donate Books CDs HOME updates search contact

Pros and Cons the Two Sister Lucys

Wildfire Spreading over Sister Lucy's Photos

Brief chronicle

On April 5, 2006, Marian Horvat, Ph.D., placed an article on this website [click here] analyzing some photographs of Sister Lucy of Fatima that raised many comments. We selected the most expressive and are placing them below for our readers.

What triggered Dr. Horvat's article was an alleged photo of Sister Lucy published in the March issue of Inside the Vatican magazine. Before writing her article, she addressed the magazine asking confirmation of the information, as well as the exact age of Sister Lucy in the photo. No answer has been provided to her request until today, April 11. Also, to date, no correction has been posted on the Inside of the Vatican website.

Two parallel pieces of information, however, were sent to us by readers that we take into due consideration.

The first is a statement by the Novus Ordo Watch website that Inside the Vatican had aknowledged that the information was wrong and the picture was not of Sister Lucy. We contacted the Editor of Novus Ordo Watch to know the credibility of his source. This was his reply: "I got the information from a friend who is friend of an associate of Inside the Vatican. I suppose they will print a correction in the April 2006 issue." Therefore, until now the basis for this news is an indirect verbal comment awaiting confirmation.

The second is data from a reader in Portugal, Mr. José Neves Lima, who affirms that when Sister Lucy's body was transferred from Coimbra to Fatima, he saw the same picture published in a Portuguese weekly. According to what Mr. Lima recalls, the photo would be of Mother Maria Celina of Jesus Crucified, the present day Prioress of the Carmelite Convent of Coimbra.

We went online to the referred newspaper and magazine but did not find the mentioned photo. The two photos sent by Mr. Lima, which we reproduce below with his correspondence, can be open to discussion. The reader can judge for himself. We asked Mr. Lima the favor of scanning the photo and article in the Portuguese weekly and sending them to us in order to clarify the situation for our readers.

Even if it were true that the person in the questioned photo is not Sister Lucy, most of the questions raised by Dr. Horvat in her article remain valid when applied to pictures of the older Carmelite Lucy and the photos of the young Dorothean Lucy. Until further explanations are provided to the serious questions raised, TIA will keep the article on our website, with these clarifications.

TIA correspondence desk selected the most significant of the many e-mails received. Read them below.

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

E_Objections2Men.jpg - 22391 Bytes

A Reader from Portugal

Dear Dr. Horvat,

I write to inform you that the religious that Inside Vatican affirms to be Sister Lucia, at age 40-50, is in truth the present day Superior of the Carmel of Coimbra, Madre Maria Celina of Jesus Crucified. I point out to you that the photograph in question, in which she leans forward in your article, was one that illustrated the interview that the aforementioned Superior granted in writing to the magazine Expresso of Lisbon in the past month of February (edition of February 18 or 25 of 2006) on the occasion of the moving of the body of Sister Lucia from the Carmel of Coimbra to the Basilica of Fatima.

With my best regards,

José Carlos Neves Lima

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Dr. Horvat responds:

Mr. José Carlos Neves Lima,

Thank you for your information. It is very useful and precise. I would like to post it on TIA's website, but I would need to know on behalf of whom you are speaking to provide a source for my readers.

E_016_LucyCelina.jpg - 27662 Bytes
As I wrote in my article, I asked Inside the Vatican about the age of Sister Lucy in the picture and waited one week for a response, without any answer. According to the rules of journalism, this is a tacit confirmation that the person is Sister Lucy.

I believe that your information could be correct, but I need to have a good source before contradicting what was published in the magazine.

If you cannot provide a source, please let me know so that I can translate and place your letter as a personal letter to the editor. In this case, I ask permission to use your name.

With regards,

Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Mr. Lima replies and sends photos:

Carmelite Convent 2006

In the arrow above, Mother Celina in the Coimbra Convent on February 13, 2006; below, with Sister Lucy II
Dear Dr. Horvat,

I am a traditionalist Catholic layman and I am writing in my name alone. I recall that I read the interview granted by the Superior of the Convent of St. Therese in Coimbra to Revista Única, which is a supplement to the Expresso newspaper of Lisbon, on last February 18 or 25. This is why I immediately recognized the photo that illustrates your article on the TIA website, which I often visit.

I think the best way to confirm what I say is to contact Expresso and check the possibility of getting a copy of the issue with that interview.

Notwithstanding, I searched on the web and found two photos of Mother Maria Celina of Jesus Crucified. Even though the photos are not of her wearing glasses, it undoubtedly seems to be the same person who Inside of the Vatican says is Sister Lucy at around 40-50 years of age.

Reading that interview, it seemed to me that Mother Maria Celina is somewhat influenced by the "spirit of Vatican II."

I give you permission to use my name in the translation of my correspondence.

Best regards,

José Carlos Neves Lima

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

You Are Right!

Dr. Horvat,

You are right when you say that this nun presented by the Vatican is not the true Sister Lucy. Since I saw her photo at age 20 as a sister in Tuy (Spain), I’ve realized that she could not be the “Vatican’s Sister Lucy.”

