I agree with Dawn. The Father Jenkins stuff should be in a different thread.

Actually I was thinking some of the remarks on this thread more like Charles Dickens:

First Collector: At this festive time of year, Mr. Scrooge, it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the poor and destitute.
Ebenezer: Are there no prisons?
First Collector: Plenty of prisons.
Ebenezer: And the union workhouses - are they still in operation?
First Collector: They are. I wish I could say they were not.
Ebenezer: Oh, from what you said at first I was afraid that something had happened to stop them in their useful course. I'm very glad to hear it.
First Collector: I don't think you quite understand us, sir. A few of us are endeavoring to buy the poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth.
Ebenezer: Why?
First Collector: Because it is at Christmastime that want is most keenly felt, and abundance rejoices. Now what can I put you down for?
Ebenezer: Huh! Nothing!
Second Collector: You wish to be anonymous?
Ebenezer: [firmly, but calmly] I wish to be left alone. Since you ask me what I wish sir, that is my answer. I help to support the establishments I have named; those who are badly off must go there.
First Collector: Many can't go there.
Second Collector: And some would rather die.

very Malthusian in the scene, Dickens works in some very good criticism of the times.

thanks for inputtin that thar sister-cousin, yuck yuck  :roll-laugh1: :roll-laugh2:

Quote from: Matthew

I assume these priests didn't give you any references for their position?

An SSPX website link, book, manual, etc.?

It does sound messed up, as you describe it.

Catholic doctrine is Catholic doctrine. And as far as I know, St. Thomas Aquinas is the source of Catholic doctrine par excellence.

Matthew

Father Asher, when he was visiting, said you must never take a girl out without her father's permission, in a sermon, on the Feast of the Circuмcision in 2009.  

Now it's one thing to suggest and say it's a good thing to have permission, it's another thing to lead laity to believe that without that paternal permission a girl passed majority cannot be taken out or even speak to someone.  But you know even when I showed St. Thomas's teaching to some people at the chapel they still said they believed a father's permission was necessary.  From young women to ex-seminarians to old men.  They have been led to believe it's necessary.  That is not an accident.

I knew a couple, OPC, that their daughters are that way, never date w/o permission, both are in late 20's and single, live away from parents...not sure how permission is allowed, maybe via telephone.........

if a girl is an adult, she is not allowed to make her own choices at that point per your SSPX chapel experience??

so, you feel they are selective in doctrine...guess if said daughter wants to date on her own, to them, she needs to move out on her own...

Belloc, the bottom line is that they do not teach what Aquinas teaches.  Aquinas doesn't say you can only marry who your father wants if you live under his roof.  He says you can marry who you want in the same way you can enter the religious life.  Are we to believe a young woman who wants to enter religious life can only have the right to talk to religious orders when she moves out on her own?

Alexandria,

You appear to be possess the attributes  that Fr Jenkins would be looking for to form the minds of young traditional  Catholics : hostile, abusive, bullying ,  egocentric,  underhanded .  If you play along he will even let you think that you can be an ancillary  Jenkins unemployable  family goon who can roam the school and church grounds randomly enforcing petty rules .  The retirement plan includes ripping off and conning the millionaires who attend the chapel .        

Rome, I do not know who you are, I will tell you that Alexandria was upset by one of the Many Many twists this thread has taken when Elizabeth mention something about White Trash. Now, earlier it was mentioned that families move to a certain area to be by a priest/school though they are financially strapped. So, when Elizabeth threw in "White Trash" it almost seemed that she was talking about those poor families. In fact, when asked, Elizabeth brought two women that she has experience with at a school (which I might be mistaken is not even the school in the beginning of this thread). Now, I can find no place where those women were mentioned in this thread except after Alexandria asked about the White Trash remark.
Alexandria has no idea about Fr. Jenkins or his school, except for the fact that Fr. Jenkins and SSPV and some "problem" are liberally sprinkled through many threads on this forum.
Now, Elizabeth has indeed said that she will finally open a thread to explain her cryptic comments  on Fr. Jenkins and SSPV.
People on this board had their feeling hurt by what was taken by some to be an elitist comment.

so they basically said "who cares about Aquinas"??

Not exactly, the priest looked rather perturbed when I mentioned it but the point is this: it's clear to me they have no interest in correcting false ideas about Church teaching on the issue.

Bottom line is they threatened to kick me out for trying to send a message or talk to a girl who was over 18 years old.  And wanted to make it seem like I was a delusional predator as well.

It was incredibly malicious and dishonest.  Pandering to machismo.

Thanks Dawn, but if the truth be known, I am glad that this happened.  

People here can't hide what they truly are forever.  And I know what they are trying to do.

And what are they "trying to do?"