Author Topic: SSPX invites Fr. Kilcawley Expert on Theology of The Body, from Lincoln, Diocese  (Read 3748 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline homeschoolmom

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Reputation: +85/-14
  • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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".

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17800
    • Reputation: +9968/-4471
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • It's NOT Mary Magdalene.  Private revelation says it's NOT.
    ...
    Church fathers can be wrong on matters not pertaining to the Faith.


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


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17800
    • Reputation: +9968/-4471
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pope St. Gregory the Great:
    Quote
    “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,”

    Offline Viva Cristo Rey

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7443
    • Reputation: +2094/-262
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In regards to other talks why bring up Protestantism or Rousseau education.   If you bring it up people will look into it.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau  
    ( I have never heard of him. ).  

    Who cares about Rousseau, Protestants or theology of the body?   Bring up how Catholics should raise children. Supply people with traditional Catholic resources.  

    I think most traditional Catholic parents are intelligent enough to talk to their children about God and marriage.  Many things should be private and not public.  

    The main thing is to keep children, teens off all social media period.  If they need one then get one without text and internet.  They are bombarding everyone with shady evil info and advertisements.  
    Temptation.  It is getting worse. 
     


    To live with the Saints in Heaven is all bliss and glory....To live with the saints on Earth is just another story!  (unknown)

    Offline apollo

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 418
    • Reputation: +188/-96
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • 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.


    Offline apollo

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 418
    • Reputation: +188/-96
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!4
  • Private revelation means nothing.  And the Catholic principle is that in matters of interpreting Scripture the Church Fathers are the standard unless proven otherwise.
    .
    Interpreting the Scriptures means speculating about who the unknown woman is ?
    .
    I don't think so.
    .
    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.
    .
    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. 
    .


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17800
    • Reputation: +9968/-4471
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17800
    • Reputation: +9968/-4471
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Anne Catherine Emmerick means nothing?
    Mary of Agreda means nothing?

    Correct.  They mean nothing from the standpoint of deriving theological conclusions from them.

    1) Nobody knows for sure if they wrote everything in the works attributed to them.

    2) Even if the visions are genuine, it's difficult to separate actual private revelation from interjections from their own minds.

    There's a reason the Church fell short of canonizing them.  It's because the Church did not wish to implicitly endorse everything in these works.

    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.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17800
    • Reputation: +9968/-4471
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 528
    • Reputation: +178/-135
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Anne Catherine Emmerick means nothing?
    Mary of Agreda means nothing?
    Nothing??
    .
    Then what do you mean?  
    .
    Less than nothing.
    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.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17800
    • Reputation: +9968/-4471
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17800
    • Reputation: +9968/-4471
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'll take Pope Gregory the Great and the Church Fathers over this private revelation.

    With that said, there's no definitive explicit Church teaching on the matter, and you're entitled to an opinion.  What I objected to as Modernist was the derogatory comments about the Church Fathers being wrong and needing to "stay out of" speculation (whereas it's OK for you).  Modernists always have this hubris about how the ancients had it wrong and we moderns know better.  You're just dripping with that mentality.

    Offline Viva Cristo Rey

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7443
    • Reputation: +2094/-262
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.  









    To live with the Saints in Heaven is all bliss and glory....To live with the saints on Earth is just another story!  (unknown)

    Offline Texana

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 8
    • Reputation: +12/-2
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Dear viva Cristo Rey:  In an interview (on YouTube-The Regular Catholic Guy) novus ordo priest Kilcawley admits being addicted to pornography and sex since age 14 through 2009-2013 when he was in graduate school at JPII Institute in Rome--after being ordained to the novus ordo rite in 2005.  Because of some "good therapists" he is now "cured" and he talks about pornography and sex with people all day, every day and gets paid to do it!
         Who in the SSPX or in the Angelus Press office thought it was a good idea to "recruit" him to speak at an SSPX conference??
    Will any parent, any priest, anybody say a peep before or at the conference?  
         Please tell me we are just in another episode of Twilight Zone, so--no worries.

    Offline apollo

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 418
    • Reputation: +188/-96
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16