|
|
Post by Fidelis on Aug 13, 2019 1:04:17 GMT
Have you ever heard or read a transcript of Fr. Pfeiffer's "barking dog" sermon of May 2012? It can be found here. This was the old-Fr. Pfeiffer we all knew and loved. This was the priest who loudly and emphatically denounced errors and 'bastard' priests and Masses, who pointed out we cannot hold an 'economy of silence' when it comes to the SSPX's errors. This is what we used to be able to depend on, a true shepherd who defends his flock and shows the thorn-strewn pitfalls to be avoided. I recall also in a conference where Father Pfeiffer encouraged the faithful to abandon him if he veered off the Faith. |
|
|
|
Post by Juan Diego on Aug 13, 2019 3:40:45 GMT
Im you embarrass yourself with the nonsense. You show your true colors, insincerity with every post you make. You sent an unsolicited letter in email, yet you want people to ask you for the reply of Fr. Hewko. That’s ridiculous. Have you no shame? It’s already been stated with example of elderly people who do not write emails that you wrote to. The people you sent emails to didn’t ask you to email them when you started the email campaign and you had no problem sending what you wanted to them. Where is your decency to provide them with Fr. Hewko’s reply? here’s what you wrote Aug. 3: Im from July 30 to Aug 3 you had no problem with making lengthy posts on this forum voicing yourself while at the same time ignoring to answer whom you choose and what you want to avoid addressing which is about sending Fr. Hewko's answer to you by email to those who you wrote to in the first place. In that time a dozen posts you made on the forum!!!!!! Yet Aug 3rd you have the audacity to ask for pardon due to your “slowness” and “busy schedules”. Here it is another WEEK later and you’re still dragging your feet to reply to the emails giving excuses and now making a request on top of it. You have a lot of nerve. All those you solicited don’t read here.
This is the bad fruit result of going against the truth, going against Church teaching in exchange for a cult mentality. There’s a reason people have separated from OLMC and have turned to Fr. Hewko. The trust in OLMC for the faithful has been destroyed by the actions of those connected with OLMC over and over now. All priests deserve respect as do the laity but you disrespect Fr. Hewko and you try to distract with the pretending to be upright. It doesn’t work. You embarrass yourselves.
The kind words from Fr. Hewko’s reply to you July 26:
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 13, 2019 9:57:06 GMT
Dear friends,
I would just like to make a point, one that I have made before, but that bears repeating.
Threads and posts that address issues and concerns about OLMC and/or Moran are not meant to be an attack. They are simply meant to warn. St. Augustine tells us that it is better for the truth to be known than a scandal covered up.
Moran is extremely doubtful. The very "bishop" who supposedly ordained him is reported to be a janitor and not a real bishop, and this is reported by the Orthodox themselves. This, in addition to the forged documents, forged photographs, etc. practically screams at us to avoid him. With what sadness did many of us hear that he is becoming accepted in OLMC circles, that he is administering doubtful "Sacraments" to our once-fellow laity; that he continues to be privately promoted as valid by OLMC priests and seminarians.
If The Catacombs was out for blood, so to speak, there are other things that could be publicized in an effort to embarrass OLMC (and other forums have done so) but this has not been done here. The issues discussed here are about the faith. I had to ban someone just a few weeks ago who (incidentally keeps coming back) who has such a loathing for OLMC that their posts continually castigate and excoriate OLMC. I always end up deleting their account as that is not what The Catacombs is here for. That type of vitriol toward OLMC is welcomed at Cathinfo but not here.
It was only in an effort to warn souls once again to beware this doubtful "bishop" that this thread was started. I have no doubt that these souls inviting Moran think they are doing the right thing. I know at least one of them, and that person is a good soul. But they themselves have admitted that it was been repeatedly drummed into their head by OLMC priests, OLMC seminarians, and OLMC friends that Moran is valid. And Moran getting invited into OLMC chapels and giving Confirmations is the fruit of that insistence on his "validity," all the while ignoring the utter lack of "legitimacy." It is for these good souls, who simply think they are doing the right thing, following their priest but not realizing the Church forbids us to receive doubtful Sacraments, that these threads are started. It is with these souls in mind and who are uppermost in my thoughts when Moran is brought up yet again.
Dear friends, let us remain firmly united in the true Faith. Let us pray for not only each other but those whose souls are dear to us, who are being misled out of a false sense of obedience, a false sense of charity. We must be loyal to the Faith and not to persons. Did we not repeat that over and over when Bp. Williamson's 'grace in the New Mass' caused souls to defend the man vigorously while ignoring the error? We have been down this road before.
God bless you all and may Our dear Heavenly Mother pour down abundant graces on you all as we approach Her great Feast of the Assumption.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 11:54:45 GMT
With what sadness did many of us hear that he is becoming accepted in OLMC circles, that he is administering doubtful "Sacraments" to our once-fellow laity; that he continues to be privately promoted as valid by OLMC priests and seminarians. I would like to know what are Fr. Pfeiffer's grounds for still accepting Ambrose Moran as a valid bishop when he, Fr. Pfeiffer, said in his last conference that he contacted again the Orthodox cathedral where Ambrose Moran was supposedly consecrated a bishop and his certainty about the consecration taking place became a doubt. We also know that Fr. Pfeiffer has even more doubt that Ambrose Moran was consecrated a bishop by Cardinal Slipyj. So, I would like to know, what are the grounds for Fr. Pfeiffer still accepting Ambrose Moran as a valid bishop. Perhaps immaculatemary or some one OLMC supporter can help answer this. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 15, 2019 14:17:49 GMT
I was forwarded this last evening from Moran's YouTube channel.
It was published August 14, 2019
Title: "Confirmation in Wisconsin - August 2019"
Presumably, Moran has these people's permission to post their pictures in this video. Whether or not they are OLMC parishioners is unclear at this time. Even if they are not, which is unlikely since that it the only group who will accept him in any way - Catholic or Orthodox - it is obvious that it was through a certain resistance group's advocacy of him (via published conferences, etc.) that there exists a public knowledge of him. Prior to this Moran was known to only a few small circles which, as far as the records show, he was dismissed from: the Orthodox themselves, the sedevacantists, etc.
It is hard to have to speak this way about anyone, let alone a possible clergyman. It seems obvious that the souls receiving "sacraments" from him were told he is legitimate. But this is not reality. Therefore we must speak out and speak the truth of the situation: Moran is shrouded in doubt.
As Catholics we must avoid doubtful Sacraments. We don't have a choice to pick and choose which of the Church's teachings we will follow. That is Protestantism. If the Church says to avoid doubtful Sacraments, we must do so. That fact that Moran is doubtful is the very reason for OLMC's disassociation from him.
Let us continue to warn our fellow Catholics, in a sense of fraternal charity, to avoid seeking sacraments from Moran, avoid interaction with Moran - he is extremely doubtful at this time. His lack of credentials alone is enough to stay away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2019 16:39:30 GMT
Very sad indeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermenegild on Aug 17, 2019 15:57:45 GMT
Let me know if I’m mistaken but it looks like some of those being confirmed are siblings of one of the OLMc seminarians.
|
|
|
|
Post by Juan Diego on Aug 17, 2019 22:17:46 GMT
Oh yeah three children of OLMC chapel coordinator that’s a fact and their brother is in OLMC seminary. I don’t know of any seminarian there who has a problem with Moran because more than one are contacting faithful who rejected OLMC over this issue defending the insanity including Moran in various states. These are young men, with little life experience going along with what is repeated to them over and over in KY. Fr. Hewko warned about this only 6 months ago! Fr. Hewko : |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 18, 2019 13:05:36 GMT
Oh yeah three children of OLMC chapel coordinator that’s a fact and their brother is in OLMC seminary. I don’t know of any seminarian there who has a problem with Moran because more than one are contacting faithful who rejected OLMC over this issue defending the insanity including Moran in various states. These are young men, with little life experience going along with what is repeated to them over and over in KY. Fr. Hewko warned about this only 6 months ago! Fr. Hewko :
This was a good reminder of how hard Fr. Hewko had to work get even get the word "disassociation" into Fr. Pfeiffer's "Disassociation Statement."
It has been known for months now that Moran is still upheld as valid and legitimate but since his (un-doctored?) paperwork is not in order, OLMC cannot use his "episcopal services."
But sadly, dear friends, look at the similarities -intentional or coincidental, we know not - of how Moran first came on the 'scene' a year ago and how he is appearing again now. The first time is was quiet and secretive until the "reordination of Fr. Poisson" was public. And this is how he is appearing now, quietly, unofficially, until his "episcopal services" are publicized on YouTube. This is not bearing good fruit.
Let us continue to keep all in our prayers! Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by QMaryLArmy on Aug 19, 2019 2:49:12 GMT
Many of Fr. Pfeiffer's faithful from OLMC have separated themselves, but few continued on in their errors despite of clear warnings! The mass was at the house and the confirmation was done in Wisconsin's chapel of the same owner! One of the girls being confirmed was his daughter for sure. I was the former altar boy/men there! and no longer (going with Fr. Hewko.)
|
|
|
|
Post by QMaryLArmy on Aug 19, 2019 3:25:48 GMT
Let me know if I’m mistaken but it looks like some of those being confirmed are siblings of one of the OLMc seminarians. If you know the seminarian, then you're correct! |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 19, 2019 10:01:35 GMT
Many of Fr. Pfeiffer's faithful from OLMC have separated themselves, but few continued on in their errors despite of clear warnings! The mass was at the house and the confirmation was done in Wisconsin's chapel of the same owner! One of the girls being confirmed was his daughter for sure. I was the former altar boy/men there! and no longer (going with Fr. Hewko.)
Thank you, QMaryLArmy, for giving some clarity to this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2019 11:39:48 GMT
Many of Fr. Pfeiffer's faithful from OLMC have separated themselves, but few continued on in their errors despite of clear warnings! The mass was at the house and the confirmation was done in Wisconsin's chapel of the same owner! One of the girls being confirmed was his daughter for sure. I was the former altar boy/men there! and no longer (going with Fr. Hewko.) Do you know whether either or both were done with Fr. Pfeiffer's explicit approval? |
|
|
|
Post by QMaryLArmy on Aug 20, 2019 2:23:07 GMT
Many of Fr. Pfeiffer's faithful from OLMC have separated themselves, but few continued on in their errors despite of clear warnings! The mass was at the house and the confirmation was done in Wisconsin's chapel of the same owner! One of the girls being confirmed was his daughter for sure. I was the former altar boy/men there! and no longer (going with Fr. Hewko.) Do you know whether either or both were done with Fr. Pfeiffer's explicit approval? No I don't. A valid bishop needs an approval from a priest?  . But the owner and I had a quick chat on the phone with Mr. Ambrose for some clarifications before. I assume that the owner (owns a manufacturing company) took it upon himself to invite Ambrose over. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 11:42:29 GMT
Do you know whether either or both were done with Fr. Pfeiffer's explicit approval? No I don't. A valid bishop needs an approval from a priest? . But the owner and I had a quick chat on the phone with Mr. Ambrose for some clarifications before. I assume that the owner (owns a manufacturing company) took it upon himself to invite Ambrose over. It's not that a bishop needs approval from a priest. However, Fr. Pfeiffer has shown that he is possessive of the missions he serves (recall Australia). Therefore, I would think that the owner would first get Father's approval, but I could be wrong of course in this case. |
|
. But the owner and I had a quick chat on the phone with Mr. Ambrose for some clarifications before. I assume that the owner (owns a manufacturing company) took it upon himself to invite Ambrose over.