes after" would be a successor, a Pope. We believe this is yet another Bayside prophecy fulfilled, in the person of Pope Francis. 


A Pope must be followed, even if he is unholy 

A Pope truly has authority, even if he is a great sinner: 

"Peter was My first Pope and your first Pope, and as all others who followed him, they must be accepted. Be they weak or noble, be they with sanctity or unholiness, they must be accepted and followed." (Jesus, June 9, 1979) 

Now that doesn't mean we should not speak out against errors, scandals or anything else that a Pope does to damage the Church and its members. But it does mean that the Pope retains his authority even in the midst of terribly regrettable statements and actions.  


Pope Francis is not the antipope predicted by Our Lady 

But Pope Francis is NOT the antipope that Our Lady prophesied, because Pope Francis' coat of arms does not contain the "half-moon sickle" that would be a sign for all of us to recognize the antipope: 

"You will all recognize the sign of him who seeks to destroy. He will have on his coat of arms the sickle, the half-moon sickle. You will all make atonement for your bishops and cardinals." (Our Lady, October 6, 1972) 


Before the Great Warning, the Pope will flee a revolution in Rome 

Jesus told Veronica on September 14, 1976: 

"My child, you speculate much about the coming Warning. I have asked you many times not to speculate on dates, but I give you one indication that the time is ripe. When you see, when you hear, when you feel the revolution in Rome, when you see the Holy Father fleeing, seeking a refuge in another land, know that the time is ripe. But beg and plead that your good Pontiff does not leave Rome, for he will allow the man of dark secrets to capture his throne." (Read more) 

This message is important to our topic for several reasons. First of all, it indicates that the antipope of history will arrive after the true Pope flees Rome. So this is yet another message from Our Lady confirming that Pope Francis is not the antipope.  

Secondly, if the revolution in Rome took place today (in 2019), which Pope would be fleeing? Would the 92-year-old Pope Benedict be fleeing? When I hear the word "fleeing" I think running. That's not happening with Pope Benedict. 

What if the Pope fleeing is Pope Francis? The September 14, 1976 message states, "when you see the Holy Father fleeing". If the Rome revolution occurs during Pope Francis' reign, it would be yet another confirmation that he is the reigning Pope. And would there not be a perfect sense of justice as well, that the hand of God would allow such a disaster during the reign of, unfortunately, one of the worst Popes in the Church's history? This event would be a sign from God to the whole world, showing God's displeasure with the conduct of Pope Francis. 

If we rely only on our opinions and limited knowledge, we are liable to start with a wrong premise, and arrive at a wrong conclusion. So that's why Our Lady's words are such a great gift. She cannot deceive us, and She has never led us astray. 

We start with Our Lady's words to point us in the right direction. So once Our Lady has pointed us in the right direction we can recognize those gifted by God, whose conclusions seem to match what Our Lady at Bayside has told us. 

The following are some of those individuals, whose articles/videos we highly recommend. 


Sources that masterfully explain why Pope Francis is truly the Pope 

Steve Skojec 

Steve Skojec thoroughly nukes the error circulating that Pope Francis is not the ruling Pope. His explanation is, to me, the simplest and the clearest of all explanations that I have come across on this topic. The following are excerpts from his podcast discussing this issue: 

"People didn't want to hear that Francis was bad when I first started saying it, but it was true. Now, people don't want to hear that Benedict isn't the Pope, but it's also true. And we know that because the Church is the only authority on earth that can state unequivocally who the Pope is. And she has told us that Francis is the Vicar of Christ. The cardinal electors were unanimous in their acceptance of him." (watch video clip) 

Pope Benedict himself wrote that the Seat of Peter would be vacant after his resignation and a conclave would have to elect a new Pope:  

"He [Pope Benedict] said in his abdication statement that the Seat would be vacant and that a conclave would have to be called so that a new Pope could be elected." (watch video clip) (text of Pope Benedict's resignation letter)

Pope Benedict wrote that speculation denying his resignation was valid is "simply absurd": 

"He said, in a letter to La Stampa, very shortly after his abdication, 'There is absolutely no doubt about the validity of my resignation from the Petrine ministry ... The only condition for the validity of my resignation is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations regarding its authenticity are simply absurd.'" (watch video clip; read letter to La Stampa; read also) 

"There is absolutely no doubt about the validity of my resignation from the Petrine ministry ... The only condition for the validity of my resignation is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations regarding its authenticity are simply absurd." - Pope Benedict 


Bishop Schneider 

Bishop Athanasius Schneider has been a great champion of truth and tradition in these confusing times. He had weighed in on the issue of a heretical pope and his article may be one of the greatest ever written on this topic. Below are a few excerpts from Bishop Schneider's article:

1) "However, they [popes] were never deposed according to a canonical procedure, since that is impossible because of the Divine structure of the Church. The pope gets his authority directly from God and not from the Church; therefore, the Church cannot depose him, for any reason whatsoever."  

2) "The theory or theological opinion that a heretical pope can be deposed or lose office was alien to the first millennium." [in the first 1,000 years of the Catholic Church, no one said this was even a possibility] 

3) "When by an inscrutable permission of God, at a certain moment of History and in a very rare instance, a pope spreads errors and heresies through his daily or ordinary non-infallible Magisterium, Divine Providence awakens at the same time the witness of some members of the episcopal college, and also of the faithful, in order to compensate the temporal failures of the Papal Magisterium. One has to say that such a situation is very rare, but not impossible, as Church History has proven." 


Eric Sammons 

Eric Sammons' article takes a deep dive on Doctor of the Church St. Robert Bellarmine's discussion of a heretical pope in De Romano Pontifice. In case #3 listed by St. Robert Bellarmine (and also the patron saint of the church where the miraculous Bayside spring and future Basilica to Our Lady of the Roses is to be erected) is the scenario of a heretical pope that cannot be deposed by any means whatsoever. He writes, “it would be the most miserable condition of the Church, if she should be compelled to recognize a wolf, manifestly prowling, for a shepherd.” 

St. Robert Bellarmine was of the opinion that such a scenario would be highly unlikely, but Eric Sammons takes issue with that opinion:  

"And I think many Catholics would agree that today we are in a 'most miserable condition.' Yet I would challenge Bellarmine’s assumption that God would not allow such a miserable condition. 
"The entire Catholic faith is founded upon suffering. Contrary to today’s Prosperity Gospel, which preaches that faith in Christ will lead to riches and comfort, Catholicism takes seriously the words of Our Lord: 'If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me' (Mt. 16:24). Catholicism not only says that you can’t avoid suffering as a disciple of Christ, but promises suffering, for this is the way of the Master. The assumption that God wouldn’t allow His church to be in a 'most miserable condition' goes against the fundamental premise of the faith: that the way of Christianity is the way of the Cross. God does not protect us from suffering; He gives us the grace to endure it and even offer it up to Him."

St. Robert's Bellarmine's scenario #3 does indeed seem to be the reality currently facing the entire Catholic Church. And it also seems to fit with Jesus' message to Veronica on June 9, 1979 that the Pope retains his authority, even if he is unholy: 

"Peter was My first Pope and your first Pope, and as all others who followed him, they must be accepted. Be they weak or noble, be they with sanctity or unholiness, they must be accepted and followed." (Jesus, June 9, 1979) 

Was this Bayside message given to us for this very situation under Pope Francis? 


Robert Ciscoe

On reading Robert Ciscoe's article, I came upon this gem of a logic syllogism, which is the shortest argument I've read that Pope Benedict's resignation was valid: 

"Major: Francis’s election was accepted by the entire Church [all the cardinals], which provides infallible certitude that he became the Pope (infallible dogmatic fact). 

Minor: A condition for Francis to have become Pope is that Benedict’s resignation was valid. 

