Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:33 pm Post subject: AQ Exclsv: Malachi Martin's Double Agent Status DOCUMENTED
Malachi Martin's Double Agent Status Documented
By John Grasmeier
Angelqueen.org
June, 2007
Angelqueen.org has obtained numerous incriminating documents proving not only that Malachi Martin was indeed the infamous Vatican II "double agent," but also that his duplicitous activities during the Council ran far deeper than had been previously thought.
Background
During the Second Vatican Council, Martin acted as an assistant and translator to Cardinal Augustin Bea, head of the Secretariat for the Promotion of Christian Unity (SPCU). At the time, a major focus of the SPCU was the Jewish declaration portion of Nostra Aetate, the Vatican II document that addressed the Church's relations with other religions. Cardinal Bea would later be referred to by Archbishop Lefebvre as an "instrument of betrayal."
In January of 1966, Look Magazine ran an article entitled "How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking," a lengthy, in-depth look at the influence various Jewish lobbying groups had over the final draft of Nostra Aetate. In the article, Senior Editor Joseph Roddy tells of an unnamed Jesuit priest who held a key position in Rome during the time the Second Vatican Council was in session. The priest, described as a “double agent who "could never turn down work" and a "savior in the diaspora," would use his position to gather and disseminate inside information to the secular press and the Jewish lobbying groups, who would in turn use that information in their efforts to influence the Council fathers, particularly the progressive American bishops. Although the priest's actual name is withheld, several pseudonyms he used for his various activities are revealed.
As Michael Serafian, he wrote "The Pilgrim" (Ferrar, Straus & Giroux, 1964), a tell-all book on the politics, key figures and inner dealings of the council. As F.E. Cartus, he penned two timely articles, one for Harper's Magazine and one for the American Jewish Committee's influential intellectual periodical "Commentary." As Pushkin, he would feed "inside tips and tactical leaks," often in the form of notes slipped under doors, to journalists of major media organizations.
This all took place many years before Malachi Martin became a cult figure and public author who wrote books under his own name. Although word began to get around in certain circles that Martin and the pen-names were one in the same, it wasn't until 5 years after he left Rome, when he wrote "The Encounter" (Ferrar, Straus & Giroux), that the first solid nexus was made between Martin and the double-agent priest. On the back cover of The Encounter, it states clearly that Malachi Martin did indeed write "The Pilgrim" under the pseudonym Michael Serafian.
Despite the indisputable self-admission that Michael Serafian was Martin's pen name, many of his devoted fans would claim that there was no evidence that he was the mole priest identified in the Look article who wrote for the American Jewish Committee and used his position in Rome to pass sensitive information to the press.What follows, will indisputably show not only that Martin was the double-agent priest in the Look article, but that the "warm friendship with the AJC" described by Joe Roddy was far warmer than anyone, including Roddy, had suspected.
The documents referenced below were made available to AQ by the Manuscripts Department of the New York Public Library. They are part of the Ferrar, Straus & Giroux collection, which contains correspondence and documentation on the publishing company's dealings with many of its authors. They are available to any and all. None have been altered in any way shape or form.
THE DOCUMENTS
Exhibit A: Setting up the Swiss bank account - This memo, dated March 19, 1964 was written by FSG treasurer Robert Wohlforth (RW) and sent to Robert Straus (RWS). Roger Straus is the president of Ferrar, Straus and Giroux and the sole heir to the Guggenheim fortune. The memo describes a discussion the two had regarding “The Pilgrim contract” and what steps needed to be taken to set up a Swiss bank account.
Exhibit B: Zachariah Shuster receives royalty payments from Martin's book, "The Pilgrim" - This extraordinarily fascinating sheet of paper must be colloquially described as the proverbial "doozey." It's a Ferrar, Straus and Giroux royalty statement listing payouts and deductions for The Pilgrim. Only instead of the payee being the author of the book, Malachi Martin (aka Michael Serafian), the payee just happens to be Zachariah Shuster of the American Jewish Committee.
Exhibit C: Zachariah Shuster wonders where the check is - Zachariah Shuster of the American Jewish Committee writes a letter to FS&G treasurer wondering why a check that was destined for a Swiss bank account hasn't yet arrived. He follows up with a confirmation then receives a response from Ferrar, Straus and Giroux treasurer Robert Wohlforth.
Exhibit D: Martin's services are requested by the AJC - Here we have Marc Tanenbaum, Director of Interreligious Affairs for the AJC, accepting a gracious offer from Roger Straus to use Malachi Martin as he sees fit. Tanenbaum thinks the idea is a good one, stating that "Serafian (Martin) could provide a genuine service if he were to deal with the crucial issue of the deicide problem. Although the hoped for late summer deadline would not be met, in the January 1965 issue of the AJC publication, Commentary, Martin, as F.E. Cartus, writes an article entitled "Vatican II and the Jews" At the beginning of the third paragraph, it reads in part as follows:
"Roman Catholic believers drew a whole range of practical conclusions from these premises. The Jews as a people-not only the Jews of Christ's time but Jews of all time-were guilty of having killed Christ, the God-man: theologically speaking, they were deicides."
Not only does Martin dutifully write the article (containing a vast amount of insider information) as requested, but he exceeds all expectations when he fabricates a statement on the Jews that he attributes to Pope John XXIII, claiming it was written shortly before his death and was to be read on a set date in all Catholic Churches worldwide. That story HERE.
