Eye's to the Sky's Fr. Malachi Martin

And the Jews are as centrally involved in the Ukraine as in Israel. The instigator of the Maidan coup, Victoria Nuland, Zelensky, most in high office in the Kiev government and military, a bizarrely distorted 30% of the Ukrainian parliament, the CEO of the company that possesses 28% of Ukrainian territory, Larry Fink, are all Jews. Oleksander Tsukerman and Timor Mindich are two reported 'Ukrainian' 'oligarchs' who have fled to Israel with hundreds of millions of allegedly embezzled dollars (they have perhaps seen the writing on the wall).

The whole series of episodes is playing out like something from the book of Revelation. Going back, let us remember the fundamental involvement of the Synagogue of Satan (Our Lord's words) in the Bolsheviks and the intriguing fact that another city in the Ukraine, Chenobyl, is mentioned quite explicitly in Revelation 8:4. When all these things are combined with the centuries-old prophecies of Russian invasion of Europe, which our wicked and insane EU leaders and Keir Starmer seem keen to provoke, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that we are in extraordinary times. Typical of a British Prime Minister, Starmer is the one most keen for war, but knows he hasn't remotely got the means to carry it out. However, he is deeply connected with Zionism and there are multiple credible reports that the headquarters of Zionism is the City of London, in the heartbof the former Empire that created the monstrosity of Israel. The United States is well aware that it has no hope of winning a war against Russia, something that Starmer, Macron, Van der Leyen and the rest seem unable or unwilling to accept. A war for Venezuelan oil is a distraction not without its rewards.

Note the hypocrisy that the US can attack Venezuela and permit itself to discuss invasion of it, but it was supposed to have been beyond the pale for Russia to have attacked the Ukraine, despite a decade of attacks on the Ukraine on the Russian ethnics in Donbass.

If the Europeans continue on their current sabre-rattling course (and those are about all the weapons they've got), they would do well to follow Father Malachi's advice and 'look to the skies', for what Our Lady described as 'Russia's secret arms'.

 

Good points. Difficult to disagree with your logic.

I think we must all remember that we are dealing with post-Revelation prophecy. It is the long-considered view of The Church that even that small fraction of such prophecy that She approves is not mandated as part of the Faith. A Catholic who is sceptical remains in just as good standing as one who chooses to believe a particular prophecy.

So, let's discuss our putative annihilation (or not) in good humour!!

 

I apologize in advance for the breakdown, but it's easier for me to address each point.

Okay, but your distrust doesn't mean the man is lying nor does it deny the facts of the matter (which is what's important).

I don't trust the CIA either, but we're not talking about "the CIA".

What do you mean there's no evidence? This stuff is documented. You're talking as if all of this is based on hearsay. This has been known for decades.

The Vatican had plenty of opportunity to expose Fr. Malachi Martin if he was lying about any of this (or his background) for decades. They didn't, and there was no lack of churchmen interested in doing just that. That's why they tried to tarnish his reputation instead with lies and gossip.

Why? It was an offhand comment made in the heat of the moment. There's nothing fantastic about it.

Who said anything exclusively about this video? Fr. Malachi Martin made plenty of public interviews over the years where he told what happened. The book simply corroborates what he had already shared for decades.

Yes, and he was even confronted with some of those fake secrets in those Art Bell interviews on public radio. And because he read the document, he was able to tell with certitude that they were false (or which aspects were true). The Vatican could have published the secret the next day, why would he risk his reputation by lying?

And Fr. Malachi Martin was one of those insiders. And the little he hinted about it is consistent with other public statements made by those who read it as well.

How does that quote refute what I said?

It is part of the third secret, she's directly referencing that and quoting Our Lady.

And of course, those words (or any word of Our Lady for that matter) are nowhere present in what the Vatican published in 2000.

Nobody said they published lies. There's a difference in telling a lie and omitting the truth. They (not necessarily the popes, but the so-called "super force" installed in the Vatican that constantly undermines the power and authority of the pope) have done the latter.

And again, go research what pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI said about the third secret over the decades. Trust them, since they corroborate what Fr. Malachi Martin said.

 

Anyone else find it interesting that Malachy Martin died 1999 the Vatican released the Third Secret 2000?



Antonio Socci, an acclaimed Italian journalist and television personality, originally sided with the Vatican s interpretation of the Third Secret.

