The Church Approved Apparition That Nobody Wants To Talk About -Except THIS Priest

[thistle]

Akita was approved for the Universal Church by (then Cardinal Ratzinger in 1988.

I’ve checked the documents of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and can find no reference to Akita.
Can you point to the documents. They would make interesting reading.

 

[thistle]

Found this on EWTN:

Church Approves Messages, Weeping Statue As Supernatural

April, 1984—Most. Rev. John Shojiro Ito, Bishop of Niigata, Japan, after years of extensive investigation, declares the events of Akita, Japan to be of supernatural origin, and authorizes throughout the entire diocese the veneration of the Holy Mother of Akita.

On April 22, 1984, after eight years of investigations, after consultation with the Holy See, the messages of Our Lady of Akita were approved by the Bishop of the diocese. In the Japanese village of Akita, a statue of the Madonna, according to the testimony of more than 500 Christians and non-Christians, including the Buddhist mayor of the town, has shed blood, sweat and tears. A nun, Agnes Katsuko Sasagawa has received the stigmata and has received messages from Our Lady.

June, 1988—Vatican City—Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, gives definitive judgement on the Akita events and messages as reliable and worthy of belief.

 

[contramundum7]

Why does it “hit hard”?

 

[Caveman]

Caveman;3174101:

This is not about this prayer. This is a fine prayer and consistent with the teachings of the Church.

You posted that Mary had changed God’s plan. That is not included in this prayer or any prayer of the Church or in any Church teaching.

This is the area where you and I disagree.

If you want to retract THAT statement, we are fine. Otherwise, we have nothing more to discuss.

Thanks,

JR

I’ll retract absolutely nothing.

It’s not about *The Hail Holy Queen *prayer any more than it is of the apparitions at Akita. What it IS about, is that there is a very special p[lace for Mary in the Salvific Plan. Protestants have consistently denied that for 500 years. Sadly, so have some Catholics.

As far as The Holy Mother changing God’s plan, it’s common sense when we read “woman, it is not My time yet”. We all know exactly what Christ was getting at. It was not His time for His public ministry.

And I’ll say it yet again… at the *insistance

of His mother, the Divine Plan changed. There simply is NO getting around that.

If you want to go with 2,000 years of Catholic teaching, that’s your call. If you so desire to adhere to a quasi-Protestant mindest, again, that’s your call.

BTW, have you noticed that the ENTIRE Akita message has been approved for the Universal Church — even the parts you find offensive?

 

[LilyM]

I have a hard time believing God the faither has decided on a chastisement of the world. Didn’t He promise not to do that after the flood and Noah?

And no, “I alone can save you” implies she has some special power to do so. Mary is a creation. The greatest of God’s created beings, but she has no power of her own. And giving this phrasement leads people to believe that the prayers need to be to her. Not to God through her. To her. That just doesn’t sit right to me.

Of course God will chastise the world (or at least those of us who deserve chastisement)!!! That’s exactly what the book of Revelation is about, the reward of the just and chastisement of the wicked at the end of days.

As for ‘I alone can save you’ - Akita is in Japan, no? The original locutions were probably in Japanese then. There’s certainly possibility for mistranslation here.

In any event approval of an apparition is not, as I understand it, really an exercise of infallibility, hence the fact that we are free not to believe in them if we so wish.

 

[puzzleannie]

alert! alert!
here is another Marian apparition I never heard of until one of the priests involved in this event spoke on Fr. Groeschel’s program, now I see this story linked on spiritdaily
members4.boardhost.com/acnaus/msg/1199839867.html
about an apparition in Rwanda where several children reportedly saw the BVM and heard warnings about the terrible things that happened years later in the genocide.

do I sense a conspiracy or cover up, just because I am ignorant of these events?

 

[Jeanette_L]

alert! alert!
here is another Marian apparition I never heard of until one of the priests involved in this event spoke on Fr. Groeschel’s program, now I see this story linked on spiritdaily
members4.boardhost.com/acnaus/msg/1199839867.html
about an apparition in Rwanda where several children reportedly saw the BVM and heard warnings about the terrible things that happened years later in the genocide.

do I sense a conspiracy or cover up, just because I am ignorant of these events?

I saw that also! It makes sense to me really, it seems that these things happen at a time when a particular group of people need to hear something very specific to them, almost like a shot of courage and strength when they most need it.

 

[JReducation]

JReducation;3174135:

I’ll retract absolutely nothing.

As far as The Holy Mother changing God’s plan, it’s common sense when we read “woman, it is not My time yet”. We all know exactly what Christ was getting at. It was not His time for His public ministry.

And I’ll say it yet again… at the insistance

of His mother, the Divine Plan changed. There simply is NO getting around that.

If you want to go with 2,000 years of Catholic teaching, that’s your call. If you so desire to adhere to a quasi-Protestant mindest, again, that’s your call.

