Well reported, Mike! I have taught mariology at my seminary for thirty-seven years and you show a great command of the issues in apparitions. I'm saving this!
Thanks. I recently gave a presentation on how the Church discerns apparitions, and during my preparation, I kept returning to the Akita rabbit hole. This article was the result.
I've followed these things since my youth and have encountered many extremists over the decades - I agree with your assessment and have said as much in the past. Which is why I consider the apparition pipeline so dangerous to the faith and discipline of the sacraments. These falsehoods have a way of embedding in the collective consciousness and influencing popular piety. Medjugorje has spawned a series of locutionists and visionaries that not a few take seriously. Anyway - good work.
Medjugorje is a complicated one. I get the feeling it will be on one of the middle levels of approval under the new guidelines because it is so big. But some of its spinoffs have been frightening, I agree.
I like your assessment Mike. I will not deny that a lot of these apocalyptic private revelations always terrified me, and kind of made me scared of Mary--to this day I still have a block not wanting to get to know her on account of Akita, Garabandal, etc. etc. I admit that I rather don't want any of the plethora of private revelations to be true.
I rather appreciated Jimmy Akin's breakdown of these phenomena. I find that his walk through of them typically makes them less scary than they had been before. I am curious what you think about the theory (assuming for a minute that Akita is authentic) that the "chastisement" that was coming was not so much a supernatural event, but rather that the world was headed for nuclear war sometime in the 80s or 90s, which was then adverted (in the theory that I heard, specifically due to St. John Paul II's consecration of the world to Mary's Immaculate Heart). To me, that would explain the fire and smoke raining down from the sky and the dead envying the living bit. Either way, it seems like the timeline of events warned is in the past now. Thoughts?
I listened to Jimmy's podcast yesterday and although I generally appreciate his analysis of this sort of thing, I think he tended to give too much benefit of the doubt to the official narrative and to Bishop Ito's judgement.
Additionally, he never mentioned The Lady of All Nations. Granted it was a few years ago so the final judgement on the Amsterdam apparitions hadn't been published, but the ties between the two also can't be ignored.
Also, pre-internet and before the year 2000, the Neues Europa text was very much "in play" as genuine in Fatima conspiracy circles. That's the obvious "link" between Fatima and Akita, and I saw his theory (relying on the 2nd secret and JP2's consecration of Russia) as a bit far fetched.
Since posting this, I've dug deeper into Bishop Ito's involvement. I don't think he was necessarily malicious, but his involvement in the phenomenon has his fingerprints all over it. Pro-Akita sources say he founded Sr Agnes's order a few years prior, and he composed their prayer (then Mary specifically told Sr Agnes that they must pray it). Much of the 2nd message had to do with obedience to Bishop Ito as well.
I need to double check on the history of the statue a little more. There's no question that it is based on the Amsterdam apparitions (Akita supporters say it frequently), but I am fairly certain that I read that Bishop Ito commissioned it himself - giving credence to the idea that he was likely an "apparition chaser." It's safe to say that he's not an unbiased observer in any of this.
We may have averted something, but I think it's obvious to say the world is worse off now than it was then. We'll see...Sister only died a few days ago.
Say your Rosary Karli! Mama Mary is the most tender of mothers.
Was a vision chaser. Then I was awakened. Don't believe in Medjugorje though I share a birthday with the anniversary of the alleged apparition. So it would flatter me to believe it was real. The fact that the Akita statue is modeled after a discredited apparition means that too is discredited for me. If I had a vision of an angel, Saint or the Virgin Mary & they told me something contrary to my beliefs I would believe that the apparition in front of me was the deceiver. In this case I would say their was something a miss about the so called 'miraculous healing' that I am unaware or or hasn't been known. But I wouldn't have to know. Usually apparition sites have more then one story of someone reportedly been healed as a sign from heaven.
Your article caught my attention even though I had never heard of Our Lady of Akita. I have read it through and find it well written and well researched. It has helped me understand the new guidelines for apparitions coming from the Vatican. Thanks for writing it and sharing it.
I'm wary of apparition-chasing as well Mike, but I'm surprised you gave no coverage of the scientific rigor this particular apparition received, such as the 101 tears, the blood & sweat of the statue, Sister's stigmata & healing etc. It baffled all involved. If these were real, (and they were) then we have a hard either/or...demonic or Divine.
Hi Joe - As I mentioned, I had no intention to do a comprehensive analysis of the phenomenon in this article, just to pull together three things that cause me to doubt its authenticity. Because of the time I spent discussing the history of its status, it turned out to be much longer than I thought it would. (The UCA News article was a new discovery for me -- I was unable to track down original sources for the 30 DAYS and Christian Order articles.)
My article is by no means the final word on the subject but I hope it can be useful for others in their own discernment.
I did link to the bishop's letter and to other sources favorable to the apparition.
As for the scientific tests on the blood and tears, my understanding is that two different blood types were detected. But that wasn't the focus of the article. A comprehensive analysis of that would probably require a whole article of its own. I do know that bleeding/crying statues have been faked, and I know that sometimes it's caused by condensation or other environmental factors. I also believe it can be genuine. If you know of an objective or authoritative source that reports on the testing of the blood and tears, I'd be interested to read it.
Thanks for the reply Mike; I've only seen a few online documentaries (secular and Catholic) with testimonies from various medical personnel. I don't know where one could find the official report(s).
Anyways, I reread your intent to offer your modest appraisal w/o doing a real deep dive, so my bad.
Can't cover everything all the time!
I think Akita is credible, but reserve and caution are always commendable.
Well reported, Mike! I have taught mariology at my seminary for thirty-seven years and you show a great command of the issues in apparitions. I'm saving this!
