Sedevacantists and Akita

[Melkite]

What do SVs think about Marian apparitions?

I was reading through some of the messages of Akita today, and I came across this: "Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests."

This was said in October of 1973.  If Akita is truly from God, then this sounds like the Theotokos is affirming Paul VI as a true pope.  She speaks as if there is a true pope currently on the throne.

Has this posed a difficulty for SVs, or at least the ones who believe the seat has been vacant since John XXIII?

[awkward customer]

If there hasn't been a Pope since 1958, then any apparition which refers to a Pope after that date can't be taken seriously.

I'm afraid that I don't take seriously any 20th century or later Marian apparitions and not just because of the Pope issue.  There's something about them .....

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

I'm afraid that I don't take seriously any 20th century or later Marian apparitions and not just because of the Pope issue.  There's something about them .....

So the pre-1958 Popes can't be trusted either?

[Baylee]

What do SVs think about Marian apparitions?

I was reading through some of the messages of Akita today, and I came across this: "Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests."

This was said in October of 1973.  If Akita is truly from God, then this sounds like the Theotokos is affirming Paul VI as a true pope.  She speaks as if there is a true pope currently on the throne.

Has this posed a difficulty for SVs, or at least the ones who believe the seat has been vacant since John XXIII?

SV's don't choose their position based on apparitions.  They base it on Catholic theology. 

And they certainly don't base it on an apparition that was approved by the post-Vatican II "authorities". 

[Kaesekopf]

I'm afraid that I don't take seriously any 20th century or later Marian apparitions and not just because of the Pope issue.  There's something about them .....

So the pre-1958 Popes can't be trusted either?

I wouldn't trust Pacelli and his liturgical reforms, to be honest.   

[LausTibiChriste]

I'm afraid that I don't take seriously any 20th century or later Marian apparitions and not just because of the Pope issue.  There's something about them .....

So the pre-1958 Popes can't be trusted either?

I wouldn't trust Pacelli and his liturgical reforms, to be honest.   

Amen, a disaster to put it mildly.

Now who among us will have the balls to talk about St Pius X's reform of the Divine Office? 

[Michael Wilson]

The Post VII "Marian" apparitions, all have one object, which is to keep us in the Conciliar Church and loyal to the "Holy Father"; for example Medjugorge; Bayside; Little Pebble; Christine Ghallager etc. Akita which happened in the 1970's warns us of a "future" crisis?: 1973(Thanks for the news flash) :

The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against 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.

This if 8 years after Vatican II and the destruction of Catholic doctrine and discipline; 3 years after the promulgation of the N.O.M. 10-15 years after the occupation of the Papacy by non-Catholics; etc. etc. 

[Michael Wilson]

On St. Pius's reform of the breviary and Pius XII's reform of the Holy Week; Catholics have to realize that the Church is infallible in its disciplinary laws including the rites and ceremonies for the administration of the sacraments. The contrary opinion was condemned by the Council of Trent, Pius VI in "Auctorem Fidei"; Gregory XVI in "Quo Graviora" etc. etc.
Basically this means that the current discipline of the Church cannot be harmful to souls or be a source of sin or impiety; but rather serves for the edification and salvation of souls. That doesn't mean that each current disciplinary law is the best or most perfect that it can be or that it cannot be improved upon or modified for the good of souls. Of course I am speaking of the disciplinary laws of the Catholic Church, not those of the false N.O. Sect which only serve the purpose of destroying the faith of Catholics and leading  men into sin and perdition. Unfortunately the fact that the men who have been wrongfully occupying the See of Peter since 1958, have enacted such bad laws, and they have been falsely mistaken for true Popes by the majority of Catholics; has led many into the false conclusion, that indeed the Church can teach errors, heresies and enact harmful discipline for souls.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

The Post VII "Marian" apparitions, all have one object, which is to keep us in the Conciliar Church and loyal to the "Holy Father"; for example Medjugorge; Bayside; Little Pebble; Christine Ghallager etc. Akita which happened in the 1970's warns us of a "future" crisis?: 1973(Thanks for the news flash) :

The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against 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.

This if 8 years after Vatican II and the destruction of Catholic doctrine and discipline; 3 years after the promulgation of the N.O.M. 10-15 years after the occupation of the Papacy by non-Catholics; etc. etc. 

If wrecktovation and scandal are your guide to when the Church defected, then you would need to declare Pius XII an antipope, along with at least one or two of his predecessors, because that began decades before 1958.

It's just not rational to lump Akita in with those other obvious frauds.

Akita called for conversion, more Rosaries, and more confession; it was given to those already in a vocation; and it didn't make anyone rich.

[Michael Wilson]

CJ.

If wrecktovation and scandal are your guide to when the Church defected, then you would need to declare Pius XII an antipope, along with at least one or two of his predecessors, because that began decades before 1958.

