Father Malachi Martin and Our Lady of Fatima

While attempting with integrity to preserve a memoria fidelis (“a memory faithful to the truth of the past”), the following tale proposes to help us guard against self-deception and presumption. The latter, we should fittingly recall, is both a form of pride, but also one of the two forms of hopelessness (along with despair) so prevalent and so subtly dangerous today, especially in the sentimental corruption and self-deception of an “unconditional” mercy. Since the Laws of God are Acts of Love, the warnings from the Merciful Heart of Mother of God—Our Blessed Lady of Fatima—might not now be genuinely accepted, nor sufficiently adhered to, nor thus perseveringly lived out with loyal love.

In 1990, just after the release of his latest book—The Keys of This Blood: The Struggle for World Domination Between Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev, and the Capitalist West—Father Malachi Martin—an earlier-laicized, former Jesuit Priest—twice visited a private office in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, one of the three office buildings of U.S. Senate in Washington D.C.

Click here to download the PDF file.

  • M.

    I can’t seem to be able to download this. It may be because of my lack of computer skills, but the download icon doesn’t seem to be working. Thank you for your attention in this. God bless.

  • M.

    Thank you, Br. André Marie. That worked and I now have the download. God bless you.

  • MSApis

    Thank you to Dr Robert Hickson for an article full of valuable information that is not widely available.

    How very revealing that Fr Martin was uncomfortable answering questions about his association with cardinal Bea.

    How ironic that Fr Tromp, who was on the side of the angels at Vatican II, was responsible for a phrase in Lumen Gentium, namely “subsistit in” which, by being used as a reference point for false ecumenism, has caused so much damage in the Church.

    Just a note on one typo – “subsidence”. Should not this be “subsistence”?

  • Thank you, MSApis. The typo has been fixed.

    I agree that “subsistit in” has caused much mischief. The Holy See clarified the matter in 2007, but that was almost 50 years too late to prevent a flood of false theology being derived from the words:

    http://catholicism.org/responses-footnotes.html

    Anyone trained in scholastic philosophy would know that “subsistit in” makes no sense in scholastic terminology. To “exist in itself” is to subsist, and to “exist in another” is to exist as an accident (the very opposite concept of a substance).

    Fr. Karl Josef Becker, S.J. wrote an article on this before that clarification came out in 2007. It’s worth reading:

    https://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/subsistitin.htm

    But the mischief continues, doesn’t it?