Malachi Martin film from Causeway pictures coming soon (trailer)
#31
(01-27-2012, 03:55 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(01-27-2012, 03:37 PM)verenaerin Wrote: Even if he was living with a woman, it could have been a house keeper or something innocent like that.  In light of all the exorcisms he did, and consequently all the demons he must have angered, any info I read of him I consider very cautiously.

I think it was Cardinal Cooke (maybe Spellman)  that encouraged him to rent rooms in a family setting for his safety.  I think it was the Cardinal who put him in touch with the Livanos family. 

Then the husband died and he continued to live with the wife, who acted as a sort of housekeeper, yes?
Reply
#32
(01-27-2012, 03:20 PM)Gerard Wrote: Fr. Paul Wickens, Fr. Charles Fiore,  William H. Kennedy and I may be wrong but I think Gerry Matatics as well have confirmed that they have seen Fr. Martin's "paperwork" verifying his status.  Cardinal O'Connor according to Kennedy tried to put a stop to Fr. Martin's activities and claims but Fr. Martin presented his celebret to O'Connor and that was the end of the issue. 

Maybe, but the statement Mr. Kennedy says proves that Fr. Martin was never laicised actually does not.  Fr. Martin, Fr. Wickens, Fr. Fiore, and Cardinal O'Connor are all deceased (requiescant in pace), and are not able to show us any documentation.  I don't know what Mr. Matatics may have seen.  Both the statement from Fr. O"Keefe and the statement from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life say that Fr. Martin was laicised. 

Tim Wrote:Does it make any sense to be laicized but still demand he remain celibate ?. I'm with Gerard, Fr.Fiore et al.

It is my understanding that the Church never used to dispense priests from the obligation of celibacy, just as bishops are never dispensed today.

verenaerin Wrote:Even if he was living with a woman, it could have been a house keeper or something innocent like that. 

Absolutely.  I only included that because I wanted to quote the entire statement.
Reply
#33
(01-27-2012, 04:11 PM)spasiisochrani Wrote: Maybe, but the statement Mr. Kennedy says proves that Fr. Martin was never laicised actually does not.  Fr. Martin, Fr. Wickens, Fr. Fiore, and Cardinal O'Connor are all deceased (requiescant in pace), and are not able to show us any documentation.  I don't know what Mr. Matatics may have seen.  Both the statement from Fr. O"Keefe and the statement from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life say that Fr. Martin was laicised. 

It may be that Fr. Martin's status fell under a broad characterization of "Laicization," but the Pope can give a dispensation allowing priests to retain some faculties. Hence the celebret was granted to say mass privately and offer pastoral and sacramental aid on a one on one level.  The question people are really asking in a round about way is whether or not Fr. Martin had faculties as a priest.  He claimed publicly that he did.  It was well known, a number of high profile priests vouched for him and no Cardinal archbishop publicly challenged him on this. 

Fr. Martin claimed on national radio he was not a "renegade" and that he had superiors in Rome that monitored how he spent his money and commanded him not to become involved in politics. 

Unfortunately because of the break in and robbery of his office when he was in the hospital towards the end of his life, we probably don't have a line on where to actually see his paperwork and so Rome would be the only other place and that is not the most trustworthy place anymore for verifying things such as this. 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)