Upon closer investigation of this matter, the evidence led him to the conclusion that there is another document of the Third Secret containing the actual words of Our Lady. So far, the Vatican is still hiding this text while claiming that all is released.

Antonio Socci, for the first time, in this book produces the testimony of a still-living witness from the inner circle of Pope John XXIII, to prove his point. This book has caused a public sensation and debate. Far from being a dead issue the urgent message of Our Lady to the shepherd children of Fatima is now being more critically discussed and examined than ever before.

 

https://www.lifesitenews.com/episod...risis/?utm_source=most_recent&utm_campaign=us
Things we have already heard: this from a close confidant of Malachi Martin.

As PNF has warned us repeatedly, the Abomination of Desolation is close at hand: according to the above.

The Ape of the Church vs. the Roman Catholic Church as spoken of by Fulton Sheen will become a reality soon?

When that stark and horrible choice is suddenly put before us, will I have the gumption and conviction to leave what would be an apostate, schismatic, false Church within the hidden auspices of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church?

We must realize that if the Lord keeps us waiting, it is that we may be humble prayer warriors in the hands of the Two Hearts to help prepare the way!

O Mary conceived without grace, Seat of Wisdom, pray for us who have recourse to thee!

 

Revelation 8:2-4
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

2 And I saw seven angels standing in the presence of God; and there were given to them seven trumpets.

3 And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God.

4 And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel.



That is not what the Bible says, where do you get that from?

 

I have to disagree that the above highlight has anything to do with Chernobyl!

Maybe I misunderstand your point, DeGaulle?

 

No worries, I often do the very same thing. In fact I appreciate it. I also like the back and forth, and it gives a better perspective going forward.

The fact that the Morro was in the CIA is important in regards to the context of his accounts. Credibility is important, and given that there is proof that the CIA has infiltrated the church previously, lends to his having less credibility from my perspective. We can tackle the facts of his accounts head on. Is there any evidence for Fr. Martin having been made a Cardinal? If not, does this not reflect on the truthfulness of the rest of Morro's accounts?

Please provide any kind of evidence then Cardinal Bea had previously been given the third secret. In my research of this I could not find anything to suggest he ever had any access.

There is a difference between what Malachi stated about himself and what Morro stated about Malachi. This is an important distinction that needs to be made. I agree that there appears to have been a coordinated campaign against his reputation. However, I do not believe it is entirely inorganic. As people began looking into Fr. Martin's there have been discoveries of false claims on his part. For example, Fr. Martin only held one relevant degree from Louvain, not the multiple doctorates he claimed to have had on his books. So while it can appear that Fr. Martin is merely a victim of attacks, much of the criticism he receives is deserved.

It is an entirely fantastical account, like one made for a movie script. It also isn't the only fantastical account Morro makes. IE, Fr. Martin was also a Cardinal.

No where in those interviews did Fr. Martin claim to have been made a Cardinal. Nor did he ever say that he received the third secret from Cardinal Bea. This is new and does not corroborate what Fr. Martin previously shared, it builds upon what he previously shared in a sensational manner.

Fr. Martin never explicitly said what the third secret was, only what the secret wasn't. Or, if there were aspects that aligned with the third secret, he would say so, but not state exactly which aspects. So even if the Vatican published the third secret during his lifetime, Fr. Martin still had plausible deniability. He also more than likely would have gone on the attack, if the secret was released during his lifetime, and he believed it to be inaccurate.

I believe Fr. Martin did believe he did read the third secret. I am not saying that the possibility doesn't exist that he read the third secret. I believe he might have, but the account given by Morro as to how Martin came across the letter I don't trust at all.

My understanding, correct me if I am wrong, is that Fr. Martin suggests there are two parts to the secret. The first is a hand written account by Sr. Lucia of the vision of the third secret. Essentially what the Vatican released. Then there is a second letter giving the interpretation of the vision. The second letter is the one that allegedly contains 25 lines of text. That being said, the quote I gave you earlier, mentioned below, refutes this.

"Write what they command you, but not that which has been given to you to understand of its meaning"

You said that Sr. Lucia did not need a translation, yet Our Lady gave her one. Why would Our Lady give Sr. Lucia a translation if one wasn't needed? The translation being "that which has been given to you to understand of its meaning".

Please provide any proof where Sr. Lucia has said that "In Portugal, the dogma of the faith will always be preserved, etc" is part of the third secret. She had many decades to do so. It was appended to the second secret, this is all we have evidence of. Also, the quote is in the document the Vatican published in 2000, at the very bottom.