Conclusion: Since the entire Church accepted Francis as Pope, it is infallibly certain that Benedict’s resignation was valid." 


Michael Massey 

Michael Massey has provided this valuable distinction to "recognize and resist" versus "reject and resist" for the faithful Catholic faced with this unprecedented situation under Pope Francis: 

"When one is tempted to reject the pope and all the bishops of the Church due to the heresy and scandal they constantly promote, remember the example of St. Athanasius, who always fought to remain in communion even with the heretic Pope Liberius. When you recognize and resist the pope, you are in communion with St. Athanasius, but when you reject and resist him, you are in communion with Lucifer." 


Absurdities if Pope Francis was not the ruling Pope 

If Pope Benedict is still the RULING POPE: 

1) Why didn't Pope Benedict object to the election of another Pope? (Pope Benedict is incredibly brilliant and knows the Church teaching and laws much better than most of us); 

2) Why didn't the cardinals insist that Pope Benedict was still the ruling Pope and proclaim to the world his resignation was unlawful, before the election of Pope Francis?  

3) Why did ALL THE CARDINALS recognize Pope Francis as the new Pope? Only the cardinals have the God-given authority to elect and identify the ruling Pope; 

4) If Pope Benedict is still the ruling Pope, why is he allowing Pope Francis to appoint new bishops and cardinals, something only the ruling Pope has authority to do? If Pope Benedict is still the ruling Pope but is on a "vacation" from his daily duties this neglect is objectively a mortal sin, for each and every major papal duty he daily allows Pope Francis to perform. 

5) If Pope Benedict is still the RULING POPE, why did he write a letter to La Stampa stating, "There is absolutely no doubt about the validity of my resignation from the Petrine ministry ... The only condition for the validity of my resignation is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations regarding its authenticity are simply absurd" (watch video clip; read letter to La Stampa)? 

6) When Pope Benedict dies, is there to be another conclave to elect a Pope? Ridiculous. 

It never ceases to amaze me at the absurdities we can come up with, and yet at the same time think we are absolutely right.  


The REAL Third Secret of Fatima explains the chaos in the Church and Vatican 

Third Secret was supposed to be revealed in 1960 

Sister Lucy was once asked why Our Lady commanded the Third Secret to be released in 1960 and she replied, "Because then it will seem clearer." In 1960, Pope John XXIII called for Vatican II (1962-1965) and step by step a new orientation was imposed on the Church. It is not without reason that Sister Lucy started writing about a "diabolical disorientation" that she saw taking hold within the Church. 

Massive changes swept over the entire Catholic Church. Did the Third Secret of Fatima allude to this new orientation affecting the lives of every Catholic throughout the world? 

It would appear so because Sister Lucy was silenced by the Vatican around 1960, and had to have permission from the Vatican to talk about Fatima related topics. The Third Secret of Fatima must have included a condemnation of the new orientation of the Church, and Sister Lucy was an obstacle. 


Our Lady of Fatima wanted the Third Secret released no later than 1960; Pope John XXIII disobeyed 

Remember, Our Lady of Fatima said the Third Secret was to be revealed to the world no later than 1960. This has now been proven with a photograph of the Third Secret envelope specifically mentioning 1960. We know that Pope John XXIII did read the Third Secret and it is reported that after reading it, Pope John XXIII stated, "this does not concern the years of my pontificate." (The Whole Truth About Fatima: The Third Secret, Brother Michael of the Holy Trinity, Vol. III, p. 557) We know that 1972 was mentioned in the Third Secret and perhaps even mentioned Pope Paul VI by name (just as Our Lady of Fatima mentioned Pius XI by name), which could explain why Pope John XXIII said after reading the Third Secret, "this does not concern the years of my pontificate." Pope John XXIII died in 1963, so he was correct in believing that the year 1972 did not concern his pontificate.  


