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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7]

Author Topic: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.  (Read 31651 times)

2 Members and 13 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online WorldsAway

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 834
  • Reputation: +677/-82
  • Gender: Male
Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
« Reply #90 on: Yesterday at 06:55:35 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Boru on Yesterday at 06:26:29 PM
    Are you being funny? Even if it was in his mind to convert, he was known as an Evangelical Christian. He wouldn't suddenly say, hey, I'm a Catholic when he hadn't formally gone through the process. Nor would he say - in the middle of a debate with a Mormon over their religion - I'm an Evangelical Christian about to convert to Catholicism. The Mormon would have completely shut down and he would have lost half his audience. It wasn't the place. Besides, most converts go through the process privately so as to avoid negative energy. Again, I'm not saying categorically that he is saved, but what I am saying is that this still not prove he was damned. If it was in his mind to convert - "I am close" - then that desire - that co-operation with God's grace -  would be enough to have saved him. I hope it was so.
    Really disturbing how far you will go trying to defend a notorious heretic and blasphemer and rationalize his attacks against Our Lord, His Church, and Our Lady. Kirk's final public testament vis-à-vis his faith (or lack thereof), minutes before his death, was an absolute rejection of Christ and His Church and an adherence to a false, anti-Christ sect. 
    Logged
    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 Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3114
    • Reputation: +1746/-965
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #91 on: Yesterday at 09:46:44 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: WorldsAway on Yesterday at 06:55:35 PM
    Really disturbing how far you will go trying to defend a notorious heretic and blasphemer and rationalize his attacks against Our Lord, His Church, and Our Lady. Kirk's final public testament vis-à-vis his faith (or lack thereof), minutes before his death, was an absolute rejection of Christ and His Church and an adherence to a false, anti-Christ sect.
    Is that being honest?  Most people had to go through some sort of stepping stone process from doing what our parents did, to finding Jesus, to finding Jesus's church, to discovering that Jesus's church has been eclipsed, to finding the place God wants us to be (SSPX, resistant SSPX, CMRI, SGG, RCI, Independent, etc.)

    I don't know where Charlie Kirk was in his journey, but nobody but God knows, and it is only God who judges him.  I understand not lifting CK up as a saint, but we shouldn't condemn him either.  It is not our place.  Discussing without emotion is interesting, but we have to remember it is just a way to pass the time and holds no real value.  (For every person that these discussions help to see Truth, it is also probably pushing away the same number of people.  That is just reality.)
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Online Miseremini

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4669
    • Reputation: +3735/-320
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #92 on: Yesterday at 10:00:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Yesterday at 09:46:44 PM
    Discussing without emotion is interesting, but we have to remember it is just a way to pass the time and holds no real value.  (For every person that these discussions help to see Truth, it is also probably pushing away the same number of people.  That is just reality.)
    That's probably the most honest and the absolute scariest thing I've read in ages.
    If it holds no real value it's a total waste of time and time is the most precious thing humans possess.
    Without time we can do nothing.  Without time we can't respond to grace.
    Oh, how the souls in purgatory would wish they had time.
    Logged
    "Let God arise, and let His enemies be scattered: and them that hate Him flee from before His Holy Face"  Psalm 67:2[/b]

    Online WorldsAway

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 834
    • Reputation: +677/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #93 on: Today at 11:51:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Yesterday at 09:46:44 PM
    Is that being honest?  Most people had to go through some sort of stepping stone process from doing what our parents did, to finding Jesus, to finding Jesus's church, to discovering that Jesus's church has been eclipsed, to finding the place God wants us to be (SSPX, resistant SSPX, CMRI, SGG, RCI, Independent, etc.)

    I don't know where Charlie Kirk was in his journey, but nobody but God knows, and it is only God who judges him.  I understand not lifting CK up as a saint, but we shouldn't condemn him either.  It is not our place.  Discussing without emotion is interesting, but we have to remember it is just a way to pass the time and holds no real value.  (For every person that these discussions help to see Truth, it is also probably pushing away the same number of people.  That is just reality.)
    Yes, expressing adherence to Evangelicalism is a rejection of Christ and His Church. We know where Kirk was on his "journey" because he explicitly told us right before he died, "I am an evangelical Christian"

    Our Lord says, "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth."

    You cannot be "with Him" if you are not united to his Mystical Body, the Church.

    Kirk, right before his death, made it clear he was not "with Him".

    Quote
    Matthew 10:32 Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven.
    10:33 But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.
    In expressing his adherence to an anti-Christ sect, Kirk publicly denied Christ before men! Right before his death!

    Hoping in the possibility of Kirk being saved flies directly in the face of Church dogma regarding what is necessary for salvation, it serves to dilute the 3x defined EENS dogma, and gives those outside the Catholic Church hope in their salvation without becoming actually united to the Church before their death

    Quote
    [The Church] firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church

    Pope Eugene IV

    Logged
    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 Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3114
    • Reputation: +1746/-965
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #94 on: Today at 02:09:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: WorldsAway on Today at 11:51:21 AM
    Yes, expressing adherence to Evangelicalism is a rejection of Christ and His Church. We know where Kirk was on his "journey" because he explicitly told us right before he died, "I am an evangelical Christian"

    Our Lord says, "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth."

    You cannot be "with Him" if you are not united to his Mystical Body, the Church.

    Kirk, right before his death, made it clear he was not "with Him".
    In expressing his adherence to an anti-Christ sect, Kirk publicly denied Christ before men! Right before his death!

    Hoping in the possibility of Kirk being saved flies directly in the face of Church dogma regarding what is necessary for salvation, it serves to dilute the 3x defined EENS dogma, and gives those outside the Catholic Church hope in their salvation without becoming actually united to the Church before their death
    We knowing these things is a small miniscule group of people who don't even have a Pope to back us up.  Reality is important.  I know what Truth is, but this Truth has been greatly eclipsed since 1963. I really wish that we could live in reality.  (That most people who call themselves Catholic believe in Ecommunism and follow Pope Leo.)  It doesn't seem to matter what past Pope's said, because actions of the visible Catholic Church paint a different story and as the saying goes "actions speak louder than words."
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Online Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 369
    • Reputation: +148/-181
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #95 on: Today at 04:19:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Boru on September 23, 2025, 05:38:32 PM
    I see. So you are a Feeneyite and a Sedevacantist. Well, well, well.

    Ok. Let us see what the Catechism of the Council of Trent says: "On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness." - Baptism:pg 179.

    This theological 'opinion' as you label it is a traditional belief of the Church supported by St. Thomas Aquinas. It may not have been formally defined, but never-the-less, it is a traditional teaching of the Catholic Church based on logical scriptural conclusions, and to reject it, for one's own opposing belief system, is to set oneself against the Church. Everything must be understood as the Church understands it. And Baptism of Desire for catechumens is part of the Ordinary and universal magisterium.

    As for the the bolded part you highlighted, yes, I agree with it. But don't you as a Sede find the follow on even more interesting? :"...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

    Evangelical baptisms are considered valid baptisms using the name of the Blessed Trinity. This means that Kirk's baptism made him a member of the Mystical Body with God as his Father.  Kirk, however chose to embrace/continue with the Protestant sect and thus cut himself off from that body via heresy. The one thing that could have made the Church his mother, is the renouncing of the protestant heresies. He would not have needed to be baptized again.

    One week before his death - that's three weeks after that Marian video - Charlie Kirk had this to say:

    https://angelusnews.com/voices/kirk-conversion/



    Hey WorldsAway - try reading my actual posts.

    Add to this: https://lonelypilgrim.com/2013/09/23/st-ambrose-on-the-baptism-of-desire/
     
    AND St. Augustine, St.     Thomas Aquinas etc etc etc:
    https://dn790004.ca.archive.org/0/items/SourcesOfBaptismOfBloodBaptismOfDesire/BobBodfinal_usTrade6x9-Anonymous.pdf

    The above lin    ks outline historically all the many saints and Doctors of the Church who support and teach 'Baptism of Desire'.
    Logged

    Online Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 369
    • Reputation: +148/-181
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #96 on: Today at 04:41:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: WorldsAway on Today at 11:51:21 AM
    Yes, expressing adherence to Evangelicalism is a rejection of Christ and His Church. We know where Kirk was on his "journey" because he explicitly told us right before he died, "I am an evangelical Christian"

    ***And how many say 'I am a Catholic' and are damned. God and God only reads the heart

    Our Lord says, "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth."

    You cannot be "with Him" if you are not united to his Mystical Body, the Church.

    *** Like yourself? The Mystical Body has a head called the Pope. Why is it ok for you to reject the Papacy but not ok for Kirk? You have less excuse.

    Kirk, right before his death, made it clear he was not "with Him".
    In expressing his adherence to an anti-Christ sect, Kirk publicly denied Christ before men! Right before his death!

    *** Kirk saw himself as a Christian. He saw himself as publicly proclaiming Christ. He also saw himself as being close to converting - to accepting the fullness of the faith. He expressed what he was that day because his conversion was still in the process.  What he was privately thinking is between himself and God.

    Hoping in the possibility of Kirk being saved flies directly in the face of Church dogma regarding what is necessary for salvation, it serves to dilute the 3x defined EENS dogma, and gives those outside the Catholic Church hope in their salvation without becoming actually united to the Church before their death.

    ***Hoping Kirk was saved WITHIN the Church does not affect the EENS. You are splitting hairs. And you do so because you will not accept Baptism of Desire; you will not accept that grace can operate outside of the sacraments in special cases. You reject the spirit of the law for the dead letter of the law.
    Logged

    Online WorldsAway

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 834
    • Reputation: +677/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #97 on: Today at 04:49:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Boru on Today at 04:19:46 PM
    Hey WorldsAway - try reading my actual posts.

