|
Post by Admin on Jan 23, 2019 18:38:02 GMT
We are most grateful to SSPX-MC for providing this copy of Fr. Pfeiffer's video.
Please note: In good conscience, we can no longer support the promotion of videos from the 469 Fitter Channel for a variety of reasons, including immorality.
+++
TRANSCRIPT
[Many thanks to the good soul who typed out this from the video!]
January 23rd, 2019 St. Emerentiana Dear Friends and Benefactors, The final decision on the case of Archbishop Ambrose Moran and Our Lady of Mount Carmel Seminary is as follows: After a long investigation, it is concluded that while the Archbishop is a valid Bishop there are nonetheless unexplained anomalies related to his case which have not been able to be verified as true since evidence points in multiple directions in these anomalies. Ample time has been given to clear up these anomalies, but the results are inconclusive. Proper sufficient ecclesiastical authentication is therefore lacking. Hence, the Archbishop cannot be used in his episcopal powers for Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Seminary. The following note was sent to the Archbishop, on Jan. 16th, 2019 last week. May God bless all the Investigators, both here and abroad, who worked diligently and thoroughly in this matter without bias, intimidation, or coercion as well as all those souls who have manifested their prayers, sacrifices, and legitimate concerns on this case. May all those who have spread unfounded gossip and twisted tales be forgiven and beg forgiveness for the spreading of evil. As for myself, I am sorry for any of my failings in this matter as well. I do not wish to turn down the gifts of Our Lady or to move forward rashly, hence the slow movement forward in this case. May God bless each and every one, and may Our Holy Mother Mary let us persevere in the great battle of the faith by keeping in the whole unblemished, and entire to hand down to the next generation what we have received. In Christ, Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer Rector Our Lady of Mount Carmel Seminary ***
|
|
|
Post by hermenegild on Jan 23, 2019 19:08:41 GMT
So this leaves Father Poisson where exactly?
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jan 23, 2019 19:34:34 GMT
Comment of SSPX-MC under the video:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2019 1:42:00 GMT
So this leaves Father Poisson where exactly? It puts Fr Poisson in need of prayers. It is through no fault of his own that he is a priest in today's times and wants to help save souls. He preaches a strong devotion to Our Lady and also that Vatican ll and the new mass is straight from Hell (meaning it definately can't give grace) which puts him in a very small minority of todays priests. What should he do? If he continues with OLMC we will whinge he hasn't been conditionally ordained, legitimately. If he asks B. Williamson or any of the SSPX bishops for ordination we will whinge he is a modernist and compromiser. If he goes back to FSSP we will whinge he is a modernist and coward. If he leaves Catholic tradition in any way shape or form we will whinge that not enough priests have come forward to help defend the faith. No matter what happens someone is going to give him grief. The second he turned up on the scene it was implied from a certain few individuals he was from a shady background of child abuse, although none had the backbone to accuse him directly. We can all help by praying for the poor man.
|
|
|
Post by peterd on Jan 24, 2019 3:41:21 GMT
I am confused by at least two things here:
1) If OLMC has made slow movement forward in this case, what does it mean that Fr. Poisson was consecrated by Ambrose Moran this past summer? How is that slow movement? That appears to me and it should to others a completed movement.
2) What is the Official site of OLMC for statements? The website I thought was it is still promoting Ambrose Moran as their bishop.
|
|
|
Post by hermenegild on Jan 24, 2019 16:23:00 GMT
When I ask about Fr. Poisson, what I mean is is he now off circuit since the statements of Fr. Pfeiffer about not using this bishop? If the bishop isn't right to use now, he wasn't right to use in July, right? Any past use of the bishop is null and void, yes or no?
