Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.  (Read 28356 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Everlast22

  • Supporter
  • ***
  • Posts: 979
  • Reputation: +860/-227
  • Gender: Male


FWIW, Michael Knowles on rumors of Kirk considering converting, start at 38:00
 
Knowles says, "[Charlie's] publicly stated views speak for themselves"
M. Knowles is a Jew loving, v2 loving sack of garbage. 

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47080
  • Reputation: +27911/-5205
  • Gender: Male
Exactly.  Desire + action.  And Charlie died before the action took place.  So he didn’t convert. 

Yes, and we say, quite simply, that he was lost ... despite some hypothetical possibility that in some last instant of consciousness he was given a choice and converted, since ...

1) the presumption is tantamount to moral certainty, and I don't go around all day saying that I merely presume that I'm validly baptized (since I don't have absolute proof).  Now I COULD find out some day, God forbid, that the priest botched my Baptism, and similarly we COULD find out that Kirk was somehow saved (assuming for the sake of argument that he's even dead), but that does not mean we prevaricate and hem-haw about his condition because ...

2) the constant hem-haw about possible extraordinary exceptions leads almost immediately to making the exceptions less and less extraordinary and more and more ordinary, which then quickly leads to a complete erosion of faith in EENS dogma and religious indifferentism ... which is precisely why Pope Gregory XVI denounced the bishop who requested (private) prayer for a departed Protestant

We say, very simply, that (if he's dead) Kirk was lost, since he died outside the Church.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  Period.  If we're wrong ... then we're wrong, just as if I'm wrong about my being validly baptized, then I'm wrong.  But in the meantime I don't wonder at every Mass I attend whether either I or the priest offering the Mass was validly baptized.  I operate on that moral certainty of presumption as if it were fact, plain and simple.

Finally, as I said about the postive doubt regarding NO Ordinations (which I consider rather more than just mere positive doubt), what are the consequences of being wrong.

1) if I say Kirk is lost and don't pray for him, the consequences is that Kirk spends more time in Purgatory than he might otherwise have, except of course, there's no guarantee that our prayers for Poor Souls are applied anyway.  And of course God can always apply general prayers for Poor Souls to any that He so chooses.  Worst case, extra Purgatory time would be fitting for him since he spent his entire life (minus one second) outside the Church (and defending genocide, blaspheming Our Lady etc. etc).  So because, what?, Kirk became rich and famous, he somehow deserves a flood of prayers from Catholics, while a poor old lady or old man who has few friends, gets 3 people at her funeral and nobody praying for the repose of her soul?  Utter nonsense.

2) if you say Kirk could have been saved, the consequence is the erosion of faith in EENS dogma, and religious indifferentism (per Pope Gregory XVI)

Very simple answer here.

95% of those who say they are praying for Kirk don't even actually do so, except maybe for 5 seconds ... but are just virtue signalling and using it as a substitute for being "nithe", where I want to make his departed relatives "feel good" and to "console" them.  OK, great, but if these relatives are outside the Church ... then it would be charity to make them FEEL BAD.  Feeling good about Kirk's chances simply confirms them in their complacency that they can be saved without conversion.  But if they heard a unanimous chorus from Catholics that Kirk's chances were slim to none, that might actually goad their conscience to at least consider cooperating with some actual graces toward their own conversion and salvation.

It's analogous to the Bogus Ordo "white ѕυιcιdє" funerals.  I was about 10 when I served the funeral of a ѕυιcιdє, where the priest announced from the pulpit that the ѕυιcιdє was "in a better place now".  So, what if I, the altar boy, had grown up to face some extreme adversity, and decided that I too wished to flee this life to that "better place" promised by the heretical presider?  Oh, well, the presider was "nithe" to that ѕυιcιdє's family, but do we know how many people may have been LOST eternally due to his actions and words?  I'm sure that many have by the combined attitude of the Conciliar Church.  I've had people tell me that they would have committed ѕυιcιdє except that they realized that it would not end their suffering but make it much worse, for all eternity.  So, then who was REALLY charitable, the person that took it on the chin for being "mean" ... and yet may have saved souls, or the "nithe" one who maybe made someone "feeeel" good, but cost souls their eternal salvation.

Snap out of this, people.  It's shameful to see these attitudes from Trads, the emotional virtue signalling and clinging to "nitheness" while throwing real charity under the bus ... especially on a Resistance Forum here where Bishop Williamson spent much of his preaching calling out the difference between true charity (which is always rooted in truth) and the fake "nitheness" for people's "feeewings".


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47080
  • Reputation: +27911/-5205
  • Gender: Male
Exactly.  Desire + action.  And Charlie died before the action took place.  So he didn’t convert. 

I will also add this about the nonsensical term "desire".  So in the context of "Baptism of Desire", the Latin word is actually votum, which is releated etymologically to the term for "vow".  This is not just some longing or even concrete intention.