Do you know that there is such a thing as a sin of omission? By omitting certain truths things can become a lie. I have researched what SJPII and PBXVI have said in regards to the third secret. Some of it was about getting away from entertaining speculations. But also their statements re-affirm what was in the second secret. If you look at the third and second secrets, they are essentially the same thing. The third is a vision of the second. Why would the Popes ultimately end up contradicting themselves? Especially if they knew billions of people were at risk.

 

Just because Martin may have read the secrets doesn't mean Marro's accounts are real. There is a distinction between what Fr. Martin said about himself and what Marro says about it. But yeah, in general what Fr. Martin disclosed in regards to the third secret is in alignment with the clergy you mentioned above. Some differences with regards to the 25 line paper, but nothing really outside of that.

It is very suspicious that the Vatican released the 3rd secret after his death. However I don't believe that automatically means we didn't get the third secret. It could be they didn't want more controversy and drama.

This is a good point and it could also be applied to SPJPII and PBXVI. Would they risk standing in the judgement seat of God after spending years perpetuating a lie? I am not saying Fr. Martin never read it, I give it a possibly that he read it. However, I do believe he believed he read it.

 

I think he means that the word Chernobyl translates as Wormwood which is mentioned in Revelations 8: 10-11

 

Fr. Malachi Martin often referred to the war of Gog and Magog in relation to the secrets of Fatima, so he viewed Fatima playing out this way. Which means he sees it as the final battle.

 

My apologies, I got the verses wrong. I refer you to Revelation 8:10-11, Douay-Rheims. Bear in mind that Chernobyl is both Russian and Ukrainian for 'wormwood'.

 

Again, apologies. Please refer to my reply above to the equivalent question from the post prior to your own.

 

Your comments, although very on the money, really amount to an indictment of Marro, rather than Malachi Martin.

If what the Vatican released in 2000 is the whole story, what was the big deal?

I think Socci's book might be the one to get.

 

In the context of current events, that view does not seem unreasonable.

 

I don't think I said anything anywhere that was an indictment of Fr. Martin other than that he might have been given a fake 3rd secret. I personally think the Vatican may have actually released the real third secret and I was simply providing evidence for it. As for the Socci book, I will look into his reasoning as to why he believes the real third secret wasn't released.

All of the arguments in Socci's book are the same ones we have heard, with the exception of one. There is a recording of Archbishop Loris Capovilla in a 2006 interview where he mentions that there are two envelopes and two texts in relation to the third secret. The first letter being the vision we currently have on the Vatican website. The other containing the words of Our Lady, that Sr. Lucia wrote, which explain the vision. Which I believe is exactly what Fr. Malachi Martin expressed as well.

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-third-secret-of-fatima.7392327/

Now the January 1944 message of Our Lady that Sr. Lucia wrote contradicts this vision translation letter. "Write that which they command you, but not that which is given to you to understand of its meaning."

Socci believes the 2000 release on the Vatican website is the authentic vision. But that there is another letter which explains it. So there is now a dilemma between this Jan 1944 vision of Sr. Lucia from Our Lady and what the Vatican actually has. What is funny however, is that would give plausible deniability to the Popes when they say this is the full third secret. Because nothing was ever mentioned regarding a letter of translation. So it was done after Malachi died, so there would be less pressure regarding this alleged vision translation letter.

It appears some kind of translation letter existed, but as to it being authentic, I doubt it. Sr. Lucia publicly affirmed the quote from Our Lady"Write that which they command you, but not that which is given to you to understand of its meaning." several different times since it's first publication.

However it is possible that Sr. Lucia was pressed later on to write a letter of the translation under obedience and was also told to keep quiet about it under obedience too. I think this is the most likely thing that happened. It fits very well into everything.

 

I very much agree. If the message of Fatima is also the end of the end, which IIRC seems to be what Sr. Lucia believed, then it makes a lot of sense. Malachi could have recognized historical patterns, other visions like Hrushiv and came to this conclusion. He said it delved into Papal secrets, so who knows.

 

Yes, especially in light of the fact that Father Martin said that if the Vatican ever released a fake or incomplete version of the secret he would come forward and release the real secret in its entirety.

 

"Various nations will be annihilated": Palestine. Ukraine. This week, the US warned that many nations in Europe face annihilation, under current anti-reproductive and immigration policies.

Martyrs in the Middle East; in Sudan; in Nigeria.