Author Topic: Father Malachi Martin (Read 33434 times)

songbird · « **Reply #165 on:** May 10, 2012, 11:29:47 PM »

What is the difference, if there is? We have Lucifer and then those who go to hell, and those who were angels are demons. Maybe there is an explanation>

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #166 on:** May 10, 2012, 11:38:37 PM »

Quote from: songbird

What is the difference, if there is? We have Lucifer and then those who go to hell, and those who were angels are demons. Maybe there is an explanation>

"Lucifer" is the name given to the devil by the angels before he turned against God. The name means "light bearer". "Devil" is a term that refers to evil spirits. I'm not overly familiar with the origins of the name "satan" but it's simply another name for the devil.

Lighthouse · « **Reply #167 on:** May 10, 2012, 11:40:36 PM »

Quote

This, said in a thread that has been running for 5 months, with no end in sight, ...

Well, its end was in sight until you reached back two months and tried to get the fire going.

Quote

This, said on the 13th year after his death,

This, said under a forum post that was started 12 years after he died.

Well you are preaching to a weird little choir here. Stand up at the checkout counter at your local grocery and ask how many people know who he is.

Quote

Why focus on him?

Read much? There are plenty of others that get their knuckles rapped around here.

I suggest you let the poor man rest in peace.

Croix de Fer · « **Reply #168 on:** May 10, 2012, 11:41:42 PM »

Quote from: songbird

What is the difference, if there is? We have Lucifer and then those who go to hell, and those who were angels are demons. Maybe there is an explanation>

Yeah, that's what I'm saying, too. I listened to the interview a number of times and I tried to decipher if his words did not come out the way he intended, but it is clear he was asserting Satan and the Devil are two different beings. This was a red flag for me regarding MM. The audio interview is on Youtube.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #169 on:** May 10, 2012, 11:43:42 PM »

Did MM ever state why he said satan and the devil are two different beings?

Croix de Fer · « **Reply #170 on:** May 10, 2012, 11:46:11 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Did MM ever state why he said satan and the devil are two different beings?

No, I was expecting Art Bell to follow up on it because I'm sure he was confused by MM's statement, too, as well as most Christians paying close attention to the interview.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #171 on:** May 11, 2012, 07:43:21 PM »

Quote from: Lighthouse

Quote
This, said in a thread that has been running for 5 months, with no end in sight, ...

Well, its end was in sight until you reached back two months and tried to get the fire going.

You're not going to believe this, but I have to tell you anyway: I didn't notice the last post was in March. I was used to looking at the General section, and this section (Crisis in the Church) doesn't move that fast.

Quote

Quote
This, said on the 13th year after his death,

This, said under a forum post that was started 12 years after he died.

Well you are preaching to a weird little choir here. Stand up at the checkout counter at your local grocery and ask how many people know who he is.

I'm not so sure that's a valid test. I can stand up at the checkout counter and ask how many people know what the Second Vatican Council is and get blank stares. But everyone I know at Traditional Mass sites (almost) has heard of MM. And their impressions are vastly different. Most priests want to steer clear of MM, I suppose it's because of his penchant for impurity in his writings. I'm beginning to see that now. He wrote at a time when that was a new fad, but coming from what was ostensibly a good priest, it wasn't right. I'll give you that. Just because the Index was out of business doesn't mean it's open season on gutter talk.

Quote

Quote
Why focus on him?

Read much? There are plenty of others that get their knuckles rapped around here.

Sorry, do you have a link for the knuckles thing? No intiendo.

Quote

I suggest you let the poor man rest in peace.

You're right, we should pray for the repose of his soul, as well as all the souls of the faithful departed.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #172 on:** January 07, 2013, 06:11:03 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Samurai

I really don't know much about Fr.Malachi Martin, but I can't help but notice that one of the trends I observe in the people who call him double agent, adulterer, etc. is that they often tend to think that the most influence the devil has on earth is a whisper in your ear, that anecdotes of exorcisms and demonic activity are fairy tales and the reported occurrences are hoaxes, Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ is basically non-existent, and that satanists are a bunch of dorky kids gathering around a campfire at night killing a rabbit every once in a while.

I could go so far as to say that they don't seriously believe in the physical existence of the devil. No one needs court docuмents to prove things of this nature because they are visible for all to see.

For me that's a red flag when anything regarding religion is concerned, let alone the reputation of an EXORCIST.

Well said.

SJB · « **Reply #173 on:** January 08, 2013, 11:28:27 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat
Quote from: Elizabeth
I can't prove that MM did exorcisms, but I have no idea how they are proven. Not many people would admit they had needed one, would they?

Fr. Fiore, who I insist was not an authority because he only ever repeated what Martin had told him, said that Martin "assisted at" exorcisms. Maybe that's true, but I wouldn't believe it without evidence.

Certainly I think he never saw an exorcism when he wrote his book describing five cases of possession and a series of exorcisms. He made it all up.

Quote from: Elizabeth
Yes, I had forgotten about The Decline and Fall of the Roman Catholic Church and it was a weird and depressing read - I think he was calling for the Church to get rid of all her money among other things - I'll go read what you've written.

