Unpublished Testimony of Fr. Malachi Martin, Taken from L’Eglise Eclipsee. TRanslated from the French by online translation tool.

Malachi Brendan Martin S.J. : July 23, 1921 ~ †July 27, 1999  Born in County Kerry, Ireland, he studied at the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium. There he received doctorates in Semitic language, archeology and Oriental history. He then studied at Oxford and at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. 

Ordained as a priest on August 15, 1954, he was a Jesuit priest in Rome from 1958 to 1964, and carried out certain delicate missions for Cardinal Augustine Bea, for whom he was private secretary, and Popes John XXIII and Paul VI.  Relieved in 1964 by Paul VI of his vows of poverty and obedience at his own request, he moved to New York and became an international author of bestsellers, fiction and non-fiction. One of his favourite subjects is the Third Secret of Fatima, about which he spoke at length in his works. He recalls that what is most frightening is that it is apocalyptic and corresponds to the eschatological texts of the Holy Scriptures.

We approach this study through the testimony of Father Malachi Martin,  who was extremely kind enough to sign his declarations. As he was secretary to Cardinal Bea, and the latter played a major role in the founding of the new “conciliar church”¹, as well as in the execution of the plan by enemies of the Church, his testimony is both of great interest and extreme seriousness. This is why we will avoid mentioning the names of the people directly concerned by this investigation; except, of course, Father Malachi Martin himself.  Some told us they didn’t really agree with some of the Father’s statements.  We point out that it is necessary to distinguish, in this testimony, the events he relates from his personal opinions, which we are not obliged to follow. What seemed important to us in the context of this work are the objective facts that it reports. 

It all started with an article entitled “Is the Pope Cardinal Siri?” » signed L.H. Rémy, of which here is the reproduction:

“In one of his writings, Prince Scortesco, first cousin of Prince Borghese, President of the Conclave having elected Montini to the Supreme Pontificate, gives the following information concerning the conclave of June 21, 1963: “During the Conclave, a cardinal left the Sistine Chapel, met the representatives of B’naï B’rith², announced to them the election of Cardinal Siri. They responded by telling him that the persecutions against the Church would resume immediately. Returning to the conclave, he had Montini elected.” 

Visiting Monsieur de la Franquerie in November 1984, with my friend Francis Dallais, we spoke again about this serious problem. Monsieur de la Franquerie, in 1963, was in close contact with numerous Roman prelates, and he confirmed to us that he had heard confidences from reliable and well-informed people who had knowledge of these facts. 

To find out for sure, e decided to go see Cardinal Siri in Genoa.  Monsieur de la Franquerie, having had the opportunity in the past to meet him and have friendly conversations with him, wrote to him to ask for an audience which the cardinal granted us on the Friday following Ascension 1985. 

This is how on May 17, 1985, we found ourselves at my home in Lyon: Monsieur de la Franquerie and Francis Dallais. The evening was wonderful. I admit that I am sensitive to the very old French charm of our dear Marquis and that we spent, until very late in the night, unforgettable moments listening to him tell us his memories of a fruitful life and well filled. Whether it is his memories of Monsignor Jouin, Marshal Pétain or Pius XII, Monsieur de la Franquerie is inexhaustible and fascinating.

The next morning we left early for Genoa where the Cardinal was waiting for us around 10 a.m. and granted us a two-hour audience. We were received with great attention in the magnificent Episcopal Palace of Genoa. The Cardinal, who speaks French very well, was warm, attentive and had a courtesy typical of these people, great in office, but even more so in heart. 

A dialogue then began between these two respectable people in a diplomatic language that I did not know and which is of a charm, of a delicacy, the fruit of the education of hundreds of years, and unfortunately disappeared from our days. 

Moments later, when asked if he had been elected pope, his reaction was completely different. He began by remaining silent for a long time, he raised his eyes to the sky with a grin of pain and sorrow, clasped his hands and said, weighing each word with gravity: “I am bound by secrecy.” Then, after a long silence, heavy for all of us, he continued: “I am bound by secrecy. This secret is horrible. I could write books on the different conclaves; very serious things have happened. But I can’t say anything.” 