So, let's say some man firmly intends to marry some woman, gets engaged, buys the ring, puts down thousands of dollars in deposits, constantly tells people it's a done deal, shows up for the wedding, but when he's asked to pronounce the VOWS, he runs out of the Church.  Were the couple married ever because of his "desire" to get married?  Certainly not.

THAT is how strong the word VOTUM is, where it almost does not and cannot exist until it becomes consummated in ACTION.  Those who do have this degree of firm intention, there's nothing contrary to Catholic faith that God WOULD in fact ensure in His Providence that such a one would receive the actual Sacrament.  That is what St. Augustine taught clearly in the "vortex of confusion" passage and St. Gregorian nαzιanzen distinguished between the act and the desire, saying the latter was not equal to the former.

St. Thomas Aquinas taught that explicit faith in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are required for salvation, and that if there WERE such a one who placed no obstacles to receiving the faith, God would send an angel if necessary and miraculously convert them.  But of course it rarely works this way, but through the normal workings of God's Providence, and even St. Alphonsus said that someone dying other than how they had lived was a one-in-a-million and basically didn't happen, and none of the "BoD" doctors would consider someone like Kirk a candidate, but someone who was already a catechumen or intent on becoming Catholic.  Similary, there's absolutely nothing stopping this same angel mentioned by St. Thomas from also baptizing said individual.  We have stories of Mary of Agreda bilocating to the New World, and miracles where saints received water springs out of nowhere or else raised dead people back to life in order to baptize them.  But in the normal ordinary working of Divine Providence, those who are known members of the Catholic Church upon their deaths (and who are in a state of grace) can be saved, but those who are not known members of the Catholic Church upon theirs deaths are presumed lost, and just said simpliciter to be lost, without qualifiction or equivocation or any secundum quids ... the one in a million exception notwithstanding, just as the one in a million chance that some Catholic was not validly baptized might occur (though seems to happen with some regularity in the Conciliar Church).  But even in those cases, God's Providence allowed some of them to find out, whereas if some of us never find out and aren't baptized, then we were simply never among the Elect ... and glory be to God.  God could also have had me born among the Worshippers of the Great Thumb and died before ever having heard about the faith ... except when Wojtyla came by and told me that I could be saved while worshipping the Thumb anyway.

Offline gladius_veritatis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8167
  • Reputation: +2544/-1122
  • Gender: Male
Wojtyla came by and told me that I could be saved while worshipping the Thumb anyway.

:laugh1:
"Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is all man."

Offline Boru

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • Reputation: +145/-173
  • Gender: Female
True Faith is not found outside the Church. No one can obtain true Faith by desiring it super duper hard because you must be united to the Mystical Body Of Christ in order to possess it. No one outside the Church can become a member of the Church by desiring it super duper hard because they lack Divine Faith.

 They cannot please God, they cannot have true Faith, they cannot obtain eternal salvation, without being a member of the Church. That is why becoming an actual member of the Church is absolutely necessary for salvation.


Quote
You see, dearly beloved sons and venerable brothers, how much vigilance is needed to keep the disease of this terrible evil from infecting and killing your flocks. Do not cease to diligently defend your people against these pernicious errors. Saturate them with the doctrine of Catholic truth more accurately each day. Teach them that just as there is only one God, one Christ, one Holy Spirit, so there is also only one truth which is divinely revealed. There is only one divine faith which is the beginning of salvation for mankind and the basis of all justification, the faith by which the just person lives and without which it is impossible to please God and to come to the community of His children.[2] There is only one true, holy, Catholic church, which is the Apostolic Roman Church. There is only one See founded in Peter by the word of the Lord,[3] outside of which we cannot find either true faith or eternal salvation. He who does not have the Church for a mother cannot have God for a father, and whoever abandons the See of Peter on which the Church is established trusts falsely that he is in the Church.[4] Thus, there can be no greater crime, no more hideous stain than to stand up against Christ, than to divide the Church engendered and purchased by His blood, than to forget evangelical love and to combat with the furor of hostile discord the harmony of the people of God

Pius IX Encyclical Letter 3/17/1856

LOVE the underlined part especially.

WorldsAway, do you believe in Baptism of Desire or are you a Feenyite?


Offline Everlast22

  • Supporter
  • ***
  • Posts: 979
  • Reputation: +860/-227
  • Gender: Male


LOVE the underlined part especially.

WorldsAway, do you believe in Baptism of Desire or are you a Feenyite?
what does baptism of desire have to do with Charlie Kirk? lol 

Offline Boru

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • Reputation: +145/-173
  • Gender: Female
I will also add this about the nonsensical term "desire".  So in the context of "Baptism of Desire", the Latin word is actually votum, which is releated etymologically to the term for "vow".  This is not just some longing or even concrete intention.