Exhibit F: Roger Straus wants to discuss Martin with Podhorez - Roger Straus wishes to discuss a letter from Michael Serafian (Malachi Martin) with Norman Podhorez, the editor of Commentary, where the article was to appear. It's unclear what is meant when Straus states they should discuss the matter as a "possible post mortem." Perhaps he was referring to the fact that the hoped for timeframe of late summer couldn't be met.
Exhibit G: Straus makes undeniable connection between Martin and F.E. Cartus - Roger Straus writes to a British publisher telling him to look for an article by pseudonym Michael Serafian (Martin) that will appear in the September 1965 issue of Harper's Magazine. As promised, an article by F.E. Cartus entitled "The Vatican Council Ends - Reform on borrowed time?" by F.E. Cartus appears in the September edition of Harpers.
Exhibit H: An ledger with interesting transactions - A ledger that was created to show "actual payments to or in (sic) behalf of Michael Serafian," offers some interesting insights. On line 1, it shows the check sent to Zachariah Shuster on June 25, 1964 (see Exhibit C). On line 3, it shows the net royalty payment that is shown on line 29 of the document at Exhibit B. On line 2, it shows another payment to Zachariah Shuster that does not have any corresponding documentation in the FS&G collection. On line 5, it shows a payment of $500 to Abe Karlikow. Abe Karlikow was the director of the American Jewish Committee's European office, based in Paris, France. On line 9, it shows Martin's last payment as being on June 7, 1965. Just a few weeks later, on June 24, 1965, Martin would receive a $7,350 (around $48,000 in 2007 dollars) fellowship grant from the Harry F. Guggenheim foundation. The founder of that foundation, Harry Frank Guggenheim, just so happens to be Roger Straus' uncle on his mother's side.
In conclusion
There is no doubt whatsoever that the double agent described in the Look article by Joseph Roddy was in fact Malachi Martin. The document at exhibit G undeniably ties Michael Serafian - who is undeniably Malachi Martin - to the F.E Cartus pseudonym.
Joe Roddy was somewhat remiss, in that the relationship between Martin and the American Jewish Committee was far more than "warm friendship." The relationship was outright collusive. Zachariah Shuster and Abe Kalikow were receiving payments on Martin's behalf that were laundered through a Swiss bank account set up specifically for that purpose. Marc Tanenbaum requested custom propaganda for the AJC periodical "Commentary," which Martin happily provided. Shuster and Kalikow were attached to the European office of the AJC in Paris, France, which just so happens to be where Martin fled to after he left Rome.
Martin was paid well for his services. According to the Straus ledger (exhibit H), during the latter half of 1964, he received a total of $3,651.03. According to the Federal Reserve consumer price index calculator, that would equal $24,202.80 today. In the first half of 1965, he received $4,282.85, which works out to $27,940.50 in 2007 dollars. Immediately after receiving his last payment from Straus in June of '65, Martin receives a grant from Straus' uncle's foundation for $7,350 or $47,950 adjusted to 2007. In fairness to Martin, it must be noted that he took that grant in monthly payments over 15 months following the time it was awarded to him. The fact remains however, in the year's time that spanned from June of '64 and June of '65, Martin was paid, granted, or received on his behalf at least $100,000 adjusted for inflation. This sum only includes what has been documented by AQ as being paid from Guggenheim and FS&G from in that one year span. It does not include other payments, if any, from Guggenheim and FS&G that AQ doesn't have a record of. It does not include any payments Martin would have received for writing the articles for Commentary and Harpers. It does not include any other possible income sources. In the summer of 1963, Robert Kaiser claims that Martin 'always had a wallet was stuffed with hundred dollar bills,' that he believed was provided by the AJC. In any case, he most certainly didn't do the AJC's bidding for free. It's more than safe to assume that Martin had income aside from that which AQ has been able to document 40 years after the fact.
While Malachi Martin was supposed to be working on behalf of Holy Mother Church, the Holy See and his brother and sister Catholics, he was working for secular publishers, secular media organization and Jewish interest groups.
Last edited by servitium on Mon Feb 18, 2008 7:28 pm; edited 5 times in total
Martin was not the only one, there were and remain thousands of clerical moles in the Catholic Church hierarchy all over the world, all bent on the destruction of the Church. All enemies within.
ST. VINCENT OF LERINS (CA. 400-CA. 450)
CONFESSOR OF THE CHURCH
"What then should a Catholic do if some part of the Church were to separate itself from communion with the universal Faith? What other
choice can he make but to prefer to the gangrenous and corrupted
member the whole of the body that is sound. And if some new contagion
were to try to poison no longer a small part of the Church, but all of
the Church at the same time, then he will take the greatest care to
attach himself to antiquity which, obviously, can no longer be seduced
by any lying novelty." (Commonitorium)
Thanks for all the effort Serv, an accurate picture of the reality of Martin has been needed and no doubt will continue to be needed.
For those referencing this thread first, the following provides the background.
servitium wrote:
Martin a 60s liberal? No FAR worse
Contains transcriptions from the memoirs of Martin’s friend Edmund Wilson with first hand accounts of Martin mocking a priest for dedicating a book to the blessed virgin, ridiculing sacred relics and taking the “fabricated Gospel” theory on the dead sea scrolls. It also shows that those who had immediate contact with him were claiming that one of the reasons he was defrocked was for the affair and that they considered Livanos his girlfriend. The memoirs also give the reason he ran into trouble with the Jesuits as being because of his heterodoxy, not his orthodoxy as he claimed.
