I thought that it might be better to start a new thread because this is a side issue on the 'Vatican Has Fallen' thread. This is a response to a comment made defending MM: With Michael Voris, the situation was private sin, with Mr. Martin (deferring to the Vatican's reference to his status) we are talking about publicly espoused theological views expressed clearly in published works that were never once disclaimed. However, dealing with a possibly parallel situation in Mr. Martin's life, there were many and persistent rumours about his relationship with Kakia Livanos with whom he appeared to be living. One of Mr. Martin's friends, a priest, issued a statement saying that theirs was a purely commercial relationship, Ms. Livanos being his 'landlady'. Now I have had several landladies in my life but none ever suggested that we be buried together and have a joint headstone and I would certainly have declined and moved out immediately if one had. If MV were to die and be buried in a joint grave with a former 'lover', this might put in doubt his conversion and it certainly does the same in my mind for Mr. Martin (though I sincerely hope that he repented at the end). Mr. Martin also appeared to believe that Judaism and Catholicism were parallel paths to salvation and this is certainly 'beyond the pale'. One also wonders about the many (hundreds ?) of exorcisms he claimed to have conducted when only a diocesan bishop can give permission for them. Did dozens of bishops provide permission to someone the Vatican regarded as a layman rather than use their own specialist priests? Or did Mr. Martin find that his 'stock increased' with that claim among the curiosity seekers and potential book buyers within and outside the Church?
I for one will not be participating in this "enquiry" regarding FATHER Malachi Martin knock yourself out kid.
How was it that Malachi Martin was always the one in the know for any trend that was happening in the Church? He knew the third secret. He was an exorcist right after the blockbuster movie, The Exorcist, came out. He knew of satanic rituals committed by clergy and wrote about it in lurid detail. I think his books did more harm than good. I have never read them and will not read them. Even if Jesus Now ultimately says that Jesus never left and is with us always, as He certainly is, then why did the author make the provocative statement on the cover that He is not coming back. MM seemed like he was desperate for attention and used his writing, in my opinion, to harm the sensibilities of the faithful.
This is not an 'enquiry', I thought that forums involved an exchange of views/information. White flag?
Father Martin spoke about people becoming perfectly possessed. I'm pretty sure I have witnessed this at some stage. Anyone else? It is very evident in pop culture and politics, to name but a couple.
No question. So many of these powerful famous wealthy people--according to M Martin enter into it willingly. For all sorts of reasons. He said it chilled his soul because they had willingly put themselves beyond God's mercy. Horrible and tragic but a terrible reality. I'm sure Stalin and Mao and Hitler had some influence of this sort. Marx too.
I think I recall reading where Jesus asked Bl. Alexandrina to accept suffering so that Stalin would accept the grace of final repentance. However, he did not accept it, according to the article. I think Carol posted it last Fall.
I see your point on Martin's 'skill' of being in the know for any trend in the Church; but you have to admit he was 'spot on' with many problems in our Church. He used his talent of writing to point out many things Catholics hate hearing about their church.