I don't disagree entirely that the revolution in the Church didn't spring forth from VII like another Palas Athena from the head of Zeus. Up to the death of Pius XII, the doctrine and discipline of the Church remained intact; even in the preparatory documents of Vatican II, the traditional doctrine of the Church was upheld. The doctrines that emanated from the Council were a true revolution in the Church. By 1973 when Akita was issuing its "terrifying" warning of a future disaster in the Church, said disaster was well officially underway and official "Church" policy.
Kind of like an apparition now from Our Lady warning us of the disasters of the Joe Biden administration, but in future terms.

It's just not rational to lump Akita in with those other obvious frauds.

One of the other obvious frauds, was "Our Lady of all Nations" of Amsterdam; condemned in the 1950's by the Holy Office. Well the statue that bled and wept a Akita was a copy of Our Lady of Amsterdam. Why would Our Blessed Mother use a statue of a condemned apparition to transmit an authentic message? 

Akita called for conversion, more Rosaries, and more confession; it was given to those already in a vocation; and it didn't make anyone rich.

This does not in itself make the apparition genuine; so did "our Lady of Bayside" and of Medjugorge; and most if not all of the false apparitions.
St. John of the Cross in his "Ascent of Mt. Carmel" stated that when the devil wishes to deceive religious souls, he does so through using genuine religious symbols, such as the Crucifix for his own purpose; but St. John adds, those object; in this case, Rosary, fasting, confession; do not lose their intrinsic and efficacious value. I know of one family that began their journey towards tradition through Bayside and several people over Medjugorge, even a N.O. Priest that joined the SSPX, after years of leading pilgrimages to the place.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

so did "our Lady of Bayside" and of Medjugorge; and most if not all of the false apparitions.

I haven't read closely about Bayside, but Medjugorje did indeed make the "seers" wealthy.  It didn't produce any vocations, either.

[awkward customer]

The Post VII "Marian" apparitions, all have one object, which is to keep us in the Conciliar Church and loyal to the "Holy Father"; for example Medjugorge; Bayside; Little Pebble; Christine Ghallager etc. Akita which happened in the 1970's warns us of a "future" crisis .....

Exactly.

Unfortunately, the same thing can be said for some of the pre-Vatican II apparitions.

[Bonaventure]

The only trad who is "into" Akita is +Williamson.

Most sede and even several SSPX clergy discount most if not all eschatology, especially 20th century, as others have said.

On the sede front, the CMRI are most into Fatima, and on the R&R front, it is mostly the "Fatima industry" types (Gruner, etc.)

The apparition that sede and R&R alike have no problem promoting is La Salette.

[Bonaventure]

On St. Pius's reform of the breviary and Pius XII's reform of the Holy Week; Catholics have to realize that the Church is infallible in its disciplinary laws including the rites and ceremonies for the administration of the sacraments. The contrary opinion was condemned by the Council of Trent, Pius VI in "Auctorem Fidei"; Gregory XVI in "Quo Graviora" etc. etc.
Basically this means that the current discipline of the Church cannot be harmful to souls or be a source of sin or impiety; but rather serves for the edification and salvation of souls. That doesn't mean that each current disciplinary law is the best or most perfect that it can be or that it cannot be improved upon or modified for the good of souls. Of course I am speaking of the disciplinary laws of the Catholic Church, not those of the false N.O. Sect which only serve the purpose of destroying the faith of Catholics and leading  men into sin and perdition. Unfortunately the fact that the men who have been wrongfully occupying the See of Peter since 1958, have enacted such bad laws, and they have been falsely mistaken for true Popes by the majority of Catholics; has led many into the false conclusion, that indeed the Church can teach errors, heresies and enact harmful discipline for souls.

Edward Feser just this week posted that Dignitas Infinita proves that "popes can teach error."

[Baylee]

The only trad who is "into" Akita is +Williamson.

Most sede and even several SSPX clergy discount most if not all eschatology, especially 20th century, as others have said.

On the sede front, the CMRI are most into Fatima, and on the R&R front, it is mostly the "Fatima industry" types (Gruner, etc.)

The apparition that sede and R&R alike have no problem promoting is La Salette.

Bishop Williamson is

On St. Pius's reform of the breviary and Pius XII's reform of the Holy Week; Catholics have to realize that the Church is infallible in its disciplinary laws including the rites and ceremonies for the administration of the sacraments. The contrary opinion was condemned by the Council of Trent, Pius VI in "Auctorem Fidei"; Gregory XVI in "Quo Graviora" etc. etc.
Basically this means that the current discipline of the Church cannot be harmful to souls or be a source of sin or impiety; but rather serves for the edification and salvation of souls. That doesn't mean that each current disciplinary law is the best or most perfect that it can be or that it cannot be improved upon or modified for the good of souls. Of course I am speaking of the disciplinary laws of the Catholic Church, not those of the false N.O. Sect which only serve the purpose of destroying the faith of Catholics and leading  men into sin and perdition. Unfortunately the fact that the men who have been wrongfully occupying the See of Peter since 1958, have enacted such bad laws, and they have been falsely mistaken for true Popes by the majority of Catholics; has led many into the false conclusion, that indeed the Church can teach errors, heresies and enact harmful discipline for souls.

Edward Feser just this week posted that Dignitas Infinita proves that "popes can teach error."

In which case...why be Catholic?