    Add to this: https://lonelypilgrim.com/2013/09/23/st-ambrose-on-the-baptism-of-desire/
     
    AND St. Augustine, St.     Thomas Aquinas etc etc etc:
    https://dn790004.ca.archive.org/0/items/SourcesOfBaptismOfBloodBaptismOfDesire/BobBodfinal_usTrade6x9-Anonymous.pdf

    The above lin    ks outline historically all the many saints and Doctors of the Church who support and teach 'Baptism of Desire'.
    Hey Boru, provide teachings from the Magisterium regarding Baptism of Desire. You claim it is Church teaching, even "from the get-go" (whatever that means). So far you have failed to do so.
    The Catechism of Trent does not mention Baptism of Desire. Point out exactly where the catechism teaches baptism can be received by desire. 



    And for the second time, provide proof to support your accusation that the Dimond brothers "spend their lives attacking...Doctors of the Church", or retract it and go to confession 
    Logged
    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.

    Online WorldsAway

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 834
    • Reputation: +677/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #98 on: Today at 05:04:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    ***And how many say 'I am a Catholic' and are damned. God and God only reads the heart
    Many saints have said few Catholics are saved. The Catholic Church teaches that no non-Catholics are saved



    Quote
    *** Like yourself? The Mystical Body has a head called the Pope. Why is it ok for you to reject the Papacy but not ok for Kirk? You have less excuse.
    Sure, but that's just, like, your opinion, man. I can just as easily say you accept an anti-pope, anti-Christ as the supreme pontiff of your church. See how easy that is? The difference between you and I and Charlie Kirk is that you and I at least claim to be Catholic and submit to the papacy. We just disagree regarding the status of the papacy



    Quote
    *** Kirk saw himself as a Christian. He saw himself as publicly proclaiming Christ. He also saw himself as being close to converting - to accepting the fullness of the faith. He expressed what he was that day because his conversion was still in the process. What he was privately thinking is between himself and God.

    Nuh-uh. Kirk saw himself as an Evangelical Christian. Be precise! Evangelicals reject Christ's doctrine, so they reject Christ. And let it be said again (and again) that all "evidence" or Kirk's alleged "conversion" has been circuмstantial. Nothing Kirk said in the public realm leading up to his death gives us reason to believe he was converting.


    Quote
    7:21  Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.
    7:22  Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name?
    7:23  And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.



    Quote
    Hoping Kirk was saved WITHIN the Church does not affect the EENS. You are splitting hairs. And you do so because you will not accept Baptism of Desire; you will not accept that grace can operate outside of the sacraments in special cases. You reject the spirit of the law for the dead letter of the law
    Yeah, and I've already explained why there is no reason for us to have any hope in that, and why hoping that doesn't contribute to anyone's salvation. You have been provided what Kirk said of his own faith minutes before death. You are obstinate and delusional


    Logged
    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.

    Online Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 369
    • Reputation: +148/-181
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #99 on: Today at 05:58:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: WorldsAway on Today at 04:49:55 PM
    Hey Boru, provide teachings from the Magisterium regarding Baptism of Desire. You claim it is Church teaching, even "from the get-go" (whatever that means). So far you have failed to do so.
    The Catechism of Trent does not mention Baptism of Desire. Point out exactly where the catechism teaches baptism can be received by desire.



    And for the second time, provide proof to support your accusation that the Dimond brothers "spend their lives attacking...Doctors of the Church", or retract it and go to confession

    Council of Trent: "....should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will av    ail them to grace and righteousness." - Under the heading Baptism:pg 179.

    How about you stop the silly games. Desire = Intention.  I desire to receive baptism. I intend to receive baptism.  One does not obtain grace and righteousness until baptism.

    I also posted a link listing historically - from early Church History - all the saints and Doctors of the Church who taught 'Baptism of Desire'.

    As for the Dimond Brothers - before we burrow down that rabbit hole - and I shall - let us take a look at their past history. How curious. They were accused of fraud and swindling. And for over 1 million dollars too. And their real names are Frederick and Robert Dimond? And they are not real Benedictine Brothers. Gosh, my interest has indeed peaked. I see Mathew posted some information about it in 2010:

    https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/dimond-brothers-busted/

    Logged

    Online Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 369
    • Reputation: +148/-181
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Charlie James Kirk Etymology→ Free man, supplanter, of the church.
    « Reply #100 on: Today at 06:14:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: WorldsAway on Today at 05:04:36 PM
    ..............
    Sure, but that's just, like, your opinion, man. I can just as easily say you accept an anti-pope, anti-Christ as the supreme pontiff of your church. See how easy that is? The difference between you and I and Charlie Kirk is that you and I at least claim to be Catholic and submit to the papacy. We just disagree regarding the status of the papacy......

    There is an un-broken line from Peter to Leo. Christ's Church was founded upon Peter, in Rome, in the Vatican where Leo sits today. They are one and the same for the Church is indefectable. Yet, you refuse to recognise Leo. Why then do you condemn another Christian for refusing a fundamental teaching of the Church when you do the same yourself?
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7]
    « previous next »