Let’s think. If he had not been elected pope, he would have said it with as much promptness and firmness as the previous question. Having been elected, he could not say it, bound by secrecy, and, not being able to lie, he took refuge behind this secret. 

In fact, it turns out that someone close to me who knew him closely assured me that the Cardinal told them that he had been elected pope twice: in place of Paul VI, and Wojtyla. The first time he refused, the second he was forced to refuse under threat of schism!

We three witnesses were left very shaken and practically convinced of his election. 

And then serious questions arise. Did he resign? Was he forced to resign? What about these elections? What heavy secrets weigh on him? During the last Synod, he stayed a few hours and left. Despite his advanced age and the fact that he was over 75, he did not resign and it was not demanded. So? 

As he was the last cardinal appointed by Pius XII, we leave it to historians and theologians to study this problem in depth and respond to it. We simply leave this grave testimony³. In the week following the publication of this article, Monsieur de la Franquerie received two telephone calls from Rome, proving that even a small, very confidential magazine was read in the Vatican. The correspondents wanted to know if the article was serious, which Monsieur de la Franquerie confirmed to them. 

The article was then translated into English, German, Spanish, Italian and distributed everywhere, so much so that one day a priest asked for a meeting with the director of the magazine. This priest was sent by Father Malachi Martin, a Jesuit, living in New York.

He met him to let him know from Father Malachi Martin, present as an interpreter at the last conclaves (speaking several languages), that what he had written was true. He supplemented this information with an important element: namely that Malachi Martin had to translate a message intended for Cardinal Siri, which contained exactly this sentence: “If you accept the pontificate, we will retaliate against your family.” 

During May 1996, one of our friends, who was in the United States for a few months, took the opportunity to go see Father Malachi Martin. He took the initiative to ask him a few questions in writing. Here is the report of the visits, the questions and the answers as they reached us.

First interview on June 3, 1996 in New York 

“Malachi Martin lives in the United States. He always says his Mass, confesses and sees people. He is seventy-five years old and in his right mind.

I introduced myself as a friend of friends of the Marquis de la Franquerie. This was enough for him to put things in perspective. (…) Almost by himself, he told me about the Conclaves he experienced. I asked him two or three questions. He told me that Cardinal Siri was indeed elected pope in place of Paul VI and John Paul II and that he refused twice because of threats made against him and his family. He came from a great family from Genoa. During the two Conclaves, none of the cardinals went out. These threats were made to him by another cardinal. 

I didn’t dwell too much on the subject and we talked about the crisis in general. Then, on his own, while he was talking about John Paul II, about the fact that he did not govern and that he did not believe in his infallibility, that the Church was governed by the bishops. He told that ultimately all this posed serious problems: that all the ordinations of priests by John Paul II were invalid and that the faithful were lost. 

I asked him the question again: “So you say that all of this is invalid?” He answered me with great simplicity and assurance: “But yes, since the sacrament was changed at the Council”⁴.

So I told him that we should write all this down and he told me that he is writing a new book on this subject. At the same time he dedicated his latest book to me in English, which will be translated into French: “Windswept House”. 

“Then we talked about this and that. He told me that the Abbot of Nantes had come to see him and asked him to insert a page about his community and himself in one of his books, but that he had to refuse. He knew Mgr Guérard des Lauriers, Mgr Ngo Dhin Thuc and many people. 

I asked him what he thought of the consecrations carried out by Mgr Ngo Dhin Thuc. He thiinks they are completely valid. He believes that there are currently some 57 bishops who have been consecrated in this way. He asked me if Bishop Williamson is a “sedevacantist” at heart or not. I told him that in any case, he is, as are others, but that he doesn’t say it and that Bishop Fellay claims to have relations with “undeclared sedevacantists”. He invited me to come back and see him – which will happen very soon.”

Second interview of September 12, 1996 in New York 

“In my last story I forgot to mention that Cardinal Ottaviani had probably been blackmailed in his last days so that he would accept the Novus Ordo, otherwise he would not be given the last sacraments. 

This Thursday evening, Malachi Martin had prepared the written answers to the questions that I had asked him in writing by mail some time before. This with the aim of possible publication. He warned me that our interview will not be long because he was to receive a prelate from Rome in an hour.

