Olavo de Carvalho accuses Philip Melanchthon of being a greater astrologer than he is
By Julio
Severo
As an attempt to challenge Brazilian televangelist
Silas Malafaia, who called him an astrologer, Olavo de Carvalho, who is the
Rasputin of Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, appealed to Philip Melanchthon,
who he says he was the “true intellectual leader of the Reformation.” Carvalho
decided to face Malafaia, even knowing that today he is the greatest
evangelical leader in Brazil.
 |
| Silas Malafaia and Olavo de Carvaho |
Carvalho said:
“Of
the three founding fathers of Malafaia’s religion, PHILIP MELANCHTON was an
astrologer by profession and heart; MARTIN LUTHER said that the theoretical
principles of astrology were right, but that astrologers were wrong in practice
for vanity and conceit. JOHN CALVIN condemned predictive astrology but believed
in medical astrology. I certainly believe less in astrology than any of these
three, since I see nothing in it but an interesting problem.”
How then did Melanchthon, Luther and Calvin
supposedly believe more in astrology than Carvalho does?
Generally, those engaging in astrology and
other kinds of occultism eventually dive into much more occultism. This is what
happened to Carvalho: his published books and schools founded in the 1970s and
1980s are unmistakable, undeniable and inerasable marks of his obvious
occultism. They also took him to Islamic occult tariqas and their sexual
orgies.
In 1980 he was interviewed by Veja, the
Brazilian counterpart of Time magazine, as one of the greatest astrologers in
Brazil. During the 1980s, the extinct TV Manchete consulted him as an
astrologer. But was Melanchthon the true astrologer? Melanchthon is having a fit
of laughter in his grave.
Philip Melanchthon (1497 – 1560), was a victim
of the tendencies of his time. He studied at Catholic universities. And what
other choice was there? None, for all the universities in Europe were under the
control of the Catholic Church. At the University of Tübingen, teachers taught
jurisprudence, mathematics, medicine and astrology to Melanchthon. Why did
Catholic universities mix astrology in their classes? Doctrinal weakness. Today
the Catholic Church in its institutions seems not to make such a mixture.
Who taught astrology to Melanchthon at a Catholic
University? Father Johannes Stöffler. Astrological indoctrination in the Middle
Ages Europe was 100 percent Catholic.
What amazes me is that the Catholic Church
was so “careful” with its doctrine using the Inquisition to torture and kill
Jews and Protestants who had religious views different from Catholic doctrine,
not sparing them, but it generously exempted astrology.
At that time, the Catholic Church taught
astrology as a kind of science. Can you suspect why Carvalho loves so much
medieval Catholicism that loved astrology and the Inquisition?
The Catholic Church made the very serious
mistake of teaching astrology as if it were as scientific as mathematics and
medicine. In fact, the Catholic Church stuck astrological indoctrination in the
midst of mathematics and medicine in its university courses.
However, the Reformation made a
difference. The Reformation stopped the Catholic astrological contamination
that affected Melanchthon and other reformers who received Catholic education,
just as evangelicals today are stopping the contamination of Carvalho with its
charge of astrology and other kinds of occultism.
Martin Luther (1483-1546), who founded and
commanded the Protestant Reformation, said: “Astrology is humbug” (Schaff’s
History of the Church).
Luther also said:
“Astrology is framed by the devil, to the end people may be
scared from entering into the state of matrimony, and from every divine and
human office and calling; for the star-peepers presage nothing that is good out
of the planets; they affright people's consciences, in regard of misfortunes to
come, which all stand in God's hand, and through such mischievous and unprofitable
cogitations vex and torment the whole life” (Luther’s Table-Talk).
Such a stance explains how astrology,
which had space in Catholic educational institutions, had no place in Protestant
institutions.
Such a stance also explains Carvalho’s
anger, which spares no curse at Luther.
Protestantism came to do a cleaning,
removing all rubble that the Catholic Church has been accumulating for
hindering the knowledge of the Gospel. One of these rubbles was astrology in
Catholic universities.
Yet, why does astrologer Olavo de Carvalho
need to appeal to historical dishonesty to defend himself? Why insinuate that
astrology was part of the Reformation when it was explicitly condemned by
Luther, the founder of the Reformation? Why hide the fact that Melanchthon’s
astrology knowledge was 100 percent fruit of Catholic universities? Why hide
the fact that Melanchthon’s knowledge of astrology was 100 percent fruit of the
teachings of a Catholic priest?
Why say that Melanchthon’s astrology was
greater than his if the opposite is true? If Melanchthon and other young people
of his generation who had been indoctrinated in astrology by priests in
Catholic institutions can be called astrologers, you can only conclude that Olavo
de Carvalho, to that extent, is a hyper astrologer.
So instead of calling Silas Malafaia “chatty,”
he should look in the mirror at his own long dirty tongue. If he cannot even
gauge the past with honesty, how can he boast of being an excellent tipster of
Brazil’s future? Only an astrologer and humbug, using Luther’s term here, would
have the nerve to do that.