Am I the only person here who realizes that this is contrary to the theology in John’s Gospel as taught by the Catholic Church?

I wrote a very clear post on John’s Gospel and what John meant. What I wrote came from the Church’s commentary on this Gospel. No where does John say that Mary changes God’s plan nor does the Church say that. Nor does the Gospel of John, which is the only one to mention the wedding at Cana, say that Mary insisted on anything.

John makes a very strong case for the signs and wonders that prove Jesus’ identity and he also makes a strong case for Mary’s place in the Churchc as the New Eve and the Mother of the Church. There is nothing heretical or Protestant here.

But when one person says that Mary changes God’s plan, there is grave danger. God’s plan is pre-existent. Only he who has power over eternity, can change eternity.

 

[Augustine]

No, God only promised Noah that He would never destroy the whole world with a flood again. God never discussed not chastising the world using other means.

God has been chastising Christians by allowing the Protestant heresy for five centuries and has recently added the Muslims to chastise us. We just don’t seem to get it…

 

[Caveman]

Caveman;3179156:

John makes a very strong case for the signs and wonders that prove Jesus’ identity and he also makes a strong case for Mary’s place in the Churchc as the New Eve and the Mother of the Church. There is nothing heretical or Protestant here.

But when one person says that Mary changes God’s plan, there is grave danger. God’s plan is pre-existent. Only he who has power over eternity, can change eternity.

Don’t let that little “Woman, it is not My time yet” change of heart throw you. Now I know what the Holy Mother meant by “there will be those who accept compromises… those who venerate me will be scorned”.

By the way, no snappy come-back to the fact that the Akita message, in it’s entirety, has been approved for belief and veneration for the entire Church?

 

[Caveman]

As for ‘I alone can save you’ - Akita is in Japan, no? The original locutions were probably in Japanese then. There’s certainly possibility for mistranslation here.

In any event approval of an apparition is not, as I understand it, really an exercise of infallibility, hence the fact that we are free not to believe in them if we so wish.

It’s not a question if any of us are “free NOT to believe”… it’s a question if we choose to venerate or not. Big difference.

It’s obvious that the phrase “I alone can save you” has caused some uncomfort in some.

Here’s the bottom line… then Cardinal Ratzinger has officially declared that the apparitions and messages from Akita REALLY are from The Holy Mother, who **REALLY WAS **sent to us from her Son.

If we find any or all of the Akita message “uncomfortable”… that’s irrelevant. The Church believes.

What ever happened to Faith?

 

[Caveman]

God has been chastising Christians by allowing the Protestant heresy for five centuries and has recently added the Muslims to chastise us. We just don’t seem to get it…

EXACTLY!!!

 

[JReducation]

JReducation;3180582:

Don’t let that little “Woman, it is not My time yet” change of heart throw you. Now I know what the Holy Mother meant by “there will be those who accept compromises… those who venerate me will be scorned”.

By the way, no snappy come-back to the fact that the Akita message, in it’s entirety

, has been approved for belief and veneration for the entire Church?

Read my post again No. 65, very carefully. It does not downplay Mary’s role in salvation history at all. In fact, I emphatically state how John’s gospel is the only Gospel to focus on Mary’s motherhood and her role as the new Eve. This is not Protestant Theology. You’re very mistaken if you believe that this is what Protestants believe about Mary.

What concerns me is that you seem to believe that Mary changed salvation history. There are two reasons why that’s not the case. The first, is that this is not what John is talking about when he writes about the wedding of Cana. He is talking about Jesus’ signs and wonders. He is driving home a point to his readers that Jesus is human, therefore, John introduces his mother into the story, and that Jesus is also divine, therefore, John introduces a miracle. The story is about Jesus the God-Man and the miracle of the wedding is a tool that John uses to drive home a fundamental truth of the Christian faith. Jesus is the God-Man.

As to the citation where Jesus says “my time has not yet come.” I already explained to you that Catholic exegesis teaches that this is an error in translatoin because in ancient manuscripts the statement appears as a rhetorical question, not a statement. You also keep saying that Mary insisted. That is nowhere in John’s Gospel. It says that Mary directed them to “do whatever he tells you.” Once again, we see Mary, as the New Eve, pointing to the New Adam as Lord and authority over all, human and material. The same Catholic church that said that the miracle of Akita is worthy of belief also says that Gods saving plan has existed from all eternity and that Mary plays her pat in it at the appointed time. She does’t change or alter it, because that is not her role.

Her role is to lead men to Christ, not to change the Father’s eternal plan. Find, in Catholic theology where we believe that Mary has the power or authority to change God’s plan or would even want to do so. She is the faithful handmaid of the Lord who does according to his will, (Luke) not the other way around. His will is that she be Mother of the God-Man, and Mother of the Church, that she draw men and women to her son. As to God’s plan, that his plan.