|
|
nick
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by nick on Jan 25, 2019 2:56:47 GMT
So this leaves Father Poisson where exactly? It puts Fr Poisson in need of prayers. It is through no fault of his own that he is a priest in today's times and wants to help save souls. He preaches a strong devotion to Our Lady and also that Vatican ll and the new mass is straight from Hell (meaning it definately can't give grace) which puts him in a very small minority of todays priests. What should he do? If he continues with OLMC we will whinge he hasn't been conditionally ordained, legitimately. If he asks B. Williamson or any of the SSPX bishops for ordination we will whinge he is a modernist and compromiser. If he goes back to FSSP we will whinge he is a modernist and coward. If he leaves Catholic tradition in any way shape or form we will whinge that not enough priests have come forward to help defend the faith. No matter what happens someone is going to give him grief. The second he turned up on the scene it was implied from a certain few individuals he was from a shady background of child abuse, although none had the backbone to accuse him directly. We can all help by praying for the poor man. In short, unless the Priest or Bishop is from SSPX, everyone will frown, and avoid them! The Novus Ordo has much more empathy.
|
|
nick
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by nick on Jan 25, 2019 3:03:25 GMT
I am confused by at least two things here:
1) If OLMC has made slow movement forward in this case, what does it mean that Fr. Poisson was consecrated by Ambrose Moran this past summer? How is that slow movement? That appears to me and it should to others a completed movement.
2) What is the Official site of OLMC for statements? The website I thought was it is still promoting Ambrose Moran as their bishop.
peterd, rather than ask the forum members, it is better to ask OLMC. The Priests should be able to answer your questions. If you want hot gossip, go to Cathinfo. Rather than spread the Faith and follow the Great Commission, Cathinfo that has the blessings of the Anti-OLMC hierarchy and the Ecumenical-Traditionalists have started a thread with acronyms on OLMC, to outdo each other with their intellectual abilities. Hopefully this forum will not devolve to that level of intellectualism.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 25, 2019 13:12:13 GMT
It puts Fr Poisson in need of prayers. It is through no fault of his own that he is a priest in today's times and wants to help save souls. He preaches a strong devotion to Our Lady and also that Vatican ll and the new mass is straight from Hell (meaning it definately can't give grace) which puts him in a very small minority of todays priests. What should he do? If he continues with OLMC we will whinge he hasn't been conditionally ordained, legitimately. If he asks B. Williamson or any of the SSPX bishops for ordination we will whinge he is a modernist and compromiser. If he goes back to FSSP we will whinge he is a modernist and coward. If he leaves Catholic tradition in any way shape or form we will whinge that not enough priests have come forward to help defend the faith. No matter what happens someone is going to give him grief. The second he turned up on the scene it was implied from a certain few individuals he was from a shady background of child abuse, although none had the backbone to accuse him directly. We can all help by praying for the poor man. In short, unless the Priest or Bishop is from SSPX, everyone will frown, and avoid them! The Novus Ordo has much more empathy.
I don't think there is one soul who doesn't compassionate Fr. Poisson's situation. When he joined OLMC both Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko said he needed to be reordained. The explanation given was that while Fr. Poisson was ordained in the old [traditional] rite; the consecrating bishop was consecrated in the new [Novus Ordo] rite.
This understanding of the need of a reordination was in line with the teachings of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. In a letter regarding reordinations quoted in an article by the Dominicans of Avrille, the Archbishop wrote the following:
The Dominicans went further to comment that [as in Fr. Poisson's case] that:
But how exactly this leaves Fr. Poisson now after a reordination by Bp. Ambrose Moran in July of 2018 is confusing and will hopefully be clarified. Fr. Pfeiffer has written [in the OP] that: It is a fair question to ask what is to become of Fr. Poisson. There is no attack in asking this question. In summary, we were told in the spring of 2018 that Fr. Poisson needed to be reordained. He was in July of 2018 but by a bishop who the Rector states now cannot be used. So the issue going forward is unclear to many. Is Fr. Poisson to remain on the Mass circuit? Again, this is a fair and balanced question.
