Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Anσnymσus Posts Allowed => Topic started by: Änσnymσus on August 04, 2013, 03:33:00 PM
-
Who is Bishop Morello?
-
Who is Father Tetherow.?
-
Taylor is not a bishop, as far as I am concerned. I was mixed up, years ago with some of the men he "ordained" that led me to do extensive research into his lines. I no longer have the resources to cite, but I will give you the short of it. He will argue that he has lines through Archbishop Thuc. Yes, Abp. Thuc's ordinations and consecrations are valid but here is the issue, which I will try to carefully explain...
1. There is a long line of orders and priests leading up to and before Taylor, even those involved with Thuc, in Taylor's lineage
2. It is not verifiable that the some of the priestly ordinations in Taylor's lines are valid and there is reason to doubt the form and validity
3. It is not verifiable that the Roman rite or another approved Eastern rite was used in these ordinations
4. There are ordinations and lines in Taylor's line weaving in and out of schismatic groups, such as the Brazilian National Catholic Church and other so-called autocellaphous churches (read: guys living with their 80 year old mom playing bishop in the garage)
5. Some of these schismatics may have had valid orders but the issue is whether they used the actual Roman rite of ordination without any changes.
6. The rites used by the schismatic groups are not verifiable, unless there are pictures and audio recordings. If someone was ignorant and foolish enough to be a witness, they still might not even have known better.
7. Many of the involved men are dead and cannot be questioned or given the chance to explain or retract their actions
I wish I had more in digital format to give you.
Taylor also did a mail order type deal, where you could send him money and he sent you a certificate as being part of some kind of order, lay order or something of that likeness. What he did escapes me, but it earned him the name of Conman Taylor.
He was also trusted by the late Fr. Hector Bolduc, who I knew personally. Fr. Bolduc, for the good he did was not careful about checking into ordinations. I don't think it was malice but that for whatever reason, Taylor wasn't the only mistake he made. He installed two men who were old Catholics at an SSPX chapel, and they were not conditionally ordained. I know many people, including myself loved Fr. Bolduc, he wasn't careful. I was actually personally affected by his ivolvement and trust with the Taylor line and it was a mess for me. Once I was made aware I set out to straighten out the problem and at the same time, a former SSPX priest, who also knew of the situation, helped me rectify the incident. Initially, it was a different former SSPX priest and some laymen who tipped me off.
Anyways, STAY AWAY! It is a mess. Only go to traditional priests and bishops with clean and verifiable lines.
-
Yes. Things are getting confusing.
There are men who are infiltrating independent chapels for evil purposes too.
May God provide all Catholic chapels with holy, chaste, valid priests of the true Catholic faith.
-
And these men are slick and take advantage of good people.
We try to trust people. Sometimes we make bad judgements because evil is slick and deceives.
-
And these men are slick and take advantage of good people.
We try to trust people. Sometimes we make bad judgements because evil is slick and deceives.
Sometimes you have to remember Ronald Reagan's slogan; Trust but verify.
-
Taylor is not a bishop, as far as I am concerned. I was mixed up, years ago with some of the men he "ordained" that led me to do extensive research into his lines. I no longer have the resources to cite, but I will give you the short of it. He will argue that he has lines through Archbishop Thuc. Yes, Abp. Thuc's ordinations and consecrations are valid but here is the issue, which I will try to carefully explain...
1. There is a long line of orders and priests leading up to and before Taylor, even those involved with Thuc, in Taylor's lineage
2. It is not verifiable that the some of the priestly ordinations in Taylor's lines are valid and there is reason to doubt the form and validity
3. It is not verifiable that the Roman rite or another approved Eastern rite was used in these ordinations
4. There are ordinations and lines in Taylor's line weaving in and out of schismatic groups, such as the Brazilian National Catholic Church and other so-called autocellaphous churches (read: guys living with their 80 year old mom playing bishop in the garage)
5. Some of these schismatics may have had valid orders but the issue is whether they used the actual Roman rite of ordination without any changes.
6. The rites used by the schismatic groups are not verifiable, unless there are pictures and audio recordings. If someone was ignorant and foolish enough to be a witness, they still might not even have known better.
7. Many of the involved men are dead and cannot be questioned or given the chance to explain or retract their actions
I wish I had more in digital format to give you.
Taylor also did a mail order type deal, where you could send him money and he sent you a certificate as being part of some kind of order, lay order or something of that likeness. What he did escapes me, but it earned him the name of Conman Taylor.
He was also trusted by the late Fr. Hector Bolduc, who I knew personally. Fr. Bolduc, for the good he did was not careful about checking into ordinations. I don't think it was malice but that for whatever reason, Taylor wasn't the only mistake he made. He installed two men who were old Catholics at an SSPX chapel, and they were not conditionally ordained. I know many people, including myself loved Fr. Bolduc, he wasn't careful. I was actually personally affected by his ivolvement and trust with the Taylor line and it was a mess for me. Once I was made aware I set out to straighten out the problem and at the same time, a former SSPX priest, who also knew of the situation, helped me rectify the incident. Initially, it was a different former SSPX priest and some laymen who tipped me off.
Anyways, STAY AWAY! It is a mess. Only go to traditional priests and bishops with clean and verifiable lines.
Uh, Fr Bolduc didn't even talk to Bishop Taylor. This is a bunch of malarchy. Fr. Bolduc had a cease and desist order against him, but since Taylor misspelled Fr. Bolduc's name, he had a hard time getting him to take it off his website, for detraction. He did sue them and got his name removed from that website when it was brought to his attention that he was appearing on there. He was livid! He had absolutely NO connection with them, and that's what he told us!
You obviously didn't know Fr. Bolduc well enough. He was -very- careful and he didn't trust Taylor at all. He always told us to stay away from the Thuc line.
People out in twin cities are telling me to go to Fr Brown down in Elgin. I won't go because it's the Thuc line.
But I'll tell you something, you got a lot of nerve talking about Fr. Bolduc, making these accusations, when he can't even defend himself. Unreal.
Go to "Bishop Taylor's" site, and you'll see that he asks for people interested in being priests, to be "incardinated" with him and his community. What in the... this is something Father Bolduc never would have okayed.
He's been "approved" by the "authorities" in "Rome?" WAT? This guy is a complete fraud.
http://netministries.org/frames.asp?ch=ch06827&st=WV&name=St.%20Basil%20Roman%20Catholic%20Church&city=Beckley
Stop slandering Father Bolduc.
-
Fr. Bolduc, in whose childhood home I have sat in and conversed with him, sent Richard McDonough to Taylor for ordination. McDonough ran the church Fr. Bolduc owned in New Hampshire and was his resident priest. As far as I know, McDonough never received conditional ordination from reliable bishop. Those are the true facts of the matter, but I'd be happy to know that a conditional ordination was done, as I really think Richard McDonough is a good and wonderful man, and I couldn't think more highly of him.
I'm not accusing him of sin, he was a good man, but he wasn't careful. Ask one of the nine who were in the SSPX at the same time, or even priests who knew him well. I got my information from both.
-
Taylor is not a bishop, as far as I am concerned. I was mixed up, years ago with some of the men he "ordained" that led me to do extensive research into his lines. I no longer have the resources to cite, but I will give you the short of it. He will argue that he has lines through Archbishop Thuc. Yes, Abp. Thuc's ordinations and consecrations are valid but here is the issue, which I will try to carefully explain...
1. There is a long line of orders and priests leading up to and before Taylor, even those involved with Thuc, in Taylor's lineage
2. It is not verifiable that the some of the priestly ordinations in Taylor's lines are valid and there is reason to doubt the form and validity
3. It is not verifiable that the Roman rite or another approved Eastern rite was used in these ordinations
4. There are ordinations and lines in Taylor's line weaving in and out of schismatic groups, such as the Brazilian National Catholic Church and other so-called autocellaphous churches (read: guys living with their 80 year old mom playing bishop in the garage)
5. Some of these schismatics may have had valid orders but the issue is whether they used the actual Roman rite of ordination without any changes.
6. The rites used by the schismatic groups are not verifiable, unless there are pictures and audio recordings. If someone was ignorant and foolish enough to be a witness, they still might not even have known better.
7. Many of the involved men are dead and cannot be questioned or given the chance to explain or retract their actions
I wish I had more in digital format to give you.
Taylor also did a mail order type deal, where you could send him money and he sent you a certificate as being part of some kind of order, lay order or something of that likeness. What he did escapes me, but it earned him the name of Conman Taylor.
Anyways, STAY AWAY! It is a mess. Only go to traditional priests and bishops with clean and verifiable lines.
Yes!
Taylor also ordained Dennis McCormack, a "priest" who got "consecrated" by Ryan Scott some years ago. Afterwards, he became a convicted sex-offender. He was in Long Island, NY, or somewhere around there.
