Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: TheRealMcCoy on November 07, 2015, 09:04:02 PM
-
November 7th, 2015
Dear faithful,
After further investigation, the Seminary of Our Lady of Mount Carmel in Boston, Kentucky, has decided not to associate with Archbishop Ambrose Moran.
Please keep our nine seminarians and brothers in your prayers and we thank all who are praying for our apostolate.
In Christ the King and the Immaculate Heart of Mary,
Father Joseph Pfeiffer
Father David Hewko
http://www.filiimariae.org/2015/11/statement-from-our-lady-of-mount-carmel-seminary-concerning-archbishop-ambrose-moran-communique-du-seminaire-our-lady-of-mount-carme
-
A welcomed step in the right direction.
-
Why not?
Note that whomever penned the "letter" attaches the title ARCHbishop to Moran.
-
UPDATE: There is a thread containing links to ALL the threads about so-called Bishop Ambrose Moran:
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-Mr-Ambrose-Moran-the-Orthodox
Why not?
Note that whomever [sic] penned the "letter" attaches the title ARCHbishop to Moran.
Whoever penned the letter gave the quoted website what it needs to post the following title on their homepage ( http://www.filiimariae.org/ ), in English and in French:
Statement from Our
Lady of Mount Carmel
Seminary concerning
Archbishop Ambrose
Moran - Communiqué
du Séminaire Our Lady
of Mount Carmel
concernant Monseigneur
Ambrose Moran
We are publishing the following statement (http://www.filiimariae.org/2015/11/statement-from-our-lady-of-mount-carmel-seminary-concerning-archbishop-ambrose-moran-communique-du-seminaire-our-lady-of-mount-carme) at the
request of Father Joseph Pfeiffer and Father
David Hewko. Nous publions le docuмent
suivant à la demande de Messieurs les abbés
Joseph Pfeiffer et David Hewko (version
française ci-dessous). * * * November...
-
.
One other Resistance site has the same page (filii mariae in Canada) linked with the following title:
Statement from Our Lady of Mount Carmel Seminary concerning Archbishop Ambrose Moran
7 November 2015
A few days prior (the 4th), Ambrose Moran's name is found in another article, but they don't use "Archbishop":
Decree Appointing Bishop Ambrose Moran as Successor for the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church in the U.S.A.
4 November 2015
That's from ecclesiamilitans. I checked what I guess is all the rest and found nothing.
Half of them are dormant or under reconstruction.
.
-
.
I get a creepy feeling about this "official statement."
If it were to be openly and officially announced, wouldn't Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko choose a more recognized venue than one little website in Canada?
It might make sense that PTM (Pablo) is not cooperating with them and that's why there is no word of this on the PTMP website. (second P=Production)
As it is, it has the aspect of a trial balloon, especially with the "Archbishop" tag attached.
.
-
May God preserve them from High Church Protestantism...
-
Their statement would indicate that they still consider him to be a bishop so that is not the problem they find with him. Also there is no apology to the laity who went to his 'mass'. Did anyone go to 'confession' to him?
The arrogance of these two priests is so much worse than what we experienced in the SSPX. At least they have managed to sweep Fr Voigt's letter under the carpet for now.
They and their ilk must be red-lighted immediately.
-
.
I get a creepy feeling about this "official statement."
If it were to be openly and officially announced, wouldn't Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko choose a more recognized venue than one little website in Canada?
It might make sense that PTM (Pablo) is not cooperating with them and that's why there is no word of this on the PTMP website. (second P=Production)
As it is, it has the aspect of a trial balloon, especially with the "Archbishop" tag attached.
.
Maybe it means they have realized it would be better for them to have someone other than Pablo distributing their "official" statements and are using other outlets.
This is wonderful news, an answer to many prayers. Thanks be to God.
-
.
I get a creepy feeling about this "official statement."
If it were to be openly and officially announced, wouldn't Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko choose a more recognized venue than one little website in Canada?
It might make sense that PTM (Pablo) is not cooperating with them and that's why there is no word of this on the PTMP website. (second P=Production)
As it is, it has the aspect of a trial balloon, especially with the "Archbishop" tag attached.
.
Maybe it means they have realized it would be better for them to have someone other than Pablo distributing their "official" statements and are using other outlets.
This is wonderful news, an answer to many prayers. Thanks be to God.
So is Fr.P going to apologize to Bp.W. or is he going to continue on his own and try to find another Bishop some where else?
-
.
I get a creepy feeling about this "official statement."
If it were to be openly and officially announced, wouldn't Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko choose a more recognized venue than one little website in Canada?
It might make sense that PTM (Pablo) is not cooperating with them and that's why there is no word of this on the PTMP website. (second P=Production)
As it is, it has the aspect of a trial balloon, especially with the "Archbishop" tag attached.
.
Maybe it means they have realized it would be better for them to have someone other than Pablo distributing their "official" statements and are using other outlets.
This is wonderful news, an answer to many prayers. Thanks be to God.
So is Fr.P going to apologize to Bp.W. or is he going to continue on his own and try to find another Bishop some where else?
Something tells me that this mess is far from over.
-
The same situation as it was with Bishop Fellay and the SSPX!
1. Bishop Fellay wanted an agreement with Rome (he wants it).
1. Fr Pfeiffer wanted an agreement with Moran Ambrose, he wanted to be connected with him and use him in his own interest.
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the Resistance was born) and by that he (bishop Fellay) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to ROME (but in 2012 they already did... although not officially).
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the TRUE or a NEW Resistance was born!) and by that he (Fr Pfeiffer) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to AMBROSE (and the Orthodox Church!).
BUT THE KY SITUATION IS MUCH MORE WORSE! While B. Fellay apologized and said that an agreement is not possible because of the apostasy of the city of Rome ... Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko do not apologize themselves!
They still insist to call Ambrose Moran "Archbishop!" and are not ashamed to have left him celebrate Mass in "Resistance chapels"!
You cannot force someone to admit they were wrong or apologize. In this case, even if they admit it, one must unfortunately expect that this only happens for their own interests, not those of our Lord Jesus Christ.
"For they all seek after their own interests, not those of Christ Jesus." Philippians 2:21
To attend their mass and "seminary" makes them complicit...
