|
Post by kelley on Nov 18, 2018 20:45:44 GMT
Archbishop Lefebvre Speaks:This is the Archbishop simply handing down what he received: a solid Thomistic formation from Fr. Henri Le Floch at the French Seminary in Rome.
In explaining Church teaching, Aquinas instructs, that in the case of the administration of Sacraments, Catholics have a strict obligation to avoid matters of doubt and find the surest means possible. This basic precept is one of the biggest reasons why many of us have left the Conciliar Church in the first place to follow Tradition.
This Church teaching especially needs to be applied when considering the great disturbance surrounding Ambrose Moran. As a priestly son of the Archbishop, Fr. Pfeiffer would do well to follow his spiritual father's wise guidance in this matter.
Regardless of Father's opinion and subjective certainty on Moran's status, there still remains serious, objective doubt from independent Ecclesiastical sources (especially in lacking official evidence from Santa Sophia Church on the consecration by Cardinal Slipyi). This is fact and not opinion; and as such, it shrouds the matter in an unmistakable element of doubt.
For this basic reason alone - because we are NOT able to be morally certain - we must avoid doubtful things and walk away from any Sacramental association with Ambrose Moran. Until these objective and credible sources can be definitively and morally certified, there essentially remains an element of doubt; and as such, there is an obligation to follow the Church’s teaching and avoid the situation. In this guise, rather than campaign a message which glosses over a doubtful situation, Father should reassure the faithful's trust with his caution and continued diligence to obtain absolute moral certitude.
Instead, Father hastily promotes a subordinate’s conditional ordination by this “bishop” without moral certainty of legitimacy; and in these last two conferences, he seems intent on directing souls to accept what is “probably” certain. To me, this is not only a departure from the Archbishop’s guiding principles but a reckless exercise in judgement and prudence.
This concept of accepting possible “deception, trickery, or falsehood”; and the resolution to “leave it in the hands of God and accept a man at his word” - is simply NOT Catholic, it's wrong. For, as we’re reminded by the Archbishop’s sure Thomistic compass, when it comes to the Sacraments, avoiding situations of doubt is definitive Church teaching; it's our obligation.
Let us pray in earnest to Our Lady of the Rosary, that she continue to dissipate this confusion and ask God to provide a bishop in the model of +Marcel Lefebvre and spare us from imprudently accepting someone surrounded with uncertainty and doubt. If this is the Will of God, He will remove all doubtful things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 0:38:11 GMT
Yes I do EM. Until the Blessed Mother definitively shows me otherwise. The Blessed Mother is showing you. She expects you to use your God-given reason by looking at the facts and adding 2+2. Don't fall into the same trap of those who blindly followed their priests into the Novus Ordo, the SSPX priests into the neo-SSPX, and the Resistance priests into the false resistance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 1:18:15 GMT
Kelley's advice is the best caution and wisdom to be presented to date. The Archbishop is the One to follow for he speaks the language of Our Lord. I am listening and I will adhere to the warnings. Em, I am not following blindly. Truly, I am not. I pray and wait. These days it is of monumental difficulty to sort out all of the he said she said... I have my doubts and concerns. I will be most cautious. I am 70 years old. I went through the changes of VII having been taught by the good Franciscan nuns. I watch and pray. There are not any Traditional Catholics where I live and I live in a very remote place... 4 1/2 hours to Mass one way. Fr. Pfeiffer has helped to keep my Faith alive. I will not throw him out with the bath water but caution and doubt has been a significant entity. Thank you Kelley you have helped.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 12:43:15 GMT
Kelley's advice is the best caution and wisdom to be presented to date. The Archbishop is the One to follow for he speaks the language of Our Lord. I am listening and I will adhere to the warnings. Em, I am not following blindly. Truly, I am not. I pray and wait. These days it is of monumental difficulty to sort out all of the he said she said... I have my doubts and concerns. I will be most cautious. I am 70 years old. I went through the changes of VII having been taught by the good Franciscan nuns. I watch and pray. There are not any Traditional Catholics where I live and I live in a very remote place... 4 1/2 hours to Mass one way. Fr. Pfeiffer has helped to keep my Faith alive. I will not throw him out with the bath water but caution and doubt has been a significant entity. Thank you Kelley you have helped. Good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 15:45:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 19, 2018 16:42:49 GMT
It would be great if the old 2015 videos of the bishop at OLMC were re-posted.
