VIDEO Fr. Ted Martin responds to the “talky-women” who confronted him

The other day I posted a video about confused liberal feminist protesters challenging a good young priest, after Mass, outside the Cathedral of Kalamazoo, MI.  HERE.  The video was made by the protesters.

Fr. Ted Martin did a video response.  Nuthin’ fancy.  Just straight at ya’.



About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Just Too Cool, Linking Back, Mail from priests, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Legisperitus says:

    No reflection on the content, but the low-angle shot gets a little disturbing over time.

  2. majuscule says:

    No reflection on the content, but on my iPad the audio was not synced with the video.

    I just pretended he was speaking Latin and it was dubbed into English.

    Fr. Ted is a good speaker IMHO.

  3. Very good reply by Father….:D

  4. lh says:

    Thanks be to God for good and faithful priests.

  5. AA Cunningham says:

    Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.

    Ordinatio Sacerdotalis

    No doubt about it, the matter is closed

  6. Dismas says:

    “Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them” William Shakespeare

    Maybe Fr. Ted should be consider being one the faces promoting the Year of Faith for our Church?

  7. Mrs. Bear says:

    As a regular lay woman – this has got to be the clearest and simplest explanation on Vatican II that I can pass on to my children as part of their religion class in September!

  8. Indulgentiam says:

    “not all truth and all holiness in the Church began in 1965” I think i’ll have that made into a T-shirt. This young Priest must make his mama very proud. His congregation is extremely fortunate. God bless Fr. Martin and Our Lady protect him

  9. FloridaJoan says:

    Father Martin is very articulate , speaking truth in charity and clarity. What a blessing to his parish. He is in my prayers. Thank you Fr Z for posting this uplifting and much needed good news.

    pax et bonum

  10. LorrieRob says:

    Thank God for this young man and his vocation. He handled the “protestors” with such respect and openness and yet softly but firmly witnessed to the Truth as he explained the teaching of the Church. Truly heartwarming and encouraging!

  11. contrarian says:

    Yeah, Father Martin is pretty much awesome.

    Watching the original video again, I’m amazed that it was posted on Youtube by the protestors. Does anyone sympathetic to the protestors watch that video and think, “Boy, she sure showed HIM!”? Does a video like that advance their cause in the least? That random people who see it on Youtube are going to be persuaded by the protestors? I can’t imagine that.
    Seems like a poor campaign strategy.

  12. Supertradmum says:

    Contrarian, people can and do change their minds and hearts about doctrines and liturgy. Hey, this is the evangelization you and I are to be doing everyday. Maybe such a video will touch hearts, and we must always hope for conversion in ourselves and others.

    Good video. He is so peaceful.

  13. Supertradmum says:

    PS I want to add I love his phrase,

    “To be a Catholic is to trust in the Church.”

    Yes, yes, yes

  14. Kerry says:

    Father Ted says “…many of their arguments…”. They made arguments? They shifted from place to place; there were no arguments.

  15. irishgirl says:

    At least Father Martin was able to make his point without someone constantly getting into his face and interrupting him, as in the case of the protesters.
    God bless him, and all faithful priests!
    @ Indulgentiam: Yeah, those words you quoted would have made a great t-shirt slogan!
    I said something similar ‘way back in the late 1980s or early 1990s, when I was at a Third Order Franciscan workshop weekend and one of the participants (a woman in her sixties, at least) kept raving on and on about how great Vatican II was. I turned and simply said to her, ‘Well, the Church didn’t start with Vatican II.’ I don’t think she liked that! I got so sick and tired of hearing that Vatican II was the greatest thing since sliced bread!

  16. Father K says:


    I like your comment and your quote fom Father, “To be a Catholic is to trust in the Church.”: now I wonder how many SSPX members [Bishops] read this blog? If they do it might give them food for thought…no?

  17. LouiseA says:

    I believe Fr. Martin is incorrect when he states that “whenever the Pope speaks to the Church on issue of Faith or morals” it is protected, infallible, and we can trust it is true. Infallibility is much more limited than that because certain additional criteria must also be met.

