Moran back with OLMC -- did he ever leave?

Not open for further replies.


In deference to Flower and Tobias I have passed your opinions of MaryM on to her in a PM. I suggest you take these matters up with her personally. Similar posts will be passed on privately.

Cor Mariae's position is that, since the Fathers are still praying for confirmation from Our Lady AND have yet to finished their research, it is at least seriously imprudent for them to allow Ambrose to publicly function as if he were a true Catholic bishop such as his conditional ordaining of Fr. Poisson and saying Masses for the public at OLMC.

The conclusions of the research carried out by Ecclesia Militans are logical and irrefutable if read through intelligently. This administration finds it regrettable that such research is misrepresented as 'circumstantial' 'uncharitable' or as slandering the Fathers.

Last edited:


Well-Known Member
Recently posted on the Catacombs by "Remy":
(From an email)

Summary of Fr. Pfeiffer’s catechism toward Bishop Ambrose Moran:

Bishop Ambrose Moran was baptized catholic in the Catholic Church of the Roman Rite (proved by an authentic Catholic Baptismal certificate).

He was raised Catholic.

He entered a catholic seminary; fulfilled his seminary pre-ordination three year teaching assignment (proved by news clippings and more).

In 1974, Ordained a priest by an orthodox bishop (Bishop Ilnytskyy).
Bishop Ilnytskyy was a bishop of the "Autocephalous Ukrainian-Orthodox
Church of America", and when he ordained a Father William
Ambrose Moran in the Catholic chapel there in Long Island, he ordained him as a
Catholic priest and he functioned as a Catholic priest under a Catholic
Bishop Boretsky serving with jurisdiction incardinated into the Toronto
Canada Diocese (proved by an incardination letter, Ibid ).

In 1975, he accepted to serve with jurisdiction under Cardinal Slipyj in Rome (news clippings prove this, Ibid ).

In 1975, he was conditionally re-ordained by Cardinal Slipyj; received the customary Adamencium (signed Greek Corporal, Ibid).

In 1976, he consecrated bishop twice; once in secret by Cardinal Slipyj
earlier in that year (supplied by circumstantial evidence, Ibid ); the second was
in July 1976 verified by a certificate of consecration and historical
accounts within an Ukrainian Cathedral in Chicago by an unprecedented
eight bishops.

Bishop Ambrose Moran served as a Ukrainian Bishop under the auspices of the
title “Autocephalous Ukrainian-Orthodox Church of America”. Remembering
the historical union between the Orthodox Bishop Hryhorij, who
established a USA jurisdiction in 1942, and was a bishop who devoted his
whole life trying to unite the Ukrainian church and separate it from
the Russian and Greek churches. He was friends with Cardinal Slipyj,
and worked with Cardinal Slipyj, to try to separate his orthodox
jurisdiction making it into a quasi-jurisdiction with the Ukraine (hence
the title of the jurisdiction “Autocephalous Ukrainian-Orthodox Church
of America” ) allowing one of Bishop Hryhorij’s priests of his
jurisdiction, or Bishop of his jurisdiction, to draw a union with the
Ukrainians under Cardinal Slipyj. In consequence, the “Autocephalous
Ukrainian-Orthodox Church of America” was divided into two parts, one
was in union with Cardinal Slipyj, the other one was not, yet all under
auspice title “Autocephalous Ukrainian-Orthodox Church of America”.
And we have it there in the documents of the Santa Sophia in Rome that
Cardinal Slipyj accepted Bishop Ambrose Moran under his jurisdiction. Hence,
the appearance of “orthodox”, but existing as an Ukrainian Bishop in
jurisdiction under Cardinal Slipyj under the quasi-Orthodox Metropolitan
trying to draw a Ukrainian union through Cardinal Slipyj and Bishop
Hryhorij. One may say ecumenical in outward practice, but through
Cardinal Slipyj life’s work with the Catholic Ukraine and Orthodox, it
was a gain as a conduit for the orthodox to come back to the Catholic
Church. (See Fr. Pfeiffer’s extended comments on this)

In 1983, Bishop Ambrose Moran was appointed the Metropolitan and successor to
the orthodox Bishop Hryhorij. This is where the question or concerns or
doubts come in from the people is primarily that, the word Orthodox is
continually used. However the name of the jurisdiction established in
1942 was called the “Autocephalous Ukrainian-Orthodox Church of
America”. So now it is led under the Ukrainian Bishop, Bishop Ambrose Moran’s
control, in union with Cardinal Slipyj. This is where we heard in a
sermon by Bishop Ambrose Moran (at OLMC) that he has jurisdiction from Cardinal
Slipyj, who himself had received it from Rome to work undercover in
communist countries to establish Catholic states and jurisdictions.

In the following years later however under the tried for union of the
“Autocephalous Ukrainian-Orthodox Church of America” (1970’s – and early
80’s), the union to the Ukraine catholic religion did not succeed. The
subsequent meetings turned into a big disaster and they separated once
again. No thanks to Vatican II promoting each religion to remain as
they are. Which fostered more distrust with Cardinal Slipyj against
modern rome to secretly ordain and consecrate more Catholic priests and

Summary to the main accusations:

Q. “He was ordained a priest and/or consecrated a bishop by an orthodox bishop”.
A. Canon law states clearly a baptized catholic who receives a
sacrament with good intention from an orthodox priest or bishop receives
the sacrament and does NOT receive the penalty. Further it states, if
there was any ‘suspension’ to the new priest or bishop, it is reversed
once officially accepted and assigned a mission in the Church. Father
William Ambrose Moran was truly ordained a catholic priest and served under the
jurisdiction of a Catholic Bishop within the Catholic Church. Many
certificates, documents, newspaper articles and photos show this (Ibid).

Q. “There are alleged ‘forged signatures and doctored photos’”.
A. This was already explained in Fr. Pfeiffer’s talk. It is
understandable through the layers of administration and corrections
inherent to sacramental records needing corrective dates…unable to fix
otherwise. Regarding any ‘doctored photos’ without forensic evidence
remains only an allegation. However, given a doubt by relying only on
face value and subjective thought, one can ponder too if Bishop Ambrose Moran
felt he later needed to have some other verification to his receiving a
SECRET consecration from Cardinal Slipyj and done so to “prove” his
consecration. Think 1980’s and the Vatican II world. One can
speculate. Still, these are only secondary questions that do not outweigh the primary
verification of a certificate of consecration elevating Bishop Ambrose
Moran to the Episcopacy documented on July 1976 within the Ukrainian
Cathedral signed by the eight consecrating bishops. This makes him a
true valid bishop of the Catholic Church.

Q. “But why two consecrations?” A. There could be reason
Cardinal Slipyj joined this conditional consecration to meet the needs
of the Ukrainian faithful wanting to see a visual consecration than the
prior secret one he gave months ago to Bishop Ambrose Moran so to appease the
Ukrainian movement helping to bring the orthodox in union with them
(isn’t that what people are asking for now, a visual consecration?,
Ironic). Moreover, there is a document that suggests this, archived
within the Ukrainian Cathedral in Chicago verified by a letter (in the
Ukraine language) addressed by the orthodox bishop, Bishop Hryhorij, to
the eight consecrating bishops, stating father William Ambrose Moran, Bishop
Ambrose Moran, was already consecrated earlier that summer by Cardinal
Slipyj. This also confirms the knowledge of that secret consecration by
Bishop Ambrose Moran to be true.


Assuming the above to be true, a few things come to my mind:

- If Moran was baptised and reared Catholic, why would he study for and be ordained orthodox?

- How can he be a teacher at a school, in lay clothing, if he was supposedly a seminarian at the same time?

- Why would he feel a need to be consecrated twice? I understand what was written, but why then, after the second consecration, did he continue acting as an orthodox bishop?

- If Moran was elevated to Metropolitan and successor to the orthodox Bishop Hryhorij, why is there no definitive proof even in a memoir or journal of some kind left by b. Hryhorij? The same question applies to Cardinal Slipyj.

- Doctored photos are still doctored photos. The end never justifies the means.


The catacombs admins then states:

"Seeing what Remy has written here has me very concerned to see the Orthodox interwoven throughout so much of Bp. Ambrose’s life.

"Which in turn begs begs the question, what has the bishop been doing from 1983 until 2015? It would be helpful if this part of his curriculum vitae were expanded upon."

The Catacombs admin poses a good question: Where is Moran's public life as a supposed Catholic bishop these last 30 years?

The answer, at least in part, is that he was busy being consecrated by and consecrating at a non-Catholic non-orthodox cult Colorado.

"It was from “Bishop” Gregory that I obtained Ambrose Moran’s Orthodox consecration certificate. Ambrose Moran presented it as evidence that he was an Orthodox bishop. He also presented this letter." - EcclesiaMilitans. [Caution, auto download.]

In this letter, written by Moran himself, Moran says he regrets all his doings outside the orthodox church and requests acceptance into the GOCA. He then ends with: "I desire to end my life in communion only with true Orthodox Christians."

According to an orthodox website Moran was, yet again, conditionally consecrated. This time, he was consecrated bishop of the GOCA (by an orthodox who was kicked out of the orthodox church 2004). "The GOCA is truly from their own admission what people worldwide have been claiming– a “personal church”, and not a single Bishop there has a right to ordain a [orthodox] priest, let alone each other."

After this non-Catholic non-orthodox consecration of Moran, Moran then consecrated a non-catholic non-orthodox bishop for the GOCA cult.

This does not sound like the actions of a Catholic to me, much less a Catholic bishop, and true Faithful of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church would do well to steer clear of Moran and all who support him.

I would encourage the Catacombs admin and all Faithful to review the excellent in-depth research and irrefutable hard evidence under "Moran" on
Last edited:


Well-Known Member
Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Seminary accepts Ambrose Moran as a valid bishop and intends to move forward with him in sacramental association; even if we eventually discover that he is lying about his consecration by Cardinal Slipyj.” - Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer [Note: bold is mine. Fr. Pfeiffer's use of we means Fr. Hewko has made his decision.]

OLMC forgets the wise words of ABL:
"In these critical moments, we must remain with that which is surest. We must avoid doubtful things.

"We must make our stand on things that are certain, absolutely certain, without a thousandth per cent of doubt [...]"

The Faithful, including Fr. Hewko and those "under" Fr. Pfeiffer, would do well to ponder these words of ABL:

“One must understand the meaning of obedience and must distinguish between blind obedience and the virtue of obedience. Indiscriminate obedience is actually a sin against the virtue of obedience.” (ABL-Interview, July 1978)
Last edited:


Well-Known Member
In this entire discussion about Moran, a few things have been overlooked:

- Though Don Bosco college denied him being an alumnus, it's still a college and not a major seminary for priestly formation. So, which seminary did he attend or who trained him privately?

- Moran claimed, in public, that his sister or aunt took him in after minor seminary where he came under the wings of Slipyj and was later ordained by him. No one has asked the name of the Catholic major seminary he attended before ordination, under the wings of Slipyj. This has been kept silent because he attended an Orthodox seminary.

- Moran said publicly that Slipyj took him under his wing as a seminarian. But then, after ordination, he applied to come under Slipyj's jurisdiction. Why would he do this if Slipyj already had Moran under his wing? It is because Moran attended and was ordained Orthodox.

- There is a complete absence of even a tiny Catholic remnant of priests and faithful from the supposed Orthodox-to-Catholic Union with Slipyj who would naturally have remained faithful to their twice consecreated/appointed bishop and jurisdictional superior according to their desire to stay with Slipyj. Even a priest from a congregation has this, let alone an Archbishop.

- The paullum for archbishops is given in Rome by the pope, now Moran wears one, like he came to the seminary with a cardinal's vest.

- On Moran's own website, no mention of anything Catholic is made. Rather, there is a strong anti-Catholic sentiment shown since the orthodox bishop he succeeds, according to Moran's website, is an old calendrist (i.e., traditional orthodox) opposed to Rome which the ecumenical Orthodox wanted to get closer to by changing their calendar.

And most importantly :
- The fact that Moran was indeed conditionally consecrated by the GOCA in 2008 and then consecrated for this schismatic group. Both of those actions incur the penalty of automatic excommunication, if ever he was Catholic.

A legitimate Catholic bishop who has been excommunicated can validly administer orders, but the orders would be illicit, irregular and illegitimate, and the receiver of such orders would bear automatic excommunication.

We should all run, not walk, away from this man.
Last edited:


St Mary's OLMC coordinator leaves. The following is a circular letter sent to the Faithful.

Dear Fellow Faithful,

I would like to wish you all a Merry Christmas.
I will no longer be in charge of the Seminary Restoration fund.
Fr.Pfeiffer prefers to have someone on the grounds of OLMC Seminary running the projects, which is certainly his prerogative.

In December we sent Fr.Pfeiffer $3500.00 out of the account per his request for a down payment on a metal roof for the Seminary Chapel, which someone else organized by contacting their own roofer.This is not the same roofing company we had do the "Old Schoolhouse" roof.
Remaining funds in the account I sent directly to Fr. Pfeiffer via certified mail and some were withdrawn directly by Fr. Pfeiffer earlier this month which closes our involvement with it.
Tim Cline


Dear Fellow Faithful,

We hope you all had a wonderful and blessed Christmas day! Beth and I have found there is a profound joy in this holy season that simply cannot be subdued!

However, as with many things during this life in the land of exile, our joy is not without some sadness which brings us to the point of this email. After many hours of researching, listening to Fr. Pfeiffer's conferences, speaking privately with both Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko, speaking with and emailing fellow faithful (on both sides of the issue), and praying, we have decided there is much doubt left regarding Ambrose Moran which causes us enough concern to step back away from this until it has been proven, without a doubt, his validity, that if he is valid he is licit, and that his character is without reproach, as recommended by sacred scripture. We are also remembering the words of advice from Archbishop Lefebvre that when there is doubt, do not proceed. We are not claiming to have all the answers here as this situation, in our humble opinion, would require a trustworthy canon lawyer, an expert in the ways and laws of Ukranian Catholicism, the eastern rite, and the schismatic Orthodox. This is not a simple issue to wrap our minds around and there is a lot of information to digest, which is most likely why we neglected to dive headfirst into all of this until recently.

Please understand firstly that we do not judge others that do not share our same opinion on this given the confusing nature of the entire situation. This is simply our personal decision, after much thought, research, and prayer. We in no way want to turn the fight for the Faith into a fight amongst ourselves. We have always had a high regard for you all and that has not changed.

More importantly, we in no way wish to embarrass or insult OLMC Seminary or Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko. We will always be grateful for the good shepherds they have been to us these past few years. We have learned much through them and we will keep them safely in our prayers.

We realize this makes for an awkward situation since, as coordinators for the priests, we feel, should not be in disagreement on such a large issue as this. With this in mind, we have chosen to step down as coordinators for the St. Mary's mission.

Regarding the website/youtube channel SSPX-MARIAN CORPS we made for Fr. Pfeiffer's use, he has relinquished it to us for our private ownership. We will most likely use it to simply build an organized library of their excellent sermons, catechisms, and conferences from the years 2012 to 2018. Fr Hewko has expressed that he may continue to have us upload his sermons for now given the rough situation with the one that Fr Pfeiffer uses, so we may be doing that if needed.

Regarding the Seminary Restoration project we were organizing and promoting, after speaking with Fr Pfeiffer, we have decided to simply close down our involvement with it, as Fr Pfeiffer wishes to have the projects ran under the control of someone there on the OLMC Seminary grounds.

Again, we are most grateful to Fr Pfeiffer and Fr Hewko for all the good they have done for us and for the Faith these last years.

We will continue to trust in the Lord with all our hearts and place ourselves safely in the hands and under the guidance of our Most Blessed Mother, who is such an admirable gift from the hands of our loving Father.

In honor of the Divine Infant,
Tim Cline

Last edited:


Statement by Fr. Hewko:

Dear Faithful, we must pray! We all suffer in this diabolical disorientation that Our Lady of Fatima warned about affecting the entire Church. Regarding Bp. Ambrose Moran, I notified Fr. Pfeiffer that if OLMC has not disassociated publicly from him within a week, I will be obliged to leave. For many reasons this is a dead end. Please offer your Rosaries to Our Blessed Mother for Her intercession! [Received from Fr. David Hewko, January 13, 2019]

We thank our Blessed Mother for this courageous decision made by Fr. Hewko. Admin



What made him make that decision? Was it the "excommunication" of Ecclesia Militans? Congratulations, by the way.


This administration agrees with the following statement:

On the Official Statement of OLMC Seminary regarding Ambrose Moran
Jan 26, 2019

This following 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

Last edited:
Not open for further replies.