From the content of the "revelation" of the "Lady", in her first appearance, we find a search for permission to accept. We have already had occasion to speak of this Fatima property above (see point 5). But then it followed from the characteristics of the "angel" phenomena - the fragility, multiplicity, uncertainty of feelings and the habituation of children, and now the "Lady" pronounces her request for the consent of the children:

"I have come to ask you to come here for the next six months every 13th at the same time. Then I will tell you who I am and what I want. After that, I will return here for the seventh time" (MLrF, p. 156). Characteristically, the Lourdes apparition, "resembling a girl in white," also sought permission to communicate with him, agreeing with Bernadette: "Would you be so kind as to come here for fifteen days?" 19.

Something else is looming, which is directly unacceptable. It is only to the popularizers of Latinism in Russia, such as Victor Shilovsky, dogma 14) a) about purgatory, flashed in the words "Ladies" (MLrF, p. 156), b) communion on unleavened bread (see above, Wafer in the Third Contact Phenomenon of the "Angel" - MLrF, p. 154) and c) the practice of the Rosary, "there are a number of small details that are associated with a purely Catholic religious ritual, the traditions and religious daily practice arising from them, different from the usual for Russian Orthodox people" (MLrF, pp. 9-11). We, following the Fathers, whose holiness is attested to by the Church, see it differently. This is how, for example, St. Maximus the Greek, exhorting the Latins: "Apostatize from the pernicious heresy of Origen (anathematized at the Fifth Ecumenical Council – Hierod. M.), which purifies souls filled with all kinds of sins for many years with purgatory fire, and then leads them from there to eternal life. This teaching not only makes many lazy to correct themselves from their sins – by the fact that they expect to be cleansed after death in the fire of purgatory, but it also perverts the teaching of righteous judgment,"20 and, in another place: "It is said, 'Turn away from evil, and do good' (Psalm 33:15), and to him who has received health He said, 'Sin not, lest it be more bitter than this' (John 3:15). V, 14), and did not say that you would be purified by the purgatory fire. And the tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire (Matt. III, 10), and is not purified. Also about the resurrection the Lord said that those who have done good, and not those who have done evil, will come out of the graves into the ageless life: for these latter will come out of the grave not in the resurrection of life, but in the resurrection of judgment, and not after purgatory, in your opinion, fire" 21. And about unleavened bread the same venerable Father writes: "It was not from the divinely inspired Peter and Paul and their other followers that the unleavened bread sacrifice began, but from the mad Apollinarius, who insanely spoke idly that God the Word took on a soulless body, created before all creation and passing through the pure Maiden as through a certain trumpet.

That is why he forbade putting salt and leaven in the divine bread, since salt represents the mind, and leaven the soul. And when he dared to introduce this innovation regarding the divine prosphora, at that time the great pastor of Caesarea, burning with apostolic zeal, denounced his wicked dogma in writing (the reference is to Basil the Great – Hierod M.). Therefore, as a product of heretical thought, and not apostolic enlightenment, and not an ancient teaching and a long-standing custom, reject this dogma from the community of the faithful, so that you may be blameless and unstumbled in all things. For in the unleavened offering of sacrifice is not a small part of the Israelite feast,"22 and, further, in another work, St. Maximus cites the 70th Apostolic Canon and the 11th Canon of the Fifth Council of Laodicea against the use of unleavened bread as Judaism

Do not the old Jewish unleavened bread of the Latins echo in the present philo-Judaism of their attempts to conduct a dialogue "as the children of Abraham with the children of Abraham," thus rejecting Christ?

Any detailed delving into dogmatics is not part of our task, but we cannot do without dogmatics when talking about the practice of praying according to the "Rosary". The prayer of the rosary, addressed to the Mother of God, or rather, the mention of her, is found from the 7th century onwards. The "Rosary" that Portuguese children prayed at the beginning of this century has remained inaccessible to us, but since it is known that Lucia, Francisco and Jacinta were illiterate at the time of the apparitions, we can assume that there were only a few prayers memorized by heart (except for the Virgin Mary 25 and the Lord's Prayer) with which the children prayed "according to the Rosary".

But here we have before us two versions of the Rosary, published quite recently – 1974 and 1992, which deserve our attention, if only because they are a kind of fruit of the Fatima events – after Fatima, the Rosary was distributed very widely – and also because both of them are published in Russian, and the 1992 edition is intended directly for Russia.