-
This can be summed up in one phrase: too little, too late. All credibility has been lost, all good faith has been squandered. Only God knows what the appropriate penance might be for this, but it's time to drop the pretense of having an actual seminary.
-
To attend their mass and "seminary" makes them complicit...
Can you provide a reference to a catechism or such that you used to come to this decision? Because I don't think attending their Masses makes someone complicit if they are not associated with Ambrose any longer. Assuming the motive for attending their Masses is the salvation of one's soul that is the greater good.
Would like to hear your explantion.
-
It is the old same story as with the Novus Ordo and the SSPX. Who attend the SSPX MC Mass and listen to the sermons of these priests, exposes himself to great danger of being manipulated and to be brainwashed... Do not forget that the devil can seduce souls even in Mass and we know how wonderful Father Pfeiffer can preach (and the actions?)... He and Fr Hewko can so wonderful preach that you trust them and therefore you went in the sacrilegious Mass of the OLMC Chapel. You've participated at the sacrilegious Mass of Moran Ambrose. To make myself understood I don´t need to quote the Catechism. With enough common sense and love to Christ you will realize that the best and wisest thing you can do is: to avoid in future the mass of these priests... and to do penance.
Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God! Deuteronomy 6:16
Getting wisdom is the wisest thing you can do!
-
To attend their mass and "seminary" makes them complicit...
Can you provide a reference to a catechism or such that you used to come to this decision? Because I don't think attending their Masses makes someone complicit if they are not associated with Ambrose any longer. Assuming the motive for attending their Masses is the salvation of one's soul that is the greater good.
Would like to hear your explantion.
I think the Real McCoy is correct. If I had no other Mass outlet, I would reluctantly attend a Fr. Hewko Mass if there were no risks of having hosts 'consecrated' by Moran and Fr. Hewko was no longer associated with those errors. A situation like this is very possible for me in the years to come, so I really hope that they do steer clear of Moran because it is hard without Mass.
-
@TheRealMcCoy
It´s the same old story as with the Novus Ordo and the SSPX. Who attend the SSPX MC Mass and listen to the sermons of these priests, exposes himself to great danger of being manipulated and brainwashed... Do not forget that the devil can seduce souls even in Mass and we know how wonderful Father Pfeiffer can preach (and the actions?)... Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko are "wonderful preacher" that you trust them... therefore you went in the sacrilegious Mass of the OLMC Chapel? You've participated in the sacrilegious Mass of Moran Ambrose. To make myself understood I don´t need to quote the Catechism. With enough common sense and love to Christ you will realize that the best and wisest thing you can do is: to avoid in future the mass of these priests... and to do penance.
Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God! Deuteronomy 6:16
Getting wisdom is the wisest thing you can do!
-
@TheRealMcCoy
It´s the same old story as with the Novus Ordo and the SSPX. Who attend the SSPX MC Mass and listen to the sermons of these priests, exposes himself to great danger of being manipulated and brainwashed... Do not forget that the devil can seduce souls even in Mass and we know how wonderful Father Pfeiffer can preach (and the actions?)... Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko are "wonderful preacher" that you trust them... therefore you went in the sacrilegious Mass of the OLMC Chapel? You've participated in the sacrilegious Mass of Moran Ambrose. To make myself understood I don´t need to quote the Catechism. With enough common sense and love to Christ you will realize that the best and wisest thing you can do is: to avoid in future the mass of these priests... and to do penance.
Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God! Deuteronomy 6:16
Getting wisdom is the wisest thing you can do!
I don't disagree that their Masses should be avoided. I questioned your statement that those who continue are complicit in their sin. Do you mean formally or materially?
I don't think Pfeiffer family members can be objective in this situation.
-
Centroamerica & TheRealMcCoy
To attend the Indult Mass is evil because you are in danger to loose your faith? There are no Eucharistic Sacrilege at Indult Mass but you had it in the OLMC.
To attend the (SSPX MC) Mass of priests that torture Christ and have no love for the Blessed Sacrament by allowing that schismatic hands touch it... is legitimate???
No!
What would have happened if the Ambrose Moral horror story took place
in another community, for example in the community of Bishop Williamson in London?
What would Fr Pfeiffer say?: "Stay away from this evil priest/bishop/chapel! He is wicked! Avoid Sin! You must stay away from anyone who claims to be a believer but does evil things." Listen Fr. Pfeiffers wonderful sermon about St. Hermenegild. St. Hermenegild would rather be killed than to receive the Holy Communion from the hands of a schismatic! And yet that's what they have allowed. Both priests have accepted what they and the Church itself have condemned.
By allowing the fraud, you are conspiring with that person to commit the fraud.
-
So is Fr.P going to apologize to Bp.W. or is he going to continue on his own and try to find another Bishop some where else?
Something tells me that this mess is far from over.
Me too. But more than an apology is needed. I believe there have to be some fundamental changes. Otherwise we are saying +Williamson is withholding his services based on personal affront. I hardly believe that's the case. And all that was before Moran came into the picture. So whatever else needs to be cleaned up let's hope and pray they do it. Frs Pfeiffer and Hewko are good priests, we cannot afford to lose them to this nonsense.
-
@TheRealMcCoy
The family members are the first one to have responsibility! They have to give good example! In addition, it happened on their ground and chapel. Who has to prevent this mess if not family P.? Their testimony can be the biggest wake-up call that will bring the priests to their senses!
Don´t you think?
Wallflower wrote: Frs Pfeiffer and Hewko are good priests! :roll-laugh1: :facepalm:
:facepalm: :facepalm: :pray:
-
The cords of trust were severed by these unfortunate priests who acted without humility and in haste. The damage is done, and there is no way to "take it back".
So, we should continue our prayers for these priests, that they may find the integrity of Jesus Christ which was infused into them by Holy Orders, and become his humble servants as they were in the past.
They need prayers now more than ever.
-
J.Paul
So, we should continue our prayers for these priests, that they may find the integrity of Jesus Christ which was infused into them by Holy Orders, and become his humble servants as they were in the past.
They need prayers now more than ever.
AMEN!
I agree :pray: :pray: :pray: Oremus!
-
.
I get a creepy feeling about this "official statement."
If it were to be openly and officially announced, wouldn't Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko choose a more recognized venue than one little website in Canada?
It might make sense that PTM (Pablo) is not cooperating with them and that's why there is no word of this on the PTMP website. (second P=Production)
As it is, it has the aspect of a trial balloon, especially with the "Archbishop" tag attached.