E_016_SisterLucy2Chin.jpg - 18385 Bytes
Where is the true seer of Fatima? I’m sure she’s still alive, and will not die before the communication of the authentic Third Secret of Fatima. What can we do to help with her mission, to know the real content of this secret? We should pray, of course, but also we should denounce this fraud.

For me the most evident difference between them is the chin: the false Sister Lucy has a lantern-jawed chin … while the real Sister Lucy has a heavy, but not prominent chin. In an attached file I’m sending you a side view of Sister Lucy (II), that destroys all pretensions of the VSL (Vatican’s Sister Lucy).

I think that the only person who can change the present day situation of the fight between the Revolution and Counter-Revolution is Sister Lucy, with the revelation of the Third Secret.


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Death Notice in Carmel Archives


I am not one for conspiracy theories, but to add to the bizarre photos of Sr. Lucia to which Ms. Horvat refer, another bizarre item is to look at the website for the Discalced Carmelites: [click here], and go to the obituaries for nuns in 2005 [click here, see entry 265]. If you go to Sr. Lucia, they have listed the date of death to be May 31, 1949.

This listing has been there for at least a year without anyone correcting it. Maybe you people could explain this to me.

Again, I am not one for conspiracy theories, but the pictures are strange and this date of death seems very odd. Just wanted to point this out.


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

TIA responds:

Entry 265 lists the correct birth and profession dates of Lucia dos Santos: she was born March 22, 1907 in Fatima, and took her first vows as a Sister of St. Dorothy on October 3, 1928.

It is difficult to understand why the official archival documents would list her as deceased on May 31, 1949. Perhaps it is because she really died at that time and another person, who died in 2005, took her place.


TIA correspondence desk

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Different Teeth in Both Sisters

Dr. Horvat,

The blatant difference between the two sets of photos of Sister Lucy really shocked me. It really is hard to explain how a person could change so much in a few years...

Another point I noticed was regarding the teeth of Sr. Lucy I in the picture where they are showing, it appears that her "eye" teeth protrude a bit. And as well, they are not "squared off" flat on the bite as those belonging to Sr. Lucy II.


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Dear Dr. Horvat,

I spoke with my sister, who is a dentist, and she will look at the pictures you provided this evening. She thinks it is possible that a complete denture, especially if there were extensive damage to the bone (called the ridge, not bridge as I mistakenly called it) could significantly alter a smile and other facial expressions - though it would not alter features unless accompanied by maxillofacial surgery. Also, she thought it was much more common prior to the 1930's-1940's for even very young people to have all their teeth removed as treatment for extensive tooth decay or periodontal disease (especially if poverty were an issue).

What is obvious is that Sr. Lucy had her own teeth at least until the date of the smiling Sr. Lucy I photograph. When they were removed and its effect on her appearance is the question (and this surely doesn't address your other points).


Dr. P.D.

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Dear Marian Horvat,

I have read your article on the "Two Sister Lucys of Fatima”.

I agree with you that we are definitely looking at two different persons. The reason I am sure is because they have different sets of dentition! People sometimes seem to look alike by their facial features, but the appearance of their teeth and their alignment is so characteristic for each person.

two different smiles
If we look at Lucy I, you can see her upper left central incisor is displaced forward while her teeth in upper right side seem also to be out of alignment. The shape of her teeth are much longer.

Now take a look at Lucy II, she has straight teeth. Unless Lucy I had a full clearance of her natural dentition and then replaced with dentures or she had undergone orthodontic treatment (which is highly improbable), then we are looking at two different individuals.

Even if we argue that Lucy II is wearing dentures, I would say that these are very natural looking dentures (which are much more difficult to fabricate as dental technicians usually will tend to set teeth as beautiful as possible). The gums of Lucy II appear to be affected by some degree of gum disease as they appear swollen and puffy as we would expect for a person of her age. All this seem to point to the fact that we are looking at a natural set of teeth for Lucy II.

I hope that this would support you in your analysis.

Yours in Jesus, Mary and Joseph,


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

The Photos Are of the Same Person.
You are Wrong!

Marian ...

You are comparing apples and oranges... Pictures of the same person can look very different depending on the angle, the light source, the camera used and whether the photo was touched up or not (the color photo was likely airbrushed... very common in the industry but you wouldn't call it a lie if it was YOUR wrinkles being airbrushed!). And you are using a very primitive childhood photo of Lucia wherein her features are obviously distorted by poor photography equipment, to draw all your conclusions...

My suggestion is that you re-think that page - someone who knows about photography might react negatively as I have reacted to it and thus, possibly the page could give someone the wrong impression about the rest of the information on your website.


S.W. (semi professional photographer and computer artist)

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

No! The Photos Are of Two
or Three Different Persons

Dr. Horvat,

I forwarded your inquiry and photos to Fr. A.B., a very accomplished artist and sculptor who has studied the subjects in Italy. His response follows.

“As far as I can see - and I have made a lifetime of studying features - the one with the sister's hand under her jaw and she is looking up - that might stop one - but all the rest seem to me to be the same person. Doubtless, her teeth were probably all pulled at one time so the mouth would change in some small regard - later on, but that's what I think. AB

Dominus tecum,


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


This photo in question is not of Sister Lucy. ITV in the current issue have indicated that an error was made and have clarified who the person really is.

