Traditional Conference: “Porn Priest” & Bishop Fellay To Share Platform…

Traditional Conference: “Porn Priest” & Bishop Fellay To Share Platform…

“Angelus Press is the publishing house of the Society of Saint Pius X. It has defended the Catholic Faith for over 40 years and now reaches the four corners of the globe with its numerous publications and products. Through these last 40 years Angelus Press has maintained an uncompromising adherence to Tradition and unflinchingly continues the work started by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre…” Source 

Given the close association between the SSPX and Angelus Press, therefore, it is not difficult, to imagine the horror of one of our readers who emailed earlier today with the shocking news that a priest of the Diocese of Lincoln, USA, regarded as something of an expert in pornography and who promotes an entirely new approach to how to deal with impure thoughts, has been invited to address the Angelus Press Conference, 4-6 October:  “Defense of the Family: Fortifying Catholic Marriage.” With Guest Speaker: Bishop Bernard Fellay – Source

Below, the biographical note about Fr Sean Kilcawley, taken from the diocesan website: 

About Fr Sean Kilcawley, Director of the Office of Family Life

Fr. Sean Kilcawley is a nationally recognized speaker on Theology of the Body, Human Love and pornography addiction. He was ordained a priest in 2005 for the Diocese of Lincoln. He served as assistant pastor at St. Joseph and North American Martyrs and taught Theology of the body at Pius X High School from 2005-2009. In 2013 Fr. Kilcawley completed a License in Sacred Theology at the John Paul II institute for marriage and family studies in Rome and returned to the Diocese of Lincoln as director of Religious Education. Fr. Kilcawley currently serves as the Director of the Office of Family Life and theological advisor for Integrity Restored.com--a non-profit organization that seeks to restore the integrity of families affected by pornography by providing education and resources to individuals, spouses, parents and clergy; to both heal and prevent wounds inflicted by the sexualized culture.

My correspondent provided me with plenty of written evidence to demonstrate that this priest is most definitely not a suitable speaker for ANY Catholic event, let alone a supposedly traditional – SSPX – event.  However, I’ve already written too much, so I’ll now let  Fr Kilcawley speak for himself in the short video clip below.  His advice on dealing with impurity contradicts, outright, the advice of saints down the centuries, so would YOU want your teenage children listening to this man?  Are you happy to think that priests and parents, not to mention a traditional Catholic Bishop,  will be listening to this man at a Conference ostensibly designed to defend  the family and to strengthen Catholic marriage?  No?  Well,  what should happen now, then?   Should the invitation be withdrawn?  We had to do this ourselves a few years ago, when we invited an American author to address one of our Conferences but, on uncovering some doubt about some of her claims, we felt we had no choice but to disinvite her.  So…  should Angelus Press withdraw its invitation to Fr Kilcawley? 

The devil is always discovering something novel against the truth.
                                                Pope St. Leo the Great   

Comments (104)

  • Miles Immaculatae Reply

    I mentioned in my first comment on this blog post that I had been harmed in the past by Catholic quacks and their dubious psychological theories. Here is a video of Dr Joseph Nicolosi promoting pornograpy in therapy:

    https://youtu.be/dzrZCSwLANo

    And here is a page of the USA SSPX website promoting and praising the same Dr Joseph Nicolosi:

    https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/american-psychologist-joseph-nicolosi-passed-away-28546

    Alan Chambers, the former leader of the organisation that ran the conference where Nicolosi gave this speech has said publicly that he banned Nicolosi from speaking at subsequent conferences because he was promoting the use of pornograpy in clinical practice. Here is a direct quote spoken by Nicolosi:

    “I do not use heterosexual pornography with my clients. I do ask them (if they wish to do this; some clients do not, and I never expect my clients to do anything they do not wish to do) to bring up a compelling image from gay porn that they wish to reduce the power of, and we work on diminishing its power (a technique with which we have had considerable success).”

    Source:

    https://thinkprogress.org/ex-gay-in-fighting-exposes-silliness-of-dangerous-sin-motivated-treatments-bc2eeaa865db/

    This is absolutely absurd: the use of homosexual pornograpy to help diminish homosexual temptations? Not only is this immoral from a Catholic perspective, what Nicolosi says is pure psuedo-science and EMDR in combination with pornographic stimuli does not cure homosexual attractions. It’s pure quackery. And Traditional Catholics should know better than to promote it. It’s not popular in Europe, we don’t tend to give credence to this kind of rubbish, but in America it’s big business.

    Dr Nicolosi was promoted by Courage Apostolate for years. The same Courage Apostolate founded by Fr John Harvey who recommended that pederast abuser priests receive therapy from men like Nicolosi, and then be moved to other parishes.

    Keep your children away from fad psychology. I think it’s demonic.

    October 4, 2019 at 2:11 am
    • RCAVictor Reply

      Miles Immaculatae,

      Your post bears witness, once again, to the SSPX’s due diligence carelessness. That article you linked on the SSPX website was actually from LifeSiteNews – although the header says “Source: District of the USA.” But since this is the USA District website, one wonders why its source is itself…

      The Society’s internal chaos is an ongoing problem.