We whole-heartedly agree with Hammerandchisel that the best we can do now for Fr. Poisson is pray for him. He has a great devotion to Our Lady and She will surely protect him after enlightening him to leave the Fraternity of St. Peter. Divine Providence will surely provide a solution to this situation.
|
|
|
Post by S.A.G. on Jan 25, 2019 23:47:48 GMT
New channel from OLMC. The first video on the channel is Fr. Pfeiffer's message from Jan 23rd with a final statement added that states the disassociation is final.
|
|
|
Post by Juan Diego on Jan 26, 2019 0:46:25 GMT
Among other problems with this statement, first of all he's not a Catholic bishop!
|
|
|
Post by Juan Diego on Jan 27, 2019 16:01:24 GMT
On the Official Statement of OLMC Seminary regarding Ambrose Moran 26 January 2019 This above video contains the official and final statement of the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Seminary in Boston, Kentucky regarding Ambrose Moran.
In this post, I expressed great dissatisfaction with the first communication of Fr. Pfeiffer regarding his putting a stop to using Ambrose Moran’s episcopal services. Since then, a new communication was posted on January 23, 2019 that included the first communication with additional material. Let us more closely examine some parts of this new communication. “After a long investigation, it is concluded that while the Archbishop is a valid Bishop….”How did Fr. Pfeiffer come to this conclusion with certainty? The truth is that, even if we grant that Ambrose Moran was consecrated by schismatic bishops, we cannot have a moral certitude that he is a valid bishop without the competent Church authorities thoroughly investigating his case. See here and here for more information regarding this matter. Ahh, but according to Fr. Pfeiffer, Ambrose Moran was consecrated a bishop in 1976 by Bishop Hryhorij, who was Catholic at the time, at the Holy Protection Cathedral. There were even, again according to Fr. Pfeiffer, other Catholic bishops who acted as co-consecrators at the same ceremony. “….there are nonetheless unexplained anomalies related to his case which have not been able to be verified as true since evidence points in multiple directions in these anomalies. Ample time has been given to clear up these anomalies, but the results are inconclusive. Proper sufficient ecclesiastical authentication is therefore lacking. Hence, the Archbishop cannot be used in his episcopal powers for Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Seminary.”Hold on. Fr. Pfeiffer started off asserting that Ambrose Moran is a valid bishop. Then he proceeds with putting into question that which he had just asserted as true. Well, is he a valid bishop or not? If he is a valid bishop consecrated by Catholic bishops, then what’s the problem? After all, it cannot be a show stopper that he is a liar because Fr. Pfeiffer, as attested by others, has stated that even if Ambrose Moran was found to have lied about being consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipyj, that would not stop him from using his ministerial services. On the other hand, if he is not a valid bishop, then what are these anomalies that put into question his validity? I think it is only fair that Fr. Pfeiffer brings forth these anomalies after spending so much time in sermons, conferences, and private discussions asserting that Ambrose Moran is a valid bishop and even criticizing those who questioned this assertion. The communication in the video then proceeds with reiterating the first communication followed by thanksgiving to those who have helped investigate the Ambrose Moran case and then making an apology. I found the bolded word (emphasis mine) peculiar in the apology: “As for myself, I am sorry for any of my failings in this matter as well. I do not wish to turn down the gifts of Our Lady or to move forward rashly, hence the slow movement forward in this case.”Should that not read “did“? I am fairly certain that the communication would have been proofread over and over again before publication. That the disassociation from Ambrose Moran is