-
Fr. Bolduc, in whose childhood home I have sat in and conversed with him, sent Richard McDonough to Taylor for ordination. McDonough ran the church Fr. Bolduc owned in New Hampshire and was his resident priest. As far as I know, McDonough never received conditional ordination from reliable bishop. Those are the true facts of the matter, but I'd be happy to know that a conditional ordination was done, as I really think Richard McDonough is a good and wonderful man, and I couldn't think more highly of him.
I'm not accusing him of sin, he was a good man, but he wasn't careful. Ask one of the nine who were in the SSPX at the same time, or even priests who knew him well. I got my information from both.
So you're saying that he sent Fr. McDounagh, the priest that he put charge over his very chapel, to "Bishop Taylor?" Fiddlesticks! I'm going to check this out myself.
-
:dancing-banana:I'd stay far away from any "bishop" who plays in his 80 year-old mother's garage!
-
These bishops have supplied jurisdiction.
It's a sin, a grave sin, to constantly cast down on Traditional Catholic Bishops.
-
Fr. Bolduc, in whose childhood home I have sat in and conversed with him, sent Richard McDonough to Taylor for ordination. McDonough ran the church Fr. Bolduc owned in New Hampshire and was his resident priest. As far as I know, McDonough never received conditional ordination from reliable bishop. Those are the true facts of the matter, but I'd be happy to know that a conditional ordination was done, as I really think Richard McDonough is a good and wonderful man, and I couldn't think more highly of him.
I'm not accusing him of sin, he was a good man, but he wasn't careful. Ask one of the nine who were in the SSPX at the same time, or even priests who knew him well. I got my information from both.
So you're saying that he sent Fr. McDounagh, the priest that he put charge over his very chapel, to "Bishop Taylor?" Fiddlesticks! I'm going to check this out myself.
You don't believe me that he was ordained by Taylor?
I have at least four former SSPX priests, one of which was the recipient of some of my research into the matter, who would affirm that this is true. I also have witnesses to Richard McDonough stating the same thing.
If you knew Father Bolduc so well, what kind of farm did he have?
-
These bishops have supplied jurisdiction.
It's a sin, a grave sin, to constantly cast down on Traditional Catholic Bishops.
Are you retarded? In what diocese do they have supplied jurisdiction? How do they break up their territories? Are they making new ones? You know only the Church has the right to set up a diocese, right?
Secondly, many of these men are not bishops. It is a mortal sin to impersonate clergy.
-
Stop slandering Father Bolduc.
And you stop slandering the Tuc line! There seems to be a few "bad apples" in the trad movement these days, but they are not confined to the Tuc line. There are others in the Lefebre line as well.
-
Stop slandering Father Bolduc.
And you stop slandering the Tuc line! There seems to be a few "bad apples" in the trad movement these days, but they are not confined to the Tuc line. There are others in the Lefebre line as well.
I'm not slandering him. Do you know what slander is? He went to Taylor for McDonough's ordination. I can't help that this is a fact.
Also, it is spelled THUC. I have no problem with clear, valid Thuc lines. I suggest you re-read about some of the issues surrounding the Thuc priests and bishops. I'm a big supporter, myself, of CMRI.
I'm well aware of the bad apples in other lines, just sticking to the subject here, which initially I provided reasons for staying away from the Taylor lines. They are good reasons, please point out the error in those reasons, if you find any. I would never want what happened to me, and others, to happen to anyone else unfortunate enough to be duped by Taylor and the SVM. Fr. Bolduc let this happen, and that is how I became involved, gaining painful knowldedge and experience along the way.
A second point that needs to be brought up is the hero worship of traditional clergy. When they do wrong, there is no mechanism for appeals, we can't turn a blind eye. We ourselves cannot let personal feeling blind us to them breaking the laws of the Church or getting involved with dubious characters, and a whole list of other things.
Traditional priests have their individual strong points, some are excellent confessors, others give good sermons, some are good with moral theology. On the flip side, some have no clue how to handle the crisis or as to their role in the function of the Church, they simply haven't studied it, and in some cases are just winging it. They make mistakes. You can't hide these kinds of mistakes behind your loyalty and personal feelings, they are serious matters.
You are getting emotional, you can't let your emotions rule you on this. It isn't going to fix the Church neither will it justify bad actions, even by those of good motive.
-
These bishops have supplied jurisdiction.
It's a sin, a grave sin, to constantly cast down on Traditional Catholic Bishops.
Are you retarded? In what diocese do they have supplied jurisdiction? How do they break up their territories? Are they making new ones? You know only the Church has the right to set up a diocese, right?
Secondly, many of these men are not bishops. It is a mortal sin to impersonate clergy.
Are you an authoritarian minded, and empty minded to boot, follower?
Jurisdiction is supplied by the Holy Church in it's true form, i.e., jurisdiction is from Our Lord.
The Church today is in apostasy with "bishops" with "jurisdiction" spouting heresy.
Can you choose to "not follow" a "bishop" who has "jurisdiction" in today's world? Well, can you?
The SSPX doesn't have "juridiction" so I guess it's totally illegitimate from your "retarded" point of view.
Our Lord is the Head of the Catholic Church and the Catholic Church can never be "acephalous" because that implies that Our Lord is separated from His Holy Church.
Constantly harping on jurisdiction, unless it's supplied, is the sure sign of an authoritarian mind and also power hungry.
-
The Thuc line, even if the rumors are absolutely beyond the shadow of a doubt true, would still have supplied jurisdiction.
Archbishop Thuc was a devout, holy and learned man. He acted when the Church went into apostasy.
When a priest showed up and told him Our Lady wanted him to go to Spain, Archbishop Thuc did as he was told without a single second of delay. This is a sign of faithfulness that Our Lady will not forget. Meanwhile, the rest of the church, allegedly with "jurisdiction" were looking for ways to downgrade Our Lady in every way imagineable.
Supplied jurisdiction is a concept that is very valuable in these times of apostasy.
How would we pass on the Catholic faith if every trad out there did as Pope Francis wanted them to?
Phase I was Paul VI and the concilliarists destroying the liturgy.
Phase II was Benedict XVI mollycoddling the leftover trads into submission.
Phase III is Francis I raising the final bastions (the memory of the Holy Church prior to the revolution).
After Francis, there was to be nothing left of the Catholic Church.
But Bishops and Priests of the Trad groups with supplied jurisdiction are going to ensure that future generations of Catholics have the Catholic faith to pass on to their children.
No thanks to the novus ordites, but why be uncharitable?
-
Fr. Bolduc, in whose childhood home I have sat in and conversed with him, sent Richard McDonough to Taylor for ordination. McDonough ran the church Fr. Bolduc owned in New Hampshire and was his resident priest. As far as I know, McDonough never received conditional ordination from reliable bishop. Those are the true facts of the matter, but I'd be happy to know that a conditional ordination was done, as I really think Richard McDonough is a good and wonderful man, and I couldn't think more highly of him.
I'm not accusing him of sin, he was a good man, but he wasn't careful. Ask one of the nine who were in the SSPX at the same time, or even priests who knew him well. I got my information from both.
So you're saying that he sent Fr. McDounagh, the priest that he put charge over his very chapel, to "Bishop Taylor?" Fiddlesticks! I'm going to check this out myself.
You don't believe me that he was ordained by Taylor?
I have at least four former SSPX priests, one of which was the recipient of some of my research into the matter, who would affirm that this is true. I also have witnesses to Richard McDonough stating the same thing.
If you knew Father Bolduc so well, what kind of farm did he have?
The house on his property was built in 1789. He has a full silo of his antiques that he collected over the years. He owned many acres of land, and has many steam powered things. If crap had hit the fan when he was alive, he'd be able to survive better than most of us. He had bison, among other animals. I've never been out there, but he was my parish priest for more than 25 years. So... doubting I knew him well? I did.
-
These bishops have supplied jurisdiction.
It's a sin, a grave sin, to constantly cast down on Traditional Catholic Bishops.
Are you retarded? In what diocese do they have supplied jurisdiction? How do they break up their territories? Are they making new ones? You know only the Church has the right to set up a diocese, right?
Secondly, many of these men are not bishops. It is a mortal sin to impersonate clergy.
This is exactly what the problem is with some grievous errors propagated openly by certain people all over the internet: it makes Catholics (especially converts) very vulnerable to charlatans like Taylor and Ryan Scott and sex-offenders like McCormack.
People should read John Lane's Bellarmine Forums to see what someone educated has to say about jurisdiction.
I can't understand how people think supplied jurisdiction (a concept so often misunderstood and used as cult propaganda by some) suffices to have a normal Catholic life: all the mess of the traddieland is proof that the contrary is quite true.
-
The Thuc line, even if the rumors are absolutely beyond the shadow of a doubt true, would still have supplied jurisdiction.