      October 4, 2019 at 10:21 pm
      • Miles Immaculatae

        Yes, I agree, I think it is just mindless carelessness that they linked this article. Life Site News is not Traditional. It’s a neo-Catholic establishment. Now the folk at Life Site News may be good, sincere, well meaning folk, but they aren’t Traditional, and as such they are disorientated. Consequently, any organ of the FSSPX should take great care not to endorse them or anything tinged with moral or doctrinal error.

        Confused and disorientated people like me look to the SSPX for clarity!

        October 4, 2019 at 11:38 pm
  • RCAVictor Reply

    I noted Athanasius’ comments about his long-term observations of the SSPX, and his opinion that cultural Marxism has infiltrated the Society. I’ve been watching the Amazon Synod Roundtable discussion on YouTube sponsored by Voice of the Family, with some very big names (including, strangely enough, Voris). Unfortunately there is a scrolling chat window to the right of the video, containing some of the most absurd comments.

    One of them, however, was interesting, in that a woman claimed with great certainty that Modernism had not infiltrated the Society! I had to wonder if she would recognize Modernism if she saw it….

    October 4, 2019 at 4:45 pm
    • editor Reply

      RCA Victor,

      I’m surprised that Voris participated in that discussion about the Synod – he, of course, would just LOVE to know about this SSPX disappointment. Laughably, he is still banging “the SSPX is in schism” drum, so maybe this would come as a relief to him – proof that they’re NOT in schism after all, if they’re pushing impurity.

      Could you – I mean COULD you, make up this stuff? That’s the correct grammar but it doesn’t have the same ring to it, does it, as “you just couldn’t make this stuff UP”!

      October 4, 2019 at 10:53 pm
      • Miles Immaculatae

        I realised Michael Voris had lost the plot when he said it was immoral to judge the Pope based on doctrinal contentions, but acceptable to judge him based on moral contentions. He’s got it completely the wrong way around!

        October 4, 2019 at 11:32 pm
    • Athanasius Reply

      RCA Victor

      The problem with this woman, as with so many others, is that while they look for signs of Modernism they fail to notice an infiltration of the principles of cultural Maxism into the education system, of which Fr. Kilcawley is the most brazen to date. The schooling system in the U.S. has had other problems in this regard, I think I mentioned here before about certain teachers and reading materials being deployed in SSPX schools in the U.S. The main problem lies in America and I think Menzingen really needs to look at the hierarchy there.

      October 5, 2019 at 12:18 pm
  • gabriel syme Reply

    I dont think this has been posted (see below).

    Louie Verrercchio has spoken with James Vogel, who is editor at Angelus Press, the organiser of their conferences and a communications director for the US district of the SSPX.

    Regarding the controversy, Mr Vogel says, in brief summary:

    – the SSPX take objections to Fr Kilcawley;s invite seriously and will address them
    – the conference will not be changed in any way
    – the conference will not be streamed live, as per previous. Instead audio will be provided later. People are asked to listen in full, before making judgement.
    – Angelus Press hopes to address this matter in full via a forthcoming podcast
    – Fr Kilcawley’s presentation has been pre-vetted, which is a standard procedure for all invited speakers
    – Mr Vogel states the presentation will not be controversial, but notes that the SSPX does not endorse any of the speakers work in its totality, regardless of who they are.
    – Mr Vogel has invited concerned parties to contact him with comments or queries, at
    jvogel@angeluspress.org

    https://akacatholic.com/angelus-conference-controversy-sspx-responds/

    Not a great response, but it seems more of a primer that “more is to come” by way of explanation / reassurance.

    Based on these comments, It is a concern that a controversial speaker could be invited but then Angelus Press / SSPX would shrug off concern by saying “we don’t endorse the totality of their work”.

    A sedevacantist or holocaust denier could be invited, based on that criteria.

    October 4, 2019 at 10:41 pm
    • editor Reply

      Gabriel Syme,

      That is a very unsatisfactory “assurance” – not least because the conference will not be streamed live, as previously. Simply audio later – yes, after it’s been carefully edited.

      And if this priest is not going to controversial – what on earth is he going to say?

      You are spot on with your remark about a sedevacantist/holocaust denier being eligible to speak under that silly “we don’t endorse the totality of their work” – if they can’t endorse the totality of their work, they shouldn’t be invited.

      I remember hearing/reading that Pope Benedict had prefaced his book on Our Lord with a warning it wasn’t necessary accurate, or words to that effect.

      I made an instant decision neither to purchase it or read it – ever.

      October 4, 2019 at 11:01 pm
      • Athanasius

        Editor

        Your point is spot on. Can you imagine the Angelus Press inviting Cardinal Walter Kasper to speak at the Angelus Conference on, say, devotion to Our Lady and then trying to justify the invitation by saying “we don’t agree with his heresies but he gives a nice wee talk on Our Lady, and we’ll be watching him anyway because we know he can’t be fully trusted”. It’s ludicrous!