I’m just not going to say that he is incurring
in vexation by being easily unmasked in this article because apparently for decades
he does not know what shame is.
If astrologer Olavo used Melanchthon’s bad
example to imply that evangelicals have no morals to criticize astrology, the
shot backfired. We are not the first to condemn astrology. Luther did this 500
years ago. And even if Luther had not existed, would the Bible be insufficient
to condemn astrology?
If with much less astrological experience
Melanchthon is accused by Carvalho of being “astrologer of profession and
heart,” why is Olavo de Carvalho so offended when he is called an astrologer?
After this cosmic blunder, he will never again
have an excuse to complain when he is called an astrologer. If Melanchthon, who
never founded schools of astrology nor gave an interview to Veja magazine and
to Brazilian television stations on astrology, can be called “astrologer,” what
should Olavo de Carvalho be called? Cinderella?
The Catholic Church is very careless about
spiritual matters. She was extremely careless about astrology, teaching it as
science to thousands of its students, including Melanchthon. That is why astrologer
Olavo feels so comfortable in the Catholic Church, just as 500 years ago, at
the time of the birth of the Reformation, astrology felt very at home in
Catholic universities.
Is it any wonder that the vast majority of
Carvalho’s adherents are Catholic? The few evangelicals who follow him have gone
so crazy that they advocate impossible issues, including the Inquisition and
astrology. It is known the case of Professor Ana Caroline Campagnolo, who fights
Marxist indoctrination in schools, but publicly confessed that she did astrology
indoctrination in students. She is Protestant, but it was not in the Protestant
church that she learned to value astrology. She is Carvalho’s adherent. Like
every Carvalho’s adherent, she puts the teachings of astrologer Olavo above the
evangelical faith.
Astrology never had space in
Protestantism. Luther condemned astrology. If Carvalho had read Luther, he
would know it, but he does not apply to himself what he teaches to his “students.”
Carvalho indoctrinates his adherents to charge from critics: “Have you read all
his books before criticizing him?”
Luther’s works include several thick
volumes. It is obvious that Carvalho never read a page of these volumes. It was
precisely for lack of reading that he made the misconception that Melanchthon
was the “true intellectual leader of the Reformation,” when Melanchthon left
few written works, but Luther, in a time when there was no computer or
typewriter, left many more bulky works than Carvalho did.
In 2015, Carvalho cursed Luther of being a
son of a b**h. He who curses is because he has no arguments. Even if Carvalho
had not cursed but only criticized Luther, the question would be: “Did he read
all his works before criticizing him?”
Carvalho not only cursed Luther for total
lack of arguments, but also because he did not read the works of Luther.
If he had read it, he would fatally see
Luther saying that astrology is nothing more than humbug and devilish.
What, then, to call a man who in his
Jupiter School in São Paulo spent years teaching humbug and devilish things to
students, but today dissimulates “philosophically”? Honest or cheater?
What to call a man who does all he can to
hide his solid past as a professor of astrology? Honest or cheater?
What to call a man who instead of recognizing
that he was a professor of astrology, gives the excuse that he only studied a
little astrology? Honest or cheater?
What to call a man who instead of recognizing
that he was an astrologer of profession and heart, prefers now to point his
finger at Melanchthon, who learned all of astrology within the Catholic Church
directly from a priest? Honest or cheater?
Henceforth, I will call him “an astrologer
of profession and heart.” If by the astrologer’s tricky rule, Melanchthon is,
he is, by the rule of honesty, much more.
See below the original commentary of astrologer Olavo:
“In
Brazil, as I have already said, certainties are inversely proportional to
knowledge. A Protestant bishop like Mr. Silas Malafaia does not realize the
vexation he incurs in when using the word ‘astrologer’ as an insult, because
Philip Melanchton, who was the true intellectual leader of the Reformation
(while Luther was the popular agitator), was an astrologer of profession and
heart, and Calvin, which condemned predictive astrology, accepted the reality
of medical astrology, hence the influence of the stars on the human body. I
personally believe in astrology much less than these two, for I have never
considered it a science, only a scientific problem which has never been
clarified or even clearly formulated (read my brief essay ‘The debate that
entered into orbit’). Malafaia, like so many Brazilian chatters, confuses the
word with the thing.”
Carvalho said
of Luther and Calvin:
“Luther
and Calvin were hatred-filled souls. The former was guilty of genocide, the
latter the creator of totalitarian government. Their followers are on the way
of Hell, and if it is necessary to revile them using all the curse words to
take them from this mess, I will do it pitilessly.”
“The
Catholic Church has been overcrowded by motherfuckers over the centuries, but
the Protestant Church was already born founded by two motherfuckers.”
On Protestantism in general Carvalho said:
“Protestantism
was born from hatred and blood thirst. Its Christian inspiration is ZERO.”
Source:
Last Days Watchman
Recommended
Reading:
Recommended
Reading on Olavo de Carvalho:
No comments:
Post a Comment