Bishop Williamson does not have a "group." So, who else is the author referring to that "endorses these likely-demonic 'wonders' "?
The liberalizing Bishop Williamson Group likewise endorses these likely-demonic “wonders”.
“Forgive me for insisting on the Third Secret of Fatima: Did Padre Pio relate it, then, to the loss of faith within the Church?”
Fr. Gabriele furrows his brow and sticks out his chin. He seems very affected.
“Indeed,” he states, “One day Padre Pio said to me very sorrowfully: ‘You know, Gabriele? It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church.’”
“Oh my God! Some kind of Antichrist! When did he prophesy this to you?” I [Zavala] ask.
“It must have been about 1960, since I was already a priest then.”
“Was that why John XXIII had such a panic about publishing the Third Secret of Fatima, so that the people wouldn’t think that he was the anti-pope or whatever it was …?”
A slight but knowing smile curls the lips of Father Amorth.
“Did Padre Pio say anything else to you about future catastrophes: earthquakes, floods, wars, epidemics, hunger …? Did he allude to the same plagues prophesied in the Holy Scriptures?” [asks Mr. Zavala]
“Nothing of the sort mattered to him, however terrifying they proved to be, except for the great apostasy within the Church. This was the issue that really tormented him and for which he prayed and offered a great part of his suffering, crucified out of love.” [says Fr. Amorth]
“The Third Secret of Fatima?”
“Exactly.”
“Is there any way to avoid something so terrible, Fr. Gabriele?”
“There is hope, but it’s useless if it’s not accompanied by works. Let us begin by consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, let us recite the Holy Rosary, let us all do prayer and penance …” [emphasis added]
Bishop Williamson does not have a "group." So, who else is the author referring to that "endorses these likely-demonic 'wonders' "?
I find the questions/concerns in the OP to be legitimate.
Everything in the above message corresponds with Fatima, the 3 Days of Darkness, the prophecy of the comet (i.e. fire from the sky), and Alois Irhlmeir. When people who have read Fatima's 3rd Secret are asked about it's contents, they always say, "Yes, it talks about physical chastisements, but that is a secondary concern. It's worse that this." Which implies that the spiritual chastisement is the main point. I don't see Akita contradicting this, or minimizing the spiritual calamities, but describing the "end" of these chastisements (i.e. 3 days of darkness, the comet, and 3/4 of humanity dead).
One of the main OP arguments is that the message of Fatima will not be a physical, but rather a spiritual chastisement.
But this is not true, since we all know Our Lady warned that if men did not come back to God, that under the reign of Pope Pius XI, a Second World War would break out.
In the text of the 3rd Secret of Fatima, approved by Cardinal Ottavianni and Father Luigi Villa, other physical chastisements were warned of (See below).
Therefore Mr. Pfeiffer’s premise to criticize the message of Our Lady of Akita is based on incorrect facts.
The Third Secret of Fatima
A great chastisement will fall on the entire human race; not today as yet, not tomorrow, but in the second half of the Twentieth Century.
No longer does order reign anywhere and Satan will reign over the highest places directing the course of events. He (Satan) really will succeed in infiltrating to the top of the Church.
Also for the Church a time of Her greatest trials will come. Cardinals will oppose Cardinals; Bishops will oppose Bishops and Satan will march amid their ranks, and in Rome there will be changes. What is rotten will fall, and what will fall will never rise again.
The Church will be darkened and the world deranged by terror.
A great war will break out within the second half of the Twentieth Century. Fire and smoke will fall from Heaven, the water of the oceans will become vapors and the foam will rise up flooding and sinking everything.
Millions and millions of people will die by the hour and the survivors will envy the dead.
Death will reign everywhere for the errors committed by the foolish and by the partisans of Satan, who, then and only then, will reign over the world.
At last, those who will survive all of these events will once more proclaim God and His Glory and serve Him like before, when the world was not so corrupted.
This version of the Third Secret is bunk ... as you need only look at the paragraph about the great war in the second half of the Twentieth Century where fire and smoke fall from heaven and the oceans become vapors and foam will flood and sink everything. Never happened.
10 And his disciples came and said to him: Why speakest thou to them in parables? 11 Who answered and said to them: Because to you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: but to them it is not given. 12 For he that hath, to him shall be given, and he shall abound: but he that hath not, from him shall be taken away that also which he hath. 13 Therefore do I speak to them in parables: because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. 14 And the prophecy of Isaias is fulfilled in them, who saith: By hearing you shall hear, and shall not understand: and seeing you shall see, and shall not perceive. 15 For the heart of this people is grown gross, and with their ears they have been dull of hearing, and their eyes they have shut: lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. 16 But blessed are your eyes, because they see, and your ears, because they hear. 17 For, amen, I say to you, many prophets and just men have desired to see the things that you see, and have not seen them, and to hear the things that you hear and have not heard them.
I have a problem with JUST mentioning the physical chastisements. It takes the eye off the ball, as it were, as everyone looks to the skies for the chastisement when it's right under our noses. Third Secret of Fatima was without any shadow of a doubt about Vatican II, the NOM, and the V2 papal claimants. Both Garabandal and Akita mention only the physical chastisements with a token mention of "bishops fighting bishops", making it seem like the Conciliar Church is legit but that it's just a matter of bishops disagreeing amongst themselves..
Both Garabandal and Akita mention only the physical chastisements with a token mention of "bishops fighting bishops"Good point.
5. Akita, like the other Marian shrines has been taken over by Freemasons.
France & Lourdes are examples.