Archbishop Thuc was a devout, holy and learned man. He acted when the Church went into apostasy.
When a priest showed up and told him Our Lady wanted him to go to Spain, Archbishop Thuc did as he was told without a single second of delay. This is a sign of faithfulness that Our Lady will not forget. Meanwhile, the rest of the church, allegedly with "jurisdiction" were looking for ways to downgrade Our Lady in every way imagineable.
Supplied jurisdiction is a concept that is very valuable in these times of apostasy.
How would we pass on the Catholic faith if every trad out there did as Pope Francis wanted them to?
Phase I was Paul VI and the concilliarists destroying the liturgy.
Phase II was Benedict XVI mollycoddling the leftover trads into submission.
Phase III is Francis I raising the final bastions (the memory of the Holy Church prior to the revolution).
After Francis, there was to be nothing left of the Catholic Church.
But Bishops and Priests of the Trad groups with supplied jurisdiction are going to ensure that future generations of Catholics have the Catholic faith to pass on to their children.
No thanks to the novus ordites, but why be uncharitable?
1. I agree that the Thuc line is valid. There are problem with some individuals. I do not espouse the SSPV ideas whatsoever.
2. Agreed
3. The NO hierarchy are not the Church and don't have jurisdiction, the only gray area would be certain bishops.
4. I have no doubts about Thuc's good character or mental state. I do have reservations about potentially malicious men who may have taken advantage of him.
5. The laws pertaining to jurisdiction can't just be thrown out the window by playing the supplied jurisdiction card. We have to be practical and draw a line somewhere while avoiding the usurpation of the offices of the Church
6-9. Bergolio is nothing to me, nothing he does has any meaning or effects me. He has no authority over me. Bergo is a face for a puppet. He is not the puppet master. I don't know the stages of their plan, the Faith goes on without him and his overlords.
10. It is up to all Catholics to keep the Faith and pass it on. Again, we have lines that can't be crossed in doing so, even for a seemingly good idea.Catholics can pass on the faith with having any idea of jurisdiction. God has provided the means with or without the sacraments, should the latter time come.
We don't disagree much. But you cannot expect people to see traditionalism for more than what it is. It isn't a parallel church or a replacement church, it is a crisis and a sad, irregular situation. We need to watch our step, tread cautiously, and not take authority onto ourselves. We can't give what is not ours to give, no matter how blessed we are with good traditional priests and bishops or how much we like them.
I'm sorry if any of my comments seemed unkind or less than charitable. I let my annoyance show but it doesn't make anything about Fr. Bolduc or Taylor untrue.
-
When a priest showed up and told him Our Lady wanted him to go to Spain, Archbishop Thuc did as he was told without a single second of delay. This is a sign of faithfulness that Our Lady will not forget. Meanwhile, the rest of the church, allegedly with "jurisdiction" were looking for ways to downgrade Our Lady in every way imagineable.
I won't comment on other aspects of Archbishop Thuc's life for I do know that he suffered immensely when his brother, Ngô Đình Diệm, the first president of South Vietnam, was murdered.
But my goodness, so a priest showed up to Archbishop Thuc stating that Our Lady wanted him to go to Spain, and Archbishop Thuc just went without even questioning if this was indeed from God?
Doesn't St. John say we must "test the spirits." That injunction to go to Spain was clearly not of God or of Our Lady because it led to the consecration of men who would later form the Palmarian "Church." How can you say that "Our Lady will not forget?" Seriously, where is the discernment? For whatever virtues Archbishop Thuc had, he lacked discernment in many things.
-
I'm not slandering him. Do you know what slander is? He went to Taylor for McDonough's ordination. I can't help that this is a fact.
Also, it is spelled THUC. I have no problem with clear, valid Thuc lines. I suggest you re-read about some of the issues surrounding the Thuc priests and bishops. I'm a big supporter, myself, of CMRI.
I'm well aware of the bad apples in other lines, just sticking to the subject here, which initially I provided reasons for staying away from the Taylor lines. They are good reasons, please point out the error in those reasons, if you find any. I would never want what happened to me, and others, to happen to anyone else unfortunate enough to be duped by Taylor and the SVM. Fr. Bolduc let this happen, and that is how I became involved, gaining painful knowldedge and experience along the way.
A second point that needs to be brought up is the hero worship of traditional clergy. When they do wrong, there is no mechanism for appeals, we can't turn a blind eye. We ourselves cannot let personal feeling blind us to them breaking the laws of the Church or getting involved with dubious characters, and a whole list of other things.
Traditional priests have their individual strong points, some are excellent confessors, others give good sermons, some are good with moral theology. On the flip side, some have no clue how to handle the crisis or as to their role in the function of the Church, they simply haven't studied it, and in some cases are just winging it. They make mistakes. You can't hide these kinds of mistakes behind your loyalty and personal feelings, they are serious matters.
You are getting emotional, you can't let your emotions rule you on this. It isn't going to fix the Church neither will it justify bad actions, even by those of good motive.
This is one of the most sensible things I have read in a long time. Thank you.
-
Fr. Bolduc, in whose childhood home I have sat in and conversed with him, sent Richard McDonough to Taylor for ordination. McDonough ran the church Fr. Bolduc owned in New Hampshire and was his resident priest. As far as I know, McDonough never received conditional ordination from reliable bishop. Those are the true facts of the matter, but I'd be happy to know that a conditional ordination was done, as I really think Richard McDonough is a good and wonderful man, and I couldn't think more highly of him.
I'm not accusing him of sin, he was a good man, but he wasn't careful. Ask one of the nine who were in the SSPX at the same time, or even priests who knew him well. I got my information from both.
So you're saying that he sent Fr. McDounagh, the priest that he put charge over his very chapel, to "Bishop Taylor?" Fiddlesticks! I'm going to check this out myself.
You don't believe me that he was ordained by Taylor?
I have at least four former SSPX priests, one of which was the recipient of some of my research into the matter, who would affirm that this is true. I also have witnesses to Richard McDonough stating the same thing.
If you knew Father Bolduc so well, what kind of farm did he have?
The house on his property was built in 1789. He has a full silo of his antiques that he collected over the years. He owned many acres of land, and has many steam powered things. If crap had hit the fan when he was alive, he'd be able to survive better than most of us. He had bison, among other animals. I've never been out there, but he was my parish priest for more than 25 years. So... doubting I knew him well? I did.
I wasn't doubting, that was solely for my curiosity. He also had a collection of milk bottles in his living room. Richard's wife is buried behind the church across the street from his house. I'm very familiar with the situation in NH. Fr. Bolduc was a kind and hospitable man who loved the Faith.
-
I've done some digging myself, about Bishop Taylor, and I have no doubt he was validly consecrated, in fact, multiple times. Fr. Bolduc -was- careful.
Bishop Patrick Taylor was born and raised a Roman Catholic. He became dissatisfied with the changes of Vatican II and became an Orthodox priest. He later returned to the True Faith after being advised by an independent traditional Catholic bishop.
When he returned to the True Faith, he was already a validly ordained priest. He received episcopal ordination from Archbishop Michael Boucher, whose episcopal lineage is Old Catholic and Eastern Orthodox and recognized as valid because it was personally investigated by the late Cardinal Edouard Gagnon.
One of the co-consecrators of Bishop Taylor was Archbishop Denis Garrison, an Eastern Orthodox bishop whose lineage is recognized by the Archdiocese of New York beginning with Cardinal Francis Spellman (1965) and later by Cardinal Terrence Cooke (1967).
Though his episcopal lineage was recognized before and after Vatican II, Bishop Taylor sought conditional episcopal ordination in 2001 from Bishop Merril Adamson. Bishop Adamson is a Thuc-line whose lineage is from Bishop Christian Datessen, a Thuc-line bishop living in France.
Bishop Taylor's validity was recently defended by Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, a former SSPX seminary professor and one of the original members of the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV).
He was consecrated with the Traditional Rite of Episcopal Consecration. He uses an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders. The Vatican to this day has a record of him, listing him as a bishop because the Holy See has kept records of independent bishops since the 1950s.
-
I've done some digging myself, about Bishop Taylor, and I have no doubt he was validly consecrated, in fact, multiple times. Fr. Bolduc -was- careful.
Bishop Patrick Taylor was born and raised a Roman Catholic. He became dissatisfied with the changes of Vatican II and became an Orthodox priest. He later returned to the True Faith after being advised by an independent traditional Catholic bishop.
When he returned to the True Faith, he was already a validly ordained priest. He received episcopal ordination from Archbishop Michael Boucher, whose episcopal lineage is Old Catholic and Eastern Orthodox and recognized as valid because it was personally investigated by the late Cardinal Edouard Gagnon. Where is the proof for this? Docuмented evidence should be abundantly available.