The story also contains the transcription of a radio interview in 1996 where Martin is put on the spot about the heterodoxy charges, which Martin actually made against himself in Wilson’s memoirs. He doesn’t refute any of it but tells the interviewer he had a conversion when he first got to New York and drove a cab. The explanation however doesn’t jibe with Martin’s other documented words, writings and actions.
Malachi Martin 1973 interview with the Cincinnati Enquirer
He relates to the interviewer how during the council he was blackmailing cardinals by digging up dirt from their past and using it to get them to go along with him and Cardinal Bea during the council. He also provides more of his absurd views on religion and Christ.
Another interesting Malachi Martin article (1974)
Martin lauds Judaism, Buddhism and Chairman Mao while his harshest criticism is for Catholicism. He also proclaims more of the heretical gunk he was given to during that time. He tells us of how he was named after his Jewish banker ancestor.
Malachi Martin's exorcism snake oil
The chief exorcist from the Archdiocese of New York explodes Martin’s claims of being an exorcist in anywhere in New York. A REAL exorcist - father Lebar - gives REAL verification of how REAL exorcisms were handled in the Archdiocese. He tells us that Martin had nothing whatsoever to do with any REAL exorcisms. This article also has Martin in 1986 telling the New York Daily News that he wasn’t clergy and wasn’t under any bishop. Also provided is a Martin’s dispensation from ALL duties and privileges from the priesthood and the Jesuit order. The exact reference number and the language from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life at the Holy See is provided.
What Malachi Martin's countrymen thought of him in 1973
Documents Martin’s Irish more traditional or orthodox countrymen completely outraged with or opposing him on a TV program. It also presents him as a liberal, and portrays him as a fantasist even back then. In fact the journalist calls him "Walter Mitty". The article has Martin yet again telling of how he was tasked with going after cardinals during the council.
Malachi Martin's betrayals (forges papal prayer)
More connections to the pseudonyms Martin was using while he was feeding information to the press and Jewish lobbying groups at the time he was supposed to be working for the Holy See on behalf of the Catholic Church. Incredibly, in an article he wrote for the American Jewish Committee under the pseudonym “F.E. Cartus,” Martin fabricates an implausible statement that he attributes to Pope John XXIII which has the pontiff apologizing for supposed past sins Catholics committed against Jews. It also shows how Martin received nearly $80,000 in 2007 dollars from his publishers family – the Guggenheims - shortly after leaving Rome.
Malachi Martin’s wife stealing documented
Available for download, is a PDF of a letter written and signed Father William Van Etten Casey S.J., on Holy Cross College stationary, sent to the office of Archbishop Eugene Cardinale, #3 in the Vatican secretary of state. The letter was written in order to shed light on the breakdown of the Kaiser’s marriage because an annulment was being sought. It documents not only that Martin had an affair with Kaiser’s wife, but that he tried to steal her away from him, destroying Kaiser’s family in the process. More evidence of Martin’s absurd lie that he that he left the priesthood because he was a pained, goodly, orthodox priest.
Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:42 am Post subject: Malachi Martin ...
Malachi Martin worked with Cardinal Bea during the VII Council...
We know that Cardinal Bea was Pope Pius XII's 'FATHER CONFESSOR'... meaning that he had quite an Influence on the Holy Father...
Trouble is ... he (the Cardinal) proved himself to be a Wild-eyed MODERNIST during that Catastrophe for the Church and for our Souls...
Maybe Cardinal Bea Dissuaded the Pope from Conecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? Kyrie Eleison.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:05 pm Post subject: Martin situation
Considering the widespread notoriety of M. Martin, this site has rendered a valuable service to those concerned with the truth about what has, factually, happened to the Catholic Church in the wake of Vatican II.
And yet, it is actually not surprising that anyone at any time might betray his position for mere lucre, or a woman, or an addiction.
Since Judas, any number of traitors have had confidence and high honors bestowed upon them by this or that ecclesiastical authority.
Too bad for Martin. I'm just very glad the facts are now on the table. _________________ Salus animarum prima lex
I don't know much about the Martin case, but is it possible that he had a guilt complex over his early years as a traitor and a Judas and this led to his later Conservative and Traditionalist stances in books and interviews?
Is it possible that the Martin of the 80's and 90's was sincerely repentent about his role in the Second Vatican Council and his behavior in the 60's and 70's and this led to his later attacks on the Jesuits and the Liberal wing of the Church?
If he really was a liberal mole, why would he start attacking the Liberals in the church at the end of his career unless he was sincerely repentent?
Father Wickens was apparently very close to Martin in his final years and he was apparently a very good and holy priest.
The contrast between the early Martin and the later Martin doesn't appear to make sense, unless he really changed. _________________ he which hath no stomach to this fight
let him depart
I don't know much about the Martin case, but is it possible that he had a guilt complex over his early years as a traitor and a Judas and this led to his later Conservative and Traditionalist stances in books and interviews?
Is it possible that the Martin of the 80's and 90's was sincerely repentent about his role in the Second Vatican Council and his behavior in the 60's and 70's and this led to his later attacks on the Jesuits and the Liberal wing of the Church?
If he really was a liberal mole, why would he start attacking the Liberals in the church at the end of his career unless he was sincerely repentent?
Father Wickens was apparently very close to Martin in his final years and he was apparently a very good and holy priest.
The contrast between the early Martin and the later Martin doesn't appear to make sense, unless he really changed.
I thought he was de-frocked, so no longer a priest in his later years? _________________ Darnel looks like wheat before it comes to fruit.