Around 2008, the Freemasons tore down Akita’s original shrine and chapel and erected what looks like a Bhuddist temple.
That the Freemasons find it necessary to occupy a Marian shrine, tells me they are trying to suppress a true Marian apparition site.
Everything in the above message corresponds with Fatima, the 3 Days of Darkness, the prophecy of the comet (i.e. fire from the sky), and Alois Irhlmeir. When people who have read Fatima's 3rd Secret are asked about it's contents, they always say, "Yes, it talks about physical chastisements, but that is a secondary concern. It's worse that this." Which implies that the spiritual chastisement is the main point. I don't see Akita contradicting this, or minimizing the spiritual calamities, but describing the "end" of these chastisements (i.e. 3 days of darkness, the comet, and 3/4 of humanity dead).Yes. I remember Father (Bishop) Malalchi Martin saying to Art Bell -- words to the effect: All the physical destruction is nothing compared to the spiritual part. People will be lined up to get to confession.
The correct Catholic position -- which is how the Church actually handles these things -- is to assume a claim is false unless it can be proved authentic. Apparitions do not receive Church approval unless the seer can prove it's authentic, usually by a miracle. And Catholics are not supposed to accept apparitions as true without Church approval.Only if God is a sede.
Since there is no one to approve private apparitions since Vatican 2, no apparitions since then have Church approval and Catholics should not accept any of them.
God would not send us miraculous messages from heaven if He knew we would not be able to accept them.
This happened in Conyers, Ga., too...
The visionary remained obedient to ecclesial authorities and died destitute after a decade of suffering. She also said that Mary told her that "she prefers tradition" and would personally drive 40 miles each way to get to the Latin Mass.
Conyers is an interesting one. No one talks much about it anymore. Those who do are generally dismissive... Briefly suppressed by a modernist young bishop, who got cancer and died shortly after doing so. His successor lifted the suppression, but never formally investigated the apparations (this remains the case)... Lots of overlap with Fatima & Akita in the messages... I'm fairly certain Conyers remains the largest attended supposed apparition site of the past 30 years in the U.S... You had 100k+ pilgrims showing up at a time in the mid/late 1990s, with lots of media coverage.
Only if God is a sede.
There's an apparition from Banneaux, Belgium approved in 1949 "Our Lady of the Poor". Hardly anyone has heard of it. The visionary left her husband and lived with another man for years. She rarely practiced any religion but would occasionally attend a Novus Ordo mass. Does that sound like someone who was visited by The Mother of God a dozen times?.
.
Oh wow, I had never heard of this. According to Wikipedia, the apparition was approved by the local bishop but not by the Holy See. The whole story is very strange.
That's dumb. As if ... ANY Traditional Catholic accepts the authority of the Conciliars.Please don't miss my point, in which I was responding to someone who said "God would not send us miraculous messages from heaven if He knew we would not be able to accept them."
I'll mail you a state of St. John Paul II next, and you'd better get back to the Novus Ordo Mass. You don't accept the "authority of the Church" on those matters, but then consider them reliable of much lesser matters?
I agree that Akita is nonsense. I think the Dimond Brothers gave the best reason for the rationale behind these, assuming they're real (i.e. of diabolical agency) and not derivative of psychological issues or fraud on the part of the "seer". As Padre Pio told Father Amorth, and as others who read the Third Secret have indicated, it's about a spiritual chastisement, the apostasy, the anti-Church, and not about physical chastisements (Padre Pio explicitly said this to Father Amorth).
But the emphasis of Garabandal and Akita is on some kind of physical calamities, with Akita's "fire from heaven". This is a distraction from the actual message, which indicates that the chastisement is well under way, since about 1960. So while everyone is looking up to the skies, they're not seeing what's right under their noses. Garabandal (clearly diabolical) came right after the Third Secret was to be revealed, Akita a little later, after the NOM was released. Akita also speaks about "bishops vs. bishops", as if to characterize the strife as something internal within the Church rather than that nearly all the bishops would become apostates.
Like Conyers Georgia, Veronica Leuken, Our Lady of the Roses , Bayside NY, also had 1000’s show up from the 70’s all the way through the 90’s. Much of the messages were very convincing and TRUE…especially about corruption and satanism in the highest echelons of the Church…the demand to return the “The Mass of All Ages” and Communion in the hand is an abomination….and yet by the 2000’s after Veronica’s death, the devotees have dwindled to barely 100’s. The “apostolate” still survives as “St Michael’s World Apostolate” SMWA but the point I’m making is that number of participants and even some undeniable truths do not make an apparition legit! They say that during the Lourdes apparitions there were 81 other people who reported seeing Our Lady.
Completely agree with your point.The reason Leuken was “disobedient” was because she was condemned without due process. No one from the diocese ever interviewed he or her staff. She also had plenty of priests and even a few bishop, although not from her diocese who supported her. Bayside Heights was very politically connected and apparitions were very disruptive of the neighborhood. Because of the lack of proper due process and the current state of the social political climate…and simply because Leuken’s vision were continuing…so did she. With that said, many approved visionaries had been told to stop by their local ordinances…to the point that you could call them “disobedient” and yet those visions were eventually approved.
Just chiming to note that Veronica Leuken's apparitions were condemned by the local bishop and she was publicly disobedient to ecclesiastical authorities.
Neither was the case for Nancy Fowler (the Conyers visionary). Nancy was 100% obedient and suffered intensely.
This doesn't prove credibilty, of course. But it is evidence that would/will be considered if/when there is a formal investigation.