        October 5, 2019 at 12:08 am
    • Athanasius Reply

      Gabriel Syme

      The comment you post containing Mr. Vogel’s response to the Fr. Kilcawley invite appears to be very similar in tone (arrogant) as a response put up on a closed SSPX group discussion on Facebook, over which Mr. Vogel is one of several administrators.

      Here’s what I think is his response to concerned Catholics in the U.S. and other parts of the world to the Fr. Kilcawley affair. Naturally, my comment follows!

      SSPX Faithful Group Admins

      “People may or may not like the fact that Fr. Kilcawley is speaking at the Angelus Conference. However, in the SSPX, decisions like this are not made haphazardly, but rather for the good of souls. If the Society did not consider the necessity great, Fr. Kilcawley would not have been asked to speak. It is no mere academic exercise. Because of this great cancer infecting souls, the District has called in an expert in this matter to speak. Judge the wisdom of SSPX by its fruits and not by speculations.”

      The first thing to note about this comment is the arrogance with which it is delivered. The second point of note, much more worrying, is the reference to “great necessity”. What does the author mean by this? The third point to note is the false claim that Fr. Kilcawley is an expert when we know he’s nothing of the sort. Fr. Kilcawley is a Novus Ordo psychology priest, the very personification of everything the SSPX stands against in its fight to maintain faith and morals.

      The faithful who have raised genuine concerns about this “Theology of the Body” priest have done so for very good reason, and they deserve no less than a full and proper explanation. The days of clerics and their jobsworthys responding with “pay up and shut up” are long gone, the post-conciliar clerical betrayal diminished that trust forever. This Fr. Kilcawley business wreaks of cultural Marxist infiltration of the SSPX on a grand scale, sharing a podium with Bishop Fellay no less, and it warrants immediate investigation by Menzingen.

      And just in case they still can’t see the danger Fr. Kilcawley represents to purity and innocence, especially in the young, then let’s recall again his blasphemous suggestion that instead of asking Our Lord to remove impure thoughts, or fleeing them as the saints admonish, we should rather invite Our Lord into the mind to co-view them. That one statement alone should have been sufficient for any Traditional Catholic priest or lay person in authority to declare Fr. Kilcawley persona non grata. Urgent answers must be forthcoming together with urgent action against whoever was responsible for this outrage.
      .

      October 4, 2019 at 11:58 pm
    • RCAVictor Reply

      Gabriel Syme,

      Pardon me for reverting to my blunt self, but I am so tired of BS artists. In the case of this particular response, if the SSPX takes the objections seriously, then why is it that they refuse to change the conference in any way?

      Answer: they don’t take the objections seriously. And extrapolating from that, they really don’t know what is for the good of souls and what is not. They are living in an ivory tower completely removed from Catholic reality…and probably terrestrial reality as well.

      Pathetic.

      And I believe Athanasius has dealt with the other ramifications in his post below.

      October 5, 2019 at 2:41 pm
      • RCAVictor

        (Sorry, that’s Athanasius’ post above mine, not below)

        October 5, 2019 at 2:43 pm
  • Athanasius Reply

    Just a quick response to Mr. Vogel welcoming questions/queries about Fr. Kilcawley. I wrote to him via the Angelus Press and received no response. I also wrote to Fr. Wegner, U.S. District Superior and received no response, at least not yet. Too late now that the dirty deed is done!

    October 5, 2019 at 12:10 am
  • gabriel syme Reply

    Angelus press is announcing that the 2019 Conference was “a great success” and “acclaimed “The best Conference yet” by many attendees!”

    This is on email (I am on their mailing list) and also their website here:

    https://angeluspress.org/blogs/blog/angelus-press-conference-2019-a-great-success

    Has anyone seen or heard more about the responses Mr Vogel claimed would be issued regarding the objections about the conference?

    There is a “conference audio” section here, but it has not been updated for 2019 so far:

    https://angeluspress.org/collections/downloads/Conference-Audio

    October 9, 2019 at 9:52 pm
    • Lily Reply

      Gabriel Syme,

      It will only confirm suspicions if that priest’s talk is not published in full. It was difficult to watch those photos of that crowd and imagine their faces when Fr Kilcawley told them to invite Jesus into their imaginations to watch porn with them.

      I can’t get over that – how on earth can Bishop Fellay justify it?

      October 9, 2019 at 9:56 pm
    • Athanasius Reply

      Gabriel Syme

      I wrote to both the SSPX District Superior of the U.S. (Fr. Wegner) and Mr. Vogel at Angelus Press, pointing out the obvious in accordance with the Traditional moral teaching of the Church and her saints. The silence ever since has been deafening which leads me to believe that Fr. Kilcawley’s invitation to speak at the Conference is down to more than misguided good will. They are either too proud to admit their blunder or they are cultural Marxist infiltrators into Tradition. I suspect the former, though the latter’s principles triumph. Either way it’s extremely worrying.