John Paul II signed an official document authorizing a Conclave to depose the pope on grounds of physical incapacity or health. So much so that we only talk about the Conclave in Rome… but the next one will be worse and so will the situation! 

In addition to the written responses, we took up some of them orally.  In particular the question of the Conclave. He described to me again how Cardinal Siri’s refusal happened: “After having been elected Pope and having read a paper which had just reached him, in an envelope, from the rank of cardinals, one of the three cardinals presiding the Conclave approached to ask him according to the consecrated words if he agreed to be pope. At that moment, Siri stood up stiff as a stick and pronounced the Latin phrases of refusal in an impersonal and cold tone as if he were forced.  The reason he gave for his refusal was propter metum, that is to say ‘because of fear’.” At this moment, Malachi Martin told me that, canonically, this way of responding could have been a reason to invalidate the Conclave⁵. 

I asked him: “Who did this paper come from?”

He answered me: “It came from the cardinals, probably from Cardinals Villot and …..⁶..In any case it was the expression of the refusal of the Special Lodge. This Lodge is reserved in Rome for cardinals in close contact with the Grand East. John XXIII and Paul VI were part of the Special Lodge.”

I asked him to confirm: “Was John XXIII a Freemason?” He replied: “On the membership of John XXIII in Freemasonry, all the proofs are in the Vatican archives, jealously guarded by Cardinal Sodano.  He himself saw photos taken by his driver revealing John XXIII frequenting Parisian dressing rooms.” The rest of our conversation was a bit of a repetition of the answers he had written. Due to lack of time we stop there. We must meet again the following Tuesday.”

Third interview of September 17, 1996 in New York 

“This will be our last meeting before my return to France. Malachi Martin told me again that we are only talking about the Conclave in Rome, that everyone is looking for votes and that the Freemasons are agitating very actively within the special Lodge reserved for cardinals, but in liaison with the rest of Freemasonry via the Grand East and the Grand Master of Italy whose name he does not remember.

He told me that he spoke several times to John Paul II about these pressures (from Freemasonry) and the errors of Vatican II, but that he told him that it was nothing and that he made fun of it. 

I asked him: “Does John Paul II consider himself pope?”. He answered me: “He even doubts whether he is pope and he behaves more like a bishop than like a pope.” 

We then talked about Mgr Thuc, Mgr Mac Kenna then he read and signed the translation of his responses into French in order to be able to ask that they be published. I asked him for some details on the reason for Cardinal Siri’s first refusal and how it happened. He replied that it was the same process each time (for Paul VI and John Paul II). 

Then I asked him what he meant by “advancing issues on Ecumenism and Judaism”. In fact, he was simply an intermediary between John XXIII and Cardinal Bea. Finally, after he gave me his blessing, we parted with the intention of remaining in correspondence.”

Questions asked of Malachi Martin (September 1996) 

Subject: Traditionalism 

Q. Do you know the so-called Cassiciacum thesis written by Mgr Guérard des Lauriers? What do you think? Do you consider that today the “pope”⁷ is a usurper, no longer has authority and should either convert or be deposed?

A. I don’t know Cassiciacum⁸.

Q. The Society of Saint Pius X⁹ signed a recognition of the legitimacy of John Paul II before the diaconate. It gives the practical instructions to pray publicly for him and to say “Una cum famulo tuo papa nostro Joanne Paulo” at Mass. What do you think of that? 

A. The Society is confused about the papacy. 

Q. Do you think that the consecrations performed by Mgr Ngo Dinh Thuc are valid? 

A. The consecrations of Mgr Ngo Dinh Thuc are valid.

Q. What do you think of the fight between Mgr Lefebvre and Mgr de Castro Mayer? 

A. I think that Mgr Lefebvre and Mgr de Castro Mayer were fallible heroes but heroes. 

Q. Do you know the book by Arnaldo Xavier da Silvera “The new Mass, what to think of it?” Is it true that he was murdered? 

A. I don’t know anything about Arnaldo Xavier da Silvera. 

Subject: Conclaves 

Q. Was Cardinal Siri elected pope twice? When ? One might think that his refusal comes from him alone. Why did he refuse and give way to Paul VI then to John Paul II? Some have asked Cardinal Siri; he did not respond and remained silent. You say there was pressure. Which ones and how do you know? From which cardinal do these pressures come?  We saw black smoke at the Conclave electing John Paul II. Was it because Cardinal Siri had been elected and refused? 

