Author Topic: Father Malachi Martin (Read 35175 times)

GertrudetheGreat · « **Reply #60 on:** December 15, 2011, 02:46:48 AM »

Quote from: parentsfortruth

Wanted to add, that I know, personally, an EYE WITNESS that saw his episcopal robes.

Yes, and I've seen David Bawden's. On video, but I don't doubt they're real, not photoshopped.

GertrudetheGreat · « **Reply #61 on:** December 15, 2011, 02:49:09 AM »

Quote from: curiouscatholic23

what does the personal state of his soul have to do with his remarkable theological knowledge?

This has nothing to do with judging the state of his soul, and is exclusively to do with whether or not he is a reliable source of fact, and a sound teacher of doctrine.

I say he was an inventer of fact, and a heretic.

But please, tell us what leads you to believe that he possessed "remarkable theological knowledge"?

Lighthouse · « **Reply #62 on:** December 15, 2011, 11:24:25 AM »

I've heard that old cowboy movies usually had the good guys in white hats and the bad guys in black hats. I'm not sure why some Catholics decided on MM being a good guy based upon a couple of fiction works that seemed to put Martin in the white hat club.

Now we are to understand that proof of his episcopal validity is possession of the correct costume.

In any case, he is a wispy straw blowing in the wind, a manufactured headliner in his own play.

The modern world has so few real saints that they grasp at such straws.
The world will little know nor long remember him.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #63 on:** December 15, 2011, 12:01:21 PM »

Quote from: Lighthouse

The world will little know nor long remember him.

Perhaps, as any human creature should be, for we are really nothing, except to God.

To the people he profoundly affected, his memory will live on, and the prayers for his immoral soul will continue to pour out from the people who recognized what struggles he endured through his lifetime.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #64 on:** December 15, 2011, 12:08:25 PM »

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat

Quote from: parentsfortruth
I love these people who try to say he was in it for money.

I'm sure most of these same people trying to argue that, were not even aware that he was offered a HUGE deal with a big movie company for his book, "Hostage to the Devil" that was supposed to be bigger than one of the most popular movies of all time, "The Exorcist." He was offered a VERY LARGE sum of money... a sum that even Mel Gibson probably wouldn't be able to say no to.

But, guess what? He said, "NO."

Proof for that claim?

Quote
Another thing that just boggles my mind, are these people that continue to slander him about him having an affair, when they have ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence that he ever had an adulterous affair with anyone except the rantings of a CLEARLY INSANE man who checked himself into a MENTAL HOSPITAL because of his insano self. I wonder if people are even checking out the history of the man lodging most of these erroneous allegations about Father Martin?

I posted a docuмent, of an eyewitness, who asked Mrs Kaiser directly, and she confirmed it. You're free to ignore evidence that doesn't suit you, but don't say we have no evidence except that of a nut.

Fr. Fiore didn't notice the problems of the Novus Ordo for decades, and instead thought that NATURAL evils such as abortion were the main problem of the day. I don't expect people who are infected by the same naturalism to see the point, but for those of you who do understand the difference it should be a strong argument.

You're also refusing to say yes, Martin was a public heretic until at least 1975. Why is that?

It is evident you didn't read the links I provided. Since you seem not interested in finding out the truth of the matter, here's a "proof" from the reference I provided.

"Another point which evades Cuneo is the fact that Father Martin was involved in exorcism for over twenty years after the publication of Hostage .
Martin never made a red cent off of these cases nor did he openly discuss the real life identities of the victims of these cases again to ensure the privacy of those involved. Father Malachi Martin never wrote a sequel to Hostage even though he was offered huge sums by major US publishers for both book and film rights.

If Martin were merely an exploiter and opportunist as Cuneo claims, he certainly would have taken up one of these multi-million dollar offers and sold his case studies for cold hard cash. Another case in point is “Son of Sam” serial killer David Berkowitz. After his arrest for various murders Berkowitz requested to see Father Malachi Martin for spiritual guidance. Martin visited Berkowitz in his jail cell and concluded that the young postal worker turned murderer was demonically possessed. After Berkowitz was sentenced to along prison term various publishers offered Martin vast sums to write a book on the “Son of Sam” murders and his relationship with this deranged killer. Berkowitz himself wanted Martin to write the account. However, Martin refused all offers claiming that authoring such a book would be a petty exercise in exploitation and sensationalism."

So, what say you now?

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #65 on:** December 15, 2011, 12:12:11 PM »

Anyone that believes this Kaiser fellow should be

HE HAD ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ FEELINGS for Malachi Martin.

Here's one of his bizarre statements:

…I had a primal dream. I was in a large room kneeling on the floor in a large circle of Novices. One of them was unmistakably Malachy Martin, who stood and announced to the group that I had been rejecting him. He proceeded to remove his cassock, lay it down and put his arms around my neck. Just as he was about to kiss me I woke up.…Now what, I asked myself, was this all about? A Freudian Psychiatrist would undoubtedly call this a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ dream. If it was, however, I didn’t see it as a sign of my ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, but of Malachy’s. My dream was a warning that Malachy wanted me.
(Kaiser: 178)

Whiskey tango foxtrot?