In those videos the bishop introduced himself and was interviewed by Fr. Hewko.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 17:09:19 GMT
In what way is he legitimate?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 17:11:09 GMT
Nick, I will not continue with your silliness. If you have some opposition to anything I wrote on Ambrose Moran showing him being a fraud in regards to being consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipyj, please point it out directly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 19:04:58 GMT
In what way is he legitimate?
How many times does a forum member or Father have to answer a question for you to accept that an answer has been given?
I choose Father's facts.
Let us now listen to the sermons linked above and hear what Bishop Ambrose has to say. That is just and prudent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 20:21:17 GMT
"If you have some opposition to anything I wrote on Ambrose Moran showing him being a fraud in regards to being consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipyj, please point it out directly."
That's very clever of you EM, very carefully worded.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 19, 2018 20:30:55 GMT
"If you have some opposition to anything I wrote on Ambrose Moran showing him being a fraud in regards to being consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipyj, please point it out directly." That's very clever of you EM, very carefully worded. In all fairness, though EM and I have not agreed on many points in the last several weeks to months, he has consistently focused on the accuracy of the claims of a consecration by Cardinal Slipyj.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 22:07:12 GMT
"If you have some opposition to anything I wrote on Ambrose Moran showing him being a fraud in regards to being consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipyj, please point it out directly." That's very clever of you EM, very carefully worded. In all fairness, though EM and I have not agreed on many points in the last several weeks to months, he has consistently focused on the accuracy of the claims of a consecration by Cardinal Slipyj. The central claim is that Ambrose Moran was consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 22:07:56 GMT
"If you have some opposition to anything I wrote on Ambrose Moran showing him being a fraud in regards to being consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipyj, please point it out directly." That's very clever of you EM, very carefully worded. In all fairness, though EM and I have not agreed on many points in the last several weeks to months, he has consistently focused on the accuracy of the claims of a consecration by Cardinal Slipyj. Yes. Thanks. It really all comes down to this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2018 22:09:41 GMT
In what way is he legitimate?
How many times does a forum member or Father have to answer a question for you to accept that an answer has been given?
I choose Father's facts.
Let us now listen to the sermons linked above and hear what Bishop Ambrose has to say. That is just and prudent.
1) Ambrose Moran claims he was consecrated in 1976 by Cardinal Slipyj, Bishop Borecky, and Bishop Dimitri: ambrosemoran.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/ambrose0022.jpg 2) Ambrose Moran claims Bishop Borecky wrote him a letter dated August 26, 1976 (shortly after the alleged consecration) that he, Ambrose Moran, was appointed the successor to Cardinal Slipyj: ambrosemoran.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/ambrose0021.jpg 3) The following letter dated June 30, 1980 was written by William Moran to Bishop Borecky: www.ecclesiamilitans.com/Letter_Fr._Moran_June_30_1980.pdfThis letter was obtained from Fr. Bohdan Bilinksy of the Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy of Toronto who found it in the archives of the eparchy: www.ucet.ca/chancery_193.htmIn this letter: a) William Moran addresses himself as a priest (Fr. Moran) and not as a Bishop. b) William Moran requests a reference letter from Bishop Borecky, one of the bishops that Ambrose Moran claims consecrated him, to join a schismatic Orthodox sect (Orthodox Church of America), so that he may finally be canonically regularized. Note: The letter is point #2 above was not found in the Eparchy of Toronto archives. 4) Orthodox priest, Fr. Tosi, confirms that William Moran applied to the Orthodox Church of America as an archimandrite (honorary title for Eastern Catholic and Orthodox priests) but was not accepted: www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2018/07/31/the-june-30-1980-letter-of-william-moran-to-bishop-borecky/oca.org/about/chancery-staff Please refute these facts, Therese.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2018 0:05:31 GMT
Yes agreed you have kept this about the consecration by Cardinal Slipyj, EM, but in all due respect this thread isn't about your claims, rather about Fr Pfeiffer's latest conference on the matter, hence what the comments should be on. I'm not interested in your views at this point. I am wondering however if the Orthodox Bishops are still valid, if they ever messed with the ceremony and ritual (please excuse the lack of terminology)? Fr Pfeiffer points out the church has always taught they are and can be accepted back in to the Catholic church fairly easily. Or have I misinterpreted?
|
|