One of the co-consecrators of Bishop Taylor was Archbishop Denis Garrison, an Eastern Orthodox bishop whose lineage is recognized by the Archdiocese of New York beginning with Cardinal Francis Spellman (1965) and later by Cardinal Terrence Cooke (1967). Again, where is the proof for this?[/color]
Though his episcopal lineage was recognized before and after Vatican II, Bishop Taylor sought conditional episcopal ordination in 2001 from Bishop Merril Adamson. Bishop Adamson is a Thuc-line whose lineage is from Bishop Christian Datessen, a Thuc-line bishop living in France. If his episcopal lineage was recognized before and after Vatican II then why did he get a conditional consecration done? Are the sacraments some play things? This is bizarre.
Bishop Taylor's validity was recently defended by Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, a former SSPX seminary professor and one of the original members of the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV).
He was consecrated with the Traditional Rite of Episcopal Consecration. He uses an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders. The Vatican to this day has a record of him, listing him as a bishop because the Holy See has kept records of independent bishops since the 1950s.
So as a bishop he now thinks it legitimate to make things up as he goes as in using an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders? Even Novus Ordo dioceses do not do this. What is going on here?
Again, discernment is needed. Also, where did you get the info you quoted? [/color]
-
Here is info on "Bishop" Bruno:
Type in Bishop Patrick Taylor and it should be the first link in a google search.
-
I've done some digging myself, about Bishop Taylor, and I have no doubt he was validly consecrated, in fact, multiple times. Fr. Bolduc -was- careful.
Bishop Patrick Taylor was born and raised a Roman Catholic. He became dissatisfied with the changes of Vatican II and became an Orthodox priest. He later returned to the True Faith after being advised by an independent traditional Catholic bishop.
When he returned to the True Faith, he was already a validly ordained priest. He received episcopal ordination from Archbishop Michael Boucher, whose episcopal lineage is Old Catholic and Eastern Orthodox and recognized as valid because it was personally investigated by the late Cardinal Edouard Gagnon. Where is the proof for this? Docuмented evidence should be abundantly available.
One of the co-consecrators of Bishop Taylor was Archbishop Denis Garrison, an Eastern Orthodox bishop whose lineage is recognized by the Archdiocese of New York beginning with Cardinal Francis Spellman (1965) and later by Cardinal Terrence Cooke (1967). Again, where is the proof for this?[/color]
Though his episcopal lineage was recognized before and after Vatican II, Bishop Taylor sought conditional episcopal ordination in 2001 from Bishop Merril Adamson. Bishop Adamson is a Thuc-line whose lineage is from Bishop Christian Datessen, a Thuc-line bishop living in France. If his episcopal lineage was recognized before and after Vatican II then why did he get a conditional consecration done? Are the sacraments some play things? This is bizarre.
Bishop Taylor's validity was recently defended by Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, a former SSPX seminary professor and one of the original members of the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV).
He was consecrated with the Traditional Rite of Episcopal Consecration. He uses an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders. The Vatican to this day has a record of him, listing him as a bishop because the Holy See has kept records of independent bishops since the 1950s.
So as a bishop he now thinks it legitimate to make things up as he goes as in using an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders? Even Novus Ordo dioceses do not do this. What is going on here?
Again, discernment is needed. Also, where did you get the info you quoted? [/color]
Guest in Red,
You beat me to it. Thank you.
:applause:
-
You could also type in Bishop Bruno Amicarelli. He "founded" a Franciscan friary in South Carolina.
-
This is from Bishop Bruno's website:
Bishop Bruno’s Apostolic Succession is derived from Bishop Patrick Taylor, who possesses valid lineages that include Eastern Orthodox, Old Roman Catholic (i.e. “Old Catholic”-Utrecht), Brazilian National Catholic (Duarte-Costa), and Roman Catholic bishops, specifically the Thuc lineage.
-
He uses an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders.
This is odd... I'll admit. I wonder if he's been doing this the whole time?
-
About Duarte-Costa, the excommunicate:
Carlos Duarte Costa (July 21, 1888 – March 26, 1961) was the founder and first patriarch of the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church and its international extension, the Worldwide Communion of Catholic Apostolic National Churches. A former Roman Catholic bishop,[1] he was excommunicated by Pope Pius XII for doctrinal and canonical issues (such as clerical celibacy). Duarte Costa has been canonized as "St. Carlos of Brazil" by the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church. [/b]ICAB is not Roman Catholic and does not want to be Roman Catholic. Attempts by the Vatican to get ICAB back into the Roman Catholic Church have failed.[citation needed] It is well docuмented, especially in the autobiography of Patriarch Luis Fernando Castillio Mendez, how the early bishops and priests had to suffer under the Vatican's influence on the Brazilian government.[citation needed] ICAB does not acknowledge Roman Catholic orders as valid after 1968 and believes that they no longer have the Catholic understanding of ordination, since the ordination rites have changed so dramatically.
In 1936, Duarte Costa made his second ad limina visit to Rome, meeting with Pope Pius XI in the Vatican. He presented the Pope with a list of quite radical (for the time) requests for the clergy and people of his diocese, including:
celebration of the Mass and administration of the sacraments in the vernacular language;
permission for clergy to marry;
the abolition of auricular confession, replacing it with general or communal confession and absolution;
distribution of Holy Communion to the laity under both kinds (i.e., bread and wine);
institution of the permanent diaconate open to married men;
celebration of the Mass versus populi (facing the people) with the priest behind the altar;
creation of a Council of Advice, composed of bishops who would govern the Church together with the Pope;
participation of laypersons in the administration of the Word, of the Eucharist, and in evangelization.[2]
Is any Catholic on here ready to trust their salvation to "episcopal" lines derived through this excommunicate and heretic?
-
The following is information about C. David Luther, the consecrator of Bp. Taylor. You can find the web page if you google, "Unity Catholic Church." I have boldfaced the key parts:
Here we will tell the story of the beginnings of our apostolic jurisdiction and how we became what we are today.
To look at the history of, "The Servants of the Good Shepherd", which gave birth to the "Unity Catholic Church", we will go back to July 25th, 1945 and Bishop Duarte Costa who started the "Igreja Catolica Apostolica Brasileira" (Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil) and registered with the Brazilian government. On August 15, 1945 Salomao Ferraz consecrated by Bishop Duarte Costa united two Brazilian churches. On Jan 23rd, 1949 Stephen Meyer Corradi-Scarella was consecrated for a Brazilian mission to Panama. During 1949, no month and date available, Bishop Corradi-Scarella arrives in the United States and starts the "Catholic Apostolic Church in North America" (later called the National Catholic Apostolic Church of America).
On June 30th, 1973 C.David Luther was ordained to the deaconate and on Nov 25th, 1973 was ordained a priest by Bishop Corradi-Scarella.
In 1973 C David Luther founded the "Community of the Good Shepherd" and in 1977 it changed its name to "The Servants of the Good Shepherd".
In May of 1980 the "National Catholic Apostolic Church of America" changes its name to the "Western Orthodox Church in America" (WOCA). On June of 1983 Bishop C David Luther also was the leader of the "Western Orthodox Church in America" and continued to lead the two groups together for many years.
Two years prior to his death, Bishop Luther retired from the Council of Bishops of the "Western Orthodox Church in America" leaving the leadership to Bishop Paul Diederich and Bishop Nickolas Careone. By amicable agreement with the other bishops, Bishop Luther retained his position as ordinary of the religious order known as the "Servants of the Good Shepherd" (SGS). From that time until his passing, the "Servants of the Good Shepherd" and the "Western Orthodox Church in America" operated as separate ecclesiastical entities.
Because of my desire to see the SGS continue in its original mission, I met and spoke to several prior SGS members during the Winter 2003-2004. We found that most of the Bishops had left the SGS and many had been left with no contact with a national SGS office. Due to an error on our part, where we were informed that Bishop Careone had passed away. (This was given to us from a Orthodox group in MN) Those current and older members of SGS and new inquirers met and decided to reform the original Order. It was only after we had finished forming our group we found out that Bishop Careone, presiding Bishop of the WOCA (California) was actually still alive.
The decision made at that time was to ask for use of the SGS name and continue our group as separate and no longer under WOCA, but still tied historically to the original SGS order.
Bishop Charles Klughart joined the SGS as a brother in 1983 and on Sept 9, 1990, he was ordained by Bishop C. David Luther into the "Servants of the Good Shepherd". In June of 2004 by election of the newly formed board of directors of the SGS, Bishop Charles was nominated and consecrated as Bishop for the "Servants of the Good Shepherd". In July of 2004 the standing Council of Bishops decided to have our church known as the "Independent Orthodox Church in America" and have the "Servants of the Good Shepherd" be an order within the church. This was done for legal reasons because we were still using the SGS name. On June 13, 2005 after much prayer we decided to change the name of the Church to the "Unity Catholic Church" to be more in line with our teachings and ministry.