You're going to believe this insano? Really? REALLY?

:stare:

REALLY?!

Keep shooting. I'm reloading.... :boxer:

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #66 on:** December 15, 2011, 12:48:38 PM »

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat

Things he claimed, without providing any evidence:

Episcopal consecration by Pius XII
Reading the Third Secret
Satanic rituals in St. Peter's
Secretly orthodox JP2 surrounded by bullying baddies
Offers of huge sums for making a movie of his book
8000 witches covens across the USA, infant sacrifice, etc.
Exorcisms he supposedly performed
At least one murder involving Cardinal Bernardin

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.

Pepsuber · « **Reply #67 on:** December 15, 2011, 12:56:32 PM »

Quote from: parentsfortruth

Anyone that believes this Kaiser fellow should be

HE HAD ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ FEELINGS for Malachi Martin.

So if someone has a dream in which he is the object of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ desire, it means he has ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ inclinations in actual life?

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #68 on:** December 15, 2011, 01:19:11 PM »

Quote from: Pepsuber

Quote from: parentsfortruth
Anyone that believes this Kaiser fellow should be

HE HAD ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ FEELINGS for Malachi Martin.

So if someone has a dream in which he is the object of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ desire, it means he has ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ inclinations in actual life?

"Nowhere does Kaiser (or anyone else) ever accuse Martin of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖly seducing them in the real world. Kaiser does not seem to realize that the dream world means nothing in reality. For Kaiser to project (yes I am using Freudian psychology) his own ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ(or bisɛҳuąƖ) feelings onto Father Martin is laughable. It was Kaiser’s own perverted dream not Martin’s. Any reasonable person can clearly see that Kaiser was sɛҳuąƖly attracted to men. His own words are proof enough. Perhaps Kaiser’s own inability to come to terms with his own same sex orientation caused him to lash out at Martin many years later. This leads to what perhaps constitutes the real reason Kaiser attacked Martin’s character after the death of the popular priest. Father Malachi Martin, S.J., Father John Courtney Murray, S.J. and Archbishop T.D. Roberts noticed Kaiser’s disturbed nature and,in the early 1960s, performed what is now known as an intervention. The three clerics persuaded Kaiser to seek psychiatric treatment and, consequently, Kaiser checked himself into a mental institution -- a fact he enjoys making light of in his various public talks.However, the psychiatric hospital where Kaiser was interned evaluated his mental condition and a team of psychiatrists diagnosed Kaiser as suffering from acute paranoia and schizophrenia. (Kaiser: 261)It is a common trend for former psychiatric patients to harbor strongly held resentments against those who suggest they seek professional help. Rather than concede that they suffer from deep-rooted psychological problems such disturbed and unbalanced individuals often lash out against their interveners and accuse them of fantastical cօռspιʀαcιҽs waged against them.Perhaps this accounts for the real motives behind Kaiser’s attack. It is a case of a paranoid attacking the intentions of someone who tried to help him. All of Kaiser’s other claims about his wife and Father Martin must be taken with a large grain of salt. It is really hard to take anything Kaiser says seriously after reading his elongated crazy rant which he published as a book. Kaiser even alludes to an alcohol problem that further added to this break with reality:

IN THE DAYS that followed, I lived mainly on gin, spent most of my nights staring at the ceiling in my bedroom, trying to process everything…
(Kaiser: 239)"

Hmm.... yeah I think so!

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #69 on:** December 15, 2011, 01:22:11 PM »

This Kaiser guy is as deluded as "the little pebble." Are you seriously going to take this insano guy's account of things; a CERTIFIED LUNATIC, over Father Martin? Really?

Also, NOTICE THAT HE DIDN'T PUBLISH THIS BOOK UNTIL AFTER FATHER MARTIN WAS DEAD!

Why?

Maybe because he didn't want a LIBEL SUIT!

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #70 on:** December 15, 2011, 03:42:11 PM »

Quote from: Lighthouse

I've heard that old cowboy movies usually had the good guys in white hats and the bad guys in black hats. I'm not sure why some Catholics decided on MM being a good guy based upon a couple of fiction works that seemed to put Martin in the white hat club.

Now we are to understand that proof of his episcopal validity is possession of the correct costume.

In any case, he is a wispy straw blowing in the wind, a manufactured headliner in his own play.

The modern world has so few real saints that they grasp at such straws.
The world will little know nor long remember him.

What does it take for people to understand the depths of the Freemasonic infiltration in the Vatican? Can you prove that what he wrote was fiction? According to MM himself, his writings were 90% fact and 10% fiction. If anyone can honestly tell me that the enthronement of satan and everything else he talked about that happened in the Vatican was absolute fiction, then it only shows that you do not have a firm understanding of just what happened in the Vatican in the 60s and 70s.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #71 on:** December 15, 2011, 04:32:22 PM »

Lighthouse said:

Quote

The modern world has so few real saints that they grasp at such straws.
The world will little know nor long remember him.

