I looked back through your posts and I don't see anything about general information about Martin's views. I have read Vatican, Final Conclave, and Decline and Fall, of his works, and don't care to read any more. If you are referring to your post about Martin and Congar, I already answered that even though it had nothing to do with the post you were replying to.
You seem to enjoy quizzing people on how much they know of someone's works, whether it be LaGrange or Congar.
This was in response to someone posting a quote from Fr. Martin on Congar.
You dismissed the quote and asked the person if all they know of Congar is from traditionalist and Fr. Martin's books.
So, naturally I assumed that you have a full knowledge of Fr. Martin on Congar and disagree with him. So, I wanted to know precisely what you disagreed with regaring Fr. Martin's position in regards to Congar.
And as far as answering goes. I've already answered you regarding the modern definition of "partial communion" vs. Augustine's exposition on Ex Opero..in which he uses a formulation that has nothing to do with the post Vatican II kiss up to non-Catholics. Reposting it will just lead to the same round robin. And Vatican II quotes are useless as well considering they use the same bastardized language that allows flexible interpretations.
Fr. Martin has and interesting Chapter in one of his books about the use of Language in Vatican II. It's originally described in Jesus Now when referring to anti-Catholic but is crystalized in The Jesuits. It probably influenced Avery Dulles' turnaround in his language from 1979 to 2002 regarding Partial communion.
But I'll get to that later on the other thread....