I have taught my children that friends should be good for you. If they are not, they should not be your friend. How can being friends with such a priest be good for fr. Pf? How can he be friends with a priest who should not be doing public masses? How can he justify exposing all those young men and boys to such a priest? Sounds like the SSJ all over again.
and he complains about b. Williamson and our new fr. Mbadugha...
Correct. I should have said "friends".Fr. Marshall Roberts was at our chapel in York, PA for almost 1 1/2 years (2005-6) during which time,
Fr. Pfeiffer was his frequent visitor until Fr. Roberts was removed for cause.
In our due diligence investigation regarding his background there was discovered several problems that would have ended any possibility of bringing him to Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission. Our Mission was helped at its foundation by sound priests from whom we relied upon for advice in such matters all of whom are now deceased. Fr. Arthur DeMaio, a former professor of Thomistic theology at St. John University in New York who helped the SSPX at the chapel in Pittston, PA acted as our representative by contacting priests that knew Fr. Roberts. There were two recommendations that swayed our decision in favor of Fr. Roberts. I will address the most important and essential without which Fr. Roberts would never have been accepted. It came from Fr. John Fullerton who was then the district superior for the SSPX in the U.S. His recommendation, through Fr. DeMaio, was fulsome.
We were contacted by a Catholic attorney from New York City accusing us of gross irresponsibility for bringing Fr. Roberts to our chapel. She was told about Fr. Fullerton’s recommendation and then confronted Fr. Fullerton in public on this matter. Fr. Fullerton denied ever having recommend Fr. Roberts and we received a letter from this attorney accusing us of having fabricated the recommendation. That letter is also available.
We had nothing but trouble with Fr. Roberts from the first week he arrived. He demonstrated a level of immaturity that can only be called puerile. He had no convictions whatsoever and changed his direction all over the map sometimes in a matter of weeks always looking out for what he thought would be in his immediate interest. If there is any interest in the details I will provide several examples. There is also a letter written to Fr. Fullerton and +Fellay on our files.
The immediate cause for which he was removed followed upon a meeting he called for with our board. At this meeting Fr. Roberts delivered an ultimatum from Fr. John Fullerton. We were told that we had three choices: 1) Become and indult community, 2) turn our property over to the SSPX through Fr. Roberts, or 3) continue as we were. The first two choices were acceptable to Fr. Fullerton but we were threatened that if we choose the third option, we would enter a “desert of spiritual desolation” and he would insure that no priest would help us.
Fr. Roberts was told to leave our chapel immediately and given two weeks to clear his apartment and return the car. He left sooner than that completely trashing the apartment which took a full day for three persons to clean which included purchasing a new rug. I have kept picture of the apartment as evidence.
As for Fr. Roberts, he left immediately and went directly to Richfield CT where Fr. Gonzales and Fullerton received him. Fr. Gonzales immediately contact Fr. DeMaio and asked him to never help us again. Fr. DiMaio declined. Fr. Roberts then went to the independent chapel in Jacksonville, Fl. He was received there on the recommendation of Fr. Fullerton. The board only asked from us if we had any evidence of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ predatory behavior of Fr. Roberts. We did not. They were not interested in any other information regarding Fr. Roberts behavior at our chapel.
Someone from Jacksonville recently visited the Mission in York and I shared some of these facts with him. He did not look surprised, and seemed interested in hearing it.
Topic: Fr. Marshall Roberts Update? (Read 15303 times)