I would like to compliment The Times for taking the initiative to organise a debate on the words of Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. I would also like to clarify some points that were discussed.

In the film presentation we heard that Cardinal Martini was “a thorn in the Church”. I am sure many people will object to such a remark.

Martini was “a generous Pastor” (Pope Benedict XVI), “ a prophet of our times” and “a giant of the Church” who sought to build the Church on the Word of God. The Cardinal had told me: “Certain times, I am presented in ‘cattiva luce’, (‘bad light’) ‘specie da alcuni giornali’ (‘particularly by some newspapers’).”

I had never met Martin Scicluna, but I think he spoke as an honest gentleman. He was free to criticise the Church, but he did so with an ethical finesse. Even if at times one may disagree with him, we need to hear voices from the other side.

It reminded me of Martini’s ‘Cattedra dei non-Credenti’ (‘Chair of non-believers’) where he invited non-believers to speak, like Umberto Eco, the famous author, the ex-mayor of Venice, Massimo Cacciari, and others. From these confrontations we grew in our search for truth and faith.

It is incorrect, as stated by a friend theologian, that in the early days Martini was left aside. Incorrect, because early in his archbishopric he was elected president of the European Bishops Conference as successor to Cardinal Basil Hume. For over a decade he was a consultant chosen by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and to the Congregation of Bishops. He also conducted spiritual exercises to the Pope and to the Conference of Bishops.

However, he was never ‘papabile’ and at the last conclave, as stated by Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor, he received only a few votes. He made it known to the cardinals that his health, (which I followed closely through San Raffaele Hospital), did not allow him to consider such a responsibility. However, as the Vaticanist of the Corriere della Sera stated, he spoke twice to the cardinals at the invitation of Cardinal Ratzinger. It seems that the content was on the lines of his last interview or ‘last will’.

In your paper Fr Joe Borg wrote that the interview was given the silent treatment by many in the Church (The Sunday Times, September 30). Maybe, but the interview was given prominence in the international press, including the Catholic media. Cardinal Murphy O’Connor wrote in The Tablet that they “disagree that the Church is 200 years behind.” For me the ‘200’ is intended more as a biblical figure than just a span of time.

Finally, one needs to know and read Martini to appreciate his learning about the Word of God, for as Prior Enzo Bianchi of the Comunità di Bose wrote in Corriere della Sera: “Also Cardinal Martini, as often happens to the true Christians, was not understood in depth. He was a man simply with faith in the Gospel. In his short time many did not grasp his meanings, but if we look ahead he remains one who truly understood what the Gospel says to men”.