***Stop trying to bamboozle. Baptism of Desire (it is called that) simply means the personal and sincere desire to be baptized as a Catholic.

So, let's say some man firmly intends to marry some woman, gets engaged, buys the ring, puts down thousands of dollars in deposits, constantly tells people it's a done deal, shows up for the wedding, but when he's asked to pronounce the VOWS, he runs out of the Church.  Were the couple married ever because of his "desire" to get married?  Certainly not.

*** I don't recall the Church ever teaching about Marriage of Desire. Most likely because there are two people involved and one cannot speak for the other.

THAT is how strong the word VOTUM is, where it almost does not and cannot exist until it becomes consummated in ACTION.  Those who do have this degree of firm intention, there's nothing contrary to Catholic faith that God WOULD in fact ensure in His Providence that such a one would receive the actual Sacrament.  That is what St. Augustine taught clearly in the "vortex of confusion" passage and St. Gregorian nαzιanzen distinguished between the act and the desire, saying the latter was not equal to the former.

*** But Laddy, you are not the Church. And the Church allows for Baptism of Desire.

St. Thomas Aquinas taught that explicit faith in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are required for salvation, and that if there WERE such a one who placed no obstacles to receiving the faith, God would send an angel if necessary and miraculously convert them.  But of course it rarely works this way, but through the normal workings of God's Providence, and even St. Alphonsus said that someone dying other than how they had lived was a one-in-a-million and basically didn't happen, and none of the "BoD" doctors would consider someone like Kirk a candidate, but someone who was already a catechumen or intent on becoming Catholic.

*** I don't want to hear your opinions. Let us have St. Alphonsus' exact words. (As far as I remember he said it was rare but not impossible.) Let us have St. Thomas Aquinas' exact words.

Similary, there's absolutely nothing stopping this same angel mentioned by St. Thomas from also baptizing said individual.  We have stories of Mary of Agreda bilocating to the New World, and miracles where saints received water springs out of nowhere or else raised dead people back to life in order to baptize them. 

*** All miraculous. So miracles happen outside the norm.

But in the normal ordinary working of Divine Providence, those who are known members of the Catholic Church upon their deaths (and who are in a state of grace) can be saved, but those who are not known members of the Catholic Church upon theirs deaths are presumed lost, and just said simpliciter to be lost, without qualifiction or equivocation or any secundum quids ... the one in a million exception notwithstanding,

*** Through baptism Kirk became a member of the Church. However he was a heretic because he held heretical Protestant views. Given he was searching and open to being convinced, there is hope that before he died he renounced his Protestant errors. It is true that he did not publicly and could be damned, but the Church says we may pray for Protestants and have Masses for them just in case.

just as the one in a million chance that some Catholic was not validly baptized might occur (though seems to happen with some regularity in the Conciliar Church).  But even in those cases, God's Providence allowed some of them to find out, whereas if some of us never find out and aren't baptized, then we were simply never among the Elect ... and glory be to God.  God could also have had me born among the Worshippers of the Great Thumb and died before ever having heard about the faith ... except when Wojtyla came by and told me that I could be saved while worshipping the Thumb anyway.

***So you are a Feenyite. You do not accept Baptism of Desire.

Offline Boru

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • Reputation: +145/-173
  • Gender: Female
what does baptism of desire have to do with Charlie Kirk? lol
Baptism of desire proves that grace can operate outside the physical sacraments. It is therefore possible that Kirk, just before he died, privately renounced his protestant errors, willed to be united with the Church, and died inside the Church.


Offline WorldsAway

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 822
  • Reputation: +662/-80
  • Gender: Male


LOVE the underlined part especially.

WorldsAway, do you believe in Baptism of Desire or are you a Feenyite?
No such thing as a "Feeneyite". Baptism of Desire for catechumens is a theological OPINION. You will find no teachings from the Magisterium defining it as a Dogma. As Charlie Kirk would say, "prove me wrong". 

Did you love the bolded part as well, where Pope Pius IX taught that true Faith cannot be found outside of the Church? That true faith, which is the beginning of salvation for man and the basis of all justification?

Kirk did not become a member of the Church by his baptism because he was baptized into a heretical sect. Even if valid his sins were not forgiven, he was not justified, because it was a sacrilegious baptism, and he was a heretic. 
John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

Offline Angelus

  • Supporter
  • ***
  • Posts: 1252
  • Reputation: +561/-105
  • Gender: Male
Baptism of desire proves that grace can operate outside the physical sacraments. It is therefore possible that Kirk, just before he died, privately renounced his protestant errors, willed to be united with the Church, and died inside the Church.

The concept of "baptism of desire" has nothing to do with "renouncing protestant errors." It has to do with a lack of water baptism. Apparently Kirk was already water baptized.