      October 10, 2019 at 1:08 pm
  • Josephine Reply

    They have published Father Kilcawley’s talk in full at this podcast link
    http://sspxpodcast.com/

    I would be interested to know what others think of it.

    October 12, 2019 at 8:26 pm
  • Josephine Reply

    I meant to say I am now giving serious thought to voting for the Scottish Family Party who made that video. I hope Brexit is done by the time of the election as I really would prefer to vote for a party which is committed to real family values.

    October 14, 2019 at 4:31 pm
    • Margaret Mary Reply

      I agree – Richard Lucas is very brave in that video and John Swinney is a real moral coward. I think he knows he is in the wrong about this but is too weak a character to resist the LGBT crowd.

      I would be tempted to vote for his party as well, but if you read the Principles, it finishes with a statement that they are opposed to abortion except in extreme circumstances which could mean the usual, rape, disability or whatever. That’s a no-go for me.

      October 14, 2019 at 4:51 pm
  • crofterlady Reply

    MM I see what you mean regarding the stance on abortion but, if we wait for the perfect party to vote for, we’d never vote! And, it’s by voting that we get a change of parties and any party has to be better than what we’ve presently got. I’ve decided to join the Scottish Family Party and I’ll also spread the word amongst my family and friends.

    As to that video content, it is vile beyond words.

    October 15, 2019 at 1:55 pm
  • Athanasius Reply

    Rarely have I witnessed anything so overtly evil as this SNP corruption of childhood innocence promoted as “education”. Surely so-called responsible politicians, teachers and/or parents who even contemplate the presentation of such perverted filth to kids in the name of “equipping them for the world” should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity. I know that what they propose is certainly one of the worst sins before God, who said:

    “But he that shall scandalise one of these little ones of mine, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea.” Mattew 18, 6-8.

    Here we have proof positive that the SNP is a cultural Marxist party intent on eradicating all Christian culture and morals from our society. This is what Marxists do, as the Popes have warned, they target incautious youth with destructive propaganda, indoctrinating children to rebel against God, against virtue and even against the natural order. They know that to bring down Christian society they have to eliminate its foundation, Christian marriage and the Christian family, and nothing achieves that goal as easily as teaching the kids 100 ways to become little sexual perverts whilst protesting that they are ensuring a healthy development. This is the “Father of Lies” at his best!

    I would hate to be a child growing up in this world today, exposed to all manner of evils by those whose duty it is to shield the young from harm, especially moral corruption. What kind of human beings are these people who view such filthy material with an approving nod that all children should see it? This is where I’m afraid I have to stop myself from saying what I think of them.

    Our Lady of Fatima told the three children that a majority of souls go to Hell through sins of the flesh, and yet here we have the Scottish government facilitating the eternal damnation of so many by its policy to make sins of the flesh “fun” for the young to view and emulate. Yes, it’s straight from Hell and what a judgment these facilitators will face when they pass from this short life to eternity!

    October 16, 2019 at 2:46 am
  • Athanasius Reply

    I received the following response 5 days ago from James Vogel at the Angelus:

    Many thanks for your e-mail: I didn’t have a chance to read this until after the conference as I received it during. My apologies! I’m only now catching up on e-mails.

    We recorded a podcast explaining why we invited Father along with the audio of his talk from our conference itself:

    http://sspxpodcast.com/

    I hope this helps; we appreciate your writing to us and ask for your prayers.

    Pax et Bonum,
    James Vogel

    Since it didn’t begin to touch on the many points raised in my original communication with Mr. Vogel, I sent another letter (below). Thus far I have received no further response from anyone in charge, so I thought it right to make my letter public for all to read and weigh.

    “Dear Mr. Vogel,
    Thank you for your kind response to my email concerning Fr. Kilcawley.

    I listened to the podcast you linked but I have to say, respectfully, that it did not diminish my concern in the least, nor, if I understand correctly, has it alleviated the concerns of so many other Traditional Catholics equally worried by this development.

    You will doubtless be aware of the controversy generated not so long ago by Fr. Paul Robinson’s book “Realist Guide to Religion and Science”, a work which, rather than strengthen the belief of the faithful in Sacred Scripture, left many of the lesser informed disturbed and ill at ease by its dismissal of certain aspects of the Creation account recorded in Genesis.

    Not only is the subject matter of this book too complex for the average Catholic to understand, it also contains personal errors in observation and conclusion that take Fr. Robinson’s thesis much further than the Church would permit in normal healthy times. Why a Traditional Catholic priest chose to open such a Pandora’s box in an unprecedented era of great crisis of faith is beyond me, yet the book is endorsed by the SSPX hierarchy.

    Now we witness the same imprudent course being followed in relation to Catholic morals by way of Fr. Kilcawley’s psychology angle on pornography addiction. Once again the approach is novel and controversial, the work of another pseudo-“expert”, that leaves Catholics unsettled by the apparent contradiction it represents with the Traditional teaching and methods of the Church and her saints.
    The basic rule of thumb I apply in such matters as these is that any subject touching faith and morals which leaves the faithful disturbed in mind or soul is not from God, regardless of how well intentioned the instigators of the scandal may be.

