TIA,

After viewing the photos of the Austrian priestess, two things came to mind almost simultaneously. One is the apostasy which is, by faithless clergy, allowing such incredible denial of who Christ is, to occupy and take over with absolutely no regard of Whose House they are in. Secondly, the leading of these innocent children onto the road of perdition with these blind heretical guides.

What more can we do to enlighten God's people as to what lies behind these unsightly and painful pretenses of "Catholicism". These pagans, influenced and lead by the most powerful destroyer and despiser of the Catholic Church, whose aim is one of relentless persecution, denial, cunningness, and brazen attacks on so many mindless and sad to say, ignorant Catholics.

We must not remain silent anymore! There is no difference here, than a parent who leads a child into prostitution or drugs, than what is being shown, practiced and taught to these little ones, who after being subjects to this insidious mind-controlling, and who will follow into the same errors and self destruction. Is this what we want the future to be like for our children? NO!

Then SPEAK UP, and Take Action! Every one of you out there who calls themselves Catholics. Do your duty and live out your responsibility as one, so that you can be recognized in the eyes of God, as one of His true defenders of His Church. These children are being raped mentally and the body will only follow.

Wake up America, and the rest of the world, and start praying and defending what God has given you!

     R.A.

Dear TIA,

I'm always impressed an enlightened by your exposure of Modernist theologians such as Rahner, Balthasar, Ratzinger, etc. However, perhaps just as dangerous are the philosophers of the same milieu. I'm thinking mostly of Bernard Lonergan S.J. Currently, I'm taking a graduate course on his tome, Insight and while I can't claim to be an expert, of course, it strikes me as something like Pelagianism. Unfortunately, many Catholic universities have centers or institutes for studying Lonergan.

We should remember that Romano Amerio always understood his place as a philosopher, not a theologian and that errors of philosophy can be just as devastating as errors of theology. TIA has, in the past, reported on Lonergan's desire for an inductive theology, however, we should understand that as simply a consequence of his inductive phenomenological philosophy.

Theologically speaking, Vatican II gave a nod to Modernism. Philosophically speaking, and perhaps more fundamentally speaking, Vatican II tried to eclipse classical logic and wisdom with Phenomenology. Replacing Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas with Hegel, Husserl, and Heidegger, the riverbed of the Rhine which flows into the Tiber, as they say.

It's the greatest of ironies that these philosophers, who thought that the classical and Scholastic ways of defining man were cold and abstract were not only referring to philosophy which existed during a time of the most tender piety, but also that the consequent theology of their Phenomenology, the theology of 'encounter', belittles the sacraments and leaves the faithful cold, able only to cling to an abstract, intellectual faith.

Philosophy ought to be abstract - man searching for God. Theology ought to be concrete - God made man.

     Pax,

     B.G.

Dear Sir,

I have completely enjoyed the first 3 tapes on Dr. Marian Horvat's series on the Formation of Children. I wanted to know when will she finish the 9 tape series, so I can purchase them?

I am anxiously awaiting your response.

     Sincerely,

     P.M.



TIA responds:

Dear P.M.,

Dr. Horvat is finishing work on a book to be released in the next 10 days. After that she plans to continue her series of formation of children. We ask your prayers in this intention.

Cordially,

TIA correspondence desk

Greetings,

Last night I saw The Matrix, which I had long avoided because it was too violent. Having read your review of it, I think the commentator missed the major points of this rather improbable film. Personally, I am at a loss as to why people liked this film, except for its remarkable special effects, and its quasi-religious themes.

The character Neo is blasphemy. He is described as "the One" and as a "savior" by an equally blasphemous character named Trinity. In fact, the character of Neo reminds me of what Jews wanted the Messiah to be: a violent liberator of his people.

Throughout the film, there are quasi-Hindu comments that reality is an illusion, that our senses cannot be trusted. The film tries to make it seem as if this false statement were true.

The plot of the Matrix doesn't even make sense. The story claims that robot software patrol The Matrix, which is where I gather Morpheus and Neo first meet. So how can they meet without being caught by the robots?

While in the non-existent Matrix, Morpheus gives Neo a pill to help locate him. If they aren't really in the same room, then how can he give Neo a pill?

Trinity extracts a revolting electronic bug from Neo. Again, if they are not physically together, how could she possibly do that?

As for the Trinity character, in addition to being blasphemous; her character is mannish, immodest, and violent. Her ugly, weird outfits are vaguely reminiscent of sadomasochism. How sad that such "female" creatures have become the norm in movies.

Finally, it is not humanly possible for people to breathe fluid after birth. Scientists have tried to do that and they have failed. Our lungs are not designed for that. Neither are we designed to live in fluid filled sacs. The part with people stuck in cocoons was revolting and unbelievable. The entire premise of the film is a denial of Divine Providence.

     Regards,

     C.M.R.

Follow us

  A Dutch Priestess in the Makin

  Women Priests: The Process Started

  Sacred Majorettes in Germany

  Lonergan and His Inductive Theology

  Card. Ratzinger against Scholasticism

  The Matrix Series