Paul F. Ford, Ph.D.
Professor of Theology and Liturgy
St. John Seminary
5012 Seminary Road
Camarillo, CA 93012-2598
Thanks. I recently gave a presentation on how the Church discerns apparitions, and during my preparation, I kept returning to the Akita rabbit hole. This article was the result.
I've followed these things since my youth and have encountered many extremists over the decades - I agree with your assessment and have said as much in the past. Which is why I consider the apparition pipeline so dangerous to the faith and discipline of the sacraments. These falsehoods have a way of embedding in the collective consciousness and influencing popular piety. Medjugorje has spawned a series of locutionists and visionaries that not a few take seriously. Anyway - good work.
Medjugorje is a complicated one. I get the feeling it will be on one of the middle levels of approval under the new guidelines because it is so big. But some of its spinoffs have been frightening, I agree.
I like your assessment Mike. I will not deny that a lot of these apocalyptic private revelations always terrified me, and kind of made me scared of Mary--to this day I still have a block not wanting to get to know her on account of Akita, Garabandal, etc. etc. I admit that I rather don't want any of the plethora of private revelations to be true.
I rather appreciated Jimmy Akin's breakdown of these phenomena. I find that his walk through of them typically makes them less scary than they had been before. I am curious what you think about the theory (assuming for a minute that Akita is authentic) that the "chastisement" that was coming was not so much a supernatural event, but rather that the world was headed for nuclear war sometime in the 80s or 90s, which was then adverted (in the theory that I heard, specifically due to St. John Paul II's consecration of the world to Mary's Immaculate Heart). To me, that would explain the fire and smoke raining down from the sky and the dead envying the living bit. Either way, it seems like the timeline of events warned is in the past now. Thoughts?
I listened to Jimmy's podcast yesterday and although I generally appreciate his analysis of this sort of thing, I think he tended to give too much benefit of the doubt to the official narrative and to Bishop Ito's judgement.
Additionally, he never mentioned The Lady of All Nations. Granted it was a few years ago so the final judgement on the Amsterdam apparitions hadn't been published, but the ties between the two also can't be ignored.
Also, pre-internet and before the year 2000, the Neues Europa text was very much "in play" as genuine in Fatima conspiracy circles. That's the obvious "link" between Fatima and Akita, and I saw his theory (relying on the 2nd secret and JP2's consecration of Russia) as a bit far fetched.
Since posting this, I've dug deeper into Bishop Ito's involvement. I don't think he was necessarily malicious, but his involvement in the phenomenon has his fingerprints all over it. Pro-Akita sources say he founded Sr Agnes's order a few years prior, and he composed their prayer (then Mary specifically told Sr Agnes that they must pray it). Much of the 2nd message had to do with obedience to Bishop Ito as well.
I need to double check on the history of the statue a little more. There's no question that it is based on the Amsterdam apparitions (Akita supporters say it frequently), but I am fairly certain that I read that Bishop Ito commissioned it himself - giving credence to the idea that he was likely an "apparition chaser." It's safe to say that he's not an unbiased observer in any of this.
We may have averted something, but I think it's obvious to say the world is worse off now than it was then. We'll see...Sister only died a few days ago.
Say your Rosary Karli! Mama Mary is the most tender of mothers.
God bless you
Was a vision chaser. Then I was awakened. Don't believe in Medjugorje though I share a birthday with the anniversary of the alleged apparition. So it would flatter me to believe it was real. The fact that the Akita statue is modeled after a discredited apparition means that too is discredited for me. If I had a vision of an angel, Saint or the Virgin Mary & they told me something contrary to my beliefs I would believe that the apparition in front of me was the deceiver. In this case I would say their was something a miss about the so called 'miraculous healing' that I am unaware or or hasn't been known. But I wouldn't have to know. Usually apparition sites have more then one story of someone reportedly been healed as a sign from heaven.
Your article caught my attention even though I had never heard of Our Lady of Akita. I have read it through and find it well written and well researched. It has helped me understand the new guidelines for apparitions coming from the Vatican. Thanks for writing it and sharing it.
I'm wary of apparition-chasing as well Mike, but I'm surprised you gave no coverage of the scientific rigor this particular apparition received, such as the 101 tears, the blood & sweat of the statue, Sister's stigmata & healing etc. It baffled all involved. If these were real, (and they were) then we have a hard either/or...demonic or Divine.
Hi Joe - As I mentioned, I had no intention to do a comprehensive analysis of the phenomenon in this article, just to pull together three things that cause me to doubt its authenticity. Because of the time I spent discussing the history of its status, it turned out to be much longer than I thought it would. (The UCA News article was a new discovery for me -- I was unable to track down original sources for the 30 DAYS and Christian Order articles.)
My article is by no means the final word on the subject but I hope it can be useful for others in their own discernment.
I did link to the bishop's letter and to other sources favorable to the apparition.
As for the scientific tests on the blood and tears, my understanding is that two different blood types were detected. But that wasn't the focus of the article. A comprehensive analysis of that would probably require a whole article of its own. I do know that bleeding/crying statues have been faked, and I know that sometimes it's caused by condensation or other environmental factors. I also believe it can be genuine. If you know of an objective or authoritative source that reports on the testing of the blood and tears, I'd be interested to read it.
Thanks for the reply Mike; I've only seen a few online documentaries (secular and Catholic) with testimonies from various medical personnel. I don't know where one could find the official report(s).
Anyways, I reread your intent to offer your modest appraisal w/o doing a real deep dive, so my bad.
Can't cover everything all the time!
I think Akita is credible, but reserve and caution are always commendable.
God bless