At Fatima, 24 Nations Consecrated – or Entrusted – to the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts

Prayer at Fatima

The Catholic News Agency (CNA) website reported on March 25, the Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, that Cardinal Antonio Marto consecrated 24 countries to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima in Fatima, Portugal in a public ceremony that day (see “At Fatima, 24 countries consecrated to Jesus and Mary amid the coronavirus pandemic”).

According to CNA, “[i]n response to the global coronavirus pandemic, the Portuguese bishops’ conference announced [the previous] week that they would reconsecrate Portugal on the evening of March 25,” and soon after “the Spanish bishops’ conference requested that their country also be consecrated in the same liturgy. The Portuguese bishops subsequently invited the heads of other national bishops’ conferences to request that their nations be added as well.”

The other countries consecrated at the request of their respective bishops’ conferences are located mostly in Europe, South America and Africa. Interestingly, the list included Cuba – a communist country – but neither the U.S. nor Canada! Were not the U.S. and Canadian bishops’ conferences invited to have their respective nations included as well?

If the American and Canadian bishops’ conferences were indeed invited but failed to accept the invitation, wouldn’t that be an act of ‘pastoral’ negligence? After all, what would they have to lose? Nothing.

On the contrary, a nation that is consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary has much to gain. We have Portugal as an example. On May 13, 1931 the Portuguese bishops consecrated Portugal to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, after which the nation experienced an unexpected period of peace, social reform, and cultural renaissance. Portugal was also preserved from the ravages of the Spanish Revolution and World War II.

Furthermore, such a consecration not only benefits the countries consecrated but also can help convince the Pope and the bishops of the importance and benefits of consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, as requested by Our Lady of Fatima, who told the three children in 1917 that (in reference to Herself) “only She can help you.”

The Nature of this Consecration?

With regard to what exactly occurred on March 25, 2020, there is unfortunately some ambiguity. A closer reading of the actual text used reveals the following noteworthy points. First, the bishops never used the generally accepted formula of consecration, namely “I (we) consecrate [name of country] to the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts.” No country was mentioned by name in this manner. References were made only to the Church being consecrated, and to the Church in Portugal and Spain belonging to Our Lord, even for centuries, and to ourselves being consecrated to the Sacred Heart. 

Second, the word ‘consecration’ was never connected to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Rather, the term ‘entrusted’ was used in reference to the Immaculate Heart. This is a significant point because “to entrust” carries different theological meaning than “to consecrate.” In the past, objections have been made against the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart by those who claim it is an act fitting only for God. They erroneously maintain that we may only ‘entrust’ with regard to the Blessed Virgin Mary. This, of course, is contrary to the very words of Our Lady of Fatima Herself. It also goes against the teachings of St. Louis de Montfort, St. Maximillian Kolbe, and the actions of various Popes who have made consecrations to the Immaculate Heart in the 20th century. 

Third, in the text of the prayer we found posted at the official Shrine of Fatima’s website, there was no mention of any of the other nations reported to have requested that their nations be included in the consecration. It is possible that this request was fulfilled by other means, but we have been unable to locate any document that demonstrates this. We would appreciate any help in this regard from our readers. One final point: the choice of wording used throughout the prayer is quite in line with the nouvelle theologie (New Theology). It would certainly be joyous to see future Acts of Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary use tone, terms, and phrasing which denote the traditional formulae and perennial faith of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

Given these points, we are left to wonder: what exactly was the nature of this ‘Act of Consecration?’ What exactly was consecrated, by who, and to whom? Here again we see how the plague of ambiguity continues to color the modern prayers of the Church.[1]

Bishops Are Denying the Sacraments to the Faithful

Nevertheless, at least a prayer was offered to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We rejoice that bishops’ conferences[2] from 24 nations desired to unite themselves to Cardinal Marto in this act. 

On the other hand, what do we have here in the USA and Canada? Many – if not all – dioceses have suspended public celebrations of the Mass. As a recent LifeSiteNews article (posted on March 30) states:

“[A]s the pandemic continues, the vast majority of American dioceses have canceled all public Masses, and some bishops have gone so far as to ban confession, baptism, and even last rites.”

As an example, on March 25, the very same day that 24 nations were uniting themselves in a prayer to the Sacred Heart and Our Lady of the Rosary of Fatima, we have the following directives pertaining to the Archdiocese of Newark, as reported in “Coronavirus Updates: 91 deaths in one day in New Jersey; 4 cities on lockdown” (see “Archdiocese of Newark gives new directives”):

“Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin says all wakes and funerals must be postponed until further notice and burials can only take place with the priest. Baptisms and weddings must also be postponed.