  18. marymediatrix says:

    Dear All,
    I find this all very disturbing that a priest and others would post this. I think women should be treated with more dignity whether or not you agree with her. “Talky woman” has a name and should be treated with respect. She was there to show support to the sisters. So be it. Fr. Martin did not have to engage on camera for 18 minutes of questioning. He could have politely listened to them and then keep them in his prayers. Instead he repeatedly said ‘my question to you is this…’ She attempts to answer and then gets labeled as the ‘talky woman.’ She said she would have a conversation about it at another time.. Some of his questions were I beleive flip.’ Do you have leather seats in your car? Can you name the sixteen documents (of Vatican II) for me? She said I am just here to support the sisters. She was clearly being provoked and Father was just trying to show how much he knows which was not appropriate. He went on and on with his questions, what was the point of that. She said she was not prepared. She was very grateful for his time and humble enough to admit that she was not prepared to speak at the moment, and did not have all of the passages. She spoke of prayer, sharing, listening, opening up and was thankful. Father was laughing at her. He then said she should sit down with someone else since he was leaving in two weeks. I am not sure I understand his latest video, ‘unfortunately, Kim Frank hasn’t gotten back to me…I haven’t had a chance to sit down with her and speak…’ I beleive Father Martin was very disrespectful and sarcastic and humiliated this woman and anyone who has left a negative comment against Kim Frank owes her an apology. I pray for Fr. Martin and beleive he owes her an apology as well. Blessings.

  19. magnificatlady says:

    Dear Marymediatrix,
    I’m calling you bluff! Exactly which one of those ladies in the original video was you?!!!!
    If he was seen in your eyes as being disrespect; I can’t imagine what you would do if you ace across a real disrespectful person, such as…one of the Nuns on the Bus?!

  20. Supertradmum says:

    I taught religion for years and years, as this woman claimed to have done and she should have known the answers to some of Father’s questions. Anyone who has taught religion should at least know the major constitutions of Vatican II by name by heart. Sorry, no excuses.

    In addition, the leather seats in the car was applicable, as the woman, whose name we do not know, was criticizing the ancient idea of having art, beauty and riches in the House of God.

    That is Socratic Dialogue. As usual, the liberals want to play the victims of oppression by the horrible, male priesthood. The woman has removed herself from the Catholic Church.

  21. asperges says:

    To take up LouseA’s comment, “the Church is infallible in her objective definitive teaching regarding faith and morals, (it is) not that believers are infallible in their subjective interpretation of her teaching.” (New Advent). I’m sure this is what the good priest was intending to convey.

    We had a fanatical, modernist priest in the 70s who maintained that the Pope / Church was always infallible on “faith morals … and liturgy!” Needless to say, he disregarded all teachings pre-Vat II in liturgy which, by his own ludicrous definition, would also have been infallible.

  22. Father K says:


    The ‘oppressed’ woman claims she has 2 degrees in theology and yet comes out with such rubbish as ‘some Catholics believe the Pope is the successor of St Peter and the bishops are successors of the apostles!’ She then presumes to speak for Jesus when she says he would disapprove of the cathedral behind her. [I presume she knows he prefers her no doubt tastefully decorated ‘house-church]. She then trots out such hackneyed and untrue statements such as ‘the Pope wears Prada shoes.’ Does she also think he was a Nazi?

    Everytime Father was able to get a word in edgeways she would change the topic or personally attack him, such as ‘I suppose you have them in Latin.’ Wow, such erudition coming from someone with 2 degrees in theology…

    No the woman was full of misdirected anger and Father was incredibly patient, kind and generous with his time.

  23. moconnor says:

    While I don’t support much of what Ms. Frank was saying in the original video, I was very uncomfortable with how Fr Martin was trying to engage her. I can tell he meant to stand up for the Church, but every Psych 101 student knows that you must meet a person like this on their ground, first. Neither of them seemed to be willing to listen to each other. I just wish Father would have talked her more about the LWRC issue and not the big argument over Vatican II. Anyway, he’s a young guy and a great priest. In time he will learn the subtleties of how to conduct these types of conversations. Isn’t the point to bring souls to the Church’s way rather than just “be right”?

