father malachi martin QUESTION from john siena on November 22, 2002 Dear Brother, I have researched Malachi Martin with integrity. My uncle works for the Vatican and is a gentleman to the pope. His employment for the Holy Father deals with canon law. Father Martin was in fact a Jesuit and disagreed strongly with Vatican II as do I. Father Martin is not incorrect in stating that the Vatican is full of self serving, certainly un-Christlike cardinals that my uncle has observed. Although Father Martin may have a bit of the Irish storytelling ways about him, he certainly is not to be discounted as you would have it posted. I have personally been in contact with two NYC Police Officers that had worked with Father Martin and they stand firmly behind his kindness and decency towards Jesus Christ. These police officers that worked with Father Martin have other police officers coming to them after observing strange, perhaps demonic behaviour.
As a soldier of Christ I ask you to pray for Father Martin and love him as you would love thyself. If you can define to me, and back up your statement that Father Martin's books should be avoided and why I will surely listen. Also have you ever assisted with an exorcism? Thank you brother for your reply
ANSWER by John-Paul Ignatius, OLSM on December 19, 2002 Dear Mr. Siena:
I do pray for Mr. Martin. I have no personal animosity toward the man. I say Mr. Martin because he was laicized in 1965 and from that time on was no longer clergy and thus not privy to the title Father.
I do not like to speak negatively about the dead and pray that Mr. Martin is now in heaven. But, the legacy of this man lingers on contaminating people and givin fuel for the fire of those inclined to wavor in faith.
Thus, we cannot excuse the maligning of our Holy Mother Church that Mr. Martin did with an excuse that he had 'Irish' storytelling ways about him.
Mr. Martin, in my opinion, and in the opinion of most of the loyal orthodox Catholics I know, was a great danger to the Church due to his irresponsible scandal-mongering National Enquirer style statements and writings.
Rarely did the man produce proof of anything. I heard him with my own ears answer this criticism. He said that he could not write about these things as a non-fiction book because the public could not take it. Thus he had to write in what he called a fac-tion style -- mixing fact with fiction to soften the blow.
Of course any REAL writer knows that this is a well-known writing technique to posit nonsense in the guise of alleged facts without the burden of offering proof. A REAL writer would have written a non-fiction book with footnotes detailing the sources and materials to back-up his claims.
On this ONE issue, the man could not be trusted anymore than the National Enquirer can be trusted to report facts.
This is the stuff the conspiracy nuts and scandal mongers and con artist eat up like candy.
As the old woman said in the commericals for Walter Mondale for President, Where's the beef.
Mr. Martin provided little beef and rarely even a bun.
Mr. Martin's legacy unfortunately was to facilitate the lack of faith among Catholics in the promise God made that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church.
The Bible specifically condemns a person who causes dissension and Mr. Martin did that to an artform.
Vatican II is a beautiful counsel that stands firmly on the shoulders of the tradition of the Church. It is binding on all Catholics and to disparage Vatican II is to not be a friend of the Church at best, and a traitor to the Church at worse, it is to say that God is a liar, it is to say that the Holy Spirit is the devil. It is a form of blasphemy.
Now, it is true that many liberal bishops and priests (who were all pre-Vatican II people) lead a campaign to derail the Church using Vatican II as an excuse. But they rape Vatican II.
In fact, nearly ALL of the abuses and problems that we now see were already brewing LONG before Vatican II. In fact, Vatican II attempted to stop some of the abuses that had been going on since the early 20th Century.
As a result of these pre-Vatican II liberals, and the bishops who did not have the guts to stop the liberal campaign that they initiated, a couple of generations of priests and theologians cannot be trusted to preach the Church teaching accurately and the laity stand in a virtual abyss of catechesis that I am sure rises in abomination to God. But Vatican II DID NOT cause this.
Vatican II is not a problem, it is the solution given by the Holy Spirit. It is not the Council that is the problem, it is the cowardice and liberal mindset of some bishops and many priests and laity that is the problem. Just as we cannot blame the whole Catholic Church for the personal sins of a priest, bishop, or pope NEITHER can we blame Vatican II for the priests, bishops, or popes who may abuse the Council's teaching.
Fortunately we have a Pope who embodies the TRUE spirit of Vatican II in John Paul II whom I believe will be names not only a saint, but a doctor of the church, and I believe history will name him John Paul the Great.
The only people I have ever seen who do not share that opinion of our Pope are the liberals and the ultra-traditionalist neither of whom are in communion with the Church.
The only ones that I have seen that disparage Vatican II are the ultra-traditionalist who seem tho think they are some sort of magisterium and know more about the Church and her documents than the God appointed pastors of the Church herself.
I pray for all those not in communion with the Church -- those who think they know more about the Church than the Church does, who set themselves up as their own magisteriums, who are in essence Protestants for they protest any official teaching or official interpretation of teaching that they personally don't like.
News Flash: the Church and her teachings are not subject to our opinions and anyone who tries to mold the Church into their own image -- as did Mr. Martin -- are no friend to the Church.
As to proving my statements about Mr. Martin, that is remarkably easy, but time-consuming to do. I was in the process of doing that when Mr. Martin died.
Since he died I thought there was no need to continue with my expose of him. But his errant and dissident legacy lives on in those who also think they are somehow part of the magisterium with the competence to back-seat drive the official teachings of the Holy Mother Church.
Thus I will probably finish that expose someday, but it is not a major priority.
Back to Index Page