“Additionally, all churches and adoration chapels must be closed and locked until further notice and private prayer in any parish building must be discontinued.”

It has been reported that some bishops have even forbidden their priests to hear confessions, period; that they are not even allowing priests to “get creative” in ways they might be able to hear confessions and still follow public health “guidelines.” For example, here you can read the official statement of Bishop Coerver of Lubbock, Texas which explicitly states, “No priests are to make themselves available to hear Confessions.”

As per our tradition, I grew up being taught that if a priest refused to hear the confession of a penitent who requested it, the priest sinned mortally. How can such a grave spiritual responsibility, upon which the eternal salvation of a soul may depend, simply be rescinded? Who would ever have thought we would see a day when a bishop would command his priests to NOT hear confessions? For those who have eyes to see, this is a clear sign of the grave crisis in our Church and of the diabolical disorientation which has descended upon us. 

As another example, according to the same LifeSiteNews article:

“Catholic blogger Fr. Zuhlsdorf reported Friday that another bishop ordered confession ‘be suspended except for those in danger of death,’ and that ‘all other means of providing the Sacrament’ should ‘cease’ – particularly drive-through confessions.”

Such bishops miss the point as to what it means to be Catholic. They do not seem to understand, or believe in (?), the efficacy and the necessity of the sanctifying grace of the Sacraments. Perhaps many or most lay faithful miss the point as well. Both stand in stark contrast to what occurred during Europe’s two pandemics of the Black Plague.

“Each of these pandemics happened in Christian cultures. On those who survived the ordeal, ‘it impressed the idea that ‘you could be struck down at any moment without warning,’ so you should focus on your immortal soul.’ 

“This led to widespread ‘repentance, self-chastisement, and prayer.’ Demands on the churches were heavy. In ministering to the ill, clergy and religious sustained stunningly high losses. These losses, in turn, colored the character and course of the churches for many decades.” [“Justinian’s Flea, Redux,” The Catholic Thing website, April 1, 2020.]

The quoted article later says, in reference to our own times:

“In Iran and other Muslim countries, crowds have stormed closed mosques in order to worship. By contrast, in the West, many Christians have voiced their frustration with the closure of churches, but most seem to accept the prudence of the decision.”

And then the article ends with:

“Life, we’re now forced to remember, is fragile and brief. No one can make us give ourselves fully and sincerely to God. But if there were ever a time to do it, this is it.”

Thus, the solution is not to close churches and suspend sacraments en masse. This is the complete opposite of what should be done. Furthermore, according to the LifeSiteNews article referenced above.

“Catholic bishops issuing blanket bans on the faithful receiving the sacraments as a response to the coronavirus pandemic is a violation of canon law, and a priest can in good conscience disregard such directives, according to an American canonist.

“In fact, a priest is obliged to do so, says Philip Gray, the president of St. Joseph’s Foundation, which advises on canon law, and director of Catholics United for the Faith (CUF).”

Bishop Athanasius Schneider confirms this: 

“If a priest observes in a reasonable manner all the necessary health precautions and uses discretion, he has not to obey the directives of his bishop or the government to suspend Mass for the faithful. Such directives are a pure human law; however, the supreme law in the Church is the salvation of souls. Priests in such a situation have to be extremely creative in order to provide for the faithful, even for a small group, the celebration of Holy Mass and the reception of the sacraments. Such was the pastoral behavior of all confessor and martyr priests in the time of persecution.”

Whether it be pandemic or persecution, there is only one solution to such crises: the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Pope in union with all the Catholic bishops of the world, in accordance with the request of Our Lady of Fatima. Let us beseech Heaven for the Church hierarchy to receive the grace to fully obey the requests of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima!

 


[1] This lack of specificity also indicates that the current state of affairs in this ‘pandemic crisis’ is as yet insufficient to move episcopal hearts to trust and obey Our Lady’s specific request of actually consecrating to Her Immaculate Heart. Remember, at Fatima Our Lady revealed that God wants to save the world through devotion to Her Immaculate Heart. Thus, only She can save us now. Without increased devotion to Her Immaculate Heart, the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on every First Saturday, we will not see an end to chastisements and a period of peace.

[2] A further point which is unclear is how the decision to join this prayer was made at the level of each bishops’ conference. For example, was this decision made by a lay bureaucrat working for the conference who sent an email reply? Or was it instead brought to a vote before all the bishops of the conference? If so, how many were in favor or against this simple prayer? We are unaware of these facts but such information is certainly relevant.

Total
0
Shares
Total
0
Share