Actually, there's a lot of decent content there mixed in with the bad.  Why can't a Traditional priest distill this and re-present it through a Traditional Catholic lense?

Because that would show "rejection in their hearts".

Pope St. Gregory the Great:

“She whom Luke calls the sinful woman, whom John calls Mary, we believe to be the Mary from whom seven devils were ejected according to Mark,”

Private revelation means nothing.  And the Catholic principle is that in matters of interpreting Scripture the Church Fathers are the standard unless proven otherwise.

Anne Catherine Emmerick means nothing?
Mary of Agreda means nothing?
Nothing??
.
Then what do you mean? 
.
Less than nothing.

And before you say it so me (as usual), I say it to you:
You are an imbecile.
.
And if you are Matthew's friend, Matthew is an imbecile also. 

I'd rather be an imbecile than an arrogant Modernist like yourself.

The Church fathers were wrong about Geocentrism, so they should
stay out of the business of speculation and other matters that don't
pertain to the Faith.  
.

Well, pagan sun god,

#1) they were not wrong about Geocentrism.  Your self-proclaimed "slam-dunk" arguments against Geocentrism were easily debunked, and you merely demonstrated your bad will and your ignorance.  One argument got debunked, so you pulled out another one ... a pattern that exposes bad will.

#2) this insulting disrespectful language used toward the Church Fathers exposes you as the impious scoundrel that you are ... "they should stay out of the business of".  Who do you think you are?  You're the one who needs to stay out of that business.  Actual Catholics revere and respect their teachings and even their speculations.

You obviously have no clue about Church teaching nor the teaching Church. In the scope of things, both of these lady’s have no standing when it comes to authoritative writing.

Nor do we even know

1) how much of the writing attributed to them was actually their work or words  (for all we know, 95% of Emmerich's work was concocted by Brentano)

2) how much if it was actual "revelation" vs. their own editorializing.  They describe things that they see/hear or think they see/hear, and their descriptions necessarily entail a certain amount of interpretation

It's chiefly why the Church did not canonize them ... because it might have meant a tacit endorsement of everything in those works.  It's well known that on a fair number of details the various recipients of the revelations have contradicted one another.

I was viewing one of the youtube videos made by the priest and it mentions the name of porn publication.  Not good at all. Someone is going to watch that video and look up name of porn mag and might get hooked.   It is almost like the school drug programs which ended up with more young people doing drugs. Communist brainwashing.  Same with these programs like Courage it just provides more opportunities for temptation and meet ups.  It justifies the sin and now the number of mortal sin based parishes are growing. 

 It is Catholics including clergy who have enabled and promoted communism.  Also, I think it is odd that the SSPX discussions did not address the sex abuse scandals.  I feel before anyone addresses the problems with Catholic laity , they ought to clean their own house out and be fit to be examples to the laity.  

I went to a conference with a Fatima organization.  I thought it was a waste of time and money even though I enjoyed meeting up with other Catholics. Plus wear and tear on my car.   These conferences should be done at our Churches so everyone can benefit.  

I'll go with the consensus of the Church Fathers, and Pope St. Gregory the Great, first.  Even many otherwise-Modernist sources have come to the conclusion that the woman is most likely St. Mary Magdalene.

.
Is there any mention of "Mary Magdalene" in the story about
the adulterous woman in the Bible ?
.
No.
.
Therefore ... it's speculation.
.
Were there other women likely to be adulterous?
Very likely.
.
Therefore to single out Mary Magdalene is narrow-minded and
SPECULATION. 
.
End of argument.