|
|
Post by Memphremagog on Jan 12, 2005 19:39:15 GMT -5
I can't seem to post anything on the Cross and the Stake so here goes on the Highgate Forum.
What people do not seem to understand is that the vampire is BOTH a demonic entity and a resuscitated corpse. The stake ends the possibility of that corpse any longer being able to supply a home for the demon. Then the demon itself must be exorcized so as to send it back to hell from whence it came! Everyone thinks that if you stick a stake into its chest it will just dissolve like the vampires on Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It is not nearly all that simple and easy! Remember that T V broadcast is a fantasy and it should be looked at like a fantasy.
Reality is much more serious and dangerous. We are dealing with an age old deomonic entity created when the angels themselves were created. It has a vast amount of intelligence and cunning. It can not stand to be outside of a bodily host be that host dead or living. If the host is dead then we have a vampire and the absolute necessity is to exorcize the demon while destroying the host corpse. We can not "kill" a vampire as such as it is already dead! But it can be gotten rid of by exorcizing the demon so that it goes back to hell and making the body incapable of possession by its destruction through staking of the heart, dismemberment if possible, cremation and reburial in consecrated ground. Bishop Manchester insists that every effort be made to insure that the demonic entity does not attempt to posses some other creature nearby like a mouse, cat, dog, vole, bird, or bat and that if such a creature seems to come forth from the dissolving vampire you must try to destroy it as well.
I would have posted this on the C & the S but I have been having problems with logging on there for some time now. PAX
_________________
Memphremagog.
In te Domine speravi.
|
|
|
|
Post by Memphremagog on Jan 14, 2005 0:24:09 GMT -5
The question might be asked about vampires and their ability to shape-shift. No this should not be possible scientifically. But once again we are not dealing with normal science here. It is the supernatural, or to be more accurate the preternatural that we encounter with the vampire. The usual laws of science, or if you will the laws of God, or natural law, does not apply because God has for some reason perhaps only known to Him allowed a transgressing of the natural law by a demonic agent.
What I want to say is that God has established natural law as the norm but reserves on occasion the momentary lapse of natural law for some reason. When Jesus was raised from the dead the natural law was in that instance transgressed by God Himself for a divine purpose that has saved us all in that Christ was the first fruit of the resurrection. Not to sound too preachy this can also apply to other events such as the miraculous multiplication of the loaves and fishes, once again for divine reasons.
But once in a while God allows his enemies to also tap into the realm of the preternatural. I can not explain why God allows this but he does. When demonic agents are allowed to alter the natural state of things it can bring about something like a vampire, and, at times a vampire might be able to shape-shift. At first I did not believe that vampires could to this but upon thinking about it for a long time I believe it is possible and has happened!
Take the instance that Bishop Manchester cites in his book THE HIGHGATE VAMPIRE when the vampire crawled at him in the shape of a huge spider. I believe one of two things happened here.
1. The vampire being a demonic agent has powers that angels in general have, and one of those powers is the ability to appear exactly as they wish. It can be as a pretty girl, a wolf, as fog, a dog, a cat, or as a spider. The form of a spider is repugnant to most people, especially if it is an extremely large one. In the form of a spider it attacked Sean Manchester. Fortunately he was able to fend it off and destroy it in spite of its horrific countenance and its awful power.
2. It may also be possible for demonic agents to appear to take another form while actually not doing so at all. I mean here that it may play tricks on the mind of the viewer so as to make the witness believe he is seeing a shape-shifting event. In the end the effect the it has on the witness is precisely the same as if the creature is shape-shifting. Whether Sean Manchester actually saw a real shape-shifting event or THOUGHT in his mind he was seeing it, the effect on him, and anyone in a similar situation, would be the same as if a shape-shifting had taken place.
This type of demonic capability has been addressed by the authors of THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM as far back as 1484 and their conclusions are similar to the ones I listed immediately above. The mystery remains as to why God allows these things to happen since he can stop them if he wishes. But for some reason probably known only to God himself he permits these terrible things to happen.
Once again I want to go on record as stating that NORMALLY these things DO NOT and CAN NOT take place as it flies in the face of all logic and science. BUT on rare occasions, for reasons unknown to us, God permits such horrors to confront his children. I can only believe that he allows these things to occur for something that is ultlimately to our benefit as he loves us as his children.
__________________________
Memphremagog.