In the "Rosary", published in the printing house "St. Scholasticism" in Subiaco, Italy, in 1974, we find not only a reference to the command of the "Lady of Fatima" to read the "Rosary", but also a 42-fold repetition (in a relatively small volume of the booklet) of one of the Fatima prayers communicated to the children by the "Lady". And, in addition, a whole bunch of heresies. From the very first page, from the very first lines, there is the Filioque: "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Life-Giving Lord, proceeding from the Father and the Son (Jesus)" (p.1). In total, the Filioque is confessed 4 times in this Rosary (St. Maximus the Greek writes this, in particular, against the Filioque: "The Father is the only source of the Divine nature. And by recognizing the Son as the emitter, His special true property of sonship is denied. This wisdom introduces two persons, completely contrary to each other, since each is ascribed the cause of the third person. In addition, two principles are very crudely and blasphemously introduced in the three-light nature. If there are two emitters in number, then how can there not be two sources of the Spirit? As in essence God is one Triune, so He is threefold in hypostases. Consequently, it must be assumed that either in persons or in essence the emitters are united when they emit the eternal Spirit. And if we assume that they are united in persons when they emit the eternal Spirit, then the confusion of Sabelli will clearly emerge when both are united in one person. If, however, we say again that by the union of beings they emit the eternal Spirit, then I truly refuse to consider the inconsistency arising from this. For the essence and union are the same for all three persons: they are equal to each other in hypostases in everything except the mode of their being. Therefore, it will turn out that the Spirit, together with the Father, gives birth to the Son. What can be more wicked than this? If for this reason you call the Son the giver, in order to show Him equal in all things to Him who begat Him, as I have heard from your wisdom, then you should also bestow upon the Spirit, for He also is equal to the Father and the Son: let Him also beget the Son together with the Father, so that the Spirit also may be equal to the Father and the Son."

"But the Holy Spirit is not from the Son, or through the Son, having a Being, but proceeding from the Father, and He is called to the Son, as being of one essence with Him.27

12 times in the pages of the Rosary, the newly-invented Catholic teaching on the Immaculate Conception of the Most Holy Theotokos, announced in 1854 by Pope Pius IX, is confessed. Ignatius (Brianchaninov) writes: "For all the greatness of the Mother of God, her conception and birth took place according to the general law of mankind; consequently, the general confession of the human race about conception in iniquity and birth in sin belongs to the Mother of God. The humble and grace-filled Mary pronounced this confession to the ears of the universe! Sensing the presence of the longed-for Saviour in her womb, she pronounced a confession in the following wondrous and remarkable words: "My soul magnifies the Lord, and My spirit rejoices in God my Saviour: for I have looked upon the humility of His servant: for behold, from henceforth all shall bless Me" (Luke I, 46-48). The Mother of God confesses before all mankind, in the Gospel read by all people, that the God born of Her is at the same time Her Savior. If God is Her Saviour, then she is conceived and born in sin according to the general law of fallen humanity. God is the Creator of both angels and men; but He is the Saviour of some men; as for the angels who have not fallen, He is their Lord, but not Redeemer or Saviour. The recognition of God as a rational creature by the Saviour is at the same time the recognition by this creature of its own destruction, in the fall. The Virgin Mary was conceived and born in perdition, in the bonds of eternal death and sin, born in a state common to the entire human race. Her birth of God, Her Saviour and all men, gave Her greatness, the supreme greatness of sinless Angels, who did not taste spiritual death and did not need a Savior."28

In this Rosary, the dogma of purgatory is confessed twice: to her. 28 and 107 (see above for him).

Twice, on page 111 ("Not only the merits and rewards of Jesus Christ Himself, but also of all the martyrs and saints and every believer constitute the treasure of the Church") and on page 114 ("The greater the number of works that bring merit, the stronger the bond of love with God, the greater becomes the grace that can be used from the treasury also for others. This means that the ability to use the merits of others is proportional to our own closeness to God, the grace received, and, consequently, the very "merits of Jesus Christ") – an indirect confession of the doctrine of the superdue merits of the saints with its accounting.

The mention of the "vicar of the Roman High Priest" to Christ (on p. 102) and his "infallibility in matters of religion" (p. 62); "the absolution of sins by a priest has legal force" (p. 2) with reference to the Council of Trent of 1545-1563.

Twice the "participation in the Redemption along with the Son the Redeemer" (p. 115) of the Most Holy Theotokos is confessed: