This video is nearly 700MB, so broadband is a must (and a download manager program is recommended).
A little over the top at times? Yes.
Anti-Vatican II and even faint sedevacantist overtones? Some.
Nonetheless, it illustrates well the most extreme fruits of liberalism that have proliferated in the Church over the past 40-some-odd years.
Additional reviews/summaries of the video may be found here and here.
Subject: Re: ("Fr. M. E.) Morrison
Body: Hello:
M.E. Morrison was "ordained" in California in a Protestant church (Ebenezer Lutheran Chirch) by Thaddeus Alioto, a married man claiming to be a bishop (because he had been "consecrated" a bishop by Wallace David de Ortega Maxey).
De Ortega Maxey had been "consecrated" numerous times by various North American Old Catholic bishops (whom even the Old Catholic Churches in Europe deny have valid orders). De Ortega Maxey also *claimed* to have been consecrated by Antoine Aneed.
Aneed's story is that he was consecrated a bishop by a RC Eastern Rite bishop in Syria and sent to America. Both the Vatican and the Syrian Patriarchate involved denounced the story as a fabrication.
If you have any doubts over the veracity of my statements as to where Morrison got "ordained," just ask his fellow "independent" priest, Merril Adamson. He was "ordained" in the same ceremony. I've a written statement from him confirming the fact.
This is important not because of anything Morrison states on the internet, but because he dresses up his statements as coming from a RC priest.
Even the devil can quote Scripture.
Anyone e-mailing to Morrison's list a request for the facts of his claimed ordination will be dropped.
It never ceases to amaze me how sedevacantists can be so cock-sure JP II is a fraud, yet swallow hook, line and sinker any number of bogus clerics; just because the frauds sing the music sedes like to hear.
It takes more than "right" preaching to make a priest.
Regards, Terry Boyle
[Mr. Boyle's website is at http://www.tboyle.net/ ]
* It is an Infallible Catholic Dogma the Church cannot fail.
Vatican I
Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time [45] . For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the catholic church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the saviour and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the holy Roman see, which he founded and consecrated with his blood [46] .
Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the church which he once received [47]
Pray for the Peace of Christ; trust in Him and His promises. Don't be led astray by those seeking to sow doubt and fear.
This is from the other link you provided. This gentleman, who wrote an online book about the Resurrection of the Roman Catholic Church (sic) apparently thinks the Popes since Pius XII (who died in 1958) are unreliable.
How are these links, which attack the Church and the Living Magisterium established by Jesus and promised by Him never to fail, useful to Christians?
Too bad because it is unnecessary. Traditionalists like that, I fear, do more harm than good.
It's just the same articles, over and over again. To answer some of your questions: Yes, the Church is still indeed Catholic, and yes, most priests still believe in the Church's teachings, and no, the disgruntled Trads are not the arbiters of what is and isn't Catholic.
ping
if the think the capitol "C" Catholic church has been around for two thousand years, you're dreamin.
In my opinion and I'll go no futher...this video IS A MUST SEE to those who have been stumbling around not understanding what has happened to the Once Universally same Roman Catholic Church!!! All priests ,Bishops, Cardinals ect. and Latity NEED to see this one!
Our Lady of La Salette,in 1864 warned that "ROME would lose the Faith and also the world...and sooo it started with the Changes of the Holy Mass to a mere mess! reverevnce and modesty went out the window and modernism and lack of realization of SIN came in ...guess who was really responsible for it all!!! WATCH AND SpREAD This Video! AMEN!
bumpus ad summum
What business does any Catholic have asking such questions?
Q. What, then, is the Church at the present time?
A. The entire body of pastors and people, bound together by the same divine truths, laws, and means of grace, under one head, the Pope of Rome.
Q. Who are the true successors of the Apostles?
A. Only the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church.
Q. Why?
A. Because they alone are rightly consecrated and in communion with the Pope, the Head of the Church.
Q. Is not the Catholic Church the household of which Jesus Christ is the Master?
A. She is.
Q. Will Satan be able to take possession of this household in spite of its Divine Master?
A. No one can say so without blasphemy.
Q. Is not the Catholic Church the Body of Jesus Christ?
A. The Church, says St. Paul, is the Body of Christ.
Q. What follows from this?
A. That Christ is inseparably united with His Church.
Q. What, then, would it be for one to say that the Church could be destroyed?
A. It would be to say that Christ or God can be overcome, which would be the height of madness and blasphemy. (Fr. Michael Müller, Familiar explanation of Christian doctrine, pp. 44-5, 65-6)
bump