    In Fr. Robinson’s work I see more Rationalist than Realist and in Fr. Kilcawley’s work I see more Cultural Marxist than Catholic Moralist. It may surprise you to learn in respect to the latter that the very same sex and sexuality tactic was employed by psychologists in post-conciliar seminaries to the very great detriment of priestly celibacy, a fact that certain of the psychologists involved proudly chalked up as a success given their secularist view of chastity as “repressive”.

    In this regard, I have heard that seminarians in Virginia are now being asked to undergo psychological evaluation before ordination, similar to what is done in modernist seminaries. If true, then the SSPX really is losing the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre; for the introduction of psychology into the Catholic religion, as per the Modernist example, is certainly indicative of a decline in supernatural faith.

    As a pertinent aside, I recall reading the text of an interview with the infamous serial rapist and killer Ted Bundy, his final testament if you like before being executed by the State for his crimes. Claiming to have repented and made his peace with God, a claim which God alone will know to be true or false, he declared that his actions were simply those of a man who, despite a happy, healthy and religious upbringing, fell into the trap of viewing pornographic magazines. This, he said, was the beginning of an insatiable lust that led to ever degenerating actions until he reached the point of utter depravity.

    Bundy more or less cast scorn on the psychologists who looked to his mind for answers to his behaviour. To paraphrase his response he said: “I was neither mad nor sad, I was just plain bad”. Bundy did not hesitate to acknowledge that his actions were due to his state of soul, the presence of evil and the absence of grace, a truth that fits well with Traditional Catholic teaching.

    And if further proof were required that addiction to impurity is a vice that God’s grace alone can deliver its victims from, I offer the examples of St. Mary Magdalene, St. Augustine and St. Mary of Egypt. All three were delivered from their enslavement to lust by supernatural grace, not a psychologist in sight!

    That access to pornographic material is more widely and easily accessible in our time does not alter fundamental Catholic teaching that mortal sin is an act of the will, not of the mind. If depression is present in the mind of a person in mortal sin then it is the sin that’s causing the depression, not the other way around. This glaring fact led Bishop Fulton Sheen to declare that psychology is merely Confession without absolution. In other words, it’s worthless.

    I would go further and add that it is also extremely dangerous, for it contradicts the Church and her saints who admonish the faithful to play the coward when it comes to impure temptations, fleeing every occasion of impure thought and conversation. How can this ever square with Fr. Kilcawley’s advice that Christ should be invited into the mind to view impure thoughts with us, or with his therapy groups in which sex addicts openly discuss amongst themselves the details of their sinful behaviour?

    Our Lady told the three children of Fatima that the greater number of souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh. To counter this tragic trend she encouraged prayer, penance and mortification. At no time did she advocate the use of psychologists. If I recall correctly, however, Fr. Edouard Dhanis employed psychology to undermine the integrity of the Third Secret as well as Our Lady’s request for the consecration of Russia by suggesting that Sister Lucy’s pious childhood memories had intertwined with Our Lady’s words and distorted her message. Very clever and hugely ironic!

    Well I think I have said enough on the subject to hopefully cause you, Fr. Beck and Fr. Wegner to reflect. As far as I can tell, and this can be ascribed also to the Fr. Robinson business, the only people to be helped by these innovative initiatives are the so-called “Resistance” folks who present them as solid proof that the SSPX is drifting into Modernism. As much as I have vigorously opposed their claims in the past, I cannot do so now because on this occasion, sadly, their assertions have a solid foundation.

    What I hope to see in the coming days, please God, is a very public change of heart on the part of Frs. Beck, Wegner and yourself, a recognition that with the best will in the world the Fr. Kilcawley invitation was a monumental error in judgment. What this would demonstrate to the faithful is that even SSPX intellectuals and clerical superiors can make mistakes, though with the marked difference of having the humility to own up to them. I think this would certainly go some way to undoing the damage this event has caused to so many souls. To this end, I would appreciate it if you would give Frs. Beck and Wegner a copy of this letter.

    Please be assured of my prayers.”

    October 17, 2019 at 3:38 pm
    • RCAVictor Reply

      Athanasius,

      What a splendid, clear and irrefutable letter! When you say you have received no response from anyone in charge, I’m guessing you also sent this to the SSPX hierarchy? I hope so…

      October 17, 2019 at 6:58 pm
      • Athanasius

        RCA Victor

        No, I haven’t sent the letter directly to the SSPX hierarchy but I did ask James Vogel to pass it on to the U.S. superiors, Frs. Beck & Wegner. What I should do now is post a copy to Fr. Pagliarani in Menzingen. I’m a little lethargic in this regard, though, because years of experience have taught me that the SSPX hierarchy does not generally pay much heed to concerns raised by ‘impertinent’ faithful. Harsh as it may sound, the general rule seems to be to close ranks around members of the clerical brotherhood whenever concerns are raised by lower beings.

