Author Topic: More info about Mr Bishop Ambrose Moran (Read 93299 times)

Henry101 · « **Reply #45 on:** October 05, 2015, 03:47:13 PM »

I'm not sure if that wiki article is correct.
Having worked in the Maronite church for many, many years, the Eastern Catholic church must always notify Rome. They do not notify the Congregation of Bishops (like the nuncios of the Latin rite dioceses) but instead to the Congregation of Oriental Churches. Different offices. But, Rome must always be notified beforehand. It would be an illicit act if they were raised to the episcopate without approval from Rome.

TheRealMcCoy · « **Reply #46 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:04:41 PM »

Quote from: Henry101

Unlike last week, Fr. Hewco doesn't mention Moran in this week's homily

He does in the unedited version of the sermon.

Caraffa · « **Reply #47 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:41:54 PM »

Quote from: Chiara

New website that just appeared on October 4, 2015

https://ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/

Check out this site:

http://theuaoc.com

The pictures of him in an Eastern Bishop's attire are basically the same to the ones that he has posted on the blog Chiara posted; only here, he claims to have been consecrated in 1983 by a Ukrainian Orthodox Metropolitan:

Quote

The Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC)-USA- SOBORNOPRAVNA was established by Metropolitan Hryhorij in Chicago in 1952. The current primate is Metropolitian-Archbishop Amvrosij - who was consecrated by Metropolitan Hryhorij and bishops of the Holy Synod as confirmed by a docuмent of agreement with the Slavonic (Czecho-slovak) Orthodox Church of 1983 signed by Metropolitan-Archbishop Hryhorij, Metropolitan-Archbishop Andrew, Metropolitan-Archbishop Amvrosij, Archbishop Anthony, Archpriest John Piecuch II, Vicar General, and Chore-bishop Dimitri (Gaines), Secretary of the Holy Synod of Bishops since the 1970's and serving under Metropolitan Amvrosij until Dimitri's death in 2010.

So was he lying then or is he lying now? … Or both times?

cathman7 · « **Reply #48 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:53:08 PM »

Great find, Caraffa!

Via the site:

Quote

Metropolitan Archbishop Amvrosij, whose godfather was King Peter II of Yugoslavia, had canonical recognition from Patriarch Pavle of the Serbian Patriarchate and was in the official publication of Yugoslavia. It may be remembered that Bishop Dionisij, Archbishop Hryhorij and Archbishop Hennadij co-consecrated the current Metropolitan in America of the Serbian Patriarchate.

This is getting even more confusing!

Matthew · « **Reply #49 on:** October 05, 2015, 06:00:52 PM »

But I know these CathInfo members, I know if anyone can figure out this mess, it's them.

We have some seriously resourceful, intelligent, and wise posters on here. I've been frequently impressed with how fast I've received an answer to a question I post on here.

I'm sure they'll collectively get to the bottom of this mystery, sooner or later.

We just need to share all our "work" as it were; help out each others' research.

cathman7 · « **Reply #50 on:** October 05, 2015, 06:02:21 PM »

I am hoping to get a response from the Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy in Toronto. Also, Ladislaus said he knows the brother of the current "Patriarch" of the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

Incidentally, the website on Ambrose has been updated:

https://ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/

opus · « **Reply #51 on:** October 05, 2015, 06:50:23 PM »

I have included a side-by-side picture of the two letters provided on Ambrose's website. First one is his Letter of Incardination, second one is the supposed letter from Bishop Borecky confirming Ambrose's appointment as Metropolitan-Archbishop.

The two signatures are exactly the same!!!!! How can this be? When people sign their name, there will always be small differences. It will not look exactly the same.

My conclusion: The second letter of Bishop Borecky confirming Ambrose as Metropolitan-Archbishop is a FAKE.[/size]

Plus, I have circled the area where in the original 1975 letter the bishop signed over text, in the 1976 letter somehow you can see those area being blurry with multiple strokes [the letter B] or the area was erased [the tail of S], as if someone is trying to reconstruct the strokes (but really did a poor job).

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #52 on:** October 05, 2015, 07:06:02 PM »

In fairness, bishops often used stamps of sorts. That could account for an apparent "identical" signature.

The most useful resource in evaluating the legitimacy of the docuмents would be a good character witness. That is, someone (or some people) proximate to the events who can testify to their happening.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #53 on:** October 05, 2015, 07:13:54 PM »

Of course, the main significance of him being appointed archbishop of Moscow is the jurisdictional significance-- and that is a moot point, since it's a matter of fact that he joined a schismatic Church as a hierarch at one point (at least in 2007 with GOCA, of which there is plenty of visual evidence), thereby tacitly resigning any office he held per Canon 188.

The "only" significance of that particular docuмent is to establish credibility of claims. Which would be useful, but that credibility can be established in other ways as well.

PG · « **Reply #54 on:** October 05, 2015, 07:25:21 PM »

opus - good find with the signature. Also note the bottom of the B for borecky in the second one. It appears to have an addition.

TheRealMcCoy · « **Reply #55 on:** October 05, 2015, 07:32:28 PM »

There is a photo of Fr Bill Moran on the CITI website. Slide 13 of the slideshow. It's not the same person as the Ambrose pics provided in Orthodox garb. But it's the same person as the younger Fr Bill Moran from the Ambrose website. I bet he's performed weddings and you can track down photos somewhere.

PG · « **Reply #56 on:** October 05, 2015, 07:43:03 PM »

realmccoy - I watched that slide show, but I didn't see it. The slideshow was not changing photos as the numbers changed as well. So maybe it did not load well. But, still, I cannot confirm your claim.

Caraffa · « **Reply #57 on:** October 05, 2015, 11:05:00 PM »

Quote from: obscurus

I am hoping to get a response from the Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy in Toronto. Also, Ladislaus said he knows the brother of the current "Patriarch" of the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

Incidentally, the website on Ambrose has been updated:

https://ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/

The newspaper articles have been added, yet they don't tell from which newspaper as that could lead us to an article about the ordination of Fr. William Moran. I was able to find an article about Fr. Ropke's ordination in a 1974, but nothing on Moran. Fr. Ropke is unfortunately no longer alive (RIP) as he would have been able to tell us something about Moran.

Given the address of the church in one of the articles is in Closter, NJ, I suspect it may be the Newark Star-Ledger, a paper whose archive is not accessible online.

Edit: With the picture of Rev. William Moran with Peter Rabbit at a Church in Westbury, NY, it seems he fit in quite well with Newchurch.

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #58 on:** October 06, 2015, 09:54:00 AM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

In fairness, bishops often used stamps of sorts. That could account for an apparent "identical" signature.

The most useful resource in evaluating the legitimacy of the docuмents would be a good character witness. That is, someone (or some people) proximate to the events who can testify to their happening.

Agreed. The fact that he is attempting to establish credibility by a website does not bode well for his claims. The only way I would believe his claims is if multiple independent trustworthy and living witnesses vouched for his claims. And at least a few of those witnesses would have to be clergy. If you go under the radar for years and then suddenly pop up as a bishop (no, an ARCHBISHOP!!, no, a PATRIARCH!!!!) you better have bullet-proof docuмentation/evidence/testimony for your claims. A doubtful bishop is no bishop at all. And this guy has not even been able to establish that he is certainly a priest. This guy is way too sketchy to trust. It is almost irrelevant if his orders are valid. He is certainly stained by his schismatic past, that is incontestable. This kind of thing is really dangerous for sedevacantists who are hoping for a bishop with ordinary jurisdiction to emerge out of the woods. I won't say that it is impossible but certainly there has to be solid evidence that the claims are true. In this case we don't have that.

confederate catholic · « **Reply #59 on:** October 06, 2015, 01:48:44 PM »

Quote

1976: Bishop Ambrose and Cardinal Slipyj outside Holy Wisdom (St. Sophia) Cathedral, Rome, following ceremony of episcopal consecration:

the pic after this is definately doctored