So OLMC announces that they won't have anything to do with Ambrose Moran for unspecified reasons.
Where do I BEGIN with this?
1. No thank you for all those Internet dwellers who (Deo Gratias!) exposed the very real problems with Ambrose -- enough to "not have anything to do with him".
2. On the contrary, they were attacked!
3. No apology was made for being stubborn, ignoring CathInfo's investigation (for example), attacking good, honest CathInfo members (among others), rashly supporting Moran, having him simulate "mass" on the OLMC altar and other places, etc.
4. No mention was made about what they found to be unacceptable. Perhaps because it would highlight their need for an apology and/or thanks to those who brought this to light?
5. They continue to call Ambrose an archbishop (out of stubbornness?) so what part of Ambrose, or his story, don't they like? If they still believe him, then they should believe the part about having special jurisdiction from Cardinal Slipyj. So his saying "I consider this seminary to be canonically erected" should make them happy, not upset.
6. Even their official damage control (Manuel Chavez/Martin Dougherty) can't give us the actual reasons why they eventually did an about-face and decided to dismiss Ambrose. Perhaps they don't want us connecting any dots or drawing any (correct) logical conclusions? Those logical conclusions might point Fr. Pfeiffer in a direction he doesn't want to go.
7. Remember the 30 days post from a couple days ago? They were defending him right to the end. Ambrose (or someone) had a whole new story concocted to fit all the evidence.
8. Long story short, I think we can conclude that Fr. Pfeiffer RELUCTANTLY was forced to distance himself somewhat from Ambrose for the very practical reason that people all over the country were cutting him off (financially, support, attending his Mass centers, etc.) and he was forced. But he wasn't happy about it: look at numbers 1-7.