Pope Paul VI was the Pope mentioned in the REAL Third Secret of Fatima

Our Lady at Bayside has warned that the real Third Secret of Fatima was suppressed and that it was about satan entering the highest realms of the Catholic hierarchy in Rome: 

"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) 

Our Lady also explained that Pope Paul VI was the "poor little one", the Pope that Jacinta saw in her Third Secret vision. Our Lady warned that satan took over the papacy of Pope Paul VI and continues control of the Vatican to this day: 

"Satan, Lucifer in human form, entered into Rome in the year 1972. He cut off the rule, the role of the Holy Father, Pope Paul VI. Lucifer has controlled Rome and continues this control now.
"And I tell you now, My children, unless you pray and make My counsel known to all of the ruling fathers of the Eternal City of Rome, My Son's Church, His House, will be forced into the catacombs. A great struggle lies ahead for mankind. The eventual outcome is for good of all, for this trial in My Son's Church will be a true proving ground for all the faithful. Many latter-day saints shall rise out of the tribulation." (Our Lady, September 7, 1978)

Furthermore, we know that Jacinta of Fatima, on her deathbed, told Mother Godinho the Third Secret so she could pass it on to the Pope. But Mother Godinho's letter to Pope Pius XII, due to personal ambition, did not faithfully relay the Third Secret to the Pope. What is significant, though, is the mention of 1972 (an authentic part of the real Third Secret). 

The Shrine workers specifically asked Veronica Lueken in what year satan entered the Church, and Veronica told us it was in 1972 and that she could not say any more because it dealt with the Third Secret of Fatima. 

Pope Paul VI was the reigning Pope in 1972. The Fatima and Bayside messages, Jacinta's Third Secret vision of the "poor little one," and the miraculous photo "Jacinta 1972" are all in agreement.   

Pope Paul VI was truly the Pope of the Third Secret (watch video). He was even replaced by an surgically altered impostor to accelerate the changes and destruction within the Church. A Swiss exorcism confirmed the truth of this revelation. We know, for many reasons, that Pope Paul VI is the Pope mentioned in the Third Secret.


Was the real Third Secret stolen in 1969, and replaced with a forgery? 

Pope John XXIII, the reigning Pope in 1960, disobeyed Our Lady of Fatima and did not reveal it.  By disobeying God's will, Pope John XXIII opened the door further for the enemies of the Church to delay and thwart the release of the Third Secret of Fatima. In November 1969, during the reign of Pope Paul VI, the Italia news agency reported there had been a burglary in August 1969 of the papal apartment in which several precious items and dossiers were stolen. "Among these dossiers was one containing the third Secret of Fatima." The Vatican denied this, but the services of SID, the Italian counter-intelligence agency, was reported to have been involved to recover the stolen items. 

The burglar probably also inserted the false version of the "third secret" at the same time, which the Vatican released on June 26, 2000. 

Had the Third Secret of Fatima been revealed to the world in 1960, as was God's will, the suppression of the real Third Secret and its replacement with a forgery could not have happened. 

And this is a probable explanation of how Pope John Paul II had been deceived into accepting what was released on June 26, 2000 as authentic. With a lying "Sister Lucy" impostor (read more; watch video) to sign off on the fake version of the Third Secret and convince John Paul II of its authenticity, the bait and switch was complete. The satanic deception and control within the Vatican continued. The diabolical disorientation that emerged post-1960 accelerated, and without the REAL Third Secret to definitively expose the new orientation as of satanic origin, the deception continued. 


TLDM proves that the Vatican's June 26, 2000 'third secret' is a forgery 

TLDM has proven that the Vatican's version of the "third secret" released on June 26, 2000 is a forgery. The handwriting in this suspicious document is totally different from Sister Lucy's authentic handwriting on the envelope enclosing the Third Secret (but the envelope matches 62 years of Sister Lucy's known handwriting).  