So he lied and told all the Traditionalists that he was still a priest who could say Mass when he couldn't? I always heard that he said Mass in his apartment. _________________ he which hath no stomach to this fight
let him depart
I dont typiclaly invovle myelf in the Malachi Martin threads, as I have no stake in them, and really hadn't studied Martin before comign here, or even after, but...
Once a Priest, always a Priest.Catholic teahcign is clear that even a Liacenced Priest is still a Proest, the Ontological CHange is similar to Baptism, and permenant.So Martin was always a Proest afte rhis Ordination, he was simply releived of his vows, and, presumabely, given orders nto to perform Proestly functions except in rare cases.IE, he woudl be permited ot sya Last Rites, if soemone was dyng and no Priest could be preasent apart form him.
The man sold us Catholics out. Maybe he repented? Still, no one should hold him in the prestine lime-light he is presented painted in. I for one have never liked his works or how he presented himself.
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 am Post subject: cons can be 98% truthful
It is the 2% that is the lie, and most people can't figure out where the 2% is located .
For example, I bought a small book that was a interview with MM.
In it, he said that in a NO mass, the consecration of the bread is valid, while the wine is not.
I have been told by very intelligent Catholics that this is a lie.
If the NO consecration of wine is not valid, then the Mass is not a Mass.
Which means....
.......... the pope is not really celebrating a mass.
This idea is stupid and has no basis in reality, but MM could pass it off to his readers and they never blinked.
I am not a theologian by any stretch, but even that idea sounds insane to me, and I doubt MM was insane even in his last days. Just a liar who let his lies get out of hand.
But , you see, liars live to tell bigger lies.
I have met a few such liars in my life, and am led to believe it is something akin to an addiction.
Such folks cannot stop the lies and tell bigger and bigger lies.
Typically they are outgoing sales people who are totally convincing.
Lets be real, at the end of the day, MM was more a salesman than a religious.
If someone like that was saved, I am sure his time in purgatory
is going to be really really long.
As far as Martin's later work, I see some big problems beyond just the fact that there are lies buried within it. To get any lie swallowed you need to wrap it up with some truth and preferably something that's especially tasty to your audience. So the ploy of burying lies in truth is just the start of the problem.
Starting with the undisputed material about the crisis -- I have yet to see anything Martin said that wasn't simply a regurgitation of the work of his betters. In other words I see him simply stealing the work of better men like Msgr. Lefebvre and Michael Davies. Outside of his wild claims, like Satan being literally enthroned in the Vatican, I've yet to see any information on the crisis where he was the original source.
Then there are the wild claims. Satan enthroned, literally. Children sacrificed, literally. The mass even if properly performed is invalid. These types of wild claims, when taken as truth, do tremendous harm.
First horrifying claims like Martin's cause despair. Despair in and of itself carries grave risk because of the risk of it reaching the point that it's a sin against the Holy Spirit. But even setting that aside, despair that the Church's leadership has become completely corrupt is a primary driving force behind trads being driven into the arms of the bleeps. How many trads became convinced The Chair is empty because of Martin's horror stories?
Martin's wild claims are also used to lead people to hate the Church and to embrace the teachings of her enemies. Martin was and is a dream come true for the crowd that preaches that the Church is the Whore of Babylon. They've got a "real priest" in the form of Martin to back them up as they literally lead people to hell.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the support of Martin's wild claims leads to traditional Catholics being marginalized in the eyes of those that we should and indeed must be converting. Those that want the traditional movement to dry up and fade away love being able to point to traditionalists that back things that make the entire movement look bad. Martin looks like a freak for good reason to a lot of the world with his aliens and Satan enthroned routine. And his supporters, and hence the entire traditionalist movement, get painted with the same brush while gaining nothing they couldn't gain through countless solid sources elsewhere.
Quite the irony traditionalists paying richly to make themselves marginalized when the salvation of souls (what really matters!) depends upon the exact opposite happening.
Has anyone read marie carre's book AA1025 (ES1025)? I do not think that martin was 1025, but i am curious as to who AQ members think 1025 might have been or whether or not the evidence in martin's case proves that something akin to the stories of AA1025 are not just a work of fiction.
There is a famous quote: "The difference between truth and fiction is that fiction has to be believable."
I have the whole set and many of his insights seemed right on tarpget
Yes. He's "right on target" if you're a nihilist who believes Holy Mother Church dead and there's nothing that can be done for her.
There's a single common thread that runs through Martin's entire life's "work," that is that he deeply despised the institutional Church. Whether it was when he was a modernist liberal in the 60s, a neocon in the late 70s and 80s or a supposed trad in the 90s, he was perpetually savaging the visible Church, which he often referred to as a "Potamkin village."
What kind of a Catholic laments and bemoans the Constantinian establishment, the way he did in "Decline and Fall of the Roman Church?" The Conversion of Constantine was the single greatest thing to happen to mankind since the Resurrection, yet Martin deplores it in the book.
What kind of a Catholic would attempt to convince others that Satan, the ancient enemy, the father of lies, the foresaken murderer could be enthroned in our Holy City? This outrageous claim is blatantly outside our teaching and doctrine as manifest through tradition and sacred scripture.
What kind of a Catholic destroys a man's family and acts as a paid double agent for the enemies of Catholicism, the way Martin did in during his time in Rome? Martin not only did this, but then went on to tell the world and his followers the lie that it was honor, not disgrace, that led to his leaving Rome.
