Malachi Martin

[Daniel_Marsh]

who is Malachi Martin? and what does he teach?

 

[Fidelis]

See this previous thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=60595

 

[GerardP]

I suggest you go directly to the source.

Here’s a link to a few audio interviews with Bernard Janzen back in the early and late 1990’s.

postpositive.org/?p=68

Kingdom of Darkness is about the nature, influence and teaching of the Church on Evil, Satan and our spiritual warfare.

Temptor’s Hour is about the crisis in the Church.

He was brilliant beyond the normal use of the word “brilliant” to describe a person and he loved the Church and Our Lord.

You will be inspired listening to him.

 

[Cathryn]

I sent for his book The Pigrim written under the psudonym Serafian Michael in 1965 . You can also download an article he wrote under the psudonym F. E. Cartus Sept 1965 Harper’s Magazine called "The Vatican Council Ends Reform on Borrowed Time? Also availablie online is Jan 25, 1966 Look Magazine Article called “How The Jews Changed Catholic Teaching” written by Joseph Roddy, Look Senior Editor. He talks about the role Malachi Martin (F. E. Cartus) had in the Council. Malachi has quite a few psudonyms. Seems to have gotten disgusted that reform did not go far enough. He was actively lobbying for an admission of the Church accusing the Jews of deicide. I wouldn’t believe a word he says. During Vatican II he was actively working against the Church.

angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=192403

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I have read, and tend to believe, that some 80-90 % of his stuff is true. Unfortunately, it is difficult to weed out the 10-20% which is not true and tends to be validated by all the true stuff.

I have only read The Last Conclave, which had some good ideas. If you do read any of his products, do so with extreme care. It is probably not worth the effort, and risk, to strain out a few useful ideas.

 

[GerardP]

I sent for his book The Pigrim written under the psudonym Serafian Michael in 1965 .

Why? It seems your mind is made up.

You can also download an article he wrote under the psudonym F. E. Cartus Sept 1965 Harper’s Magazine called "The Vatican Council Ends Reform on Borrowed Time?

Did you read this article? If so, how does it end? There are several pages missing from the archives.

Also availablie online is Jan 25, 1966 Look Magazine Article called “How The Jews Changed Catholic Teaching” written by Joseph Roddy, Look Senior Editor. He talks about the role Malachi Martin (F. E. Cartus) had in the Council. Malachi has quite a few psudonyms.

That’s a very biased article.

Seems to have gotten disgusted that reform did not go far enough.

No. He thought the Council was a wasted opportunity. He thought John XXIII had a naive optimism but essentially if the bishops had been of more good will and the liberal modernists weren’t in hiding, the Council could have done much more good.

He was actively lobbying for an admission of the Church accusing the Jews of deicide.

No. He was part of an office that non-Catholics were to make suggestions to. Jewish groups wanted a condemnation of the charge of deicide from the Church. One of the false accusations against Fr. Martin was that this was all done in secret. But in 1961, Cardinal Augustin Bea was being interviewed publicly about the issue and stated that they were having talks with Jewish groups discussing the issue of deicide.

I wouldn’t believe a word he says.

Then why did you order the book? I actually don’t believe a word you say. I think you are just headhunting.

During Vatican II he was actively working against the Church.

You are either the author of that angelqueen garbage or someone parroting his inane gibberish.

angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=192403

Pure junk. The author omits any information that vindicates Fr. Martin’s contentions and gives undue weight to critics of Fr. Martin. Then he demands that people produce evidence to prove him wrong, yet he would ban anyone who did.

(Robt. Blair Kaiser’s book “Clerical error” where he accuses Fr. Martin of wanting him sexually. Kaiser’s evidence? Kaiser claims had a dream where Fr. Martin was making advances on him. )

(eg. Edmund Wilson’s diaries in the 1960’s are selectively edited where Fr. Martin explains that he is still being harassed by “enemies of the faith” within the Jesuit order,)

(eg. interviews with Fr. James Lebar where Fr. Lebar credits Fr. Martin with helping him learn the ropes on Exorcism are ignored. with Raymond Arroyo on EWTN as a matter of fact. )

The author also tends to cite authors he hasn’t actually read.
(eg. Michael Cuneo’s interview with Fr. Martin in American Exorcism.)

In fact, the author hasn’t even read Fr. Martin’s books as far as I can tell and as was admitted by the author at the time of his attacks.

People who actually knew Fr. Martin were not considered reliable sources (unless they were intent on trashing him) It’s ridiculous.

The brilliant and gentle Dr. David Allen White of the U.S. Naval Academy was broomed for trying to defend his friend.

And I can go on and on…

But it’s part of a pattern. Two years ago it was an attack against Atila Sinke Guimareas.

traditioninaction.org/Questions/E019_Grasmeier-AbbotAttack.htm

Last year it was Fr. Malachi Martin

And it looks like the kettle is brewing on another popular traditionalist this year.

 

[GerardP]

I have read, and tend to believe, that some 80-90 % of his stuff is true. Unfortunately, it is difficult to weed out the 10-20% which is not true and tends to be validated by all the true stuff.

I have only read The Last Conclave, which had some good ideas. If you do read any of his products, do so with extreme care. It is probably not worth the effort, and risk, to strain out a few useful ideas.

That’s not a fair evaluation you only have a small amount of interaction with his work. “The Final Conclave” was written as a fictional account, just as “Windswept House,” “Vatican” or “King of Kings”

That is a far different style of book than “the Jesuits,” “The Keys of this Blood” “Hostage to the Devil” “Three Popes and the Cardinal”

I have listened to and read more than a majority of his works and interviews at this point and I think it has been well worth it. He’s been a reliable guide on where to seek authentic Catholic teaching, his history always turns out to be good. (His predictions are about 70% correct and 30% wrong–but he said he was no prophet.) His advice to people was always sound. I know of several people who he helped discern their vocation.

He was a courageous and grace-filled servant of God.

 

[SoulRebel777]

Is It True That Father Martin Had Committed Adultry With Some Mans Wife??