There is no argument with a fact. The handwriting on the Third Secret envelope and what the Vatican released on June 26, 2000 is not the same handwriting. But we know Sister Lucy wrote down the Third Secret and the instructions on the envelope the same day. The contents do not match what Fatima experts knew about the real Third Secret, and the handwriting does not match either.

Also, the phony "third secret" released on June 26, 2000 contradicts the time-sensitive nature of the REAL Third Secret, as proven by Pope John XXIII statement, "this does not concern the years of my pontificate." Additionally, it does not contain the first line of the authentic Third Secret which is, "In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved…" This particular sentence was analyzed by the official archivist of Fatima, Father Joaquin Alonso:

"'In Portugal, the dogma of the faith will always be preserved'. This sentence in all clarity implies the critical state of the faith which will befall other nations. That is to say that there will be a crisis of faith, while Portugal will save its faith". "Therefore", Father Alonso asserts, "in the period which precedes the great Triumph of the Heart of Mary, the terrible things which are the object of the third part of the Secret, will occur. Which ones? If, 'In Portugal, the dogmas of faith will always be preserved,' one can deduce from it with perfect clarity that in other parts of the Church these dogmas either are going to become obscure or else even be lost." Thus it is quite possible that in this ...period which is in question, ...the text makes concrete reference to the negligence of the pastors themselves.... One conclusion does indeed seem to be beyond question: the content of the unpublished part of the Secret does not refer to new wars or political upheavals, but to happenings of a religious and intra-Church character, which of their nature are still more grave."(The Secret of Fatima, pp. 80-81) 

The June 26, 2000 document does not explain why the Vatican would not release it in 1960. The REAL Third Secret of Fatima was disturbing, so much so that the Vatican would lie about its contents, refuse to release it, and even silence the last remaining Fatima seer (Sister Lucy) from talking about its contents. 

Furthermore, the June 26, 2000 document is a vision, not the words of Our Lady of Fatima. But we know this is false. The Third Secret was the words of Our Lady of Fatima, not a vision.  

In Sister Lucy's Memoirs she records two of Jacinta’s visions that refer to the Third Secret, the words that the three shepherd children heard on July 13, 1917. After one of these visions, Jacinta asks Lucy, “Is he the one I saw weeping, the one Our Lady told us about in the Secret?" Here, it is important to pay close attention: If the Third Secret had been a vision, wouldn’t Jacinta have rather said, “the one Our Lady showed us in the Secret?"  But this is not the case. Jacinta clearly said “told us” which means words, not a vision. Had the Third Secret been only a vision, Jacinta would have said “showed us”, referring to a vision. 

Again, the Pope of the Third Secret who Jacinta saw weeping is Pope Paul VI. 


Did you know there is a demonstrable lie in the Vatican's June 26, 2000 document? 

In the Vatican's June 26, 2000 document, Cardinal Bertone had supposedly interviewed Sister Lucy and questioned her about the 1960 release date. Sister Lucy replied, "It was not Our Lady. I fixed the date..." We know this is a lie. Pope Benedict instructed Cardinal Bertone that the Third Secret envelope be shown on Italian TV, and it clearly showed Sister Lucy's instructions on the envelope, written in Portuguese: 

"By express order of Our Lady, this envelope can only be opened in 1960 by the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon or the Bishop of Leiria." 

Of course, the 1960 release date is what the Fatima experts had proclaimed for years, and it was the Vatican and a woman reported to be "Sister Lucy" who were caught in a lie, a lie reproduced and spread throughout the world. So many lies and acts of disobedience coming from the Vatican over a simple document, the Third Secret. What were they afraid of? 



Only the simple of heart shall receive the light 

That such great crimes should be committed by the Vatican is not surprising. Cardinal Ciappi stated that “In the Third Secret, it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”

Our Lady has warned the Vatican, the cardinals, the bishops, and the Catholic laity in every possible way. If mankind will not accept the solution to the current crisis (repentance, obedience to God's will and Our Lady's counsel), then we must accept the terrible consequences. After a merciful Great Warning and Miracle, without conversion the world will receive a two-part global Chastisement: The Third World War and the Ball of Redemption. 