This is a very historic group, tracing our roots through Bishop Aftimios Ofiesh and Bishop Carlos Duarte Costa and to St. Paul, the tent maker.
One just has to look at the background of many of the groups in the Independent Catholic movement and those that also use the Orthodox name, to see them having ties to the historic "Western Orthodox Church in America", of Bishop Luther and the "Servants of the Good Shepherd". You the reader, have found where this movement has started in this country. While other Independent Jurisdictions may have Apostolic Succsesion from Bishop Duarte Costa, the "Unity Catholic Church" through the "Servants of the Good Shepherd" have helped bring this movement in a very real and historic way through His Grace Carlos Duarte Costa, carrying his vision for the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church into the present day in America.
The Unity Catholic Church is not a church in the denominational sense of the word. Unity is an independent and self governing jurisdiction within the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. The Servants of the Good Shepherd and The Order of St. Andrew are two religious orders within the Unity Catholic Jurisdiction. Each of the two religious orders supply the clergy for the Unity Catholic Church and each is unique in its rules of the order. Following their long standing tradition that closely unites them to the Roman Catholic Church - the Servants do not admit women into their ranks. The Order of St. Andrew which more closely associates with our Anglican and Lutheran Brethern of the Catholic Family....do allow for the ordination of women. Our Apostolic Lineage is closely guarded and preserved through the two religious orders of the Unity Catholic Church.
We invite you to review our web site, and come and join us, and we even hope that some of those in the Independent/Old Catholic movement will join us in intercommunion of our Catholic Jurisdiction.
In May of 2010 Bishop Charles Klughart resigned as head of the church and on On June 1, 2010 Bishop Elwood Cromwell was elected as The Metropolitan Archbishop.
On March 4, 2011 His Eminence +Elwood Cromwell Metropolitan Archbishop, Unity Catholic Church, Protectorate of the Order of the Servants of the Good Shepherd and the Order of St. Andrew passed on to the glory of our Lord. May he rest in eternal peace.
Bishop +David Pascua, Vicar General, SGS, UCC led the Church until the Holy Synod of Bishops met on April 16, 2011 at which time a new Metropolitan was elected by the Synod. His Eminence +++Allen Lambert was nominated and elected to head the Unity Catholic Church as Metropolitan Archbishop, Protectorate of the Order of the Servants of the Good Shepherd and the Order of Saint Andrew. In June of 2011, Metropolitan +++Lambert turned over the Protectorate of the SGS to His Grace, Most Reverend +Joseph Thornton, SGS.
The Order of Saint Andrew (OSA) is defunct without a head and currently no body since the deposition of Gina Bridgewater. Bridgewater was the acting Protector of the OSA and Bishop of Ecuмenical relations. She was deposed for flagrant violation of Canon Laws and joining with other particular Churches without Synodal permission or credentials.
In the Fall of 2012, Fr. Alex Brow formed the Monastic Order of Saint Sebastion (OSS) with approval of the Synod and the Blessing of the Metropolitan. At the same time the St. Duarte Costa Seminary and School of Religion was re-invigorated and now serves as the Seminary for the whole of the UCC.
Fr. Alex Brow was consecrated to the Episcopacy in January of 2013.
At this time, any and all reference to the term WOCA means the historic WOCA which I, +Charles Klughart, SGS was a part that was headed and started by Bishop Luther, and which continues today, based in California and led by Bishop Careone.
Is any Catholic on here ready to trust their salvation to "bishops" who come through this line?
-
I've done some digging myself, about Bishop Taylor, and I have no doubt he was validly consecrated, in fact, multiple times. Fr. Bolduc -was- careful.
Bishop Patrick Taylor was born and raised a Roman Catholic. He became dissatisfied with the changes of Vatican II and became an Orthodox priest. He later returned to the True Faith after being advised by an independent traditional Catholic bishop.
When he returned to the True Faith, he was already a validly ordained priest. He received episcopal ordination from Archbishop Michael Boucher, whose episcopal lineage is Old Catholic and Eastern Orthodox and recognized as valid because it was personally investigated by the late Cardinal Edouard Gagnon. Where is the proof for this? Docuмented evidence should be abundantly available.
One of the co-consecrators of Bishop Taylor was Archbishop Denis Garrison, an Eastern Orthodox bishop whose lineage is recognized by the Archdiocese of New York beginning with Cardinal Francis Spellman (1965) and later by Cardinal Terrence Cooke (1967). Again, where is the proof for this?[/color]
Though his episcopal lineage was recognized before and after Vatican II, Bishop Taylor sought conditional episcopal ordination in 2001 from Bishop Merril Adamson. Bishop Adamson is a Thuc-line whose lineage is from Bishop Christian Datessen, a Thuc-line bishop living in France. If his episcopal lineage was recognized before and after Vatican II then why did he get a conditional consecration done? Are the sacraments some play things? This is bizarre.
Bishop Taylor's validity was recently defended by Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, a former SSPX seminary professor and one of the original members of the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV).
He was consecrated with the Traditional Rite of Episcopal Consecration. He uses an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders. The Vatican to this day has a record of him, listing him as a bishop because the Holy See has kept records of independent bishops since the 1950s.
So as a bishop he now thinks it legitimate to make things up as he goes as in using an English translation of the Traditional Rite to confer Holy Orders? Even Novus Ordo dioceses do not do this. What is going on here?
Again, discernment is needed. Also, where did you get the info you quoted? [/color]
So I did some more digging, and I found out some more information. Someone close to Taylor told me that he's never heard of him using the "English Translation of the Roman Rite," and that he scrupulously followed the old rite in the Latin formula.
Each and every one of these people mentioned here, I have been looking into their histories, and so far they're checking out. I'm going out of town for a couple of days, and doing what digging I've done (I'm a kind of researcher myself, having been employed by a lobbyist in Washington DC, to do just that). I'm sure it had to be "fun" for poor Fr. Bolduc to try to sift through this kind of stuff himself -without- the internet.
Please pray for him, he wasn't perfect either.
-
Information about Denis Michel Garrison, another consecrator of Taylor. You can find the online source if you google "Orthodox Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore."
--------------------------
[b]Denis Garrison:[/b]
Excommunicated priest who illegally became a bishop, and was excommunicated twice again, has used a defective ordinal to perform over 20 bogus ordinations and consecrations since 1985. Garrison as an excommunicated priest was consecrated unknowingly by Francis Ryan who later also excommunicated him. Garrison admitted this when another jurisdiction called to inquire about it, and he refused to talk. Garrison was also excommunicated a fourth time by a group which he abandoned (see docuмents below). Garrison works for Medicare, US Dept of Health, and once got into trouble for wearing his priest outfit to work. Garrison's "chapel" is a small second bedroom on the second floor of his duplex and is filled with boxes which he slides into the closet when it's time to ordain bishops. (See Shedrick below)
Garrison started the "Military Order of the Knights of the Temple of Jerusalem" in OCCNA which Spataro (see here) now runs. Note that this is not a masonic group.
Paul Dolan:
Whereabouts unknown.
William Shedrick (William Louis Shedrick, Jr.):
As Garrison's latest bishopping project, Shedrick is consistent with his new found buddies. Shedrick claims "Church of the Most Holy Theotokos Mother of Africa Western Rite Orthodox Catholic Church" which has no telephone or mail contact (or congregation to speak of other than a few seminarian "clergy" scattered across the country). Shedrick's website sports a black Mary holding a black baby Jesus. Shedrick claims to be the bishop of "San Rafael, CA and Washington, D.C.". Garrison's description of the ceremony, taking place in the inappropriate season of Lent for the Orthodox, is dominated by references to food, Garrison's other hobby: "The lenten [sic] dinner was at a local Italian restaurant" and later "The lenten [sic] dinner was at a local Irish restaurant."
Another one of Garrison's more recent bishopping projects is found at http://www.occna.com/md/admin/stpatrick.html:
"DIOCESE OF PORTLAND Saint Jude the Apostle Parish Pastor - Bishop Bryan Smith, OSB Portland, Oregon. The Most Reverend Bryan Smith, OSB is the Pastor of Saint Jude the Apostle Parish and Bishop of the Diocese of Portland, which is the British Rite jurisdiction of OCCNA. His Excellency, Bishop Bryan resides in Portland."
Neither Bryan Smith nor Saint Jude Parish have a published telephone listing.
Also, there is no such thing as an Orthodox, or otherwise, "British Rite", hence there can be no such jurisdiction, unless it means that Smith uses tea and scones as the basis for his liturgical confections.
Get your free certificate of consecration from Denis Garrison for three box tops of frosted flakes at: www.occna.com/md/vocations/holyangels10f.html
CERTIFICATE OF THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA
In the Name of the + Father, and of the + Son, and of the + Holy Spirit. Amen.
To All of the Faithful in Christ, Health, Peace and Apostolic
Benediction.
CERTIFICATE OF CONSECRATION OF BISHOP
Be it Known that I, Denis Michel Garrison, Exercising My
Divine Office as ARCHBISHOP in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of the Orthodox Faith, in the City of Baltimore, Do Certify by these present Letters That, on the __________ Day of _______ in the Year of Our Lord _____, At Baltimore, Maryland, By the Powers Conferred upon Me and In Accordance with the Constitution and Canons of the Orthodox Catholic Church, Whereas, in His Saving Providence, Our Lord JESUS CHRIST, Through the All HOLY SPIRIT, Has Established the ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA (OCCNA) And Has Set as Elders and Teachers of His Holy Orthodox Church in the Americas the North American Orthodox Holy Synod Thereof, And Whereas, By Due Election and Confirmation by the said Orthodox College of Bishops, the holy & Orthodox servant of God, the worthy candidate, ___________________________________ Was Chosen and Ordered to be CONSECRATED as BISHOP of OCCNA Therefore, Be It Known Unto All the Faithful in JESUS CHRIST, that He/SheWas Consecrated as ___________________ At ______________; On the ____________ Day of __________ Anno Domini, _____. In Witness Whereof, the Said Consecrator Has Hereto Set the Imprimatur. In Testimony Whereof, I Affix Hereto My Hand and Seal. Given this ______ Day of _________, Anno Domini _____. Dennis Michael Garrison Imprimatur of the Archbishop Archdiocese of Baltimore
Interesting docuмents found on the internet:
[Editor notes: the foregoing has been misconstrued by those unchurched in Orthodoxy, such as Joe (Joseph Mahomond) Swaydyn, that Metroplitan Victor Prentice excommunicated those listed below. According to The Orthicon newsletter, it was THEOCACNA (Inc.) Synod, containing valid bishops (in the plural), which excommunicated those listed below.]
THE HOLY EASTERN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC
AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA, Inc.
HC74, Box 419-2 Mtn.View AR 7256O
870-269-2912
Primate: Metropolitan Victor
SYNOD FINDINGS
Former bishops of this church have established a church separate and independent of this Holy Church and Synod without authority or knowledge of the Metropolitan and contrary to canon. The Metropolitan was attacked verbally and in writing and he has been listed on a schismatic church website as their former primate thus they proclaim a new primate for their new church while listing our church history and their old roman rite among others. They also acknowledge recent ordinations on their own authority, and communion with non-orthodox groups.
Two of these bishops had resigned and two were released. One wrote the Metropolitan had mandated a consecration without synod approval which was incorrect. He later claimed another synod vote to be papal irregularity or error. A claim as this allows certain action by the synod which did not occur and instead the 2 bishops resigned only to start another church c1aiming the history of this church.
The full synod of this church declares these four bishops have left the church and acted against the canons and as former bishops who continue to hold liturgies separate and apart from Holy Church they continue to act against the mandates of the Rudder.
The full synod headed by the Metropolitan being in agreement that the canons have been violated numerous times agree to follow the canons and declare and proclaim Anathema and depose from office the bishops involved in this schismatic church. It is therefore decreed by the full synod that Denis Garrison, Paul Dolan, Paul Stoms and Andrei S.P. Brennan are proclaimed Anathema and deposed according to the precepts of the Sacred and Divine Canons. Their actions are public and on the internet and without repentance. The synod finds no valid reason to justify their actions and since their acts have been ongoing and contrary to canons we determine the canons mandate this action by the full synod.
For the Synod,
+ Victor
Dated this _16th_ day of
February, 1999 at
Mountain View, AR.
THE HOLY EASTERN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA, INC.
DECREE
Primate: Metropolitan Victor
+In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
To fulfill the requirements of be Sacred Canons of the Holy Orthodox Church we find it necessary to proclaim and publish this "Anathema" against former bishops of this church who by their actions have created a Schism by founding and establishing a church titled "The Orthodox Catholic Church in North America", using our church history and actually acting in a non-orthodox manner. These actions by our former bishops violate numerous canons against leaving the church, and Metropolitan, setting up a separate altar without the approval, knowledge or consent of the Metropolitan, for condemning and for insulting their bishop and for other acts that have violated the Sacred Canons of the church.
The canons (rudder) are clear that the Anathema be pronounced and the bishops guilty of such acts be deposed from office. This act is not done lightly, but after much prayer, consideration, discussion and research of the sacred canons and seeking advice from those educated in such matters of canon law, as well as bishops of historic national (ethnic) churches.
The full synod including the Metropolitan agree and act as follows;
WE HEREWITH PRONOUNCE THIS ANATHEMA AGAINST AND DEPOSE FROM OFFICE:
Denis Garrison of Baltimore
Paul Dolan of Pennsylvania
Paul Stoms of Georgia (formerly N.J.)
Andrei S.P. Brennan of Canada
The Canons prohibit anyone from praying with them under penalty
For the Synod,
Dated this _16th_ day of +Victor
February, 1999 at
Mountain View, AR. Metropolitan (Primate)
More from the internet:
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox
Subject: Public declaration of invalid acts by Denis Garrison and Orthodox Catholic Church in North America (OCCNA) since before May 1984
Public Declaration of Invalid Acts by Denis Garrison and Orthodox Catholic Church in North America (OCCNA) since before May 1984
1 Garrison admitted being excommunicated as an orthodox priest in Western Orthodox Church in America (WOCA) before May 1984 in "Canonical Opinion" dated 9/12/1990 by Dom Justo R. Gonzalez Trimino, Primate (Designate), Catholic Apostolic Church in North America (CACINA).
2 Garrison was invalidly consecrated on 4/13/1985 because he was a defective subject (not being a canonical priest) to the sacrament.
3. Garrison has performed over 20 invalid acts since 4/13/1985 because he was a defective minister (not being a canonical bishop) to the sacrament.
Some of the invalid acts performed by Denis Garrison from 1985 - 1997 as listed at the web site
http://www.occna.com/md/history/annex.html are:
"ACTS OF ARCHBISHOP DENIS MICHEL GARRISON - 1985 - 1997 EPISCOPAL CONSECRATIONS
1986 RENE BERGERON Baltimore, MD April 6, 1986
1986 STANLEY ANJULIS Baltimore, MD April 6, 1986
1987 PAUL DOLAN Wilmington, DE June 13, 1987
1987 JOSEPH DUBOIS Wilmington, DE June 13, 1987
1987 WILSON SEHORN Wilmington, DE June 13, 1987
1987 PAUL BENTLEY Wilmington, DE June 13, 1987
1987 ALBERT ROSEVICH Wilmington, DE September 26, 1987
1988 SERAPHIM HOLDRIDGE Wilmington, DE June 4, 1988
1988 HARRY ARMSTRONG Wilmington, DE June 4, 1988
1990 DONALD BUTTENBUSCH Philadelphia,PA September 22, 1990
1991 MICHAEL MARTINAT Columbia, SC December 14, 1991
1993 PATRICK TAYLOR Gorham, NH November 20, 1993
1994 PETER STERLING Wilmington, DE October 16, 1994
1995 ANTONY EPAPHRAS Trenton, NJ July 23, 1995
1995 EUGENE KYLE Wilmington, DE December 3, 1995
1997 PAUL JAMES STOMS Timonium, MD May 3, 1997
1997 OPTAT BEHANZIN Timonium, MD May 3, 1997"
From the internet:
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox
Subject: Re: Bogus Orthodox group exposed: OCCNA (update2)
Catholic Apostolic Church
in North America
Province of the Paraclete
and the Theotokos
+Dom Justo R. Gonzalez,
250 West 91st Street 4N
New York, NY 10024
To: The Most Rev. Denis Garrison
From: Dom Justo R. Gonzalez-Trimino
Primate Designate/CACINA
RE: Canonical Opinion regarding the Decree of Excommunication issued
against the person of Denis Garrison.
DISTRIBUTION: +Dom Luis Fernando Castillo Mendez, Bishops of CACINA
Preamble: In our judgment, the ability to forgive a canonical crime or to even recognize it depends upon the prayerful, prudent and unbiased judgment of the competent authority. The decision we are about to render has been pronounced after much prayer and consultation with the appropriate ecclesiastical authorities [sic]
In order for a church or any of its officials to render a decree of excommunication or declare such sentence, it is required that the church enjoys ordinary jurisdiction. In the case of the Western Orthodox Church in America and/or the Servants of the Good Shepherd, all canonical authority was dissolved when the Bishop of Altoona, C. David Luther, sometime between the 1st and 15th day of June of 1983, did willfully leave the Communion of the Catholic Apostolic Church in North America by refusing to accept the decision of the Synod of Bishops to consecrate us as the duly elected Bishop of New York.
