Author Topic: Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014 (Read 30119 times)

1st Mansion Tenant · « **Reply #240 on:** October 31, 2014, 04:23:13 PM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant
Quote from: Militia Jesu
Quote from: Ladislaus
So what exactly does Dawn Marie hope to gain from this besides publicity?

I don't know for sure but someone already mentioned she has a "Donate Button" on her website.

This CANNOT get anymore bizarre!!! Or can?

The donations are for Mass stipends for the Crusader's masses for the consecration of Russia. Why are you deliberately trying to make it sound like she is soliciting donations for her personal use? That is underhanded behavior.

And you have certitude about this how?
If you do, please list the priests, Masses, and times for us.

With that post, I think this thread(s) has reached a new low.

Matthew · « **Reply #241 on:** October 31, 2014, 04:28:03 PM »

The fact is that any speculation about Dawn Marie's motives is pure speculation.

Let's stick to the facts here.

When you talk about determining a person's interior motives, it's impossible to grasp or attain to the truth. Can one of us read her heart from a distance?

And bringing up the "donate" button is neither here nor there, because we have no way to audit where the money goes. That is an objective fact. So it can't be used as evidence pro or con.

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #242 on:** October 31, 2014, 04:28:30 PM »

Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant

Quote from: ultrarigorist
Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant
Quote from: Militia Jesu
Quote from: Ladislaus
So what exactly does Dawn Marie hope to gain from this besides publicity?

I don't know for sure but someone already mentioned she has a "Donate Button" on her website.

This CANNOT get anymore bizarre!!! Or can?

The donations are for Mass stipends for the Crusader's masses for the consecration of Russia. Why are you deliberately trying to make it sound like she is soliciting donations for her personal use? That is underhanded behavior.

And you have certitude about this how?
If you do, please list the priests, Masses, and times for us.

With that post, I think this thread(s) has reached a new low.

Ah, but surely you'll stay with it 1MT, right to the bottom, huh? If you wanted to prove your point though, you could answer the question (assuming that's possible)

hollingsworth · « **Reply #243 on:** October 31, 2014, 04:52:41 PM »

Matthew:

Quote

The fact is that any speculation about Dawn Marie's motives is pure speculation.

That might have been said 48 pages ago.

Militia Jesu · « **Reply #244 on:** October 31, 2014, 05:50:17 PM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

Matthew:
Quote
The fact is that any speculation about Dawn Marie's motives is pure speculation.

That might have been said 48 pages ago.

Speculation might've been in regards to what she does with the money donated through her website but not in regards to the message having flaws and the messenger having lied on more than one occasion about her vision.

But the willfully blind won't see it. Rev. Fr. William Welsh have rightly said that the people who follow these apparitions have developed a devotion, an avidity for these and future messages, which easily stands out as the chief characteristic of their spiritual life. The slightest doubt expressed [let alone proven facts] in their presence about the truth or holiness of these supposed heavenly manifestations will immediately raise an emotional furore difficult to ever completely pacify.

The Church's Magisterium with all its popes, theologians and TRUE mystics will be of no avail for these kind of people who are prone to accept a phenomena that appears "catholic oriented", the words "hold fast to tradition" are conveniently forgotten by all of them.

Kyrie Eleison indeed!

Adolphus · « **Reply #245 on:** October 31, 2014, 09:17:53 PM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

I see His Lordship's opening EC remarks as somewhat defensive of Bp. Fellay, arguing that the latter did not have full knowledge, thereby justifying, at least somewhat, his actions in 2006. If the SSPX has fallen apart, it is certainly not primarily over +Fellay's refusing to comply with Our Lady's demands.

I see the last ECs as a defense of Bp. Fellay. I don't know if in the future issues this will change, but as it is now, Bp. Williamson is defending Bp. Fellay. He is even repeating the superior general's errors:

* The Most Blessed Virgin Mary is behind the deplorable motu proprio Summorum pontificuм.

* The first Rosary Crusade was a success.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #246 on:** October 31, 2014, 10:46:58 PM »

Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant

Quote from: Militia Jesu
Quote from: Ladislaus
So what exactly does Dawn Marie hope to gain from this besides publicity?

I don't know for sure but someone already mentioned she has a "Donate Button" on her website.

This CANNOT get anymore bizarre!!! Or can?

The donations are for Mass stipends for the Crusader's masses for the consecration of Russia. Why are you deliberately trying to make it sound like she is soliciting donations for her personal use? That is underhanded behavior.

I just checked and it also says: "...contributions also go toward having Masses said and toward the support of the Monastery of the Holy Cross of the Benedictine Monks of Brazil."

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #247 on:** October 31, 2014, 10:47:34 PM »

"DM Motives is just speculation".

This is a thread to no where and the bottomless pit.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #248 on:** November 01, 2014, 09:49:18 AM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

Mary had a genuine communication, or communications, form Our Lady, or she didn't. Bp. X has confirmed that she did, apparently, although he may have wavered in the past. Whatever the present ulterior motives of the two may be in fine, subtle shades of gray, I'll leave to chat forum experts like yourself.

Obviously, on the objective level, you are quite correct. Either she had a genuine vision or she did not. I am in the camp of having adopted the default position of Catholics, which is that of skepticism. Unless I see evidence or proof to the contrary, something which would overcome that default stance, then I remain in the default stance. In other words, the burden of proof is on the visionary and on Bishop Williamson. What I was addressing was the fact that OTHERS are making this about motivations. So, for instance, even if we can rightly conclude that the visions are false, we cannot know where in the spectrum of falsehood it lies, from the one end of outright fabrication to the other of being convinced that she was indeed receiving a vision but it was her mind playing tricks on her, or anywhere in between; only God knows the truth really.