Without humility, it is difficult to find the truth. I remember the great Fr. John Hardon, who many years ago stumbled over Our Lady of the Roses condemnation of Communion in the hand. Fr. Hardon questioned how the practice could be considered wrong if Pope John Paul II was allowing it (even though at the beginning of his pontificate he personally would never distribute Communion in the hand). Years later, Fr. Hardon modified his position on Communion in the hand and stated on November 1, 1997:  

"Behind Communion in the hand—I wish to repeat and make as plain as I can—is a weakening, a conscious, deliberate weakening of faith in the Real Presence…. Whatever you can do to stop Communion in the hand will be blessed by God.” 

Our Lady of the Roses is never wrong; She is in a class by Herself. The rest of us have difficulty hitting the target of truth with our judgments. We may have a lot of ammunition, information in our brains, but we don't always hit the target of truth in our judgments. Sometimes we are like crazy men shooting any which way, and injuring others spiritually by our false opinions that we spread around so carelessly. 

Opinions are a dime a dozen. And just because some say Pope Francis is not the Pope, does not make it true.  

This reminds me of a quote about a group of heretical Jansenist nuns, that they were "pure as angels, but proud as devils." Their arrogance and lack of charity brought them into heresy. Without humility, we cannot for long keep the grace of God in our souls. As Our Lady said on December 24, 1976, "it is only the simple of heart, the little ones, who shall receive the light." 


"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  


VIDEO: Steve Skojec - Why Francis is the ruling Pope

Who is the real Pope? (Steve Skojec)

Bishop Schneider: On the question of a heretical Pope

If Benedict Is Still Pope, the Papacy Dies with Him

Bishop Schneider releases essay ‘on the question of the true Pope’

In New Book, Benedict XVI Confirms His Resignation, But Clings to Confusing Theology

POPE FRANCIS: Pope or Antipope? Schismatic and Heretic? (Toronto Catholic Witness)

Eric Sammons: Is Francis the Pope?

Robert Siscoe: Why Francis is Pope

Michael Massey: Sedevacantism is Modern Luciferianism



Fr. Alonso, official achivist of Fatima: The REAL Third Secret of Fatima warned of apostasy in the Church

Third Secret tells of a spiritual chastisement: loss of faith, faltering and punishment of the pastors, diabolical disorientation


Cardinal Oddi on the REAL Third Secret of Fatima: "The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against the apostasy in the Church"

Cardinal Oddi's hypothesis on the REAL Third Secret: "Let me advance a hypothesis: that the Third Secret of Fatima pre-announces something terrible the Church has done"


Sister Lucy talked about the "diabolical disorientation" in the Church as 1972 approached


Why Pope Paul VI is the Pope mentioned in the REAL Third Secret

The "deception of the century"

Warnings from Beyond: A Swiss exorcism reveals existence of an impostor to Pope Paul VI


Third Secret was to be revealed no later than 1960, "because the Blessed Virgin wishes it so"

Evidence of a fabrication: Sister Lucy's handwriting notably different in document released by Vatican as the "third secret"

Evidence of a fabrication: World-famous forensic expert believes Vatican's released "third secret" is not in Sister Lucy's authentic handwriting

Evidence of a fabrication: The REAL Third Secret of Fatima specifically mentioned the year 1972, as Jacinta revealed to Mother Godinho


More evidence of a fabrication: Jacinta's vision of the Holy Father, "the poor little one," was Pope Paul VI

The Murder of Pope John Paul I

The strange death of a Pope: “John Paul I was assassinated”

Many are called and few are chosen (book review of Se Pedirá Cuenta)



Email us:

| Home | Introduction | Bayside Messages | Directives from Heaven | Miracles & Cures | Veronica Lueken | Miraculous Photos |
Videos |