        How I miss the saintly Archbishop Lefebvre!

        October 17, 2019 at 7:44 pm
      • RCAVictor

        Athanasius,

        Maybe you could talk Editor into including your letter as an article in the next newsletter….if those Happiness Engineers don’t get in the way…

        October 17, 2019 at 9:01 pm
      • Athanasius

        RCA Victor

        Now that you’ve sent out the subliminal message, so to speak, we’ll have to wait and see if the chief happiness engineer has the space or the inclination to slot that one into the newsletter. I think space may be tight, what with all the myriad of other subjects that have to be slotted in to the newsletter. I’m just happy that I was able to keep folks up to date here on the blog. You see, now I’m on my way to being a happiness engineer!

        October 17, 2019 at 9:15 pm
      • editor

        Athanasius & RCA Victor,

        While I would LOVE to have included the letter in the November newsletter, it is just jam packed, finished and about to go to the printer. Sorry! I’ve had to set aside quite a few bits and pieces which I would have loved to include but just not possible this time.

        I’ll see what can be organised for the January edition – but what an awful start to the New Year that would be! No offence, Athanasius – you’ll get my drift. Actually, unless John Swinney has removed his disgraceful approval of the pornographic material he is permitting to be used in Scottish schools, I think I can see a wee pattern there, so don’t lose hope. Or rather, let’s hope that it’s all sorted by then and children are no longer at risk from such abusive sex education. Then the hunt will be on for something else to put in the newsletter 😀

        October 17, 2019 at 9:38 pm
      • RCAVictor

        Editor,

        I suspected that would be the case. I think “Chief Happiness Engineer,” however, is a much more impressive title than “Editor” – though it might have certain Orwellian overtones…

        …as in…”We;re sending you to the Chief Happiness Engineer, Winston, for some re-programming of your dangerous thoughts…”

        October 17, 2019 at 9:45 pm
  • editor Reply

    Apologies, Athanasius – no idea why your latest comment went into moderation.

    October 17, 2019 at 3:48 pm
    • Athanasius Reply

      Editor

      Not to worry, it’s the WordPress platform to blame for that. I knew you would spot the comment eventually.

      October 17, 2019 at 7:47 pm
      • editor

        Athanasius,

        Thank you for your understanding. I’ve had hassle every time I’ve tried to log in today, so the WordPress “Happiness Engineers” (who were undoubtedly less than happy by the end of our session!) advised me to try another browser. Took me a while to work that one out but now I’ve managed to log in thanks to (drum roll) … Firefox.

        Let’s see how long it lasts. The mysteries of the internet are much harder to fathom, in my humble view, than any mystery of the Faith!

        And now that I’ve worked it out – I need a break 😀

        October 17, 2019 at 8:18 pm
      • Athanasius

        Editor

        Good old Firefox, the only browser I use, though I think it’s slowing down with all the security updates they’re giving it. If it continues to get slower then I’ll simply fire the fox and move on.

        October 17, 2019 at 9:09 pm
      • RCAVictor

        Editor,

        Funny you should mention Firefox: I stopped using that browser about 5 months ago, because it kept getting hacked, i.e. a fake “warning” screen would appear, freezing the browser and the computer, and instructing me to call Microsoft.

        I became suspicious when I noticed a pattern to this hacking: it always happened right after I viewed two “right-wing” websites, WorldNetDaily and TheNewAmerican. So I ran all manner of anti-virus scans, uninstalled and reinstalled Firefox per the instructions of some tech assistance website…but when it happened again I switched browsers to Opera, and haven’t had any trouble since.

        October 17, 2019 at 9:10 pm
      • editor

        RCA Victor,

        Well, forewarned is forearmed, as the saying goes, so thank you for that. I’ve never been much of an opera fan but needs must if Firefox drives, to paraphrase the old saying!

        October 17, 2019 at 9:41 pm
      • Athanasius

        RCA Victor

        I’ll watch out for that, had no idea Firefox was that vulnerable. Mind you, telll me one browser of website that’s not vulnerable to hackers. It’s enough to hack you off!

        October 17, 2019 at 10:01 pm
  • Marcy Ray Reply

    Hello,

    I just want to add that I appreciate the letters that were written against the talk given by Fr. Kilcawley at the Angelus conference. Even if it doesn’t seem as though your concerns were taken seriously, it’s good that you wrote. If no one complains, then it will be assumed that there wasn’t a problem.

    The issue of Fr. Kilcawley was brought up and discussed (debated) before the conference, on the CathInfo forum. Some of you may know it, or may have heard of it, as the “Resistance” forum. This comments section of this blog was recently referred to there (in a positive manner), so I thought I’d mention it.

    October 23, 2019 at 6:44 pm
  • editor Reply

    Marcy Ray,

    Thank you for this information – greatly appreciated.

    October 23, 2019 at 7:18 pm
  • cathjnc Reply

    Kilcawley changed things up a bit from his normal routine, but even in his vetted talk, not only was group therapy (man-centered) programs heavily recommended, he was allowed to invite SSPX priests & laity to attend his “My House Workshop for Men” – a 3-day intensive in Kansas City where he is on the team with 3 other therapists (so traditionalists can go learn his unvetted modernist approaches in that forum).

    The site for that workshop is FULL of anti-Catholic modernist materials. His IntegrityRestored.com site is advertised, again, which heavily promotes Theology of the Body & authors who degrade the Faith. That same controversial video on how to deal with impure temptations is on a link for priests (which also contains a link to an article on why 12-step group programs are a good idea, though Traditional Priests have warned about them.). His Porn Plague talk with all of its feelings-based, man-centered, Theology of the Body-influenced philosophies is posted under Resources. Classes for children (which include Theology of the Body) are recommended on the site. And Bishop Barron (who praised Henri DeLubac for his nouvelle theologie & believes Christ is simply a “privileged” route to salvation among many routes) is on the Resource page speaking favorably on a psychology professor, Jordan Peterson, who presents the archetypal psychology of C.G. Jung, a disciple of Sigmund Freud. Psychologists, such as Freud & Jung, are known to destroy the Faith, but no one would guess that by watching Bishop Barron’s video. Barron recommends this psychologist/author, lauding his use of the Dao symbol for balance & says at the very end that he is worried about his gnosticizing tendency. (And we wonder why Catholics are confused.) Psychotherapists & social workers are recommended on this site. It is all very humanist. https://centerforhealingkc.com/myhouse/my-house-initiative https://centerforhealingkc.com/resources/audio-books

    In the videos below, a Traditional Priest explains why group therapy/12-step programs are harmful to the Catholic faith & how having accountability partners is evil (though Kilcawley highly recommends it). The details of the evils of group therapy/12-step addiction programs begin at timestamp 35:40: https://youtu.be/3i6vyzo-K3c Part 2: https://youtu.be/bNT7W49J-Aw

    When dioceses/NO priests have adopted these Marxist methods, it is extremely troubling that traditional priests are looking to them for advice. There are concerns about teachers in our SSPX school adopting some of these ideas/methods. Some attended the conference. There is a popular “Catholic” group therapy/sharing circle program (similar to what Fr. Kilcawley recommends) being adopted in Catholic schools. It would fall under “Communist Sensitivity Training”. It is used in Fr. Kilcawley’s diocese, and I fought it in my diocese. It was created by a human dignity curriculum writer for the U.N.’s World Youth Alliance; she incorporates training by a non-Christian international social justice organization, & its book has the imprimatur of the Archbishop of St. Louis. (Another example of the New Order destroying the Faith.) I have feedback from some of the top Catholic researchers in the country explaining why this program is anti-Catholic. This program (& other psychological & group therapy-type programs, like Fr. Kilcawley’s) leads to a breakdown of the Faith, consensus morals, & a destruction of the Divine authority structure as it is a horizontal feelings-based approach to behavioral issues vs. a vertical dogmatic approach to spiritual issues that affect behavior.

    Here is the link to Kilcawley’s talk: http://sspxpodcast.com/2019/10/danger-online-fr-kilcawley/
    Here is the link to Fr. Wegner’s and James Vogel’s comments on Fr. Kilcawley’s invitation: http://sspxpodcast.com/2019/10/interview-fr-wegner-vogel-conference/
    It’s troubling to hear them rationalize this invitation & that SSPX priests will now be referring laity to Fr. Kilcawley & his methods.

    November 10, 2019 at 5:55 am
    • editor Reply

      Cathjnc,

      Thank you for taking the trouble to write your lengthy post and provide linked evidence. I will check out the links as soon as possible.

      My own over-riding thought throughout this, has been how few SSPX Catholics have been able to bring themselves to criticise this shocking invitation and its aftermath.

      How on earth anyone can defend it – AND, above all, defend Bishop Fellay’s participation in it – is beyond my simple Catholic mind.

      And how anyone can keep silent – suggesting complicit consent – is another puzzle. If a modernist bishop were sharing a platform with a priest as confused, sexualised and disturbed as Fr Kilcawley, there would be no shortage of vociferous criticism. Talk about forked tongues.

      November 10, 2019 at 4:59 pm
  • Athanasius Reply

    Cathjnc

    What you describe is shocking in the extreme, the SSPX superiors cannot be ignorant of this. You hit the nail on the head with the word “conditioning”. This is truly Cultural Marxism at work within the SSPX. I remember not so long ago that in one of the SSPX schools in the U.S. there were serious questions over the content of some of the literature, especially one particular book called “The Green Knight” in which there is a strong hint at a homosexual relationship. It’s very worrying.