  24. majuscule says:


    Of course Fr. Ted did not have to come outside to speak to the protesters. (Or nun supporters, whatever). That would have them complaining that no one was listening (and that could be what they hoped for. I’m not a mind reader, just saying’ is all). I don’t see what use coming out there to simply stand and smile and listen without speaking (and later on pray for them) would be unless it would be to stroke their egos and encourage them to think they are on the right path. (Betcha he prayed for them anyway!)

    They are the ones who came prepared with a videographer. Why do you suppose that was?

    If she was not prepared to speak to him why did she “engage on camera” at all?

    Did you notice at the beginning of his video response he said he was responding because she had not gotten back to him yet?

    I await her response to his response…

  25. fathertedmartin says:


    Thanks for your comments and I too would not subscribe to the notion that the Pope speaks infallibly whenever he speaks on Faith and Morals. You wrote that I said, “’whenever the Pope speaks to the Church on issue of Faith or morals’ it is protected, infallible, and we can trust it is true.” If you go to around 6.15 minutes in the video you will hear me speak about how infallibility only pertains to faith and morals and nothing else; hence my kidding example concerning the Chicago Cubs. You will hear that I make a distinction between the Extraordinary Universal Magisterium, the Ordinary Universal and the Ordinary Magisterium. I explicitly state that the last of these three is not infallible. I hope that helps and I apologize if I was imprecise or unclear in that matter.


    I am unable to understand how I was anything but kind to these women… If I can’t laugh or make use of humor in discussions, well…. I don’t know… If a women who is a self proclaimed University Professor with two degrees in theology can’t be engaged in theological discussion, then I don’t know who can. Asking someone with two degrees in theology if they can name the 16 documents of the Second Vatican Council is not unfair, especially since she never made a single citation of the texts of the Second Vatican Council.


    I listened to Kim Franke for 18 minutes… so I don’t know how you could say, “Neither of them seemed to be willing to listen to each other.” Take a look at the comments on M-Live where Julie Mack, the reporter, said, “I was very, very impressed Sunday by Father Martin’s willingness to speaking with the rally participants and to me. He was put in an awkward situation not of his making, and he truly rose to the occasion. He could have easily ignored the whole thing or brushed me off; instead, he was exceptionally welcoming, open and gracious. I certainly didn’t need (or ask for) “special access.” He was more than willing to speak at length to whomever was there about whatever topic that arose.” ( I tried my best to listen and felt like I was constantly interrupted.

    Finally, you said, “I just wish Father would have talked her more about the LWRC issue and not the big argument over Vatican II. ” You will see that she is the one to bring up the sexual abuse crisis, Church “riches”, Prada shoes, etc… She was justifying her stance apropos the LWCR by an appeal to the “spirit of Vatican II”.

    If I was uncharitable in the least, miserere mei. I was only trying to help people understand why I hold what I do.

  26. Lisieux says:

    As someone not involved with the situation (I live in England where we don’t have a LCWR and where the remaining sisters tend to be less confrontational), I was consumed with admiration not just at the patience of the priest (who presumably hadn’t been asked in advance to meet the women) but at the way he had all the facts and documentation at his fingertips, providing chapter and verse for the documents of VII.

    Nor can I sympathise with the reaction of ‘marymediatrix’ who thinks that Fr Martin was somehow provoking the women (though I can understand that sympathisers with the latter would certainly find it provoking that a champion of the SpiritOfVaticanTwo clearly knew so little about the actual documents of the Council); I’m afraid that I was irrestistibly reminded of that wonderful scene in Crocodile Dundee when a New York mugger tries it on with our hero: The time, ground and weapons were chosen by Fr Martin’s interlocutors: it doesn’t behove anyone to whimper that Father isn’t playing fair and he was howwid to the poor ickle defenceless females. If they don’t like sensible argument, why start one?

  27. LouiseA says:

    Dear Fr. Martin, Thanks for the clarification. – LouiseA

  28. acardnal says:

    @Fr Ted Martin: You did a great job! Keep it up.

  29. RosaryMan says:

    I greatly appreciate this commentary. Thank you especially for the explanations at the beginning of your video.

  30. Pingback: Convert Journal – 7 Quick Takes Friday (set #68)

Comments are closed.