I just got the above message from a friend, after showing them the photos. Heh...

STILL there are some questions in my mind, about the two, if not the three.

God bless,


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Suggestions for a Forensic Study


I think you have some strong points. To me, the slightly downward thrust of the beak of Sr Lucy II's nose is different than the "normal" nose of Lucy I.

Perhaps one of your many readers is a forensic expert who can examine the pictures and use his expertise to determine if a "switch" was made. Certainly possible in this day and age.


in Jesus, Mary and Joseph,


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Dear Marian,

I read your article "Two Sister Lucys of Fatima?". It's a fascinating article.

I think you could easily prove your point if you have the images studied forensically. There are also many software packages available that compare and study faces for law enforcement purposes. Perhaps you can advertise to have some examine the photos in this manner on your site.

Thanks again for your articles.



burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Dear Dr. Horvat,

There is excellent software that could address the "Two Lucys" question. The most sophisticated version of such software is being used by our earthly masters in their public surveillance camera networks.

Best regards,


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

The End Is Near...


Regarding the pictures of Sister Lucy I and Sister Lucy II, those are NOT the same woman. This is a clumsy attempt to deceive the public, that is, those who actually might care. However there is no need to carry out these things with great care anymore, for the simple reason that there are few, VERY VERY FEW today who possess true discernment.

The game is over: the Modernists have (temporarily) won; there is no Holy Mass and no true Sacraments, because there are precious few true, validly ordained priests, and therefore, THERE IS NO GRACE, THERE IS NO LIGHT OF THE HOLY GHOST, the people have lost their Faith, the True Faith, not that most of them ever truly cared in the first place.

The Great Apostasy, the 'great falling away,' is over, it is completed, and now all that remains are the times of the great disturbances of nature which will increase in number and intensity and then the Antichrist will appear.

Hang on to your hats, or maybe rather your Rosaries, if you still own one.


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

The Most Important Point Is That
Sister Lucy Changed Her Doctrine

Dear Dr. Horvat,

I understand from the Novus Ordo website that Inside the Vatican mislabeled the young Sister Lucy picture. With that being the case, and with your probable knowledge of it now, I would just like to bring to your attention the photos of the older (and now deceased) Sister Lucy.

It appears that she is wearing eyeglasses for farsightedness due to the magnification of the cheekbone area. I doubt that this has any meaning regarding her identification because many older people require eyeglasses to see close but I thought I would bring it to your attention.

If you know a dentist who fits people with false teeth maybe you could ask that dentist if the altering of the shape and length of the teeth would change the formation of the natural smile. I have no clue to the answer, but the teeth of Sr. Lucy as a Dorothean and those of the Carmelite elderly Sr. Lucy are most obviously different. It is perplexing at how different she looks in old age but I must admit that the jaw line is quite similar.

The greatest difficulty of this whole problem is that Sr. Lucy said one thing up until the 1960's and then had changed her thinking many years later. For what reason could this be? There is so much to speculate on and we may never know the reasons. We can only see the differences.

Yours, through the hearts of Jesus and Mary,


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Dear Marian,

That might also explain why the Sr. Lucy II would attend the Novus Ordo, and why the Novus Ordo completely took over the Fatima shrine.

Where is the real Sister Lucy? The mystery of iniquity continues to grow.

Thanks for publishing the article.

In Maria,


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

There Is Also Fraud About the Third Secret

Dear Ms. Horvat,

I just read your article concerning Sister Lucy I and Lucy II. I am very pleased by your analysis. It is pretty good. Congratulations for your discernment.

Maybe have you read a book published May 13th 2000 entitled : Le troisième Secret de Fatima est un faux: En voici les preuves… [The Third Secret of Fatima is a Fraud: Here are the proofs…] published by Le Vatican, June 26.

The book has been written by Laurent Morlier and published in France by D.F.T. Editions.

If you read French, have not had the opportunity to read it, and want it, I can managed to send it to you. It is a full inquiry about the third secret and clearly demonstrates the falsification of the message.

Union of prayers and thank you for your tremendous work

Best regards,


     blank.gif - 807 BytesE_Objections2Men.jpg - 22391 Bytes


Blason de Charlemagne
Follow us

Posted April 11, 2006

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

Related Topics of Interest

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   Photos and Facts The Two Sr. Lucys Controversy

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   Readers Concur: There Are Two Sister Lucys

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   The Inside the Vatican Photo Is Mislabed: You Are Conspiracy Maniacs

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   The Controversy Grows...

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   Forebodings about the Death of Sister Lucy

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   The Progressivist Challenge to Fatima

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   Is a Sleeping Giant Beginning to Awaken?

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   Tears, A Miraculous Warning

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes   Our Lady of Good Success and Our Lady of Fatima

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes

AdmirableLife_yellow.gif - 11343 Bytes

Objections  |  Comments  |  Questions  |  Home  |  Books  |  CDs  |  Search  |  Contact Us  |  Donate

Tradition in Action
© 2002-   Tradition in Action, Inc.    All Rights Reserved