.
Maybe it means they have realized it would be better for them to have someone other than Pablo distributing their "official" statements and are using other outlets.
This is wonderful news, an answer to many prayers. Thanks be to God.
Supposing the letter is true:
It's an answer to prayers in the sense that now those laity who've put their trust in Fr. Pfeiffer can now attend a certainly valid mass. That is, by itself, a "good thing."
But "wonderful" news seems a bit wishful; a Catholic priest should never be involved with schismatic cons to begin with. Keep in mind, it didn't take a whole lot of effort to discover a dozen very unsettling and disturbing facts about Moran.
I don't really see how celebrating this event is any different than celebrating the fact that the AFD wasn't signed into law. Through these events, Fr. P has been revealed to be (at a generous best) a very, very poor decision maker who plays fast and loose with Catholic doctrine, prudence, and discipline.
I'd really like to know why the decision was made-- the letter doesn't say. When the AFD fell through, vigilant Catholics were not rejoicing because a fundamental, underlying problem persisted. If Boston KY disassociates with Ambrose Moran because people didn't "like him" or because some donors threatened to cut ties, that's not very reassuring, is it?
-
If the Church were operating in normal times, and Fr. Pfeiffer were a true missionary priest given a territory to evangelize, he'd most likely be required to publicly renounce his actions and would spend the rest of his days atoning in a monastery under a vow of silence.
-
Centroamerica & TheRealMcCoy
To attend the Indult Mass is evil because you are in danger to loose your faith? There are no Eucharistic Sacrilege at Indult Mass but you had it in the OLMC.
To attend the (SSPX MC) Mass of priests that torture Christ and have no love for the Blessed Sacrament by allowing that schismatic hands touch it... is legitimate???
No!
What would have happened if the Ambrose Moral horror story took place
in another community, for example in the community of Bishop Williamson in London?
What would Fr Pfeiffer say?: "Stay away from this evil priest/bishop/chapel! He is wicked! Avoid Sin! You must stay away from anyone who claims to be a believer but does evil things." Listen Fr. Pfeiffers wonderful sermon about St. Hermenegild. St. Hermenegild would rather be killed than to receive the Holy Communion from the hands of a schismatic! And yet that's what they have allowed. Both priests have accepted what they and the Church itself have condemned.
By allowing the fraud, you are conspiring with that person to commit the fraud.
What are you talking about? If a priest associated with the "SSPX-MC" is not involved with Moran and separates himself from being associated with any of that mess, how exactly is he schismatic? Just because he isn't part of the SSPX?
I have no idea why you directed this comment to me.
I have never attended a Mass in Kentucky or by Fr. Hewko or Fr. Pfeiffer.
-
The same situation as it was with Bishop Fellay and the SSPX!
1. Bishop Fellay wanted an agreement with Rome (he wants it).
1. Fr Pfeiffer wanted an agreement with Moran Ambrose, he wanted to be connected with him and use him in his own interest.
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the Resistance was born) and by that he (bishop Fellay) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to ROME (but in 2012 they already did... although not officially).
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the TRUE or a NEW Resistance was born!) and by that he (Fr Pfeiffer) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to AMBROSE (and the Orthodox Church!).
BUT THE KY SITUATION IS MUCH MORE WORSE! While B. Fellay apologized and said that an agreement is not possible because of the apostasy of the city of Rome ... Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko do not apologize themselves!
No, Bishop Fellay and the Menzingen SSWPLX are worse. Fr. Pfeiffer, and by default Fr. Hewko, are reckless and unwise, but Bp. Fellay is a traitor. A society or organization can generally survive the unwise, but it can not survive treason from within.
-
I'd really like to know why the decision was made-- the letter doesn't say.
If you find any credibility in what Paul H. has to say, he blames Ambrose's Oct 31 sermon.
Subsequent to statements made during a sermon given by His Excellency, the following has been decided: (link to statement in OP)
-
The same situation as it was with Bishop Fellay and the SSPX!
1. Bishop Fellay wanted an agreement with Rome (he wants it).
1. Fr Pfeiffer wanted an agreement with Moran Ambrose, he wanted to be connected with him and use him in his own interest.
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the Resistance was born) and by that he (bishop Fellay) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to ROME (but in 2012 they already did... although not officially).
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the TRUE or a NEW Resistance was born!) and by that he (Fr Pfeiffer) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to AMBROSE (and the Orthodox Church!).
BUT THE KY SITUATION IS MUCH MORE WORSE! While B. Fellay apologized and said that an agreement is not possible because of the apostasy of the city of Rome ... Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko do not apologize themselves!
No, Bishop Fellay and the Menzingen SSWPLX are worse. Fr. Pfeiffer, and by default Fr. Hewko, are reckless and unwise, but Bp. Fellay is a traitor. A society or organization can generally survive the unwise, but it can not survive treason from within.
Treason is not something that can only be committed by liberals and their sympathizers.
If a Catholic priest, who purports to take the care of souls into his hands, elevates a man whose orders and faith are doubtful as a bishop before the laity-- what do we call such a man?
Certainly, Fellay's direction will affect more souls. But is it really that different? Essentially, is there really such a chasm between the two; one who sells out for purple buttons and the other who sells out for the potential of episcopi vagante? Would you actually choose one over the other? Or wash your hands of both?
-
Me too. But more than an apology is needed. I believe there have to be some fundamental changes. Otherwise we are saying +Williamson is withholding his services based on personal affront. I hardly believe that's the case. And all that was before Moran came into the picture. So whatever else needs to be cleaned up let's hope and pray they do it.
This is very important to remember. Bp Williamson refused to service OLMC before Ambrose became an issue.
-
I'd really like to know why the decision was made-- the letter doesn't say.
If you find any credibility in what Paul H. has to say, he blames Ambrose's Oct 31 sermon.
Subsequent to statements made during a sermon given by His Excellency, the following has been decided: (link to statement in OP)
I recorded that Sermon, and I put it on the internet. In it, he mentioned that he considered the seminary as canonically erected. I believe this is what caused a big issue, and why I was asked to remove the sermon from the internet.
It is one reason why they released their letter, I firmly believe.
-
@MaterDominici
You wrote: "It his is very important to remember. Bp Williamson refused to service OLMC before Ambrose became an issue."
BUT THAT´S NOT TRUE! The bishop said that he has never said that. What Fr Pfeiffer said was wrong and not true. Of course there are some things that has to be done, for example he has to discharge Pablo... But fr Pfeiffer doesn´t want to discharge him... So for the sake of pablo the Amateur Exorcist he sacrifices his Seminary, his family as well as God!
Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko are just little priest and should be humble worker in the vineyard of God. They need the support of a bishop when they should in fact have a seminary, they must behave and be obedient to the bishop. The priests should be humble and become a monk and learn the virtue of obedience, but if they do not endure to live a contemplative life, then they may go in mission... But for one priest it will be dangerous, because he will be tempted to do his own will, to think to be a St Athanasius... He cannot come under any submission!
But the one that said NON SERVIAM was Lucifer. Non serviam is Latin for "I will not serve". The phrase is generally attributed to Lucifer, who have spoken these words to express rejection to serve God.
The priests has to obey the bishops, the successors of the apostles.
The bishops, as vicars and legates of Christ! If the bishop says to close the Seminary, one should obey! But the only thing our 2 good bishops want is above all, that Pablo leaves! But the answer was and still is: "NON SERVIAM!"
Ambrose was only the proof that in KY Seminary is an evil spirit... We knew it before but now it´s public.
-
@MaterDominici
I'm sorry, I misread what you wrote...
Bishop didn´t come to OLMC, so there was no confirmation! He just wants loyalty and that Pablo leaves this place. If Pablo would have left, the bishop would have come!
With: "BUT THAT´S NOT TRUE! The bishop said that he has never said that. What Fr Pfeiffer said was wrong and not true. Of course there are some things that has to be done, for example he has to discharge Pablo...!" What I meant to say is, that the bishop never said that he doesn´t want to serve/help the OLMC and the Seminary. But after all what happened... now it´s to late.
-
Father Hewko dodged the real issue of Ambrose being a fraud, instead claiming "people panicked thinking that OLMC had gone orthodox schismatic". Ambrose was clearly a liar and of extremely dubious validity as a priest/bishop. For Fr. Hewko to skirt around this without apologizing for Father Pfeiffer's having subjected his faithful to Ambrose' simulated mass and confessions was at the very least disingenuous.
-
Father Hewko dodged the real issue of Ambrose being a fraud, instead claiming "people panicked thinking that OLMC had gone orthodox schismatic". Ambrose was clearly a liar and of extremely dubious validity as a priest/bishop. For Fr. Hewko to skirt around this without apologizing for Father Pfeiffer's having subjected his faithful to Ambrose' simulated mass and confessions was at the very least disingenuous.
Good comments. This sermon was a repetition of two weeks ago,
Ambrose is legitimate
We did nothing wrong
It is the wicked interneters spreading panic and lies( SSPXism here)
All is normal and fine at the "seminary"
With the addition that, they gave him the boot. I guess that was Bishop Williamson's fault as well.............................. :facepalm:
-
The same situation as it was with Bishop Fellay and the SSPX!
1. Bishop Fellay wanted an agreement with Rome (he wants it).
1. Fr Pfeiffer wanted an agreement with Moran Ambrose, he wanted to be connected with him and use him in his own interest.
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the Resistance was born) and by that he (bishop Fellay) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to ROME (but in 2012 they already did... although not officially).
2. Many faithful and some priests were greatly disturbed and angry (the TRUE or a NEW Resistance was born!) and by that he (Fr Pfeiffer) was prevented to HANDOVER the SOCIETY to AMBROSE (and the Orthodox Church!).
BUT THE KY SITUATION IS MUCH MORE WORSE! While B. Fellay apologized and said that an agreement is not possible because of the apostasy of the city of Rome ... Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko do not apologize themselves!
No, Bishop Fellay and the Menzingen SSWPLX are worse. Fr. Pfeiffer, and by default Fr. Hewko, are reckless and unwise, but Bp. Fellay is a traitor. A society or organization can generally survive the unwise, but it can not survive treason from within.
Sacrilege is a much higher crime than treason. You can't compare what +Fellay did, or almost did concerning the DD, to the faithful consuming pieces of bread they believed to be the Blessed Sacrament at OLMC. Nothing that has taken place in the SSPX rises to the seriousness of that situation. If he heard Confessions, at least the faithful would be protected (by the church) in that Sacrament, assuming no ill advice was given in spiritual direction.
-
.
This "secret consecration" is nonsense. Cardinal Slipjy was living in Rome, not in a cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρ at the time. There would be no need for him to do a secret consecration.
And if he was supposed to be going to do secret work in the Soviet Union how is it that he wound up in the United States?
This Ambrose person must have a very bad sense of direction.
-
.
This "secret consecration" is nonsense. Cardinal Slipjy was living in Rome, not in a cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρ at the time. There would be no need for him to do a secret consecration.
And if he was supposed to be going to do secret work in the Soviet Union how is it that he wound up in the United States?
This Ambrose person must have a very bad sense of direction.
What I believe may have happened was that Moran came across the true story of how Cardinal Slipyj consecrated three bishops without a papal mandate in 1977, here is the he Wikipedia excerpt:
"In 1977 Slipyj consecrated Ivan Choma, Stefan Czmil and Lubomyr Husar as bishops without approval of the pope in an act of exposition of patriarchal aspirations. These consecrations caused much annoyance to the Roman Curia as episcopal consecrations without papal permission are considered illicit in Roman Canon Law but not Eastern Canon Law."
Moran then used this true story as a basis to contrive his false narrative. I am not saying that I am absolutely sure that this is what occurred, but I think it is quite possible.
-
Personally, I think it is very probable that he was ordained a Catholic priest. I've said this since the beginning. This would explain Fr. Pfeiffer's lack of scruples in inviting him to the altar. Even so he was lacking scruples in letting this guy in the pulpit because there is no doubt that he preached lies. Like I said from the beginning, I think he was consecrated a bishop under dubious orders of a schismatic group. The Slipyj story was just something he put together and thought he would convince by mixing fake pics with real ones. It seems more than obvious since the beginning that this was probably the case. Now it also seems that others have came to these conclusions as well.
-
Personally, I think it is very probable that he was ordained a Catholic priest.
By whom?
-
Personally, I think it is very probable that he was ordained a Catholic priest.
By whom?
And by what evidence?
-
This seems to support that as well...
UKRAINIAN CATHOLIC PRIEST PROVIDES INFO
On November 10, 2015, I had a phone call and email exchange with Rev. Fr. Andriy Chirovsky, Professor of Theology with specialization in Patristics and Later Eastern Christian Theology and Spirituality; Saint Paul University, Ottawa, Canada.
Per his biography: Fr. Andriy was born in 1956 in New Jersey. He is the Founding Director of the Sheptytsky Institute and is the Peter and Doris Kule Professor of Eastern Christian Theology and Spirituality. He has a special interest in the spiritual life of Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky, on whom he wrote his master’s and doctoral theses. Fr. Andriy was ordained a Ukrainian Catholic priest by the confessor of faith Patriarch Josyf Slipyj in Castelgandolfo, in 1980, and elevated to the rank of Mitred Archpriest in August, 2005. He is married to Halyna (Pawlyshyn), and they have two children, Sophia and Alexander. On November 26, 2005 Fr. Andriy was elevated to Archpriest.
Fr. Chirovsky's curriculum vitae can be found on the webpage for the Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky Institute of Eastern Christian Studies: http://www.sheptytskyinstitute.ca/facul ... chirovsky/
When we spoke on the telephone, Fr. Chirovsky told me that he was already familiar with the case of Ambrose Moran because another person contacted him. He had seen the photoshopped image of Cardinal Slipjy and the wordpress blog. In the public interest, he agreed to review materials I sent him and provide answers to several questions. He also gave me permission to publish his comments.
I provided him with the following docuмentation:
- The wordpress blog: https://ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/
- The links to the schismatic consecration certificate, the schismatic passing of the baton certificate, and the email from Santa Sophia in Rome, which affirms that Ambrose is a fake: http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2015/11 ... secration/
- A series of links that docuмent Ambrose's affiliation with Gregory of Denver.
- My email exchange with Sister Kathleen Hutsko of the Sister Servants of Mary Immaculate.
- A transcript of the sermon given by Moran at OLMC on September 13, 2015.
Below is the record of my questions and Fr. Chirovsky's answers. I have bolded certain statements of Fr. Chirovsky to add emphasis.
If this is posted to other media outlets, please retain the bolding.
_________________________________________________
INTERVIEW: NOVEMBER 10, 2015
FR. CHIROVSKY REVIEW OF DOcuмENT: NOVEMBER 11, 2015
Questions asked: Please review all the materials, and pay special attention to the claims Ambrose makes in his sermon and on the wordpress page. If you have information which can prove that Ambrose is lying in particular instances, we would ask that you demonstrate the falsity of his claims.
Pease provide historical information about your ordination by Cardinal Slipjy; his work with the underground Catholic Church in Ukraine and the Eastern Rite churches in the West; the names of the bishops he consecrated in secret; the reasons for these secret consecrations;whether or not there is docuмentary evidence to substantiate their episcopal consecration and where the records are housed; and the reasons underpinning your determination that Ambrose was never consecrated by Slipjy.
If you recognize any of the persons in Ambrose’s picture collection, including Ambrose himself, please provide the public with information about them.
Do you know any of the schismatic personalities or groups whose signatures appear in the consecration certificates and on the internet links?
Did Cardinal Slipjy work with the Orthodox, and could he have met this Ambrose in an ecuмenical setting?
_______________________________________________
FR. CHIROVSKY'S ANSWERS: It may well be that William Moran was ordained a priest. Nothing in the docuмents or photos suggests to me that he was consecrated a Catholic bishop. The photographs and captions are a mixture of the real and the fake. The photo purporting to be taken after his consecration at St. Sophia in Rome is a manifestly doctored picture. Cardinal Slipyj would have to have been falling down to appear at such an angle. Simply ridiculous.
The photos with Fr. John Ropke may well be authentic. Fr. Ropke was known to me and served in the St. Josaphat Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy of Parma, Ohio in his later years.
The photos with clergy in Toronto include Deacon Chuck Bell (who fancifully liked to use the name Constantine Belsarius) and the late Fr. Serge Keleher, who was a secretary to Bp. Isidore Borecky and may have been the source of Eparchy of Toronto letterhead.
Interestingly, Bp. Isidore does not incardinate Fr. Moran. He accepts him for a trial two year period. Other priests received letters of incardination and a celebret from Bp. Isidore. This is what I received when I was loaned to the Eparchy of Toronto.
Cardinal Slipyj consecrated four Bishops in secret. In Moscow on 4 February 1963 he consecrated Bp. (Now Blessed) Vasyl Vsevolod Velychkovsky.
On 2 April 1977 Cardinal Slipyj consecrated three Bishops:
Bp. Lubomyr (now Cardinal) Husar.
Bp. Ivan Choma (who died in 2006)
Bp. Stepan Chmil (who died within the year)
The co-consecrators of these Bishops were Bp. Isidore Borecky of Toronto and Bp. Ivan Prasko of Melbourne.
All if this info is readily available on catholic-hierarchy.org
There is no mention of any Archbishop Ambrose Moran anywhere in that meticulous database.
It is absurd to claim that William Moran was consecrated in the Church of St. Sophia. All ordinations (even to the priesthood, much less the episcopate) within the borders of the city of Rome must be registered with the Vicariate of Rome. That is why all of the married candidates for the priesthood were ordained at the Studion (the Studite monastery) in Castelgandolfo, not within the city limits of Rome. That is where I was ordained to the priesthood on June 8, 1980. I was immediately given an antimension like that which William Moran has, but he had the audacity to scribble in his own name on the line reserved for the signature of Cardinal Slipyj.
The Cardinal's signature is where he usually signed (not on that line because it was too small for his large signature). I think he [Ambrose] got hold of an authentic antimension and added in his own name in an inappropriate spot.
At my priestly ordination, I received such an antimension and a celebret in Latin. The consecration certificate supposedly signed by Cardinal Slipyj, Bishop Isidore Borecky, and a supposed Bp. Dimitri "for Patriarch Maximos Hakim" is obviously fake. The signatures of Slipyj and Borecky are forgeries. Why would the Melkite Bishop sign "for Patriarch Maximos?" That is ridiculous. He would have listed his Eparchy (diocese).
The claim that he [Ambrose] was named some sort of vicar, coadjutor, or successor to Cardinal Slipyj is absolutely false. On 27 March 1980, Myroslav Ivan Lubachivsky was elected coadjutor at an extraordinary synod called by Pope John Paul II. Why would that have happened if Ambrose Moran was the coadjutor?
All of Moran's claims to be a Catholic Bishop are absurd. He may be an Orthodox bishop of a very dubious jurisdiction and dubious orders. But then why does he celebrate in the Latin rite? He is clearly not who he represents himself to be.
I find the Orthodox consecration certificate more believable. The particular group listed was notorious for all sorts of illicit (and likely invalid) consecrations.
There is no such thing as bi-ritual bishops in the Catholic Church. His claim to be one is absurd.
He may have been present at the 1975 Liturgy at the papal altar in St. Peter's Basilica. There were many priests there. I was an acolyte at that liturgy.
Cardinal Slipyj did meet with Orthodox hierarchs, but I doubt that this man would have been one of them. He may have been a Ruthenian or Ukrainian Catholic priest at one point (that is not clear to me). He may have at some point after 1975 apostasized and sought consecration from a dubious Ukrainian Orthodox group.
It's clear from these accounts that Ambrose Moran is most certainly NOT in any sense in communion with the Catholic Church. He is at best a wandering bishop of the dubious Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (Sobornopravna), but he seems to have abandoned that church and anathematized it along with World Orthodoxy. He is therefore definitely not a Catholic bishop.
I really have nothing more to add. You actually had plenty of information already that makes clear that this man is not what he says he is. I hope this helps you protect innocent people from his dissimulation.
Andriy Chirovsky, sinner-priest
-
This was posted on another forum. I don't know what to think. It was just a hunch I had but could be incorrect. There is enough to legitimately doubt, of course. It was still imprudent to let him offer Mass, and no one should receive the sacraments from him with a serious doubt existing.
At this point nobody knows if he is a priest.
-
Just to make things clearer, and because she specifically requested to retain the original bolding:
This seems to support that as well...
UKRAINIAN CATHOLIC PRIEST PROVIDES INFO
On November 10, 2015, I had a phone call and email exchange with Rev. Fr. Andriy Chirovsky, Professor of Theology with specialization in Patristics and Later Eastern Christian Theology and Spirituality; Saint Paul University, Ottawa, Canada.
Per his biography: Fr. Andriy was born in 1956 in New Jersey. He is the Founding Director of the Sheptytsky Institute and is the Peter and Doris Kule Professor of Eastern Christian Theology and Spirituality. He has a special interest in the spiritual life of Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky, on whom he wrote his master’s and doctoral theses. Fr. Andriy was ordained a Ukrainian Catholic priest by the confessor of faith Patriarch Josyf Slipyj in Castelgandolfo, in 1980, and elevated to the rank of Mitred Archpriest in August, 2005. He is married to Halyna (Pawlyshyn), and they have two children, Sophia and Alexander. On November 26, 2005 Fr. Andriy was elevated to Archpriest.
Fr. Chirovsky's curriculum vitae can be found on the webpage for the Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky Institute of Eastern Christian Studies: http://www.sheptytskyinstitute.ca/facul ... chirovsky/
When we spoke on the telephone, Fr. Chirovsky told me that he was already familiar with the case of Ambrose Moran because another person contacted him. He had seen the photoshopped image of Cardinal Slipjy and the wordpress blog. In the public interest, he agreed to review materials I sent him and provide answers to several questions. He also gave me permission to publish his comments.
I provided him with the following docuмentation:
- The wordpress blog: https://ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/
- The links to the schismatic consecration certificate, the schismatic passing of the baton certificate, and the email from Santa Sophia in Rome, which affirms that Ambrose is a fake: http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2015/11 ... secration/
- A series of links that docuмent Ambrose's affiliation with Gregory of Denver.
- My email exchange with Sister Kathleen Hutsko of the Sister Servants of Mary Immaculate.
- A transcript of the sermon given by Moran at OLMC on September 13, 2015.
Below is the record of my questions and Fr. Chirovsky's answers. I have bolded certain statements of Fr. Chirovsky to add emphasis.
If this is posted to other media outlets, please retain the bolding.
_________________________________________________
INTERVIEW: NOVEMBER 10, 2015
FR. CHIROVSKY REVIEW OF DOcuмENT: NOVEMBER 11, 2015
Questions asked: Please review all the materials, and pay special attention to the claims Ambrose makes in his sermon and on the wordpress page. If you have information which can prove that Ambrose is lying in particular instances, we would ask that you demonstrate the falsity of his claims.
Pease provide historical information about your ordination by Cardinal Slipjy; his work with the underground Catholic Church in Ukraine and the Eastern Rite churches in the West; the names of the bishops he consecrated in secret; the reasons for these secret consecrations;whether or not there is docuмentary evidence to substantiate their episcopal consecration and where the records are housed; and the reasons underpinning your determination that Ambrose was never consecrated by Slipjy.
If you recognize any of the persons in Ambrose’s picture collection, including Ambrose himself, please provide the public with information about them.
Do you know any of the schismatic personalities or groups whose signatures appear in the consecration certificates and on the internet links?
Did Cardinal Slipjy work with the Orthodox, and could he have met this Ambrose in an ecuмenical setting?
_______________________________________________
FR. CHIROVSKY'S ANSWERS: It may well be that William Moran was ordained a priest. Nothing in the docuмents or photos suggests to me that he was consecrated a Catholic bishop. The photographs and captions are a mixture of the real and the fake. The photo purporting to be taken after his consecration at St. Sophia in Rome is a manifestly doctored picture. Cardinal Slipyj would have to have been falling down to appear at such an angle. Simply ridiculous.
The photos with Fr. John Ropke may well be authentic. Fr. Ropke was known to me and served in the St. Josaphat Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy of Parma, Ohio in his later years.
The photos with clergy in Toronto include Deacon Chuck Bell (who fancifully liked to use the name Constantine Belsarius) and the late Fr. Serge Keleher, who was a secretary to Bp. Isidore Borecky and may have been the source of Eparchy of Toronto letterhead.
Interestingly, Bp. Isidore does not incardinate Fr. Moran. He accepts him for a trial two year period. Other priests received letters of incardination and a celebret from Bp. Isidore. This is what I received when I was loaned to the Eparchy of Toronto.
Cardinal Slipyj consecrated four Bishops in secret. In Moscow on 4 February 1963 he consecrated Bp. (Now Blessed) Vasyl Vsevolod Velychkovsky.
On 2 April 1977 Cardinal Slipyj consecrated three Bishops:
Bp. Lubomyr (now Cardinal) Husar.
Bp. Ivan Choma (who died in 2006)
Bp. Stepan Chmil (who died within the year)
The co-consecrators of these Bishops were Bp. Isidore Borecky of Toronto and Bp. Ivan Prasko of Melbourne.
All if this info is readily available on catholic-hierarchy.org
There is no mention of any Archbishop Ambrose Moran anywhere in that meticulous database.
It is absurd to claim that William Moran was consecrated in the Church of St. Sophia. All ordinations (even to the priesthood, much less the episcopate) within the borders of the city of Rome must be registered with the Vicariate of Rome. That is why all of the married candidates for the priesthood were ordained at the Studion (the Studite monastery) in Castelgandolfo, not within the city limits of Rome. That is where I was ordained to the priesthood on June 8, 1980. I was immediately given an antimension like that which William Moran has, but he had the audacity to scribble in his own name on the line reserved for the signature of Cardinal Slipyj.
The Cardinal's signature is where he usually signed (not on that line because it was too small for his large signature). I think he [Ambrose] got hold of an authentic antimension and added in his own name in an inappropriate spot.
At my priestly ordination, I received such an antimension and a celebret in Latin. The consecration certificate supposedly signed by Cardinal Slipyj, Bishop Isidore Borecky, and a supposed Bp. Dimitri "for Patriarch Maximos Hakim" is obviously fake. The signatures of Slipyj and Borecky are forgeries. Why would the Melkite Bishop sign "for Patriarch Maximos?" That is ridiculous. He would have listed his Eparchy (diocese).
The claim that he [Ambrose] was named some sort of vicar, coadjutor, or successor to Cardinal Slipyj is absolutely false. On 27 March 1980, Myroslav Ivan Lubachivsky was elected coadjutor at an extraordinary synod called by Pope John Paul II. Why would that have happened if Ambrose Moran was the coadjutor?
All of Moran's claims to be a Catholic Bishop are absurd. He may be an Orthodox bishop of a very dubious jurisdiction and dubious orders. But then why does he celebrate in the Latin rite? He is clearly not who he represents himself to be.
I find the Orthodox consecration certificate more believable. The particular group listed was notorious for all sorts of illicit (and likely invalid) consecrations.
There is no such thing as bi-ritual bishops in the Catholic Church. His claim to be one is absurd.
He may have been present at the 1975 Liturgy at the papal altar in St. Peter's Basilica. There were many priests there. I was an acolyte at that liturgy.
Cardinal Slipyj did meet with Orthodox hierarchs, but I doubt that this man would have been one of them. He may have been a Ruthenian or Ukrainian Catholic priest at one point (that is not clear to me). He may have at some point after 1975 apostasized and sought consecration from a dubious Ukrainian Orthodox group.
It's clear from these accounts that Ambrose Moran is most certainly NOT in any sense in communion with the Catholic Church. He is at best a wandering bishop of the dubious Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (Sobornopravna), but he seems to have abandoned that church and anathematized it along with World Orthodoxy. He is therefore definitely not a Catholic bishop.
I really have nothing more to add. You actually had plenty of information already that makes clear that this man is not what he says he is. I hope this helps you protect innocent people from his dissimulation.
Andriy Chirovsky, sinner-priest
I did my best to retain the bold in the original.
-
I wondered about this point since I first heard the interview with Fr. Hewko:
There is no such thing as bi-ritual bishops in the Catholic Church. His claim to be one is absurd.
-
I was involved in the Orthodox Traditionalist underground for three years.
Ambrose Moran is known.
Here is a perspective from the Traditionalist Orthodox:
http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=11462&hilit=ambrose+moran
Just to prove he is known in that neck of the woods.
-
Personally, I think it is very probable that he was ordained a Catholic priest.
By whom?
And by what evidence?
This seems to support that as well...
UKRAINIAN CATHOLIC PRIEST PROVIDES INFO
_______________________________________________
FR. CHIROVSKY'S ANSWERS: It may well be that William Moran was ordained a priest. Nothing in the docuмents or photos suggests to me that he was consecrated a Catholic bishop.
[Bold emphasis mine this time.] Fr. Chirovsky says "It may well be..." i.e. he sounds like he has no knowledge one way or the other on this particular point.
-
Personally, I think it is very probable that he was ordained a Catholic priest.
By whom?
And by what evidence?
This seems to support that as well...
FR. CHIROVSKY'S ANSWERS: It may well be that William Moran was ordained a priest. Nothing in the docuмents or photos suggests to me that he was consecrated a Catholic bishop.
Fr. Chirovsky says "It may well be..." i.e. he sounds like he has no knowledge one way or the other on this particular point.
Already this post is out of date.
The 1974 certificate of ordination by this Bishop Ilnyckyj, which Fr. Pfeiffer is qualifying as proof of an ordination to the Roman Catholic priesthood, can be viewed on the cathinfo thread "Who supposedly, by his account, ordained Bill Moran?"
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=38550&min=36&num=3
I submitted the certificate to Fr. Andriy Chirovsky this afternoon. He had already provided the answers to my questions. The submission of the certificate was a follow up.
Before Fr. Chirovsky examined the certificate, he opined that "It may well be that William Moran was ordained a priest." But this opinion was inconclusive.
After looking over the 1974 ordination certificate, Fr. Chirovsky identified the group as "one of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Churches. This one has dubious apostolic succession."
Chirovsky's testimony directly contradicts Fr. Pfeiffer's assertion that the 1974 certificate is evidence of an ordination to the Roman Catholic priesthood.
-
After looking over the 1974 ordination certificate, Fr. Chirovsky identified the group as "one of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Churches. This one has dubious apostolic succession."
I posted elsewhere that even members of "Bp" Nicholas' own group show him to have been consecrated in 1978 ... four years after the questionable ordination certificate date.
-
I was involved in the Orthodox Traditionalist underground for three years.
Ambrose Moran is known.
Here is a perspective from the Traditionalist Orthodox:
http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=11462&hilit=ambrose+moran
Just to prove he is known in that neck of the woods.
I looked through the linked site and found this on page 4:
Re: Archbishop Ambrose Moran Has Resurfaced With SSPX Resistance
Quote
Postby Maria » Fri 6 November 2015 8:39 pm
Madison Grant wrote:
When Ambrose is presenting himself to the members of the Orthodox Church he presents himself as a lifelong TOC.
When Ambrose is presenting himself to the members of the Roman Catholic Church he presents himself as a lifelong Traditional Catholic.
Thank you.
Thank you for this alert.
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.
"TOC" means Traditional Orthodox Christians
I can't help but wonder how Fr. Pfeiffer would spin a response to this question:
Are you okay with Archbishop Ambrose Moran presenting himself as a lifelong Traditional Orthodox Christian to members of the Orthodox Church, while he presents himself as a lifelong Traditional Catholic to members of the Roman Catholic Church?
.
-
Are you okay with Archbishop Ambrose Moran presenting himself as a lifelong Traditional Orthodox Christian to members of the Orthodox Church, while he presents himself as a lifelong Traditional Catholic to members of the Roman Catholic Church?
Father: He was trying to convert them!
Me: How do you know he's not trying to convert you?
-
.
Father:
Don't pay any attention to CathInfo -- they're the enemy because they don't like us.
(Apparently anyone brash enough to dare ask an honest question doesn't "like" them.)
Meanwhile CathInfo gets thousands of hits and the pews at OLMC are virtually empty.
.
-
Are you okay with Archbishop Ambrose Moran presenting himself as a lifelong Traditional Orthodox Christian to members of the Orthodox Church, while he presents himself as a lifelong Traditional Catholic to members of the Roman Catholic Church?
Father: He was trying to convert them!
Me: How do you know he's not trying to convert you?
In the video with Fr. Hewko interviewing Ambrose, the part near the end when he was asked about Modernism and the Newmass was very telling. Ambrose tried to steer away from that question and avoid the topic of Modernism. At the time, I thought there wasn't something right about that, but in practice, this is how a Modernist works: keep treating the topic like it's to be avoided, and get the listener into the habit of jumping topic to something else. Therefore by avoiding the key issue he is effectively converting Fr. Hewko into his way of thinking.
.
-
After looking over the 1974 ordination certificate, Fr. Chirovsky identified the group as "one of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Churches. This one has dubious apostolic succession."
I posted elsewhere that even members of "Bp" Nicholas' own group show him to have been consecrated in 1978 ... four years after the questionable ordination certificate date.
Yes, which is proof that Moran's claim to be ordained a priest is also highly dubious. But because we have already shown that his claim to be a bishop as well as a number of other of his claims are indubitably false, it would be insanity to give him the benefit of the doubt even if doing so would be permissible, which it is not. The only sane conclusion we can make is that Moran is not a priest.
If we could speculate about what would happen if a valid Catholic bishop decided to ordain Moran, I don't think a conditional ordination would be required. The only docuмentation Moran has is forged and even the forged docuмent indicates he was ordained by dubious characters. There can hardly be any doubt at all that he is not a priest. Not only is he not a Catholic priest but he is no priest at all. The most certain thing we can say about Moran is that he's a mentally ill janitor from Long Island, NY.
-
Fr. P pulled this straight out of the Novus Ordo playbook. I wouldn't expect an explanation for the "separation" from Ambrose. This is Pfeiffer's Summorum Pontificuм. A docuмent which is ideally meant to reinforce a status quo (of Catholicism) that no one paying attention believed still existed, but a docuмent which satisfies those who either aren't paying attention, or are, and are just willfully ignorant of the situation.
Besides, he can't give an explanation without looking incompetent (at best). What's he going to say?
"After much deliberation, we've concluded that the man to whom we presented you as a Catholic priest and bishop, is not."
There is literally no explanation that allows Pfeiffer to save face. Ergo, he won't posit one.
Still not entirely sure how he ever thought he'd be able to pull this one over on anyone. It's no secret that he's a revolutionary with an ego, but even at that, did he really expect to be able to keep a sustainable following after inviting Ambrose?
Keep in mind that discerning Catholics have left their place of worship over far more innocent errors than this.
-
Still not entirely sure how he ever thought he'd be able to pull this one over on anyone. It's no secret that he's a revolutionary with an ego, but even at that, did he really expect to be able to keep a sustainable following after inviting Ambrose?
Keep in mind that discerning Catholics have left their place of worship over far more innocent errors than this.
I guess he thought we were (collectively) more stupid and gullible than we (collectively) are.
Again, it seems that Fr. Pfeiffer is not completely in touch with reality. This was a crazy stunt from the start. Did he really think it would work?
And he thinks he's going all Sun-Tsu on us, but in reality all he's managing to pull off is a less savvy version of Bishop Fellay, with a bit of Pope Benedict and Bill Clinton thrown in for good measure.
-
Still not entirely sure how he ever thought he'd be able to pull this one over on anyone. It's no secret that he's a revolutionary with an ego, but even at that, did he really expect to be able to keep a sustainable following after inviting Ambrose?
Keep in mind that discerning Catholics have left their place of worship over far more innocent errors than this.
I guess he thought we were (collectively) more stupid and gullible than we (collectively) are.
Again, it seems that Fr. Pfeiffer is not completely in touch with reality. This was a crazy stunt from the start. Did he really think it would work?
And he thinks he's going all Sun-Tsu on us, but in reality all he's managing to pull off is a less savvy version of Bishop Fellay, with a bit of Pope Benedict and Bill Clinton thrown in for good measure.
But there are still people will to kill/die for thi$ guy! I know! Because Pfeifferistan has existed before Pfeifferville!
-
The moment I watched Fr. Pfeiffer's videos, I was deeply disturbed, because of his passionate nature.
I have passionate nature too, and I will tell you, it is a breeding ground for the ego!
And what breeds schism?
Ego. Inability to humble yourself.
I just am afraid Fr. Pfeiffer is too much a firebrand to take positions of serious leadership, because he is volatile. Part of what made Abp. Lefebvre a great leader was his diplomacy and Patience. He should really be a low level priest with no serious leadership positions. IMHO.