Of course the event occurs on JPII's "Divine Mercy" Sunday (aka Low Sunday... a very low Sunday indeed).
Unfortunately there are many foundering souls in the SSPX who have been misled by clergy to accept the "Divine Mercy Message and Devotion" and false/Novus Ordo apparitions like Akita.
I agree with you about the Divine Mercy, for countless reasons.
But what about Akita makes it dubious or unworthy of belief? I am familiar with the apparition, and it seems quite legit from every angle: From the message, to the seer, to the seer's life, to the apparition itself, etc.
On second thought, if you do choose to respond, please start a new thread. It would cause a major derailing of this thread.
Akita doesn't deserve a new thread, or any additional comment.
Akita gives an "Imprimatur" to "Bastard Rites" and related "Eucharistic Presence Miracles" as well as a thumbs up on VII and the Apostates in Rome. It has the same stench as "Stefano Gobbi" and his "Marian Movement of Priests".
If Our Lady were to appear at Akita, she would most certainly address the general apostasy, the Robber Council and the Bastard Sacraments... IMHO
Not necessarily. What if the Novus Ordo isn't intrinsically invalid? How can you say that every Novus Ordo Mass ever celebrated was completely invalid, regardless of the priest's intention, translation used, matter used, etc.?
That certainly wasn't the SSPX position. Are you better educated than Archbishop Lefebvre?
I certainly couldn't rule on the validity of ALL N.O. Masses one way or the other. But you can? Are you omniscient?
Akita only has a "stench" for you because you're a staunch Sedevacantist (now). When we spoke by phone, you gave me the pearl of wisdom that no group around today was capable of answering perfectly
ALL the hard questions arising from the Crisis in the Church. When I thought about it, it rang true. Hence the element of mystery
in this Crisis, and why we shouldn't be harsh to judge our fellow Traditional Catholics trying to cling to Tradition.
Anyhow, I thought it summed up everything I know about the Crisis perfectly, and then some! I think I literally gained some insight and wisdom from that conversation of ours. I've been repeating that gem to others ever since.
I've noticed that for several months now, your posts all sound like those of a Sedevacantist, and an angry/frustrated one at that.
Anyhow, Akita is no more or less unpalatable than Fatima to a Sedevacantist. After all, with a 55 year interregnum, and almost no bishops appointed by Pius XII left alive, there is no longer a way to elect a pope and end the Crisis. So how can the Pope consecrate Russia to the I.H.M., if there is no Pope?
Indeed Fatima poses plenty of a problem for sedevacantists, which is probably why some good Trads stay away from that position.
Let's put it this way -- even if you've changed your mind, it's still nevertheless true
what we agreed on back in 2012: The Sedevacantist position has at least a few holes, as does the SSPX position, the Indult position (and all the others). None of them is able to answer all the other side's objections perfectly, to everyone's satisfaction, and removing all the mystery.