I am sure that Akita is from the devil. I have collected many proves. I am preparing an article about that problem. It would have been already published if new events weren't always happening, making me busy. I will publish on this forum my article in french within one month and you will be able to read it with google translation. God bless you all.
Let me know. My French isn't so bad, I will probably be able to read it without translation.
I guess I'm wary of apparitions easily approved by the Vatican 2 church.
I can hardly blame you, Mabel, for being "wary of apparitions
easily approved by the Vat.II church." Do you have any
examples of these 'easily approved' apparitions of which you
are wary? Certainly Medjugorje can't be one of them, because
it's not approved. Nor could Akita, it would seem, for it was not
"easily" approved, as it took over 10 years, with every detail
having been examined, and nothing
per se specifically found
to be in question.
So do you have any other examples?
As for the article above, where it says that Bishop Ito made
pilgrimages to Amsterdam to the site of 'the Lady of All Nations'
apparitions site, it would seem those took place after he gave
his approval of the Akita phenomena. This is not to say they
are unrelated, but only that the pilgrimages could not have any
causal relationship toward his approval of the Akita phenomena,
because they had not yet occurred when he gave his approval.
Rather, the pilgrimages can be seen as an outgrowth, or a result
consequent to his approval of the Akita phenomena.
In ages past, one of the things that may occur after some
mystical phenomenon has been approved by the local bishop
and makes its way to the attention of the Vatican is, once
sufficient supplication of the faithful takes place, the Holy See
responds by adding the new title of Our Lady to the official
version of the Litany of Loreto.
(This happened after JPII did his stint with
"the Mother
of the Church" and I heard it used in a NovusOrdo
parish setting, but it seems the Litany of Loreto isn't
being used much anymore in NovusOrdo settings
(correct me if I'm wrong), but in traditional groups that
I know of, the title
"Mother of the Church" is not
included when the prayer is recited. We make this
decision after due examination of the circuмstances, in
which we find there is no good reason to add it, and
there are numerous good reasons to NOT add it. We
therefore conclude that its "official addition" can only be
explained by the fact that the pope who added it was a
Modernist, and likewise, if he is Newcanonized, his
so-called 'sainthood' will be likewise questionable, due
to the influence of Modernism in the highest offices of
Holy Mother Church.)
Before the time of St. John Bosco, for example, "Our Lady Help
of Christians" was not in the Litany. Maybe you didn't know that
it was due to Don Bosco's efforts that it became added, and
likewise, it was due to his efforts that St. Francis de Sales was
later raised to the dignity of Doctor of the Church. In fact, Don
Bosco's international order of
The Salesians derives its name
from St. Francis.
The phrase "Queen assumed into Heaven" was added in 1950.
That is to say, when the Litany of Our Lady was recited in public
up until the year 1949, everyone said, "...Queen of all saints (pray
for us), Queen conceived without original sin (pray for us), Queen
of the most Holy Rosary (pray for us), Queen of peace..."
The same can be noted for other titles, such as "Queen of the
most Holy Rosary," which was added in 1571 after the victory
at Lepanto. This can basically be verified by checking the texts
in use at those times. For example, in my 1945 St. Andrew's
Missal, which was printed before the dogmatic definition of the
Assumption by Pius XII in 1950, the Litany of Our Lady reads
exactly as I quoted it above, without the title "Queen assumed
into heaven" just before "Queen of the most Holy Rosary."
Notice too, that titles are not appended simply to the end of the
prayer, but are "inserted" literally, into the place where they
appropriately belong. E.g., A.D. 1571 occurred, and the
associated title (Queen of the most holy Rosary) was added 379
years BEFORE 1950, yet the title from 1571 is today found AFTER
the title from 1950 (Queen assumed into heaven). The reason it
was arranged that way is because the Assumption of Our Lady
body and soul occurred first, and the victory at Lepanto occurred
many centuries later. If there is any obvious chronological
aspect like that, the titles in the Litany are arranged to reflect it
as a 'timeline'.
The point is, the true Church is a living thing. And her theology
is also alive. It grows and develops over time, however, her
doctrines are not made up out of thin air or out of nothing. They
are based squarely on God's divine revelation in Sacred
Tradition.
We are presently in a time when the dogmatic definition of Our
Lady as "Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix of graces: Advocate" is
imminent. It has been imminent for the past 70 years, as to
the articles in my previous post allude. Can you find anything
in those articles that is questionable, that is, other than "it's the
NovusOrdo and he's a Newbishop consecrated after 1968?"
Because, at some point, that's all the sedes have, is that
same old canard. And when there is one day a conversion of Rome, by the
infinite mercy of God, and/or the dogmatic definition of Our
Lady as
Co-Redemptrix and Meiatrix of graces: Advocate, what will the sedes do?
I have it from the
"horse's mouth" that:
There will be no Collegial Consecration
of Russia to the IHM by the Pope and
all the bishops of the world, nor any
conversion of Russia, and to go around
thinking that there will be is foolishness. That's not a direct quote, but it is a most reasonable take-away.
So it seems to me that the sedes have dug themselves into a
hole. And perhaps some of them will be able to pull themselves
out, or at least won't refuse the help of those on the outside to
pull them up and out of their "deep pit of unknowing," but others
will remain there in time, and perhaps therefore even in eternity,
where their unknowing in this life may be brought to fruition in an
everlasting unknowing of the clear vision of God which is heaven.
And as Our Lord put it,
"...into the exterior darkness: there shall
be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (
Matt. xxii. 13).
It is the very nature of schism to be separated from the life
of the Church, most often manifested as separation from the
head of the Mystical Body of Christ. The defined dogma is
the following, given
ex cathedra, some 248 years after the
Great Western Schism, the schism to which it directly refers and
aptly applies:
"Unam Sanctam,"[/i] A.D. 1302, Denz. 875, Pope Boniface VIII]
We declare, say, define and pronounce
that it is absolutely necessary for the
salvation of every human creature to
be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
And it is in our modern IGNORANCE of the importance and
significance, and abiding essential gravity of doctrine,
per se,that we have lost all sense of why, how, when, and where this
is worth our paying attention.
This is the Deposit of Faith. This is what it takes for us to know about and believe, if we
are capable of doing so, so that we can avoid eternity in hell.
What else is more important?