That's right. Fr. Sellmair is describing the age-old heresy of gnosticism, as it perpetuates itself as a tendency in every age. It is rooted in an unbalanced view of man, seeing his body, which is an essential part of his unity, as an evil in itself. This type of belief always manifests the same characteristics - impurity, denial of the necessity of the visible Church, the denial of the Church's right to own property, and demonology. And that is Martin to a "T". If you want examples, read about the Manicheans, the Albigensians, and the Franciscan "Spirituals." These types tend to disaparage holy matrimony and promote the religious life as the ideal for every man, and they love mystery and the notion that some are "adepts" who have secret knowledge (the gnosis) which is revealed to devotees stage by stage.

Martin's final book, which he said would be the most controversial of all, was to be the revelation of his thesis in full regarding the visible Church, and how it was no longer necessary. His earlier books had already said everything he would have said in the last book, but in peacemeal fashion, not in one unified theory. He was drawing trads along, loosening their love of the Church and teaching them to love his mysteries, so that he could establish his new religion more openly.

I regard it as additional proof of this that his followers are so cemented to his cult of personality that even when confonted with the worst heresies they have ever seen, they try and find ways to justify the creature as a good and holy priest. Tell me honestly, have you ever seen anything as bad as this anywhere? Luther was not as bad as this open blasphemy:

Quote from: Malachi Martin
The god of Christians was then pictured as making an offering to ‘natural’ man: ‘You do this, okay? And I’ll do that, okay? Don’t eat those apples, and I'll make you tremendously happy for ever.’ The Deal. Naughty man, ‘Adam and Eve’, that miserable primal couple, would go and eat that apple. Original Sin! God’s plans were in fragments. What to do? God decides to tack on something to man: supernature, the supernatural. Hence Jesus, God’s son, jumps into human time and space from ‘eternity’, dies on a cross, thus satisfying God’s anger and offended honour, and ‘winning’ the super-nature for ‘natural’ man. Jesus then jumps out of human time and space back into ‘eternity’. Hence the Church, the Churches, the Sacraments, the Commandments, Hell and Heaven.

I promise you, that is not taken out of context, and believe it or not, it is not the worst material in that book. It boggles the mind.

What boggles the mind is that a argument is made, substantiated by the man's own writings, and people here pretend like you never said it. A few weeks later, all is forgotten and they drink from the same poisoned well.

How can one ignore the man's own writings?

sedetrad · « **Reply #174 on:** January 08, 2013, 11:31:33 AM »

Quote

How can one ignore the man's own writings?

Truth!

Elizabeth · « **Reply #175 on:** January 08, 2013, 06:46:19 PM »

Quote from: SJB

How can one ignore the man's own writings?

You said you have not read his books, remember?

SJB · « **Reply #176 on:** January 08, 2013, 06:52:18 PM »

Quote from: Elizabeth

Quote from: SJB

How can one ignore the man's own writings?

You said you have not read his books, remember?

The excerpts from these books have been posted here. I was given The Keys of this Blood many years ago, and did not read that book except for a small portion.

Once again, are you saying that what was quoted was inaccurate or out of context? If so, how?

SJB · « **Reply #177 on:** January 08, 2013, 06:59:03 PM »

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat

I regard it as additional proof of this that his followers are so cemented to his cult of personality that even when confonted with the worst heresies they have ever seen, they try and find ways to justify the creature as a good and holy priest. Tell me honestly, have you ever seen anything as bad as this anywhere? Luther was not as bad as this open blasphemy:

Quote from: Malachi Martin
The god of Christians was then pictured as making an offering to ‘natural’ man: ‘You do this, okay? And I’ll do that, okay? Don’t eat those apples, and I'll make you tremendously happy for ever.’ The Deal. Naughty man, ‘Adam and Eve’, that miserable primal couple, would go and eat that apple. Original Sin! God’s plans were in fragments. What to do? God decides to tack on something to man: supernature, the supernatural. Hence Jesus, God’s son, jumps into human time and space from ‘eternity’, dies on a cross, thus satisfying God’s anger and offended honour, and ‘winning’ the super-nature for ‘natural’ man. Jesus then jumps out of human time and space back into ‘eternity’. Hence the Church, the Churches, the Sacraments, the Commandments, Hell and Heaven.

I promise you, that is not taken out of context, and believe it or not, it is not the worst material in that book. It boggles the mind.

Sede Catholic · « **Reply #178 on:** January 08, 2013, 10:23:16 PM »

Malachi Martin claimed to be a traditional Catholic.
But it appears that he was in reality working for the modernists.

Catholics should NOT trust Malachi Martin.

SJB · « **Reply #179 on:** January 09, 2013, 10:59:19 AM »

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat

Martin's book "Jesus Now" (1975) had the following on the front cover: "How Jesus has no Past, Will not come Again and in loving actions is Dissolving the Molds of Our Spent Society."

Now just in case you think that clear heresy was a publisher's literary license (even though Martin never disavowed it), take a look inside and discover the most direct apostasy one could imagine.

Here's a tid-bit, but I encourage you to buy a copy and see for yourself.
Quote
Jesus was taken away, lived a short while, and then died. A marvellous plot! A complete stranger posing as Jesus carried off the part about the resurrection. There was no real resurrection, of course. It all rather reminds one of the those stories about Hitler being alive and well in Acapulco. P. 166.

Sickening, isn't it?

And trust me, that isn't the worst stuff in there. What he says about the Mother of God is unrepeatable. If Martin were in reach, I'd rearrange his face.

What really amazes me is how open Martin's heresy was, and how nobody who defends him seems to know about it.