Exactly -- except it's more to the point to say that the world wouldn't know a real saint, they are too superstitious. The fact that Malachi Martin is actually admired is a truly terrifying statement about modern Catholics.

It's not only about superstition, it's about the media, stars, celebrity. People have been trained to worship celebrities. This, unfortunately, is the real legacy of Abp. Sheen, who I'm quite sure was being used by the devil for this purpose. It's all part of the build-up to Anti-Christ, who will certainly be a media star to the nth degree. The media, movies, TV, radio, all of this is high-tech magic. The devil wants to make people trust what they see on TV, trusting notoriety and popularity rather than truth, and eventually he'll use this to spring Anti-Christ on them.

The media is the new version of the "village square" where the saints used to preach, except it is the evil version of that. Whereas before, the people sought out the saints, because they wanted to hear truth and be brought to repentance, now we just want to be in awe of celebrities, turn off our minds, and hear someone lie to us. The media turns the world, vast as it is, into a small village where one man can be heard everywhere. Do you understand how dangerous this is? And who chooses who these men will be that get to have this degree of fame? They are not sought out like they used to be for their humility and wisdom; rather, they are sprung upon us, come out of nowhere, chosen by some invisible committee in the shadows. Abp. Sheen, at least at first, was closer to the truth than later media figures, but he still got people accustomed to being spoon-fed by the TV, or thinking they could trust what they saw there. And eventually he began rhapsodizing about Vatican II.

The proof? Look at how sympathetic people are to Mel Gibson. True, more and more, he is criticized for setting a bad example. But if anyone on CathInfo did even 1% of the evil this man has done in Hollywood, in his blaspheming movies, constantly romanticizing revenge-killing and other sick stuff, there would be no mercy whatsoever. This man is anti-Christ-like in what he's doing, yet people only seem to be bothered that he cheated on his wife, which is the least of his problems. His appalling films are his main problem, they send a negative and obscene message to BILLIONS, and he keeps making them. That shows you the power of charm, of fame, and it's why almost everyone will be fooled by anti-Christ, who will go well beyond Mel Gibson in terms of charm and intellect and artistic power.

Malachi Martin behaved like a charlatan, not like a saint. The fencing, plummy-accented, international man of mystery with deep connections and insider knowledge that he just can't tell us about on national radio or he might be killed... Then why bother to say anything at all, if he has to keep mum? Just so he can be famous? Unless someone can explain it to me better, it seems this man never went beyond saying "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark." Well, DUH.

Instead of simply explaining theologically what is going on, as a priest would do, Malachi Martin always took this approach of "Well, it's very deep and dark, I can't tell you all about, but I was there at Vatican II and I know, and it's really bad." Pure mystification. I can't judge his heart, but I can judge his actions, which added to the confusion rather than helping it.

And how, Spiritus Sanctus, can you not see that Malachi Martin was just another version of Tomas? Tomas posts lots of garish pictures of sexy alien women and demons as some kind of "warning" -- that is the level that Malachi Martin remained at, portraying child sacrifices in St. Paul's Cathedral, penny-dreadful fiction that had some vague links to reality. It is junk.

It may have made some people take a closer look at what's going on in Vatican II, but then, priests constantly molesting children may make some people take a closer look at what's going on in Vatican II. Does that mean what they do is good? The way Malachi Martin acted, the way he never took responsibility for what he did at Vatican II but just continued to act like some cryptic spook out of a John Forsythe novel, that doesn't tip his fans off?

Elizabeth · « **Reply #72 on:** December 15, 2011, 04:45:39 PM »

Quote from: parentsfortruth

This Kaiser guy is as deluded as "the little pebble."

Oh I had forgotten about Little Pebble!! :roll-laugh1: Perfect!

Raoul76 · « **Reply #73 on:** December 15, 2011, 04:46:18 PM »

It is known that Martin wrote a book called The Pilgrim, under the pen name of Michael Serafian, in the early 70's, which portrays the "absolution" of the Jews for the death of Christ in a positive light. Did he ever repent for this in any way? Did he ever admit to it?

Raoul76 · « **Reply #74 on:** December 15, 2011, 04:51:41 PM »

I must say, women who hysterically defend Malachi Martin weird me out a little. Something tells me that they would be nowhere near as concerned about a saint's reputation if he were being attacked. If Padre Pio were being questioned, they may disagree politely, but they wouldn't be all violent like they are when it comes to Malachi, they wouldn't make defending Padre Pio their pet cause. Malachi obsessives often sound sarcastic and abrasive in defending their idol, which shows me clearly there is something wrong. I am certain that most of this is based on Malachi's personal charm. It reminds me of how women acted around Rasputin, like they were under a spell.