TIA,

I wanted to respond to your article "Married Priests? They are here." While it is certainly worth exposing the heretic Mahony's actions in ordaining married heretical men, I think that you are making too big of a deal with the married priest issue.

Also, I think that your article entitled "Blessing to Married Priests" is also making much to do about nothing. There have been married priests in the East for centuries, and they are still in service today. Canada has a large number of married Eastern Catholic priests. By the way, if married priests are acceptable in the East, what is the big deal with having them in the West?

Please understand that I am not an advocate of instituting a married priesthood in the Western Church, I just think that the Latins sometimes make to big a deal over the married priest issue.

Here is what Pope Benedict XIV had to say regarding married priesthood in the Catholic Church:

Encyclical Allatae Sunt of Pope Benedict XIV promulgated on July 26, 1755:

(#22) "Another example is the freedom enjoyed by priests of the Oriental and Greek Church to remain married to their wives after their ordination (see can. Aliter, dist. 31 and chap. Cum Olim, de Clericis Conjugatis). Considering that this practice was at variance neither with divine nor natural law, but only with Church discipline, the Popes judged it right to tolerate this custom, which flourished among Greeks and Orientals, rather than to forbid it by their apostolic authority..."

I do wish you well and applaude your efforts to preserve Catholic Tradition. My comments are meant to be constructive criticism.

     D.S.



TIA responds:

Mr. D.S.

The permission for priests to marry in some Eastern rites of the Catholic Church was never promoted, but 'tolerated' in the Church, as the quoted document stresses, as an exception and as a less perfect state. Even in those Eastern rites, a married priest cannot ascend to the Episcopacy, which demonstrates that the married state is not considered the most perfect for priests, and is only permitted for particular historical and psychological reasons.

The Latin rite, which encompasses the greatest majority of the Catholic Church, called for celibacy - the stage of being single - as the perfect condition for a priest.

There was a time in the past when priests pretended to have the right to wives, and Pope St. Gregory VII fought such tendency as a heresy: Nicholaism.

This fight ended in a formal condemnation under Pope Calixtus II and the First Lateran Council, in which we read:

"It is absolutely forbidden to priests, deacons and sub-deacons the company of concubines or wives, and the cohabitation of any other women but those close relatives permitted by the Council of Nicea - mother, sister, maternal or paternal aunts, and similar persons - upon which no suspicion can fall" (can. 3, Denzinger 360).

The exception of some Eastern rites does not in any sense lessen the gravity, as you wrongly assume, of the attempt to introduce married priests into the entire Catholic Church.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to clarify this sophism.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

TIA,

The Bishops are supposed to be the direct "descendants" of the Apostles in that they are supposed to be able to trace their "lineage" back to the Apostles. This naturally suggests the question: "What do you think Our Lord would have done to any of His Apostles who aided and abetted sodomy and abortion, both of which are such terrible sins that committing them cries out to Heaven for vengeance?

Now, the Pope is supposed to be the direct successor of St. Peter. Thus one wonders if St. Peter would have rewarded say, St. James, with a nice plush position in Rome as did Pope John Paul II reward Cardinal Law for the Cardinal's aiding and abetting the sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance.

Similarly, would St. Peter have rewarded say, St. John, with such a high position as did Pope Benedict XVI reward former Archbishop Levada with such an important position [prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith], knowing full well the Archbishop had been up to his ears in aiding and abetting sodomy?

Is it any wonder why the conciliar Church rarely says the Pope is the successor of St. Peter and the Bishops are "descendants" of the Apostles?

If you were right then, we are right now.
If we are wrong now, you were wrong then.

     R.B.

Dear TIA,

In your picture of clowns around the altar at the Salzburg Cathedral, one thing you didn't remark on were what look like benches around the altar. Are people supposed to sit and eat?

     J.F.

Dear Mr. Guimaraes,

Perhaps the Holy Ghost is kicking the anthill in an effort to put the brakes on the JPII canonization.

Are we certain JPII was free of such collaboration?

     Best regards,

     D.C.

Dear TIA,

A comment on the prophecy at Fatima that 'the dogma of faith will always be preserved in Portugal.'... To refer only to the dogma of faith being preserved, we cannot confuse it with non-dogmatic matters such as abuses of the Novus Ordo, the very recent abortion-on-demand law passed in Portugal, or such outrages as a Hindu ceremony being allowed at the very shrine of Fatima.

These words refer exclusively to the core beliefs of Catholicism and warn us that those beliefs may be lost elsewhere. It suggests the possibility of a great schism.

I offer this view only because of the inquiries published from some of your readers on this, as well as the subject of the Sisters at Quito. Certainly, we may ponder these messages but should avoid unhealthy preoccupation.

The Holy Roman Catholic Church teaches us to exercise prudence and to govern our minds, and it is well to apply her wisdom in such matters regarding private revelations. Even when apparitions, revelations etc. receive Church approval, it reserves judgment that they were truly of Heaven (impossible to discern). The Church's decision is based on matters that may be contrary to faith & morals.

There is spiritual danger & disorder in one's relating to private revelations as 'Gospel.' The one true Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ should content us.

     M.K.

Dear Sir/Madam,

You may be aware that at 'Catholic' sponsored ecumenical meetings - as at Assisi - a familiar sight are the Parsi (Zoroastrian) priests and their fire worship. I'd like to inform you that these Parsees do not allow non-Parsees to enter their temples.

In the city of Bombay, India, one comes across Parsi temples which are called agiaries. All of them have signboards forbiding entry to non-Parsees. Yet, the Parsees attend ecumenical meetings! And no comments from the Catholic Archdiocese of Bombay.

     With best wishes I remain,

     Yours faithfully,

     N.C., India

Dear Dr. Horvat,

Thank you for your articles on good manners. One of the most distressing (and revolting) modern customs is to plop oneself down on the filthy, dirty ground as if one were an animal and sit there whilst waiting or reading at the library.

People don't seem to grasp that there are lots of germs on the ground, and that it is disgusting to watch human beings made in the image and likeness of Almighty God behave in such a manner.

At one point, I asked an older American when this custom came to pass. She said it happened in the 1960s; it came in with the hippies.

A few years ago, an American Catholic magazine had an article on manners. They said that gracious manners were considered a sign of sanctifying grace in Catholic Europe.

As for dress, as you know, we are all obliged to be devout to be Our Lady and her Divine Son. It strikes me that Queens and Kings expect their courtiers to be at least neatly dressed with clean and modest clothing. It also strikes me that they would be displeased by the slobs lurking about today.

Also, I appreciate your articles on history. Recently I stayed in a youth hostel. It was distressing to meet young people from Spain, Mexico, and Italy who had no knowledge of the wonderful and miraculous events that had taken place in their native countries.

     Regards,

     C.M.R.

Dear Dr. Horvat,

I hope this finds you and family well. I would like to express to you my gratitude and admiration for what I consider to be the beautiful work you do on the Tradition in Action website. It is not long ago that I came across your site, and what a great and rare find it has been for me. It would be hard for me to express adequately just how great a work you do.

Your work on promoting, upholding and explaining true Catholic culture, especially in the area of women's dress, their roles etc., I believe is very important and necessary today. It gives me great hope to find others of like mind and there doesn't seem to be too many of us around who appreciate the importance of these things. I would encourage you to live for God alone, and in this context to continue to use your talents in producing the most enlightening and helpful articles that appear on your website.

I am a young married man. My wife, G., and I have been blessed with a beautiful daughter, P., now 16 months old, and another baby is due on 26th July (I would like it to be a boy this time).

It would be an honor to meet you, although that may not happen in this life anyway.

We live in Ireland, though I may be living in the U.S. sometime (my wife is there now, near Chicago). Please let me know if I can be of any help in your work, I think we share a lot of the same interests and desires.

Thank you again and God bless you.

     United in prayer,

     S.D.

Follow us

  How Are Prophecies Being Fulfilled

  Pope Ratzinger Defendant in a Texas Lawsuit

  Clownish Mass in Switzerland

  In India a Tabernacle Shaped as a Phallus

  Blasphemy in India

  The Papal Letter

  Did Cardinal Law Fall from Grace?

  The Mystery of the Smoking Gun Papal Letter