final and no longer open for debate is stated in the communication in the video, but it was not stated in the same communication posted on The Catacombs Forum. Hmm. Strange. After reading this final communication, the question is: Is this communication sufficient to support again the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church and Seminary for those who withdrew support? I do not believe so. Here are my reasons: 1. I do not believe that this is a sincere retraction. Up until a couple of weeks ago, Fr. Pfeiffer was moving in the direction to further use Ambrose Moran for his episcopal services. I say “further” because remember that he used Ambrose Moran to conditionally ordain Fr. Poisson in July 2018. Fr. Pfeiffer heated up his promotion and defence of Ambrose Moran over the last few months despite the fact that priests and faithful, including mission coordinators, were trying to convince him otherwise. It was only when Fr. Hewko made his threat to leave OLMC did Fr. Pfeiffer stop. Furthermore, the first communication, which was awful, was all that Fr. Pfeiffer was originally going to issue. It was only after being pressed did he issue the second communication. 2. The conditions that caused Fr. Pfeiffer to bring Ambrose Moran back from the dead have not gone away. Remember that in November 2015 OLMC made a declaration that it would not associate with Ambrose Moran. Many of us came back after leaving at that time on the trust and hope that Ambrose Moran was gone for good. Fr. Pfeiffer broke our trust by, without prior announcement, having Ambrose Moran conditionally ordain Fr. Poisson. Now, the same as in 2015, Fr. Pfeiffer needs a bishop for his apostolate and seminary. The situation will only get more desperate from here forward. All Fr. Hewko did was place a stopgap measure in the process. Therefore, I don’t believe Ambrose Moran is gone for good. And as the saying goes, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” 3. Faced with the facts as was Mr. Gregory Taylor, who was commissioned by Fr. Pfeiffer himself to investigate the Ambrose Moran case, the only prudent outcome is to call Ambrose Moran what he is, a liar. Instead, Fr. Pfeiffer uses weak terms like “inconclusive”. The reality is that Fr. Pfeiffer should denounce Ambrose Moran for the liar he is and to reject his ministerial services even if it can be proven with a moral certitude that he is a valid bishop. We do not need shady characters like Ambrose Moran in the Resistance. 4. In addition to denouncing Ambrose Moran, there should be some form of reparation made on the part of OLMC. First of all, to use Ambrose Moran for the conditional ordination of Fr. Poisson is, objectively speaking, an act of sacrilege because there is not a moral certitude that Ambrose Moran is a valid bishop. And even if there was a moral certitude that he is a valid bishop, the same conditional ordination would still be morally reprehensible, if not also an act of sacrilege, because Ambrose Moran to this day refuses to publicly admit and repent of his public schismatic past. Secondly, OLMC has done much damage to the unity of the Resistance with this Ambrose Moran affair (and for the second time). Next to Bishop Williamson’s public statement about the moral acceptability of actively attending the Novus Ordo Mass under certain circumstances, I would place the Ambrose Moran affair second, perhaps even a close second, in the detrimental effect it has had on the unity of the Resistance. Thirdly, Fr. Pfeiffer should not state that “this disassociation is final and not open for debate” if by this he means that he will no longer discuss the reasons for the sudden disassociation. After ramming Ambrose Moran down our throats, causing so much havoc, and criticizing those who provided opposition, elaborating on the “anomalies” seems to be a matter of justice. Let us continue to keep watch and pray! Ecclesia Militans
|
|
|
Post by Juan Diego on Jan 27, 2019 19:22:36 GMT
Instead of protecting the flock a wolf was invited back in. Remember all this information was publicly made known since 2015.
