TIA,

I very much appreciate all the work you do for Christ and His Church and I think your website is great.

Now I have a question. In the article New Saints: A Lack of Consistency Atila Sinke Guimarães calls Cardinal Newman a pre-modernist. Can you please tell me why or give me a link where I can find out more?

     God bless,

     A.M.



TIA responds:

A.M.,

Thank you for your initial words.

Cardinal Newman was one of the leaders of the liberal wing at the First Vatican Council. Among other things, he was one of the principal opponents to the dogmas of the Pontifical Infallibility and Petrine Primacy that were proclaimed by Pius IX at that Council. This opposition was characteristic of the liberal wing of Vatican I. That liberal wing gave birth to Modernism, which in turn generated Progressivism, as you may read here.

This is why Mr. Guimarães correctly qualified Cardinal Newman as a pre-modernist.

For more on Newman as pre-mdernist click here.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondent desk

Hello Tradition in Action,

As an adult woman, formerly a Protestant, now progressing along what I hope isn't a 'garden path' to becoming a Roman Catholic. I was recently the dinner guest of a couple my own age (50's), who are members of my personal support group. In the course of various topics of discussion, they wanted to loan me the DVD series "Naked without Shame," the home study material from JPII's "Theology of the Body" program.

I gracefully somehow turned down this golden opportunity; actually they explained they had not listened to the whole series of CD's themselves yet, so I expressed my willingness to wait until they were really done with the set.

Could you please comment on this material, or direct me to a previous article where you tackle it? I just feel totally repelled by what I have seen of the marketing & presentation of this teaching.

     C.E., Canada



TIA responds:

Hello C.E.,

We congratulate you for becoming Catholic. May Our Lady give you all the graces you need to be an outstanding member of the Church Militant. We are praying for you and also recommending you to our readers- prayers.

We have not seen the Naked without Shame series, but the name suggests an apologia of and invitation for nudism. The way you described it, the couple who advised you to watch the movie seems to be looking more for a kind of 'blessed eroticism' than anything else. It is a sad example of where the theology of the body by John Paul II is leading people. You did very well in refusing the offer. Our advice is that you should always turn down this kind of invitation and keep a distance from persons who promote this series or others like it.

When a couple marries, they give to each other the full right over their bodies. But this is a private matter - we would say it is the most private matter possible. Neither party should allow anyone other than the spouse to know his or her body. Insomuch as bodies are exposed in the public domain, this is not different from a scandal that induces others to sin. Actually, when viewing a naked woman or man in a movie or photo, who cares about whether that person is married? The person displaying the body propitiates sins of the eyes and invites sins of the flesh. So, any public nudity must be rejected as immoral and sinful. No matter under what pretext it was presented - in either the preaching of John Paul II or on the walls of the Sistine Chapel - it should be rejected.

In our opinion, the theology of the body of JPII is a pretext to justify nudism and eroticism. The presupposition of this wrong doctrine is that there is no original sin and, therefore, there is nothing wrong in displaying one's body. We have to wait for a good Pope to have this shameless doctrine banished from Catholic teaching.

You may find a refutation of this doctrine in a seven-part series entitled John Paul II and the Theology of the Body - A Study in Modernism by Randy Engel. You can read an excerpt from it: The Phenomenology of von Hildebrand and His Novel Teaching on Marriage. The full text is now published in a book titled Theology of the Body that can be purchased here.

We hope this will help you to be a good Catholic maintaining chastity according to your state of life, be it married or single.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

Dear TIA,

What are your thoughts on Christopher West and his Theology of the Body?

In Christo et Maria,

A.L.



TIA responds:

Dear A.L.,

We believe that this author is causing a great damage to Catholic Morals. He promotes sodomy and other anti-natural practices for married couples pretending that this is Catholic, when it is precisely the opposite.

It is sad that Bishops and priests do not come forth to defend marriage from such a filthy interpretation and bar his works. If we would have a little more spare time, we would put his theses to rest.

Do not read or follow what he preaches.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

Dear Tradition in Action,

I am a recent convert to the Catholic Faith and am having great difficulties understanding something. I hope and pray you may be able to help me.

I have been told it is wrong to think or consider that a particular person you knew is probably not saved because they died outside the Catholic Faith - because this would be subjectively judging that person's soul, which is wrong. Yet it is alright to think "things do not look good" for that person regarding their salvation, as long you do not go any further, because you are not subjectively judging the soul in that case. I am very confused by this. If you do not judge that a particular soul is condemned, but only think they probably are because they died outside the Church, is this sinful judgment?

I am sometimes sad or distressed that my non-Catholic family members are outside the Church, but now I am afraid that I have not had the proper Catholic orientation for my thinking.

I have read catechisms and several articles but I cannot seem to find a clear teaching on this particular matter, and I would so appreciate any help you can offer me.

My deepest thanks for your excellent work to defend the Faith,

      J.K.



TIA responds:

Dear J.K.,

Thank you for your kind words of encouragement.

If a man had a long life on the path of evil and died in a house of prostitution, anyone has the right to suppose that he lost his soul. This is supported by a saying of the Church: qualis vita, finis ita (as a man lives, so shall he die). There is no sin in supposing that such a person lost his soul. It is the rule of common sense. We can say the same regarding those who lived and died in false religions. Several times in Scriptures heresies are compared to prostitution.

In a magnificent text that we will post tomorrow on our Forgotten Truths, Pope Eugene IV in the Council of Florence teaches that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, no true charity and no real martyrdom.

What the Church forbids regarding the salvation of the deceased is to affirm that this or that person was certainly condemned. We can say that he or she was most probably condemned. We should never say that he or she was certainly condemned. In principle, anyone can be saved by a grace at the last moment, and we will not know this for sure until the Final Judgment Day.

The only persons who we can assuredly say were condemned are Judas Iscariotes (Mark 14:21) and some reprobates who were sent to Hell alive as described in Holy Scriptures, for example those described in Num 16: 31-33.

We hope this will help you to discern the opinion a Catholic can have or not have regarding the deceased.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

Follow us

  Was Newman a Homosexual?

  Cardinal Newman Recognized as Gay

  What Stopped the Beatification of Paul VI?

  Philosophy Then and Now

  Liberals, Modernists, Progressivists