Skip to comments.
August 3 - The Second Message of Our Lady of Akita (A Warning)
Our Lady of the Rosary Library ^
| n/a
| n/a
Posted on 08/03/2003 2:28:00 PM PDT by Pyro7480
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
I first heard of Our Lady of Akita earlier this summer during a visit to the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center in Washington, DC. Before then, I hadn't heard of this particular Marian apparition. Yesterday, a woman passed out pamphlets that had the text of this article in them at a First Saturday devotion I went to at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. The text of this intrigued me, because of use of the older catechisms and the criticism of the ecumenical moves after Vatican II. The website that I copied this text from is obviously from a traditionalist group.
Let's have your thoughts on this article.
1
posted on
08/03/2003 2:28:01 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
To: Akron Al; Alberta's Child; Aloysius; AniGrrl; Antoninus; As you well know...; BBarcaro; ...
Pinging the traditionalists!
2
posted on
08/03/2003 2:29:55 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: Pyro7480
If sins increase in number and gravity, there will no longer be pardon for them." This is contrary to Catholic doctrine, contrary to the Bishop's contention that there is nothing contrary to Catholic doctrine in these apparitions.
These appartions sound like a rip-off of Fatima, and add nothing new to those.
"The Congregation of the Doctrine for the Faith has given me directives in this sense," the Bishop said, "that only the bishop of the diocese in question has the power to recognize an event of this kind."
IOW, Ratzinger doesn't want to touch this with a ten-foot pole.
3
posted on
08/03/2003 2:38:23 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
("Messina, Brad! Messina!" George C. Scott as "PATTON.")
To: sinkspur
"If sins increase in number and gravity, there will no longer be pardon for them."
I think there is a misunderstanding over who the "them" is here. The "them" mentioned are probably those who sin and don't repent, not those killed in the fire. There won't be pardon for them, because their chance for pardon has been lost.
4
posted on
08/03/2003 2:46:05 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: sinkspur
Only I can prevent the disaster. Whoever entrusts themselves to me will be saved." Is Mary the one that is supposed to be saying this?
5
posted on
08/03/2003 2:55:54 PM PDT
by
ET(end tyranny)
(Psalm 146:3 -- Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.)
To: Pyro7480
By taking part in non-Catholic worship! This, indeed, is a powerful indictment against the present ecumenical pracitce that has swept through and disfigured the Church since the Second Vatican Council. "distort Sacred Scriptures from their genuine and true meaning," are guilty of sins against the Second Commandment.
People doing unnecessary, places of business opened with people shopping without any regard to the Third Commandment which stricty forbids all unnecessary work and doing business on Sunday.
Something's fishy about all this. There's clearly an agenda from the outfit that is promoting these apparitions. Is praying with non-Catholics in a generic setting "non-Catholic worship"?
Is there an "official" "genuine and true meaning of Sacred Scripture", according to the Church? Exegesis is still ongoing, and some finer points are a matter of dispute.
And does the 3rd commandment REALLY forbid shopping on Sunday?
I notice the only reference to Vatican II is derogatory, while there are many positive references to Trent.
This is why private apparitions are problematic; there's always the possibility that they're being clouded by the perceptions and biases of those involved.
6
posted on
08/03/2003 3:02:06 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
("Messina, Brad! Messina!" George C. Scott as "PATTON.")
To: ET(end tyranny)
Is Mary the one that is supposed to be saying this? Yep. I guess anyone who's not Catholic is out of luck.
BTW, Catholics are not required to believe ANY of these apparitions, as they are all considered private. Those which are approved by the Church (a mere bishop can, in this case, be considered "the Church") are supposed to be free of error, but I've got questions about this one.
Fatima, and LaSalette, and apparitions to Simon Stock have stood the test of time.
This one has not.
7
posted on
08/03/2003 3:05:37 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
("Messina, Brad! Messina!" George C. Scott as "PATTON.")
To: Pyro7480
I'm familiar with this particular visionary. She was healed of deafness. The Bishop there approved the vision. The warning was predicated on ~if, then~ which I think is one of the hallmarks of truth.
In any event, whatever comes, comes. I really think we are beyond warnings at this time. As far as being a Fatima ~ripoff~, I don't think so. I think this is another warning that the previous ones were not taken seriously by either the Church or the laity.
8
posted on
08/03/2003 3:06:21 PM PDT
by
OpusatFR
To: Pyro7480
We are certainly living in much of what was predicted.
To: sinkspur
From the article: Only I can prevent the disaster. Whoever entrusts themselves to me will be saved."
Mine: Is Mary the one that is supposed to be saying this?
Yours: Yep. I guess anyone who's not Catholic is out of luck.
The reason I asked is it seems from the article that only Mary can prevent the disaster???? You have to entrust yourself to Mary to be saved????
What happened to God? Did Mary take over God's role? My trust and faith is in God, Our Heavenly Father, and that is to whom I pray.
10
posted on
08/03/2003 3:15:27 PM PDT
by
ET(end tyranny)
(Psalm 146:3 -- Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.)
To: ET(end tyranny)
Did you read the rest of the article? God the Father is the one whose wrath is fuming, and is planning to send fire and brimstone done upon us. What she is saying that her intercessory prayer, along with Jesus', is the only thing delaying the fury of God.
11
posted on
08/03/2003 3:33:16 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: sinkspur
Ping post #8.
12
posted on
08/03/2003 3:34:07 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: sinkspur
IOW, Ratzinger doesn't want to touch this with a ten-foot pole.
I wouldn't speak for Cardinal Ratzinger before knowing what he actually said about it. In June 1988, Cardinal Ratzinger gave definitive judgement on the Akita events and messages as reliable and worthy of belief.
13
posted on
08/03/2003 3:54:59 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: Pyro7480
O my Jesus, forgive us our sins and save us from the fires of hell, lead all souls to heaven, especially those in most need of Thy mercy.
14
posted on
08/03/2003 4:04:30 PM PDT
by
Litany
(The Truth shall set you free.)
To: Pyro7480
God the Father is the one whose wrath is fuming, and is planning to send fire and brimstone done upon us. What she is saying that her intercessory prayer, along with Jesus', is the only thing delaying the fury of God. What happened to the parable of the wheat and the chaff? I've been reading about the "wrath of God" that is supposed to be visited on us all my life, and the apparitions of Fatima predicted the same, 87 years ago. Meanwhile, one of the linchpins of Fatima, the downfall of communist Russia, has taken place, and "Russia's conversion" seems underway.
For me, the recognition of God's love in my life is sufficient to prompt me to keep His commandments.
Love, not fear.
Terrorizing people into heaven with threats of "God's wrath" seems awfully childish.
15
posted on
08/03/2003 4:28:57 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
("Messina, Brad! Messina!" George C. Scott as "PATTON.")
To: ET(end tyranny)
What happened to God? Did Mary take over God's role? My trust and faith is in God, Our Heavenly Father, and that is to whom I pray. Continue as you were.
16
posted on
08/03/2003 4:30:03 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
("Messina, Brad! Messina!" George C. Scott as "PATTON.")
To: Pyro7480
Did you scout out that website.
Lookie here, at what I found:
The Evils of the New Liturgy
The Tridentine or Roman Rite Mass is not the result of a development or evolution over the 2,000 year history of the Church. It is essentially the Mass that was given to the Apostles and the Church by Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.
This is patent nonsense; the Tridentine Mass did evolve.
Pyro, this website appears to advocate some kind of near-sedevacantism (see the section on "sedevacantism" where Raymond Taouk comes as close to denying the legitimacy of post-conciliar Popes as he can, without coming right out and saying so).
No wonder these folks are so negative.
17
posted on
08/03/2003 4:48:29 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
("Messina, Brad! Messina!" George C. Scott as "PATTON.")
To: Pyro7480
*****Did you read the rest of the article? God the Father is the one whose wrath is fuming, and is
planning to send fire and brimstone done upon us. What she is saying that her intercessory
prayer, along with Jesus', is the only thing delaying the fury of God.*****
11 Corinthians 5:19
For God indeed was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing to them their sins; and he hath placed in us the word of reconciliation. Douai-Rheims
To wit, God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. KJV
To: OpusatFR
"I really think we are beyond warnings at this time."
Interesting. For the past year I found myself scatterbrained in prayer often saying "Lord have Mercy, Christ have Mercy, Lord have Mercy" as my Rosaries too often became fragmented and resembled bouguets of wildflowers instead of the spiritual roses I wanted to offer.
If we were truly beyond warnings then there would be no spiritual battle in saying the Rosary.
19
posted on
08/03/2003 5:33:15 PM PDT
by
Domestic Church
(AMDG...just stay focused on the Eucharist)
To: Pyro7480
God the Father is the one whose wrath is fuming, and is planning to send fire and brimstone done upon us. All the more reason why we should be repenting and praying to God the Father, imho.
20
posted on
08/03/2003 7:24:51 PM PDT
by
ET(end tyranny)
(Psalm 146:3 -- Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson