Author Topic: OLMC Official Statement Regarding Ambrose Moran (Read 10673 times)

Gregory I · « **Reply #45 on:** November 11, 2015, 09:07:39 PM »

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.

PAT317 · « **Reply #46 on:** November 11, 2015, 09:08:14 PM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: MaterDominici
Quote from: Centroamerica

Personally, I think it is very probable that he was ordained a Catholic priest.

By whom?

And by what evidence?

Quote from: Centroamerica

This seems to support that as well...

Quote from: Posted by suzanneromano Wed Nov 11, 2015 9:27 pm
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.

PAT317 · « **Reply #47 on:** November 11, 2015, 10:02:04 PM »

Quote from: PAT317

Quote from: TKGS
Quote from: MaterDominici
Quote from: Centroamerica

Personally, I think it is very probable that he was ordained a Catholic priest.

By whom?

And by what evidence?

Quote from: Centroamerica
This seems to support that as well...

Quote
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Already this post is out of date.

Quote from: Post by suzanneromano » Thu Nov 12, 2015 3:29 am

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.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #48 on:** November 11, 2015, 10:10:49 PM »

Quote from: PAT317

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.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #49 on:** November 12, 2015, 01:24:02 AM »

Quote from: Gregory I

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:

Quote

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?

.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #50 on:** November 12, 2015, 01:50:34 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

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?

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #51 on:** November 12, 2015, 02:23:30 AM »

.

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.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #52 on:** November 12, 2015, 02:33:16 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

Quote from: Neil Obstat
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.

.

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #53 on:** November 12, 2015, 11:26:01 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

Quote from: PAT317
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.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #54 on:** November 12, 2015, 11:15:07 PM »

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.

Matthew · « **Reply #55 on:** November 12, 2015, 11:41:35 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

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.

AJNC · « **Reply #56 on:** November 12, 2015, 11:47:00 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Mithrandylan

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!

Gregory I · « **Reply #57 on:** November 12, 2015, 11:47:38 PM »

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.