In te Domine speravi.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Apr 10, 2005 9:04:07 GMT -5
"Sean Manchester is a descendant of Lord Byron and the closest thing England has to an official vampire slayer. These two facts are not unrelated. "In 1967, two schoolgirls walking home down Swain's Lane claimed to have witnessed a terrifying creature looking out from the north gate of Highgate Cemetery. One of the girls then continued to have nightmares or visions of the creature, and believed it was trying to attack her as she slept. A couple were next to see the horrific vision by the cemetery. As these events were reported in the local press, scores of people began to write in claiming to have seen a ghostly figure crossing the road; Manchester went to investigate with another man who claimed to have seen the ghastly apparition, but the terrified witness subsequently refused to ever set foot in the cemetery again. "And then there are the women. Two years after her initial experience, Manchester discovered that the schoolgirl witness, Elizabeth Wojdyla, was still having nightmares to the extent that her health was being affected. He discovered two tiny puncture marks in her neck, and diagnosed vampire, a thesis that only seemed to be proved correct when garlic, holy water and crucifixes apparantly cured her. "A far more persistant victim of supernatural villainy was the beautiful blonde Lusia, with whom Manchester fell in love. The sleepwalking girl led him to Highgate Cemetery and to a tomb in the catacombs, where Manchester heard the strange booming noise reported by many of the newspaper correspondents; surely this was the vampire's lair? "Fortunately for there being a book's worth of material in all this, Manchester (quite inexplicably) failed to slay the vampire he discovered within the cemetery, which moved lair and went on to haunt this otherwise desirable area of north London for many years before our intrepid hero managed to track it down and finally despatch it. Sadly for his doomed love, too late..." © Sue Bailey www.suziesbookpages.co.uk/book.php?id=164 |
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Apr 10, 2005 9:11:32 GMT -5
"Manchester (quite inexplicably) failed to slay the vampire he discovered within the cemetery." - Sue Bailey
Seán Manchester was asked by "Today" interviewer Sandra Harris whether he would employ the traditional remedy, ie impalation, decapitation etc, if the vampire was located in Highgate Cemetery.
Seán Manchester's verbatim reply on the "Today" programme (transmitted 13 March 1970) was:
"I would not do this because it would be illegal and against the wishes of the authorities which I respect. However, [NAME DELETED] has told me that he is going to do it this Friday against my explicit wish for his own safety."
[NAME DELETED] confirmed this to the case in a privately recorded interview with Seán Manchester and in public interviews given to various members of the press where he was accurately quoted. We now know, of course, that [NAME DELETED] did not attempt to hunt the vampire "next Friday" but instead waited until the following August before equipping himself with a home-made stake and Christian cross to hunt the vampire.
A lone, amateur “vampire hunter” is as much a danger to himself as he is to any investigation that might already be in progress. It is common sense that if the pursuit of supernatural evil is a dangerous occupation to embark upon, then the last thing anyone needs are bungling amateurs drawing attention to themselves in the media as invariably always happens. The outcome is a breakdown in relations between officials, landowners and potential witnesses.
This certainly happened at Highgate Cemetery in London, and at Kirklees Hall Estate in West Yorkshire.
One amateur “vampire hunter” is bad enough, but each of those investigations became plagued with all too many amateurs who only served to add to the mayhem. The curious thing is that some subsequent reporting of events at a very much later date by journalists who could not be bothered to do their homework only referred to the antics of meddlers and amateurs in the Highgate Vampire case and made absolutely no mention of the genuine VRS investigation that took place over a period of thirteen years.
The Vampire Research Society, though informally a specialist unit within the BOS from 1967, became autonomous in February 1970. On 13 March 1970, Seán Manchester made a transmission for Thames Television as the head of that organisation, and its parent BOS, where he warned against lone “vampire hunting” by amateurs.
Seán Manchester reiterated his disapproval again on 15 October 1970 for a BBC television documentary which also included brief footage of one such amateur brandishing a home-made stake and cross.
|
|
|
|
Post by bill722 on Jun 21, 2005 22:45:49 GMT -5
This type of demonic capability has been addressed by the authors of THE MALLEUS MALEFICARUM as far back as 1484 and their conclusions are similar to the ones I listed immediately above. The mystery remains as to why God allows these things to happen since he can stop them if he wishes. But for some reason probably known only to God himself he permits these terrible things to happen.
Now if I'm correct it was Innocent VIII who was the pontiff at that time. Right in the middle of the witch craze. How much of the "Hammer against the Witch" is truth and how much folklore to scare people into submission? Many people were killed who were innocent and if you weighed more than the bible you were a witch. Women disrobed so prying eyes could look for the mark of the devil.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Jun 22, 2005 3:24:44 GMT -5
Most people understand that "witchcraft" was being used during that period of history as a political tool to attack whomever was perceived to be the "enemy." Or as a useful "scapegoat." That does not, however, preclude the existence of real witchcraft in the biblical meaning of the word, as opposed to the pick 'n' mix catch-all New Age phrase it has come to represent for many today.
When we accepted the forbidden fruit (whether you subscribe to the Garden of Eden or treat it as a metaphor) from the serpent, we disobeyed God and brought what followed onto ourselves. We have free will and if God interfered with that free will we would be denied the opportunity to redeem ourselves.
God, of course, is all powerful. Yet evil (epitomised by Satan and his legion for those who believe) entered our world. It is, therefore, our duty and true destiny to oppose this evil.