You said in one of your posts that “this simple woman changed God’s eternal plan.” This not only misrepresents Catholic Marian theology, but also misrepresents John’s message. The Eastern Orthodox church said it very well, Mary is the Theotokos. Which the Catholic Church accepts. She is the God-Bearer. Can you think of a more exalted title? We do not have to give her attributes that are neither in the Gospels nor in Christian tradition. She doesn’t need them or want them. What she wants is what John tried to say.

You must read John’s Gospel as John wanted it to be read and see what John wanted us to see. He wanted to show us the signs that proved that Jesus was the Logos.

 

[Klara_Collins]

Reminder:

Please self edit for tone and keep the lines of communication to one another (especially to those with whom you disagree) respectful and charitable or this thread will be closed.

Thanks.

 

[LilyM]

It’s not a question if any of us are “free NOT to believe”… it’s a question if we choose to venerate or not. Big difference.

It’s obvious that the phrase “I alone can save you” has caused some uncomfort in some.

Here’s the bottom line… then Cardinal Ratzinger has officially declared that the apparitions and messages from Akita REALLY are from The Holy Mother, who **REALLY WAS **sent to us from her Son.

If we find any or all of the Akita message “uncomfortable”… that’s irrelevant. The Church believes.

What ever happened to Faith?

Our current Holy Father declared no such thing.

That is NOT what approval of an apparition means - nothing like. Approval of an apparition simply means it contains nothing contrary to Catholic faith or morals. Eg the messages of Mary at Fatima fit comfortably with Church teaching and do not contradict it - they are considered WORTHY of belief.

That’s a very different thing to saying that they are either true or required belief. We are not required at all to believe in the truth of any Marian apparition. You will not be excommunicated or a bad Catholic if you state that you personally don’t believe Mary appeared at Lourdes, Fatima or anywhere else, as long as you allow to others the freedom to believe.

As so often in such cases the Catechism provides the last word:

" [67](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/67.htm’) Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history." (my emphasis)

All Marian apparitions constitute private revelation - if they are not part of the deposit of faith they are not required belief.

 

[JReducation]

It’s obvious that the phrase "I alone can save you" has caused some uncomfort in some.

Mary did not say, "I ALONE CAN SAVE YOU."

I did some research and I found this. These are the actual words of the three messages as posted by St. Francis de Sales Parish in NY

stfrancisvernon.org/akita.htm

MESSAGE ONE

"Don’t be afraid… You will be healed. Be patient. This is your last trial…Pray alone for all people. All my daughters here are very precious to me".

MESSAGE TWO

**“Many men in the world, afflict the Lord. I desire souls to console Him, to soften the anger of the Heavenly Father. I wish, with my Son, for souls who will repair by their suffering and their poverty for the sinners and ungrateful ones.”

“In order that the world might know His anger, the Heavenly father is preparing to inflict a great chastisement on all mankind. With my son, I have intervened so many times to appease the wrath of the Father. I have prevented the coming of calamities by offering the sufferings of the Son on the Cross. (This is what the Church does at mass.) His Precious Blood, and beloved souls who console Him forming a cohort of victim souls. Prayer, penance, and courageous sacrifices can soften the Father’s anger…Let each one endeavor, according to capacity to offer oneself entirely to the Lord.”**

MESSAGE THREE

**"As I told you , if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible chastisement on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one has never seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by my Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary, with the rosary, Pray for the Pope, the bishops and the priests.

The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate Me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres… churches and altars sacked: the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord. The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will no longer be pardon for them…**

Do not put words into Our Lady’s mouth. That’s wrong. That’s an insult to our Lady and to her Son.

This is almost a verbetim repetition of the message of Fatima.

CAVEMAN you have been misleading us and that’s not right. You have been presenting that Mary will save and that she will alter God’s Saving plan.

What we see here, is Mary, once again, fulfilling her role as the compassionate mother who tries to lead men back to Christ.

You should have said that in the first place and you would not have gotten such a negative reaction.

As to the Church’s approval, I looked that up too. Then, Cardinal Ratzinger said, the message is worthy of belief. Of couse it is. It is consistent with what the Church teaches and what the Church warns us about all the time.

You didn’t have to blow it up as The Miracle that no one wants to talk about because it’s so extraordinary and new! Where I come from, we call that sensationalism worthy of the Enquierer.

What I read in this message is a repetition of Fatima and other messages, such as Sister Faustina and such saints as St. Francis who called the world to conversion.

I fail to understand why you blew this up as if it was something new. I’m sorry.

 

[jj2011]

I was recently informed that a certain Father Parker of St. Mary’s parish in Iowa gave a sermon recently about the warnings given by The Holy Mather at Akita, Japan back in 1973.