Why do you continue with this nonsense? Kirk was an apparently baptized person who renounced his membership in the One, Holy, Catholic Church and chose (haeresis) to be outside of that one true Church, thinking he was more knowledgable in theological matters than all the Popes and Saints. Simply speaking, he was a heretic as as Church defines that term.

Just like Kirk, you fancy yourself a theologian. Just like Eve, you refuse to be obedient.

Offline WorldsAway

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 822
  • Reputation: +662/-80
  • Gender: Male
FWIW, Kirk's producer and "best friend", Andrew Kolvet, on rumors of Kirk considering converting to Catholicism:



Relevant section starts at 7:30


Quote
Alex Clark: Was [Charlie] becoming Catholic?

Andrew: No. But, he really loved Catholic mass. He loved the ritual of it, he loved the beauty of old Catholic churches.


Andrew later implies that Charlie Kirk would sometimes attend mass because he did not like "worshipping" in a gym, or other bland environments. He implies this was more to do with aesthetics and the "feel" of a Catholic mass, because Charlie had "some really big theological hangups with [Catholicism]"

Andrew Kolvet claims that he was a cradle Catholic and "became a Christian in college" (I.e. apostatized). He says he and Erika share that experience.

Alex Clark claims there is an Instagram post from Erika of her and Charlie at mass. A user commented, "are you converting?". Erika responded "No, we just like going sometimes"


John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.


Offline Miseremini

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4662
  • Reputation: +3732/-320
  • Gender: Female
Baptism of desire proves that grace can operate outside the physical sacraments. It is therefore possible that Kirk, just before he died, privately renounced his protestant errors, willed to be united with the Church, and died inside the Church.

However, just minutes before he died he said,  "We need the strong Mormon church back in this country"  (I didn't count the minutes on the video)

He didn't say we need the Catholic Church back in this country.

Is it PROBABLE that in mere minutes he changed his mind and wanted to be united to the Catholic Church?......Not probable,  just wishful thinking.
"Let God arise, and let His enemies be scattered: and them that hate Him flee from before His Holy Face"  Psalm 67:2[/b]


Offline WorldsAway

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 822
  • Reputation: +662/-80
  • Gender: Male
 You will find no teachings from the Magisterium defining it as a Dogma. As Charlie Kirk would say, "prove me wrong".

To be more clear, you will find no teachings from the Magisterium regarding BOD at all. 
John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

Offline Boru

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 357
  • Reputation: +145/-173
  • Gender: Female
However, just minutes before he died he said,  "We need the strong Mormon church back in this country"  (I didn't count the minutes on the video)

He didn't say we need the Catholic Church back in this country.

Is it PROBABLE that in mere minutes he changed his mind and wanted to be united to the Catholic Church?......Not probable,  just wishful thinking.

I see your point Miseremini but there is this to consider - the context. Part of Kirk's method was to draw in - find common ground - instead of going on the attack. He did this with everybody including gαys. He made it clear he didn't agree with their life-style, but he always treated them respectfully as people. It was the same for the Mormon Church. And the point he was making - I've watched the video - is that the Morman Church had of late been promoting woke LGBT rubbish. That is what he meant when he said 'We need a strong Morman church back in this country'. He was encouraging them to get back to their more 'Christian' teachings.  And as Utah is the Morman state of America, he approached it tactfully. 

Also, desiring to become a Catholic doesn't mean you are instantly infused with wisdom. (I know I wasn't. The ardent desire was there, but the understanding and knowledge was a long process). Nor would it have been wise to suddenly start laying down the law to thousands of Mormans. Kirk's method was always dialogue - such as encouraging protestants to venerate our Lady more. As I said, Kirk may very well be damned -  but I personally have great hope for him - and the Church allows us to privately pray for him and have Masses said which could win him that rare conversion. He was a brave man who was willing to put his life on the line for his faith. He willed to be united with Christ. It's worth praying for someone like that.

Offline WorldsAway

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 822
  • Reputation: +662/-80
  • Gender: Male
Andrew Kolvet claims that he was a cradle Catholic and "became a Christian in college" (I.e. apostatized). He says he and Erika share that experience.

Alex Clark claims there is an Instagram post from Erika of her and Charlie at mass. A user commented, "are you converting?". Erika responded "No, we just like going sometimes"
Additional evidence that Erika Kirk is NOT a practicing Catholic ("NO Catholic" or otherwise):

https://www.mrserikakirk.com/listen/episode/1d82a45c/s0409-summer-in-the-psalms-speech-at-calvary-chapel-signal-hill-womens-conference

From July of this year. Speech at Calvary Chapel Signal Hill. Evangelical sect. Skip to 4:45 

"It feels really nice to be here in person because...this is our Church on Sunday for our family because...I am obsessed with Pastor James Kaddis..you guys are so blessed to have him." 



John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.