|
|
ajnc
New Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by ajnc on Jan 29, 2019 15:52:17 GMT
It puts Fr Poisson in need of prayers. It is through no fault of his own that he is a priest in today's times and wants to help save souls. He preaches a strong devotion to Our Lady and also that Vatican ll and the new mass is straight from Hell (meaning it definately can't give grace) which puts him in a very small minority of todays priests. What should he do? If he continues with OLMC we will whinge he hasn't been conditionally ordained, legitimately. If he asks B. Williamson or any of the SSPX bishops for ordination we will whinge he is a modernist and compromiser. If he goes back to FSSP we will whinge he is a modernist and coward. If he leaves Catholic tradition in any way shape or form we will whinge that not enough priests have come forward to help defend the faith. No matter what happens someone is going to give him grief. The second he turned up on the scene it was implied from a certain few individuals he was from a shady background of child abuse, although none had the backbone to accuse him directly. We can all help by praying for the poor man. In short, unless the Priest or Bishop is from SSPX, everyone will frown, and avoid them! The Novus Ordo has much more empathy. Just as an aside Nick, I am with the SSPX and none of the priests I know are following this story. I dont know what to make of it. I just wonder why the Rev. Moran did not get himself ordained/consecrated by a Traditional Catholic bishop. There were/are so many around. He has been mixing with the Traditional Catholic movement since the seventies. The quote below concerns the late Bishop Francis Schuckardt founder of the CMRI: Bishop Daniel Quilter Brown had been born and raised a Catholic, but became disenchanted with the reforms of Vatican II and chose to become an Old Roman Catholic bishop in order to perpetuate valid Episcopal Orders. He recognized that the Old Roman Catholics, although schismatic, had nevertheless not fallen into heresy like the modern post-Conciliar Vatican 2 Church and that they also still retained valid Holy Orders. In 1969, Brown received Episcopal consecration as an “Old Roman Catholic” bishop.
Despite the fact that Bishop Brown obtained his consecration in the Old Roman Catholic Church, he and his followers called themselves “Roman Catholics” and refused to use the title of “Old Roman Catholic.” Shortly after his consecration, he broke all ties and communications with the Old Roman Catholics and soon became acquainted with Brother Francis, whom he tried to persuade to accept ordination from him, because “in view of the fact that we cannot exist for long as Catholics without the sacraments, I would propose to ordain to the priesthood a qualified member of your group (from the information I have, this would probably be yourself)...” (Letter from Bishop Brown to Francis Schuckardt - Sept. 17, 1970). Later he offered to consecrate Brother Francis to the episcopacy in addition to ordaining him to the priesthood.
Brother Francis sought the advice of some traditional Catholic priests, most notably Fr. Burton Fraser, S.J., about Bishop Brown's proposal. He was advised that under the grave circumstances which presently engulfed the Church, that it was well within Catholic law and principles to accept consecration from Bishop Brown. Nevertheless, even though the Catholic Church acknowledges the validity of Old Catholics Orders, Brother Francis told Bishop Brown that he was unwilling to receive Holy Orders from him because of the schismatic origins of his consecration.
There upon Bishop Brown openly repented of having received consecration from the Old Roman Catholics, made a public “Abjuration of Error and Profession of Faith” to the Catholic Church, confessed his sins and received absolution from a traditional priest. Bishop Brown’s return to the Catholic Church cleared the sole obstacle that obstructed Brother Francis from receiving consecration from him.
On October 28, 1971, in the presence of some loyal Fatima Crusaders, Bishop Brown tonsured and bestowed the four Minor Orders on Francis Schuckardt. On October 29, 1971, Bishop Brown conferred the Major Orders of Subdeacon and Deacon upon him. On October 31, 1971, Bishop Brown ordained Francis Schuckardt to the priesthood, and on November 1, 1971, the Feast of All Saints, Bishop Brown consecrated Fr. Francis Schuckardt a bishop according to the traditional Roman Catholic Rite. The fact of his consecration and the source of his Episcopal Orders were not announced publicly until December 8, 1971. He celebrated his first public Mass for the Community at Mary, Immaculate Queen Church in northern Idaho on December 12, 1971. All but a tiny fraction of the Community accepted his consecration. www.bishopjosephmarie.org/doctrine/Godasmywitness.html
|
|
|
Post by Juan Diego on Feb 2, 2019 22:37:03 GMT
Hermenegild now we know the answer to your question how he will be utilized at OLMC...with him on altar last night and today at OLMC.
Sermon Father Poisson First Friday February 1, 2019 posted
and Taking Of The Cassock February 2, 2019.
|
|