And yes, Akita is a fully recognized, Church approved apparition of The Holy Mother. But unfortunantly, it hits home a little too hard for some within The Church.

Click here to hear Fr Parker’s sermon.

Here is my take.

From what I have read, it was approved by the local bishop who consulted Cardinal Ratzinger.

While it’s true that we aren’t obliged to believe in private revelations, I think the notion of praying the rosary for priests is a very sound one. Let us by all means encourage prayer for priests, something that is deeply necessary today.

 

[JReducation]

From what I have read, it was approved by the local bishop who consulted Cardinal Ratzinger.

While it’s true that we aren’t obliged to believe in private revelations, I think the notion of praying the rosary for priests is a very sound one. Let us by all means encourage prayer for priests, something that is deeply necessary today.

Also JJ, if you read the quotes that I posted above your post, what the Sister says that Our Lady told her, is not the same as what Caveman reported. What she reported is very acceptable.

1. The world is in crisis.
2. If it gets worse God is going to act by allowing man to take his consequences.
3. There will be problems within the infrastructure of the Church and they won’t be pretty. Well . . . we had the whole Lefebvre thing, the child sexual abuse issue and whatever other issues. No mystery there.
4. Fire may fall from the sky. Well, we are in wars all around the world, not just our country. And some one is going to lose it some day and drop a nuclear bomb somewhere.
5. The only way to stop this is to convert from sin and pray.

I can live with this revelation. Because it’s not a revelation. It may be a miracle, but not news.

We must report these things accurately. In my mind the original poster kept adding and sensationalizing the story to the point that statements were made which are contrary to what Our Lady said, if the apparitons are real.

Yes, you’re right, I should have said, that Cardinal Ratzinger, said that it was worthy of belief. It was not the Holy Father. Judging from the message, I can believe that Our Lady appeared and delivered THIS message, as I cited above from a reliable source. Not this other nonsense that she is the only one who can save the world. That’s not what she said. What she’s saying is that she wants the world to be saved. Every loving mother wants her children to be safe.

However, I must add in defence of those who belief in the apparition, that the Cardinal would not have made such a statement if he believed for a moment that John Paul II would disapprove.

Cardinal Ratzinger is very holy, very conservative and a company man. I say this is the positive sense. He would rather die than disappoint John Paul II. I truly believed that they dearly loved each other. They made a great team. One was the cold analyst and the other the mystic, typical German and Polish combo.

It may be a long time before we see such a wondeful combination together.

 

[Joysong]

Caveman:

Again, per Jesus via His Holy Mother… the Great Chastisment is at hand unless things change real darn quick.

Shouldn’t we act like it?

I hear you, Caveman, but I am not understanding you.

What does “shouldn’t we act like it” mean? Not a single post has said anything about what “actions” are an appropriate response. Do you believe all should put on sackcloth and wear ashes, or something similar as a sign they are ‘acting’ … ?

The devout faithful in the Church who take salvation for all seriously, have been, are, and will continue doing much, but how does a casual poster on an internet web determine this with any accurate form of measurement? Does measurement necessitate propagating the apparition? Do you think that ‘scaring the hell’ out of people is a good motive for doing anything worthy of God, who desires our love and fidelity?

I am pleased that you are concerned enough to ask the question, but there are many paths people take in their own way that do not include a sole dedication to the message of an apparition. The Church, through the gospel, has asked us to repent and believe the good news. However, Jesus warns that for some, if they do not believe what has been handed down through Moses and the prophets, even if someone rise from the dead, they will not heed. I believe that’s called ‘free will.’

Badgering the faithful for not heeding an appartion is IMO not the the way to win hearts to gospel living. Jesus never used these methods.

 

[JReducation]

I’m going to piggy-back on what JoySong posted. Not only is badgering the faithful unreasonable, it is completely contrary to good Catholic spirituality.

The great evangelists of our Church and the great preachers, such as: Paul, Ambrose, Francis of Assisi, Dominic, Catherine of Sienna, Ignatius Loyola, Francis Xavier, John Paul II and countless others preached conversion, but they told the truth. They did not inflate it. Nor did they try to frighten others toward conversion.

The tactics on this thread have been the same as those deplored by the world, which the Spanish Conquistadores used in Latin America to submit the natives, what the Puritans used in New England to wipe out witchcraft, what Communists and Islamic extremists continue to use to subjugate people.

Faith is a liberating experience. It is an invitation to love, not and inducement to fear. At the core of all of her messages, Our Lady calls men to love her Son, not to fear him. When you take the words of Akita, Fatima, Lourdes, or any other apparition and you quote them outside of the context of what the Church teaches, you are not acting as an evangelist, but as a messenger of doom.

I believe that the message that is being delivered here needs a different approach. Maybe the poster or posters need to look at those great preachers and learn something about style and hermaneutics.