Some make the choice (not necessarily always consciously) to serve Satan, as evinced by their actions. Others choose a path of redemption by seeking God through Christ.
These choices would no longer exist if God ceased to "allow these things to happen."
The point of it all is to make the right choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by bill722 on Jun 22, 2005 16:27:53 GMT -5
I believe in the way of the kabbalah which talks about the tree of life. The children of Israel which whoring after false gods one of which was "shatan" and it was incorporated into the Israelite mythos. I personally believe in Lucifer, not in Satan, but I believe in evil and demons. I also believe in vampires. I don't believe the bible mentioned anything about witchcraft in 1484. They only had the vulgate which was owned only by the nobility the very rich. Common people couldn't read and write. They did what they told. King James put things in the bible about witchcraft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Jun 23, 2005 3:18:04 GMT -5
It is generally understood by scholars what is meant by "witchcraft" in the biblical meaning, ie those who employ magic and the occult. Concocting a DIY pagan religion from various aspects of Hinduism, Theosophy and Freemasonry, which is then adapted to personal requirements by sprinkling in a bit of whatever is fancied, is largely what modern "witchcraft" comprises today.
Ignoring the King James version and turning, for example, to a direct translation from the original language we find for Deuteronomy 18: 10-12:
"There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, anyone who employs divination, a practice of magic or anyone who looks for omens or a sorcerer, or one who binds others with a spell or anyone who consults a spirit medium or a professional foreteller of events or anyone who inquires of the dead. For everybody doing these things is detestable to God."
The New American Standard version for Deuteronomy 18: 10-12 offers:
"There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For whoever does these things is detestable to the Lord."
The instruction seems to be clear whatever version you read.
However, what has any of this got to do with the case of the Highgate Vampire about which this forum is exclusively concerned?
|
|
|
|
Post by BaronVordenburg on Jun 26, 2005 15:21:47 GMT -5
This is an important point that Vampirologist is making and worthy of close consideration. There has been a semantic shift here as regards 'Witchcraft'. What is denoted by the word 'Witchcraft' in our own day i.e. Gerald Gardner's hoax pseudo-religion launched in the late 40's/early 50's and various derivatives of that hoax with its pretensions to antiquity as a pre-Christian alternative religion (which historically never existed anyway).
Let's be very clear - in the Middle Ages and up to the 17th century 'Witchcraft' invariably meant the exercise of instrumental Maleficium, of evil magic intended to wreak harm and corruption, infliction of disease and death, worked via the agency of malign spiritual beings i.e unclean demonic powers and their chief and monarch, the hideous Exarch of Hell himself, Sathanas, the Foul One, the fallen Lucifer, the Prince of Lies, who was, and is still, served by the perpetration of acts of evil and of spreading the insidious disease of rank falshood and delusion to prepare the way for the coming of Anti-Christ.
Thus was the rank and noisome fungus of Witchcraft, spreading secretly through all classes, as condemned by the just, prudent and wise Inquisitors, Prelates, Judges and Popes of mediaeval Europe. The ancient measures of the rack and the pyre were only a considered and measured response to a virulent spiritual poison and the methods of the 'Malleus Maleficarum' of Sprenger and Kramer should, in my view, be implemented afresh in the present day. The time for such a great purification of these ancient evils is long overdue.
The unbelief and scepticism of the materialistic and atheistic epoch we live in may be pervasive but that does not mean that the hellish potencies of black magic, evil witchcraft and demonry are no more. As Bram Stoker wrote in 'Dracula':
'And yet, unless my senses deceive me, the old centuries had, and have, powers of their own which mere "modernity" cannot kill.'
Vordenburg
|
|
|
|
Post by bill722 on Jun 30, 2005 23:30:35 GMT -5
While I cannot deny the words of the bible and the quote from Devarim or Deuteronemy you almost must understand Moses was "Skilled in all the wisdom of Egypt". The high preist of the temple employed divination with two stones hidden in his pocket behind the breastplate. To create a pillar of fire and cloud during the day is no easy task. So moses had the need of the ark that was placed in certain places to draw power. When it is written that a man touched the ark and was immediately killed is no suprise. The Chief of the Egyptian Magicians was no other than Mose's father-in-law, Ziparah's father. He taught Moses most of what he knew. Moses also dealt much with a certain "dead man" which I guess would be necromancy in some of his amazing stories. What's good for the preists, is not necessarily good for the people. Hince the commandment, There will be no diviners among you. The people are to follow the preists, not each other.  |
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Jul 1, 2005 3:33:24 GMT -5
Even taking what is said in the preceding post at face value, the New has superseded the Old.
The Old Covenant was carved in the stone of two tablets and a golden Ark was built at the foot of Mount Sinai where Moses had received the tablets. This reliquary became known as the Ark of the Covenant.
The New Covenant was inaugurated by Jesus Christ at the Passover Supper that ended with His injunction to "do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me."
"This cup is the new covenant sealed by My blood."
(1 Corinthians 11: 25)
|
|
