In the previous article, we traced a rather broad history of the Fake Lúcia Hypothesis (FLH) from 2006 to the present. In this article, we will make an initial dive into some of the material from Sister Lucy Truth (SLT) and ask whether its scholarship warrants credibility.
SLT has today confined itself to the credibility and expertise of the people the organization hired to examine various pieces of evidence. Indeed, when someone challenges SLT, its default response has become “But our experts have said…” or similar words. Lest one be accused of the genetic fallacy,[1] it is important not to have recourse solely to the history of the FLH and the personal reasons why some of its proponents advance it.
When one looks at the material published by SLT, it appears very impressive. For example, one of the organization’s experts is Lois Gibson.[2] She is a forensic artist whose work earned her a place in the Guinness World Book of Records as “the world’s most successful forensic artist” for the most cases solved by her artistry.[3] This fact alone has been a marketing point by SLT in its promotional literature.[4] Despite the usage by SLT of the credentials of its experts, there is a general rule that is easily forgotten: one does not go by a man’s subjects, but rather his predicates—i.e., one must look behind a matter to see what is truly going on. It is in this latter arena where a lot of detail often goes unnoticed or overlooked.[5]
After looking at the various reports, we must ask how did SLT conduct its research? Knowing the rather serious nature of the project, did the organization adopt a posture of great caution and respect for the enterprise upon which it had embarked? Were rigorous and generally accepted academic standards maintained throughout? Did it gather information in a hasty or haphazard manner? Was time taken to organize and review this information, make some initial assessments, get dates/times correct? When and how was material submitted to the experts?
Given the gravity of the matter—a potential impostor of a world-famous person and all its implications—SLT’s manner of proceeding is not a negligible factor. In the legal profession, procedural errors can irreparably damage a case, and SLT has self-styled its investigation as a criminal case.[6] Therefore, it is not unfair to raise questions about the manner in which SLT has conducted its investigation. In order to show that the findings of the organization withstand scrutiny, its manner of proceeding must necessarily be reviewed.
Regretfully, evidence suggests that SLT was not always careful in its manner of proceeding.
One example of questionable methodology appeared on a 2025 SLT video entitled “The Priest Who Knew Too Much.”[7] Among other things, this video claimed that the former Fátima archivist, Fr. Joaquín María Alonso, supported the FLH via his book La verdad sobre el secreto de Fátima.[8] I reviewed this video and discovered the evidence suggested SLT depended solely upon a digital edition of Alonso’s book. A check of the digital edition against the hard copies revealed that a later editor changed the digital edition’s text to include a reference to the FLH.[9] This new text was not original to Alonso, therefore how could SLT use this text to claim he believed in the FLH?
Chojnowski published a ten-page response on February 13, 2026 on his personal blog RadTrad Thomist (not the SLT website).[10] In the response, Chojnowski reiterated the claims in the video. The defects in his argumentation were obvious. I subsequently published a refutation that provided photo evidence of hard copies of Alonso’s book, showing the disputed pages.[11] They strongly demonstrated that SLT had not checked the digital edition against the original hard copy. Particularly damning was the fact that one of the head investigators for SLT has connections between Spain and Portugal. Did SLT ask him to obtain copies of the books before publication of the video to verify its claims?
In the several months that have passed since my refutation, there has been no published word from SLT on the matter of Alonso’s book.[12] Cracks have formed in the edifice of the story being told by SLT about a “fake” Sr. Lúcia. Thus, if the organization did not conduct thorough research here, where else might it have similarly failed to do so? In the next article, we’ll continue with our examination and will provide further information in answer to the preceding question.
[1] The genetic fallacy is the dismissal or validation of a claim based upon its origins as opposed to its own merits. For more information, see Dr. Peter Chojnowski (edit.). “Fatima Fraud: Our Case for an Impostor Sister Lucy.” Sister Lucy Impostor (October, 2019): 27; Jonas E. Alexis. “The Vatican’s Top Secret.” VT Foreign Policy (July 22, 2023).
[2] Dr. Peter Chojnowski (edit.). “Lois Gibson.” Sister Lucy Truth (2026).
[3] Cf. “Who is Lois Gibson?” Lois Gibson (2026).
[4] For example, see Dr. Peter Chojnowski. “Breaking: World-Record Forensic Artist Reports.” RadTrad Thomist (March 2, 2020); “Breaking: Prof. Gibson Offers Proof.” RadTrad Thomist (March 9, 2020); “Prof. Lois Gibson’s Professional and Scientific Determination.” RadTrad Thomist (April 4, 2020).
[5] See, for example, the remarks of John Henry Westen about how his organization “LifeSite News” inquired after the work of Sister Lucy Truth. Westen states that he spoke with the researchers, not whether he went deeper than merely talking with them (cf. Conor Gallagher with John Henry Westen. “Are We in the End Times NOW?” The Conor Gallagher Show YouTube Channel [April 15, 2026]. 23:33 – 35:12, and 1:23:19 – 1:24:25).
[6] Dr. Peter Chojnowski. “Criminal Case.” RadTrad Thomist (October 3, 2018). “The Phantom Sister Lucy Theory: An Attempt to Derail a Criminal Investigation.” Sister Lucy Truth (2024).
[7] Dr. Peter Chojnowski. “Fr. Alonso KNEW.” RadTrad Thomist (December 22, 2025); Sister Lucy Truth. “THE FATIMA FILES: The Priest who knew too much.” Sister Lucy Truth YouTube Channel (December 22, 2025).
[8] Allegedly, Fr. Alonso dropped some clues alluding to it in his 1976 book La verdad sobre el secreto de Fátima: Fátima sin mitos that were maintained in a second edition published in 1988.
[9] Kevin J. Symonds. “Alonso Believed in an Impostor Sr. Lúcia?” kevinsymonds.com (January 23, 2026).
[10] Dr. Peter Chojnowski. “Sister Lucy Truth’s Response to Kevin Symonds’ Denial.” RadTrad Thomist (February 13, 2026); Dr. Peter Chojnowski. “Dr. Chojnowski Response to K. Symonds.” Sister Lucy Truth (February 13, 2026).
[11] Kevin J. Symonds. “The Texts That Aren’t There.” kevinsymonds.com (February 14, 2026).
[12] Dr. Chojnowski did promote a Spanish-language video that repeated the error (cf. Dr. Peter Chojnowski. “New Video, in Auto English Dub.” RadTrad Thomist [July 21, 2026]).