    November 10, 2019 at 4:24 pm
  • editor Reply

    For the record, here is how the SSPX USA District is reporting this Conference in its Review of 2019…
    http://2019.sspx.online/en_US/17971/250571/angelus_press.html

    January 1, 2020 at 10:36 am
    • cathjnc Reply

      Thanks for sharing the link. Included in the online document is the following link re: the relationship SSPX priests are developing with Conciliar bishops: http://2019.sspx.online/en_US/17971/250574/contact_with_bishops.html
      Also, see this article where an SSPX spokesman describes the open and warm relationships being established with Conciliar bishops & the pride of the SSPX in impressing these enemies of the Faith with SSPX’s traditional flocks (as if they are a commodity to be shown & sold off to these utilitarian bishops, who consider the local constituency as primarily human capital): https://catholicherald.co.uk/magazine/dozens-of-us-bishops-approve-sspx-weddings/

      I’ve learned that our Conciliar bishop in the U.S., who supports Marxist agendas in his very own schools (sold children’s souls for vouchers, broke his promise to parents), is planning on giving a talk at the local SSPX chapel (welcomed by their trusted SSPX priest, who has seemed to develop a cozy relationship with him). This modernist bishop’s political charm will likely pull innocent souls & the naive over to his side & his modernist philosophies. The next time the innocent children of this chapel see this bishop on the news, again, with his right-hand man endorsing the message of a “priest” dressed in lavender laymen’s clothing covering up the homosexual scourge, these innocent souls will likely trust this message as well as the lavender priest that the bishop is endorsing. SSPX priests are poisoning their own flocks by bringing in those who do not have the True Faith (like Kilcawley & these Conciliar bishops). Satan’s latest plan is to conceal his works with traditional aesthetics. These utilitarian freemason bishops see traditional flocks as potential human & material capital. They are willing to exchange use of N.O. buildings, administrative resources, etc. as bait to bring traditionalists into the modernist folds, mixing modernist philosophies (man-centered, feelings-based, UN-driven) with the cover of the TLM.
      Archbishop Lefebvre warned about this: “It is not the subjects that make the superiors, but the superiors who make the subjects.”

      January 2, 2020 at 10:23 pm
      • Josephine

        CathJNC,

        I have checked your links and to be honest, I think it’s a good thing that the Society priests are having positive interaction with the diocesan bishops. In the first link, all the praise is coming from the diocesan bishops TO the SSPX, not the other way round. I think such contact is very different from the disgraceful invitation to Fr Kilcawley, allowing him to peddle impurity.

        Obviously, if there are cases, such as the bishop of your own diocese who “supports Marxist agendas in his own schools”, then that should not be happening. However, I don’t think the SSPX should be cutting off all contact with the bishops of the dioceses – if they do that, how are the bishops to be given the chance to change for the better? Also, how are the SSPX faithful to learn to interact with those in the diocesan parishes, to teach them the truth?

        IMHO, the policy of keeping isolated, heads down until the crisis passes, causes a schismatic mentality and that is not at all a good thing.

        January 2, 2020 at 11:42 pm
      • cathjnc

        Having positive interaction with SSPX priests is one thing…bringing in the unconverted with their modernist anti-Catholic ideologies to influence & instruct innocent souls in traditional flocks at schools & chapels is another. Clergy should be converted before being brought in as trusted shepherds to the innocent souls who are trying to learn & conform to tradition. The diocesan bishop peddles modernism that endanger souls….just as Kilcawley does. He peddles the same errors of Theology of the Body that Kilcawley peddles in his addiction programs; he peddles socialism, relativism, global one world education (which is the one world religion), etc. Sadly, most Catholics have become modernists themselves & are blind to this danger & believe that young traditional families & children should interact with the New Order believing that the subjects will convert the superiors. Archbishop Lefebvre said this was an illusion.

        Archbishop Lefebvre: “We must absolutely convince our faithful that it is no more than a maneuver, that it is dangerous to put oneself into the hands of Conciliar bishops and Modernist Rome. It is the greatest danger threatening our people! If we have struggled for twenty years to avoid the Conciliar errors, it was not in order, now, to put ourselves in the hands of those professing these errors.” Fideliter, July/August, 1989
        “Such things are easy to say. To stay inside the Church, or to put oneself inside the Church – what does that mean? Firstly, what Church are we talking about? If you mean the Conciliar Church, then we who have struggled against the Council for twenty years because we want the Catholic Church, we would have to re-enter this Conciliar Church in order, supposedly, to make it Catholic. That is a complete illusion. It is not the subjects that make the superiors, but the superiors who make the subjects.” – Archbishop Lefebvre, Fideliter, July/August 1989

        The modernist bishops are in schism, not the traditionalists. ABL: “It is not we who are in schism but the Conciliar Church.” (Homily preached at Lille, August 29, 1976) The bishops have plenty of chances to change for the better. This bishop works with the Institute of Christ the King and their flock, who embrace much modernism due to the bishop’s influence. Only prayer and sacrifices can change him. Shepherds must protect their flocks from the modernists who destroy souls and the True Catholic Faith.

        January 3, 2020 at 1:21 am

Join the discussion


%d bloggers like this: