I have a definite issue with the Akita apparitions irregardless of the fact that the bishop there accepted them as authentic. What concerns me is the wording of the punishment as outlined by the Akita apparition which is almost taken verbatim from the article published by Neues Europa in 1963 claiming to be part of the unpublished Fatima message. When I read the Akita description of the coming punishment, red flags went up because it sounded so familiar, and then I was able to track it down to the above.
Either the Vatican's publication of the third Fatima secret in 2000 is right and the Neues Europa article from 1963 is wrong, or the Vatican's publication is wrong and the newspaper article is correct. The latter I doubt. So, how would an apparition almost relate verbatim something that has never been substantiated in a newspaper article almost 15 years earlier?
I wish that the bishop and his team would have done a more thorough job on investigating the phenomenon. It doesn't mean that the good sister was wrong, but that the apparition was authentically NOT supernatural (from God).
As Catholic Christians, the Church does not require us to believe in the authenticity of any apparition to support our faith in Christ. I am a firm believer in Lourdes and Fatima. My faith does not require me to believe in Garabandal though I personally do. But, as I said, Akita is strange, and it poses a slight problem for me.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Friends of Garabandal" group.
To post to this group, send email to friends-of...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to friends-of-garab...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/friends-of-garabandal?hl=en.