Therefore, we have determined that no lawful excommunication has been issued against the REVEREND DENIS GARRISON. We have found that Father Garrison, suffering under the unlawful jurisdiction of his bishop, was within his rights in establishing another altar due to the heterodox activities of his bishop within the rights allowed by Apostolic Canon XXXI.
And therefore, We, Dom Justo R. Gonzalez, The Primate Designate of CACINA, a canonically established national church, in communion with the Patriarch of all the National Catholic and Apostolic Churches, lift the unlawful Decree of Excommunication against THE MOST REVEREND DENIS GARRISON.
In witness whereof we hereunto set our hand and seal this 12th day of September in the year of our Lord of 1990 in the eighth year of our Episcopate.
+Dom Justo Roque Gonzalez Trimino
Metropolitan Bishop of New York
Primate-Designate of CACINA
Commentary on uncanonical acts by Gonzalez:
===========================================
1. Apostolic Canon XXXI [31] reads:
"If any presbyter, condemning his own bishop, draw people aside, and set up another altar, without finding anything wrong with the Bishop in point of piety and righteousness, let him be deposed, on the ground that he is an office seeker. For he is a tyrant. Let the rest of clergymen be treated likewise, and all those who abet him. But let the laymen be excommunicated. Let these things be done after one, and a second, and third request of the bishop."
This canon does not authorize a priest to leave a bishop and to continue to act as a priest without authority from his bishop.
Gonzalez cites this canon as justification for Garrison leaving Luther, but the canon does not support lifting a decree of excommunication by another bishop. The canon does not support the priest leaving his bishop, or a bishop lifting the decree of excommunication of another bishop.
2. Apostolic Canon XXXII [32] reads:
"If any Bishop excommunicates any Presbyter or Deacon, these men must not be incardinated by anyone else but the one who excommunicated them, unless by a coincidence the Bishop who excommunicated them should decease."
From Interpretation: "... can only be admitted and be freed from the excommunication by that same bishop who excommunicated him in the first place: with the sole exception that he may resort to another if the bishop or metropolitan or patriarch, as the case may be, who excommunicated him has by any chance died before the presbyter or deacon has received a pardon. For in that event a bishop or metropolitan or patriarch who has become the successor after the death of the one who excommunicated him may free him from the bond, and not anyone else."
Luther who excommunicated Garrison is alive, but Gonzalez attempted to lift the decree by citing an Orthodox canon that does not apply and by ignoring the Orthodox canon which does apply and which prohibited Gonzalez from doing so.
3. Gonzalez' decree was dated September 12, 1990, and ten days later on September 22, 1990 Gonzalez attempted to co-consecrate with Garrison one Donald J. Buttenbusch in Philadelphia: this smacks of favor-for-favor simony.
Garrison was subsequently excommunicated for a third time in 1991 by Jerome "Joachim" Ladd (Gonzalez' consecrator and predecessor as primate).
Why Garrison's cooked-up pontifical (a Roman Catholic, not Orthodox term) is invalid:
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox
Subject: Defective "pontifical" makes null and void all episcopal acts from 1985 to date by Denis Michel Garrison et al (including Andrei Brennan) of the Orthodox Catholic Church in North America.
From: http://www.occna.com/md/orosb/pontifical.html
Old Roman Orthodox Pontifical The Ritual for Bishops According to the Ancient & Orthodox Old Roman Rites ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA ... Old Roman Orthodox Pontifical (4th Edition) was compiled & arranged by the Most Reverend +Denis Michel Garrison, Th.D., OSB, Metropolitan Archbishop of Baltimore. The Holy Eastern Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church in North America [sic]. Fourth Edition published by Orthodox Benedictine Missions - Saint Herman of Alaska Orthodox Mission, Orthodox Catholic Church in North America. ...1998.
-
Taylor was "ordained" by a man named Luther. Luther normally sought his vocations through ads in the National Enquirer magazine under the heading of "become a priest." His "lines" are strictly of the Old Catholic pseudo-Catholic groups that Luther and Boucher came from.
Taylor, it is reported, "exchanged consecrations" with a fellow named Merrill Adamson of San Francisco. Adamson was ordained by Old Catholic Thadeus Alioto. It is not certain if and when he was received back into the Catholic Church after this irregular and sinful ordination. Married bishop Urbina consecrated Adamson.
Unfortunately for the Catholic faithful who are not astute on these matters, Taylor and company now make the audacious claim of being "Thuc bishops" and in agreement with just about every shade of traditionalist under the sun. Recently Taylor changed the name of his many headed organization.
Taylor does not have the succession of Archbishop Thuc and this is clearly established. At the time that Adamson proceeded to consecrate Taylor, Taylor organization issued a caveat which they published on their website. The caveat stated the reconsecration was NOT DONE FOR VALIDITY but for INTERNAL purposs of the Society of the Virgin Mary. So we have it, this clear lack of understanding as regards the transmission of holy orders (if a "reconsecration" is not done for validity, then why do it at all???). This caveat disqualified a Catholic intention to receive valid holy orders (at least presumed so, given the background of Adamson).
A Catholic must have the intention to receive holy orders. To state that you don't have the intention for validity means you've received nothing. This is basic people.
Taylor has a long history of ordinations and consecrations of various people from a variety of backgrounds: from strict Sede Vacantist to those who are involved with the occult and Gnosticism. A Jason Spadafore (who ordained Bruno, consecrated by Taylor) comes to mind.
Check the theology and canon law manuals, or better yet, ask Fr. Cekada or Bishop Dolan, Bishop Pivarunas, Bishop Sanborn, or any of the bone fide bishops of the Thuc line if you have any doubts.
-
Who is Father giustino? And how is he affiliated with Bishop Taylor?
I heard this priest and bishop Taylor are invalid. Catholics from st Jude's and the resisistance are going to Saint Mary the Virgin Church which would be a invalid Mass.
-
Taylor is not a bishop, as far as I am concerned. I was mixed up, years ago with some of the men he "ordained" that led me to do extensive research into his lines. I no longer have the resources to cite, but I will give you the short of it. He will argue that he has lines through Archbishop Thuc. Yes, Abp. Thuc's ordinations and consecrations are valid but here is the issue, which I will try to carefully explain...
1. There is a long line of orders and priests leading up to and before Taylor, even those involved with Thuc, in Taylor's lineage
2. It is not verifiable that the some of the priestly ordinations in Taylor's lines are valid and there is reason to doubt the form and validity
3. It is not verifiable that the Roman rite or another approved Eastern rite was used in these ordinations
4. There are ordinations and lines in Taylor's line weaving in and out of schismatic groups, such as the Brazilian National Catholic Church and other so-called autocellaphous churches (read: guys living with their 80 year old mom playing bishop in the garage)
5. Some of these schismatics may have had valid orders but the issue is whether they used the actual Roman rite of ordination without any changes.
6. The rites used by the schismatic groups are not verifiable, unless there are pictures and audio recordings. If someone was ignorant and foolish enough to be a witness, they still might not even have known better.
7. Many of the involved men are dead and cannot be questioned or given the chance to explain or retract their actions
I wish I had more in digital format to give you.
Taylor also did a mail order type deal, where you could send him money and he sent you a certificate as being part of some kind of order, lay order or something of that likeness. What he did escapes me, but it earned him the name of Conman Taylor.
He was also trusted by the late Fr. Hector Bolduc, who I knew personally. Fr. Bolduc, for the good he did was not careful about checking into ordinations. I don't think it was malice but that for whatever reason, Taylor wasn't the only mistake he made. He installed two men who were old Catholics at an SSPX chapel, and they were not conditionally ordained. I know many people, including myself loved Fr. Bolduc, he wasn't careful. I was actually personally affected by his ivolvement and trust with the Taylor line and it was a mess for me. Once I was made aware I set out to straighten out the problem and at the same time, a former SSPX priest, who also knew of the situation, helped me rectify the incident. Initially, it was a different former SSPX priest and some laymen who tipped me off.
Anyways, STAY AWAY! It is a mess. Only go to traditional priests and bishops with clean and verifiable lines.
Great advice!
-
All the above is very correct.
Also to be addressed is the fact that Taylor admitted (and so you'll note he now removed his website) that his "conditional" consecration from Adamson was NOT DONE FOR VALIDITY. Now again, what is it done for? Taylor tells us: "for an internal" reason for the Society of the Virgin Mary.
It appears that a "Bishop Macek" also at one point "enthroned" Taylor during some type of ceremonial in his tiny Chapel. This is nothing but shear Old Catholic shenanigans at best. These are men who clearly have no grasp on Catholic ceremonial or teaching, or else they would not conduct themselves in this manner.
The Taylor group is apparently now working with the following to form some type of "new organization" to gain entrance into traditional Chapels. Among the participants are a Fr. Gabriel Tetherow, Louis Montelongo, Merrill Brian Adamson, Pablo Dolorosa, Jesse Milagrosa, a Taylor product named Macek and another product of Taylor (via Jason Spadafore) and consecrated by Taylor, a fellow named Bruno and a few others.
-
Poor Fr. Bolduc has a long, long history of involvement with Old Catholics and such. It was he that initially contributed to the "famous nine" who split from the Society of St. Pius X. The "nine" had complained (and rightly so) to His Excellency, Msgr. Lefebvre that Fr. Bolduc was permitting Old Catholic clergy to offer Mass at St. Mary Kansas. Lefebvre put a stop to it.
While he might have "meant well" he made serious mistakes in this regard. Meaning well and doing well (especially as regards sacramental validity or insuring souls were being administered to by properly ordained Catholic priests) is something that he failed miserably at. Pray for his soul.
-
Other than noticing this thread has been reduced from 14 pages to 8, since this morning, 95% to 98% of the anonymous postings in this thread have thus far been mud-slinging, grossly inaccurate, contain half or twisted truths, and are cowardly and pathetic.
I strongly advise and urge anyone with questions about me to pick up your phone and call to speak with me directly…same goes for any questions about, or for, other bishops or priests. By the way, don’t think the questions will be one-sided either, as I expect to know exactly who I am talking with and will have questions of my own for you to answer; “private” or “blocked” numbers will not be answered.
Oh, and for the record: I am not part of any “Taylor group” or “new organization,” so get your facts straight, as someone clearly does not know what they are talking about, or is trying to cause trouble…more likely both. Someone should be ashamed of themselves for making insinuations about a fictitious “Taylor group” or “new organization” being set up to infiltrate trad chapels…what a load of manure!
Never ever trust the words of an anonymous poster, as there is no way to hold them accountable for what they say.
-
Welcome, Bishop Bruno.
-
Welcome, Bishop Bruno.
Thank you, Matto, and happy feast day of the Holy Name of Mary. Although I'm not sure how long I will be welcome, I appreciate your greetings. Take care and may God bless you.
-
Other than noticing this thread has been reduced from 14 pages to 8, since this morning
FYI - there are more posts per page when you're signed in as a member which is why you're seeing fewer pages.
-
Other than noticing this thread has been reduced from 14 pages to 8, since this morning
FYI - there are more posts per page when you're signed in as a member which is why you're seeing fewer pages.
Thank you for the correction. Being new here, I wasn't aware of that and apologize to anyone who was offended.
-
Other than noticing this thread has been reduced from 14 pages to 8, since this morning
FYI - there are more posts per page when you're signed in as a member which is why you're seeing fewer pages.
Thank you for the correction. Being new here, I wasn't aware of that and apologize to anyone who was offended.
Thank you for the correction. Being new here, I wasn't aware of that and apologize to anyone who was offended.
-
Other than noticing this thread has been reduced from 14 pages to 8, since this morning
FYI - there are more posts per page when you're signed in as a member which is why you're seeing fewer pages.
Thank you for the correction. Being new here, I wasn't aware of that and apologize to anyone who was offended.
Thank you for the correction. Being new here, I wasn't aware of that and apologize to anyone who was offended.
I would love to hear your version of this. Poor Father Bolduc did what he believed was the right thing. If you have any information on that, feel free to PM me in a week, after you've been approved to send PMs. Or if you're comfortable with posting what you know here, that would be extremely helpful. Thank you.
-
All the above is very correct.
Really, now? It's plainly libelous from a journalistic perspective. The only legal defenses for the anonymous sources of the postings above, for willfully damaging the reputations of named independent clergy, would be for all of their allegations to be provably true. Even the reputation of a 'public person' like a bishop.
It's not even an exercise in flash-mob libel, because the anonymous originators began their campaign on the afternoon of Aug 4, 2013, then stretched their campaign in the topic out for more than a month, last posting on the afternoon of Sep 8, 2013.
This topic strikes me, overall, as a cowardly exercise following a 2-part principle: "If you can't bamboozle (opponents) with bluster, then bury them in bull--um--manure."  As exemplified by the eye-glazing individual postings that stretch for half-a-dozen laptop-screenfuls.
They are good reasons, please point out the error in those reasons, if you find any. I would never want what happened to me, and others, to happen to anyone else unfortunate enough to be duped [....]
Worse than mere innuendo: An accusation of fraud, rhetorically softened with an expression of empathy, but deprived of all the specifics necessary for readers to evaluate it (much less "point out the error"): Who? What? When? Where?
I seriously doubt that anonymous posters on an anonymous-by-design Internet subforum would have a whole lotta truth on their side. How many anonymous-but-real people have posted in this thread, piling on under the default names 'Guest' and 'Guest Unregistered'? The software doesn't even assign them ordinal numbers to distinguish them, but there seem to be at least 2 different people under the latter name. Then again, the apparent dialog among the anonymeeses might've been a completely fabricated one, simulated via postings from a single real person.
Readers might be best advised to raise the classic question: "Cui bono?", i.e.: "Who would benefit most from damaging the reputations of independent traditional Catholic bishops?"  Hmmm?
The postings in this topic definitely warrant "further review" by the forum moderator. Strictly speaking, they weren't willful violations of the later warning that opened this subforum's topic "Friendly Warning for any Trolls", but they certainly violated its principle(s):
The Anonymous subforum is not "the Wild West" or a place where anything goes. [....] The Anonymous subforum IS moderated, and has the same standards as the rest of the forum. [....] you can't use the Anonymous subforum as a cloak for malice.
<http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Friendly-Warning-for-any-Trolls (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Friendly-Warning-for-any-Trolls)>.
I believe that the advantage of "a cloak for malice" was exactly why the anonymous posters chose to conduct their hostile campaign in this subforum. I believe that this thread is a black eye to the reputation of CathInfo, but the remedies are not for me to determine.
-
Who are Bp Bruno and Bp. Taylor?
Obviously, they are not known to us. :thinking:
-
All the above is very correct.
Also to be addressed is the fact that Taylor admitted (and so you'll note he now removed his website) that his "conditional" consecration from Adamson was NOT DONE FOR VALIDITY. Now again, what is it done for? Taylor tells us: "for an internal" reason for the Society of the Virgin Mary.
It appears that a "Bishop Macek" also at one point "enthroned" Taylor during some type of ceremonial in his tiny Chapel. This is nothing but shear Old Catholic shenanigans at best. These are men who clearly have no grasp on Catholic ceremonial or teaching, or else they would not conduct themselves in this manner.
The Taylor group is apparently now working with the following to form some type of "new organization" to gain entrance into traditional Chapels. Among the participants are a Fr. Gabriel Tetherow, Louis Montelongo, Merrill Brian Adamson, Pablo Dolorosa, Jesse Milagrosa, a Taylor product named Macek and another product of Taylor (via Jason Spadafore) and consecrated by Taylor, a fellow named Bruno and a few others.
I've read enough. This thread is so full of slander and lies--I personally know Several of the above and they are priests beyond reproach. I've beeno on several trad sites and seen this kind of gossip and slander over and over. How dare you stay anonymous. Use at least a screen name, you cowards. Have you seen the blog "the Lay Pulpit" or some others like this? Same thing. If you cannot use at least a registered screen name how can you be taken seriously? Or maybe, like some political comment sites, "unregistered guest" is a troll sent here to divide us against successful priests by innuendo, rumor and planting doubt.
-
wait? this says I am unregistered - I am compassionprayer. Hmm. I must not be using this right but what I said about slander stands.
-
At the bottom of the screen when posting on this sub forum you will see a little box that you can check to that your post will not be anonymous. It is below the browse button and above the reply button
-
Ok finally figured it out.
-
http://scor.sled.sc.gov/OffenderDetails.aspx?Display=Main&Id=2304116 (http://scor.sled.sc.gov/OffenderDetails.aspx?Display=Main&Id=2304116)
http://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/News-Release-for-Amicarelli-01256294xD2C78.pdf (http://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/News-Release-for-Amicarelli-01256294xD2C78.pdf)
https://www.live5news.com/story/34436821/summerville-man-faces-child-pornography-charges/ (https://www.live5news.com/story/34436821/summerville-man-faces-child-pornography-charges/)
http://www.holyfamilytraditionalcatholicchurch.com/home.html (http://www.holyfamilytraditionalcatholicchurch.com/home.html)
Dorchester County public index (court records) - click "accept" and then search on last name:
https://publicindex.sccourts.org/dorchester/publicindex/
-
Check the SC court pages and the sex offender registry for "Tommaso Giovanni Amicarelli". Also Google the name.