A. That Siri, twice in his old age, was elected pope is an undeniable fact to those who know what happened. All that Siri himself conceded was that fear of retaliation was the determining factor in his behaviour. The pressure on him not to accept the pontificate did not come from a single cardinal. Simply Siri was not acceptable to the progressive faction and its bosses. Yes, there was confusion after a vote at the October 1978 Conclave.

Q. You did not attend the Conclave electing John XXIII but you say that he kindly carried out his personal propaganda. Is this true? Why would he want to be pope? 

A. Angelo Roncalli was always a missionary with his intention of becoming pope.  He had an entirely Modernist agenda for the Church¹⁰.

Subject: The Popes 

Q. Was John XXIII an initiate? Some documents refer to him as “brother”. What do you think? 

A. Yes, he was initiated by Vincent Auriol¹¹.

Q. Does the encyclical Pacem in Terris contain heresies? Does it fall under the infallible Magisterium? 

A. This should belong to the universal Ordinary Magisterium, but it is a Modernist document.

Q. Should we consider John XXIII as a legitimate pope? Should we follow his liturgical reform? 

A. He was validly elected. No, we should not follow his liturgical reform. 

Q. Did Paul VI have Jewish origins? What do you think of the thesis of the survival of Paul VI saying that he was replaced by a double? 

A. No one really knows all of Montini’s ancestors. No, Paul VI was never replaced by a double. 

Q. Did John Paul II have Jewish origins? Was he a heretic before his election?  Some Masonic documents acclaimed him because he recognized “the right to make mistakes.” Do you think he is perfectly aware of what he is doing? 

A. John Paul II, no, as far as I know, has no Jewish ancestors, but who really knows¹²? He is perfectly aware of what he did. He is not aware of the mistakes he has made. 

Q. Was John Paul I assassinated? For what ? 

A. We cannot explain the events surrounding the death of John Paul I by ordinary means. Powerful people didn’t like him as pope. 

Q. What do you think of the reform of the psalms by Cardinal Bea under Pius XII?  What do we think of the institution of the Easter liturgy at midnight by Pius XII? 

A. I think all their changes were harmful. 

Q. Which pope is guilty of obscuring the message of Fatima?

A. Pope John XXIII. 

Q. Who are the current “papabile” cardinals? Can we hope for a return to order after John Paul II? What future do you envision for the papacy and therefore for the Church? 

A. The future of the papacy: the hierarchy of the Church is extremely gloomy.¹³ 

Subject: Vatican II

Q. Does the Second Vatican Council include formal heresies? Which ones? 

A. Certain parts of certain documents contradict past statements of the Roman Magisterium. For example, about religious freedom, papal primacy and infallibility; about the purpose of marriage, about the role of Jews, about the Church in the world. 

Q. Does the Second Vatican Council fall under the Ordinary Universal Magisterium? Is it infallible? 

A. Explicitly, Paul VI and the bishops of the Council denied the infallibility of the Second Vatican Council. If it had reflected the Tradition of the Roman Magisterium, it would have been part of the Ordinary Universal Magisterium, but it did not do so. 

Q. Should the Second Vatican Council be declared a robbery, in the same way as the Council of Ephesus? Can we interpret the Council in the light of Tradition? 

A. What the Roman Magisterium will ultimately do regarding Vatican II is what everyone hopes. Ultimately the pope will have to correct Vatican II and its documents in light of the fixed teaching of the Roman Magisterium – which won’t happen very soon. If you want to interpret Vatican II in the light of Tradition, you will have to reform its main documents completely¹⁴.

Subject: Relations at the Vatican 

Q. You were Cardinal Bea’s secretary and therefore probably followed his interviews. What do you think of him? Cardinal Bea is said to have been at the origin of Ch.4 of the Schema on Ecumenism concerning the Jews¹⁵, which rejects the guilt of the Jewish people in the crucifixion. What do you think? Did you participate in the writing of this text? 

A. Cardinal Bea was busy introducing as many progressive doctrines and policies as possible. He was the leading hand in the Schema on Ecumenism.  I refused to follow what John XXIII and Bea proposed about the role of the Jewish population. 

Q. It is said that you have spent your entire career in the Vatican. Is this true? In what position? 

A. No, I was appointed professor at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome in 1958. From there I became an assistant and advisor to Cardinal Bea. 

Q. What was your role during the Council? Did the “observers” participate in the writing of the “New Mass”?

A. During the Council, my role was to be “behind the scenes”, pushing forward plans on Ecumenism and Judaism. Six Protestant clergymen (out of a total of eight consultants) wrote the Novus Ordo under the direction of Mgr.  Annibale Bugnini. Unless very special care is exercised, the Novus Ordo is invalid. 

Q. Was Mgr Bugnini initiated into Freemasonry? 

A. Yes, Bugnini was a member of the Lodge¹⁶.

Q. All your books are released in novel form with imaginary names.  Why is that ? Have you had death threats? 

A. Not all of my books are in the form of a novel; only three of them. I have published sixteen books. 

Q. Did you know Carlo Falconi? What do you think of him? In his book Seen and heard at the Council, he said: “An otherwise trustworthy thirty-third degree assured me that Montini was a Freemason. For my part, I don’t believe it.”  What do you think?

A. I did not know Carlo Falconi personally.  Yes, for a certain period, Montini was a member of the Lodge, as was John XXIII.  

What matters in this testimony – disregarding the fact that these maneuvers may have rendered these conclaves invalid – is that the election of these conciliar pontiffs is due to enormous manipulation by the servants of the Masonic sect.

Let us thank Father Malachi Martin for his courage. His accusations raise serious questions that only theologians and canonists can resolve. How did we get to this? 

The reader will have understood: what Father Malachi Martin reveals is the culmination of a long conspiracy. Indeed, what does he say?

“Siri was not acceptable to the progressive faction and its bosses.”  “We cannot explain the events surrounding the death of John Paul I by ordinary means.” “Powerful people didn’t like him as pope.” 

Who are the “bosses” of this progressive faction plaguing the Vatican? Who are these “powerful people”? How did they come to dominate in the Vatican, to the point of being able to manipulate Conclaves? 

FOOTNOTES

1. This is the name that Cardinal Benelli used to designate the church resulting from the Council. Cardinal Wojtyla, in his book “Sign of Contradiction”, gives it the name “post-conciliar church”. ↩︎
2.  “B’naï B’rith, which means ‘Sons of the Covenant’ in Hebrew, is the first world Jewish organization. It is at the same time the oldest, the most numerous and undoubtedly the most influential. Founded in 1843 in the United States, this para-Masonic secret society exclusively reserved for Jews includes more than 550,000 Brothers and Sisters in around fifty countries” (The Warriors of Israel, Facta, 1995, p. 415). Also read the remarkable work by Mr. E. Ratier: Mysteries and secrets of B’naï B’rith. ↩︎
3. Under the Banner, July/August 1986. ↩︎
4. The question of the possible invalidity of the post-conciliar rite of the sacrament of orders is dealt with in the magazine “Forts dans la Foi”. Rama P. Coomaraswamy, MD: “The Anglican drama of the post-conciliar Catholic clergy”, n° 9/10, 2nd quarter 1990. ↩︎
5. L’Osservatore Romano of 03/21/1989 reports a comment by Father Betti about the new formulas of the profession of faith (a chapter should be written to comment on them). He says among other things: “The second category concerns the truths and doctrines that the Magisterium proposes in a definitive manner although they are not divinely revealed. To these truths must correspond to a total assent, even if it is not an assent of faith, because they are precisely not proposed as divinely revealed. For example, the legitimacy of a Roman Pontiff: his election is a historical fact. It could even be theoretically tainted by an electoral defect. It is not the fact in itself which is divinely revealed, but it is so linked to Revelation that the Magisterium can pronounce in a definitive manner on the legitimacy of this or that Pope. Otherwise, the Church would have remained for this or that period without a legitimate leader, without a successor to Peter. This extract would almost seem  a response to the testimony published three years before, in 1986 in “Under the Banner”. ↩︎
6. The second name is difficult to grasp. In order to avoid an error we prefer not to transcribe it. ↩︎
7. In quotation marks in the original. ↩︎
8. We do not know why Father Malachi Martin did not answer the second question. ↩︎
9.  The Society of Saint Pius X was founded by Mgr Lefebvre in 1970. ↩︎
10. By evoking this expression of “missionary” Father Malachi Martin means that Cardinal Angelo Roncalli was acting to become Pope. By the word “agenda” he means that he had a modernist program. We will come back to this later. ↩︎
11. This is an initiation into Freemasonry. Let us note this extract from Father Mouraux’s magazine: “Nuncio in Paris, Mgr Roncalli received at an open table Edouard Herriot and Vincent Auriol, notorious freemasons and politicians who carried out persecutory action against the Church.  In the warmth of a banquet, he said to them one day: “What separates us is of little importance”. All his happiness seemed to be that of the table where he wanted above all to please” (Bonum Certamen 122, p. 7). ↩︎
12.  Emilia Kaczorowska, the mother of John Paul II, was Jewish. ↩︎
13. Note from AC – Fr. Martin had read the Third Secret of Fatima, which is widely believed by traditionalists to have predicted the Crisis. He knew in the 1990’s where the Church was heading. ↩︎
14. We can note that “totally reforming the main documents” of Vatican II necessarily amounts to rejecting the Council, the good parts of which served to push through the bad ones. ↩︎
15. During the Council a brochure was distributed to the Council Fathers entitled Judeo-Masonic action in the Council. After having given several proofs that chapter 4 presented to the Council was of Jewish origin, we find this on page 10:
    “If we want definitive proof that chapter 4 of the Schema on Ecumenism presented to the Council by Cardinal Bea — who personally defended this thesis – is from a Judeo-Masonic source, we find it in the pages of the important French newspaper Le Monde, of November 19, 1963: “The international Jewish organization B’naï B’rith has expressed its desire to establish closer relations with the Catholic Church. The said Order has just submitted to the Council a declaration in which the responsibility of all humanity in the death of Jesus Christ is affirmed. If this declaration is accepted by the Council, declared Mr. Label A. Katz, President of the International Council of B’naï B’rith, the Jewish communities will study the means of cooperation with the authorities of the (Catholic) Church.”
    In presenting his draft decree in favor of the Jews – completely contrary to the Gospel – His Eminence Cardinal Bea took care not to properly inform the Fathers of the Council of the origin of his theses and to specify to them they were suggested by the Masonic Order of B’naï B’rith.
    Let us also add this letter from Cardinal Villot to Cardinal Marty of December 22, 1977: “…The Holy Father is indeed well aware of the sincere and fruitful relations that his venerated predecessor Pope John XXIII maintained with Jules Isaac. He also appreciates the happy consequences that these reports have had for subsequent orientation of the relations of the Catholic Church with Judaism, relations which found ecclesial expression in number 4 of the declaration Nostra Aetate of the Second Vatican Council, as well as in other manifestations which preceded it deated or followed” (The Churches before Judaism, Ed. du Cerf, Paris, 1980, pp. 181 and 182). ↩︎
16. We therefore know, as it is confirmed by this testimony, that the “New Mass” is the work of Protestants and Freemasons. Should we be surprised to find, for example, cabbalistic formulas in the Offertory?
    To know the thoughts of Protestants on the subject of the mass, let us read what Luther, founder of this sect, wrote: “We declare in the first place that our intention has never been to absolutely abolish all worship of God, but only to purge that which is in use, of all the additions with which it has been soiled: I am speaking of this abominable Canon, which is a collection of muddy lacunae; we made the Mass a sacrifice; we added offerories. The Mass is not a sacrifice or the action of the priest. Let us look at it as a sacrament or as a testament.  Let us call it blessing, eucharist, or table of the Lord, or Lord’s Supper, or Memory of the Lord. Let us give it any other title we wish, provided that we do not sully it with the name of sacrifice or action” (Werke, t. xi, p. 774). “When the mass is overthrown, I think we will have overthrown the papacy” (Contra Henricum Angliae Regem, Werke, t. x; sec. ii).
    ↩︎