What boggles my mind is that some of the same people who will give guru status to Martin, despite the indisputable DOCUMENTATION of his treason in the 60s will be the first to indict the Holy Father because there exists a picture of him in a suit and tie, taken in the 60s. This is because they believe Martin to be one of their own, as he whispered (or hissed) all of the sweet nothings that was music to their ears.
It's a strange dynamic that entangles souls when some person or group becomes the hero/mascott/figurehead/icon/guru. Once this person or group acheives this status, there is almost nothing the person or group cannot get away with, nothing that the muse can say or do that can't be excused or explained away.
The dynamic is nothing new, and has been employed by manipulators for ages. They find a demographic or individual(s) that are disillusioned, disenfranchised or vulnerable due to life circumstances and exploit them for certain purposes or agendas. Charles Manson used this dynamic to turn his suburban teenagers into murderers. The Bolsheviks used it to turn lower class Russians into thugs. The Masons used it during the French revolution to turn cultured citizens into bloodthirsty mobs. The leader of the heaven's gate cult convinced men to surgically remove their testicles and commit suicide. This dynamic is not lost on the ficitonal writers of Svengali and the Pied Piper.
While Martin wasn't a muderer or a civil criminal on the level of some of the above, he certainly was a ecclisiastical criminal who used his influence to do a great deal of damage. His traditionalist supporters, what's left of them anyway, are a funny bunch. Traditionally speaking, there was a time when his turncoat activities in the 60s, his claims of being a priest with faculties and a legitimate exorcist, his public heresy (which influenced multitudes) of Satan having an authoritative seat in Rome all would have gotten him dungeon cell or perhaps a death sentence. Now THAT's tradition. Traditionally, Catholics don't honor scoundrals who betray their Church and lead the faithful astray.
All this being said, most of Martin's followers - those who knew him personally and those who knew him only through his writings and ramblings - took to him in a mostly innocent manner. They range from the average everyday Catholic to some well known figures and organizations.
The good news for them all, is that they have the opportunity walk out of the goat pen into greener pastures. They should do so immediately.
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:45 pm Post subject: Never Liked his attack on Jesuits
I was educated by the Jesuits in both high school and college.
My high school had 40 Jesuits. They were 30 to 80 years old. I knew them all. they were outstanding priests and teachers. Dedicated, fair and always helpful.
My college had at least 40 Jesuits. I enjoyed my classes with them, and also found them to be excellent teachers and good priests.
Many of my relatives were also educated by the Jesuits, and none of us ever had a complaint. This over a period of 40 years.
I was more than disgusted when I picked up the book, the Jesuits, and realized it was a underhanded and brutal assault on the Jesuits.
The fact there are some clergy and religious today who are homosexuals is unfortunate, but the reality is, these problems have been with the church for centuries.
Martin was a Judas goat - and he did his job well. This is exactly why so many "conservatives/traditionalists" will not believe he was a double agent. _________________ Pray the Rosary
Btw, the WorldNetDaily article "correcting" certain "myths" about Martin is itself part of the deception. Joseph Farah, who runs WND, is a Judas goat, too, evidenced partly by the fact that he is a "conservative Christian" who is very pro-Israel. _________________ Pray the Rosary
Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 533 Location: Laveen, Arizona
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:07 pm Post subject:
I believe that I am a reasonably intelligent Catholic and would counter 767heavy with ?What does intelligence have to do with the mass?? Just because prominent peoples of all walks of life have weighed in that the Novus Ordo mass is valid does not make it so. Just because our pope recites the Novus Ordo mass, if heaven decrees it not valid, so be it; the pope, then, is not really celebrating a mass.
My point being, how does intelligence validate truth? I can name numerous intelligent peoples who deprecate the Catholic Faith, does that make their statements true? I believe your argument, 767heavy, is null.
I would proffer you this for thought. Given that in every Novus Ordo service I ever attended, from its inception in the 1960?s through 1997, the unconfessed always lined up in droves to receive whatever it is that they were offered. And, too, I hear, that happens today. Consider that if sooo many communicants take part in that aspect of their faith, why has the Catholic population fallen lock-step with all of the heretical groups, engaging in public sin and quiet resignation to society?s ways. Who can say that because a priest, bishop, cardinal, or pope officiates at a service which was created by committee, that that service is a Holy Mass?
I believe that I am a reasonably intelligent Catholic and would counter 767heavy with ?What does intelligence have to do with the mass??
My point was to reference what MM said in an interview. When I said I spoke to intelligent people about it, let me define that for you. One person was a Catholic friend who is a scripture scholar, and the other a Catholic priest who spent 7 years studying philosophy and patristics.
Just because prominent peoples of all walks of life have weighed in that the Novus Ordo mass is valid does not make it so.
What is your benchmark?
Just because our pope recites the Novus Ordo mass, if heaven decrees it not valid, so be it; the pope, then, is not really celebrating a mass.
This is a non-sequitur. Heaven does not decree whether a mass is valid. Validity is based on form, matter and intent. Same with Baptism. Either it is done properly and confers the grace, or it is done improperly and no sacrament is performed.
My point being, how does intelligence validate truth?
Again, this is a non- sequitur.
I can name numerous intelligent peoples who deprecate the Catholic Faith, does that make their statements true?
No.
I believe your argument, 767heavy, is null.
I have no argument, I was making an observation.
I would proffer you this for thought. Given that in every Novus Ordo service I ever attended, from its inception in the 1960?s through 1997, the unconfessed always lined up in droves to receive whatever it is that they were offered. And, too, I hear, that happens today. Consider that if sooo many communicants take part in that aspect of their faith, why has the Catholic population fallen lock-step with all of the heretical groups, engaging in public sin and quiet resignation to society?s ways.
I agree many people approach Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin.
One reason for this might be the priest not teaching the faith.
When I attend a NO Mass with a Mexican congregation, about 70% do not go to communion.
Who can say that because a priest, bishop, cardinal, or pope officiates at a service which was created by committee, that that service is a Holy Mass?
I have the whole set and many of his insights seemed right on tarpget
Yes. He's "right on target" if you're a nihilist who believes Holy Mother Church dead and there's nothing that can be done for her.
There's a single common thread that runs through Martin's entire life's "work," that is that he deeply despised the institutional Church. Whether it was when he was a modernist liberal in the 60s, a neocon in the late 70s and 80s or a supposed trad in the 90s, he was perpetually savaging the visible Church, which he often referred to as a "Potamkin village."
What kind of a Catholic laments and bemoans the Constantinian establishment, the way he did in "Decline and Fall of the Roman Church?" The Conversion of Constantine was the single greatest thing to happen to mankind since the Resurrection, yet Martin deplores it in the book.
What kind of a Catholic would attempt to convince others that Satan, the ancient enemy, the father of lies, the foresaken murderer could be enthroned in our Holy City? This outrageous claim is blatantly outside our teaching and doctrine as manifest through tradition and sacred scripture.
What kind of a Catholic destroys a man's family and acts as a paid double agent for the enemies of Catholicism, the way Martin did in during his time in Rome? Martin not only did this, but then went on to tell the world and his followers the lie that it was honor, not disgrace, that led to his leaving Rome.
What boggles my mind is that some of the same people who will give guru status to Martin, despite the indisputable DOCUMENTATION of his treason in the 60s will be the first to indict the Holy Father because there exists a picture of him in a suit and tie, taken in the 60s. This is because they believe Martin to be one of their own, as he whispered (or hissed) all of the sweet nothings that was music to their ears.
It's a strange dynamic that entangles souls when some person or group becomes the hero/mascott/figurehead/icon/guru. Once this person or group acheives this status, there is almost nothing the person or group cannot get away with, nothing that the muse can say or do that can't be excused or explained away.
The dynamic is nothing new, and has been employed by manipulators for ages. They find a demographic or individual(s) that are disillusioned, disenfranchised or vulnerable due to life circumstances and exploit them for certain purposes or agendas. Charles Manson used this dynamic to turn his suburban teenagers into murderers. The Bolsheviks used it to turn lower class Russians into thugs. The Masons used it during the French revolution to turn cultured citizens into bloodthirsty mobs. The leader of the heaven's gate cult convinced men to surgically remove their testicles and commit suicide. This dynamic is not lost on the ficitonal writers of Svengali and the Pied Piper.
While Martin wasn't a muderer or a civil criminal on the level of some of the above, he certainly was a ecclisiastical criminal who used his influence to do a great deal of damage. His traditionalist supporters, what's left of them anyway, are a funny bunch. Traditionally speaking, there was a time when his turncoat activities in the 60s, his claims of being a priest with faculties and a legitimate exorcist, his public heresy (which influenced multitudes) of Satan having an authoritative seat in Rome all would have gotten him dungeon cell or perhaps a death sentence. Now THAT's tradition. Traditionally, Catholics don't honor scoundrals who betray their Church and lead the faithful astray.
All this being said, most of Martin's followers - those who knew him personally and those who knew him only through his writings and ramblings - took to him in a mostly innocent manner. They range from the average everyday Catholic to some well known figures and organizations.
The good news for them all, is that they have the opportunity walk out of the goat pen into greener pastures. They should do so immediately.
Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 533 Location: Laveen, Arizona
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:12 am Post subject:
767heavy - My point was to reference what MM said in an interview. When I said I spoke to intelligent people about it, let me define that for you. One person was a Catholic friend who is a scripture scholar, and the other a Catholic priest who spent 7 years studying philosophy and patristics.
And my point remains. It is good to have intelligent friends with titled positions, but that does not automatically deem them correct on their postures in matters pertaining to the Faith. Consider the mess our Church is in because intelligent scholarly clergy decided to veer Peter?s Barque off its centuries-old course.
Just because prominent peoples of all walks of life have weighed in that the Novus Ordo mass is valid does not make it so.
767heavy - What is your benchmark?
Much has been written of invalid masses; written by intelligent Catholic writers.
Just because our pope recites the Novus Ordo mass, if heaven decrees it not valid, so be it; the pope, then, is not really celebrating a mass.
767heavy - This is a non-sequitur. Heaven does not decree whether a mass is valid. Validity is based on form, matter and intent. Same with Baptism. Either it is done properly and confers the grace, or it is done improperly and no sacrament is performed.
The Holy Ghost will eventually pass judgment on the Vatican II fallout, including the Novus Ordo, through council. Some folks believe the Novus Ordo valid, other reserve accolades for official judgment. I believe that sequiturized my poorly written original comment.
My point being, how does intelligence validate truth?
767heavy - Again, this is a non- sequitur.
Hardly! The gift, the grace, of Faith enters into the realm in determining truth. One need only look to the children of Fatima to see substance trumping intelligence.
I can name numerous intelligent peoples who deprecate the Catholic Faith, does that make their statements true?
No.
I believe your argument, 767heavy, is null.
767heavy - I have no argument, I was making an observation.
And my use of the word ?argument? was in the context of supporting one?s view to establish a point.
I would proffer you this for thought. Given that in every Novus Ordo service I ever attended, from its inception in the 1960?s through 1997, the unconfessed always lined up in droves to receive whatever it is that they were offered. And, too, I hear, that happens today. Consider that if sooo many communicants take part in that aspect of their faith, why has the Catholic population fallen lock-step with all of the heretical groups, engaging in public sin and quiet resignation to society?s ways.
767heavy - I agree many people approach Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin.
One reason for this might be the priest not teaching the faith.
When I attend a NO Mass with a Mexican congregation, about 70% do not go to communion.
And that, my good friend, is how I was raised; that one not approach the communion rail without a good confession first.
Who can say that because a priest, bishop, cardinal, or pope officiates at a service which was created by committee, that that service is a Holy Mass?
767heavy - what committee are you referring to?
The Novus Ordo service was derived by a delegation of Churchmen who chose to seek the advice of a variety of heretics. The reasoning, as it has become known, was to ensure that this NEW ORDER of Catholic worship would be acceptable to the various heretical groups. This NEW SERVICE was created by committee and consent, it is not a mass of Catholicism as has been handed down from our Chief Priest, Jesus Christ, through St. Peter to our present day priests; (and preserved) in the hands of what we are now forced to call ?traditionalist? priests, principally those of the Society of St. Pius X.
Second, Pope Paul VI approved the Novus Ordo Mass.
My bet is if he had not done so, the various factions that are in open oppositionn to Rome might not exist.
But he did sign off on that new Mass, and became in the eyes of many, a false pope.
Think of the Pope as your parent. Parents sometimes make bad decisions. They are still your parent,
Even if your parents acted as though they do not care for you, and hired lousy babysitters and you grew up in poor health.
You might have much to whine about, but those are still your parents and you are bound to obey them and honor them.
Same for the pope.
Let us assume he ( Paul VI) made bad decisions, and was a pope who let Catholic bashers into the higher ranks of the Church etc...
So What. God will deal with him.
It is not the duty of Catholics to proclaim a pope is not a pope. Catholics who play those games are assuming a degree of authority never granted to them.
It also assumes god has allowed his church to become nearly invisible, and that alone is plenty of evidence to disprove the idea.
We are promised a visible church, and
joe blows backyard chapel will not cut it.
Could someone repair the links or take contact with me ?
I'd like to read and study these documents.
Yours,
Lutefisk !
I think if you remove the "02" from the ".../articles02/..." sub-directory in the URLs you'll find the articles are still there. (i.e. => ".../articles/...") New location perhaps?
Joined: 01 Apr 2007 Posts: 414 Location: California
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject:
Malachi Martin was never defrocked. He always remained a priest with faculties. Pope Paul VI released him from his vows except for the vow of Chastity which he kept his whole life. Cardinal Cooke accepted him in New York and let him continue to function as a priest with the order that he not wear a Roman collar so that he would not be mistaken for a local parish priest.
Could someone repair the links or take contact with me ?
I'd like to read and study these documents.
Yours,
Lutefisk !
I think if you remove the "02" from the ".../articles02/..." sub-directory in the URLs you'll find the articles are still there. (i.e. => ".../articles/...") New location perhaps?
Joined: 27 Jan 2008 Posts: 308 Location: Philadelphia Area
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:32 pm Post subject:
I heard he was pushed to his death. I don't know if that is true. But he was supposedly working on a new book that would totaly expose the infiltration of the Church and where it was leading. I'm talking totaly spilling the beans here even more so than "Keys to His Blood" and the other big one which I forget right now.
He was even going to write about how they plan on establishing world government in the secular sphere. He was supposedly going to lay it all out, everything he knew which was probably quite a bit.
I heard he was pushed to his death. I don't know if that is true. But he was supposedly working on a new book that would totaly expose the infiltration of the Church and where it was leading. I'm talking totaly spilling the beans here even more so than "Keys to His Blood" and the other big one which I forget right now.
He was even going to write about how they plan on establishing world government in the secular sphere. He was supposedly going to lay it all out, everything he knew which was probably quite a bit.
CKKnight,
Did you even read this article?
Malachi Martin was a huckster trying to marginalize and weaken the Traditional movement.
... everything he knew which was probably quite a bit.
He knew nothing except how to ensure his bread was always buttered. A complete fake from the beginning. His books are packed with guesswork, hints, insinuations, suggestions, ambiguities. His technique was precisely that of a horoscope writer. He knew what his audience wanted, and he provided it. His lack of factual clarity served precisely to provide an air of mystery. You display this to great effect yourself right here in this post, where you suggest that despite his publishing numerous weighty books, he was finally intending to tell the whole truth. He created that sense in you of mystery, of half-truths, of great realities hidden (necessarily) behind a veil, of the master of truth unable for grand and noble reasons to be entirely frank, and needing to insinuate truth by degrees, Freemason-like, as the audience can take it, and always with the sense of extreme danger to himself, thus elevating himself into the ranks of living martyr, ecclesiastical 007, and masterful literateur whose silky skill is more than a match for those clots in the basements of the Vatican...
Don't allow pride to prevent you from seeing that you fell for a criminal poseur. _________________ Ave Maria gratia plena, Dominus tecum!
I remember when he got on a radio talk show and he told his listeners to anticipate two tremendous things that would be happening that Spring: One would be something coming out of Rome; the other was going to be some kind of sign.
Then, when nothing happened, he said that his timing might have been off, but that those two things would surely happen.
Yes, indeed, he sure knew how to string people along! (Specially those with a penchant for the sensational)
Serv, thanks for investigating this matter. I've never been inclined to listen to too much that MM had to say - there was a tabloid feeling to him that I couldn't get over. First instincts' always right I suppose.
Joined: 27 Jan 2008 Posts: 308 Location: Philadelphia Area
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:30 pm Post subject:
HallnOates wrote:
ckknight wrote:
I heard he was pushed to his death. I don't know if that is true. But he was supposedly working on a new book that would totaly expose the infiltration of the Church and where it was leading. I'm talking totaly spilling the beans here even more so than "Keys to His Blood" and the other big one which I forget right now.
He was even going to write about how they plan on establishing world government in the secular sphere. He was supposedly going to lay it all out, everything he knew which was probably quite a bit.
CKKnight,
Did you even read this article?
Malachi Martin was a huckster trying to marginalize and weaken the Traditional movement.
I understand that. But that doesn't mean everything he wrote was a lie. I'm sure there's a lot of truth in there. Especially concerning the powerful pedophile/homosexual network of bishops and priests.
And I'd be willing to bet that the black mass in the Vatican and enthronement of Lucifer is also true. The woman they used for the mock sacrifice (funny they do mock sacrifice at Bohemian Grove also, hmmmm...) is supposedly still alive and well.
Joined: 27 Jan 2008 Posts: 308 Location: Philadelphia Area
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:38 pm Post subject:
MariaGratiaPlena wrote:
ckknight wrote:
... everything he knew which was probably quite a bit.
He knew nothing except how to ensure his bread was always buttered. A complete fake from the beginning. His books are packed with guesswork, hints, insinuations, suggestions, ambiguities. His technique was precisely that of a horoscope writer. He knew what his audience wanted, and he provided it. His lack of factual clarity served precisely to provide an air of mystery. You display this to great effect yourself right here in this post, where you suggest that despite his publishing numerous weighty books, he was finally intending to tell the whole truth. He created that sense in you of mystery, of half-truths, of great realities hidden (necessarily) behind a veil, of the master of truth unable for grand and noble reasons to be entirely frank, and needing to insinuate truth by degrees, Freemason-like, as the audience can take it, and always with the sense of extreme danger to himself, thus elevating himself into the ranks of living martyr, ecclesiastical 007, and masterful literateur whose silky skill is more than a match for those clots in the basements of the Vatican...
Don't allow pride to prevent you from seeing that you fell for a criminal poseur.
Disagree with the bold part. The man knew quite a bit. I don't know if I believe he knew the 3rd secret but just the fact that he was in a position to even sound credible about that should prove "that he knew nothing" is completely off base.
Joined: 25 Nov 2005 Posts: 118 Location: County Longford
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:14 pm Post subject:
How very sad to see. I can understand how people can fall for guru figures but its still sad. Lord have mercy on him. _________________ Non nobis, Domine, non nobis: sed nomini tuo da gloriam
Joined: 01 Apr 2007 Posts: 414 Location: California
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:16 am Post subject:
Having read The Windswept House which was Fr. Martin's masterpiece, it is striking how much the character Fr. Christian resembles Malachi Martin. It is the key to understand Martin. Fr. Christian thought he was on the right side doing the work of his boss the cardinal, until he found out that he was an agent for the evil men ion the Vatican.
As far as the Third Secret, he read it in Feb. 1960 while he was Cardinal Beas's personal secretary. Cardinal Bea was the Pope's confessor.
Fr. Martin practically tried to give away the secret during his radio interviews. It was about apostasy.
The great Fr. Gruner talks about Fr. Malachi Martin and the Third Secret:
Joined: 30 Nov 2005 Posts: 3188 Location: People's Republic of Kalifornia
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:41 am Post subject:
Rafael wrote:
... The Windswept House which was Fr. Martin's masterpiece ...
I certainly wouldn't call it a masterpiece of Catholic writing, at any rate -- it violates the de fide article of faith that the Church is indefectible, that it will always exist in visible form until the end of time. And if you buy the novel's premise, you also leave yourself open to despair.
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:06 am Post subject: Re: Martin situation
gpmtrad wrote:
Considering the widespread notoriety of M. Martin, this site has rendered a valuable service to those concerned with the truth about what has, factually, happened to the Catholic Church in the wake of Vatican II.
Very detailed job to uncover dead man's, MM, activities when he was a young priest during V2. But what is exactly the point of all these efforts? This man is dead for a long time - are we expected to spit every time we hear or read his name? I have no doubt in good intention of this job done to uncover the past mistakes of dead man. Every single man can make mistakes and bad choices, and MM has been judged by God and get his punishments already. God bless.
He knew nothing except how to ensure his bread was always buttered. A complete fake from the beginning. His books are packed with guesswork, hints, insinuations, suggestions, ambiguities. His technique was precisely that of a horoscope writer. He knew what his audience wanted, and he provided it. His lack of factual clarity served precisely to provide an air of mystery. You display this to great effect yourself right here in this post, where you suggest that despite his publishing numerous weighty books, he was finally intending to tell the whole truth. He created that sense in you of mystery, of half-truths, of great realities hidden (necessarily) behind a veil, of the master of truth unable for grand and noble reasons to be entirely frank, and needing to insinuate truth by degrees, Freemason-like, as the audience can take it, and always with the sense of extreme danger to himself, thus elevating himself into the ranks of living martyr, ecclesiastical 007, and masterful literateur whose silky skill is more than a match for those clots in the basements of the Vatican...
Don't allow pride to prevent you from seeing that you fell for a criminal poseur.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
