Dear TIA,

I am outraged and nauseated by the photograph of the flamenco dancing "nuns". They are not worthy of the title "nun", displaying themselves in a brazen manner in the first photograph and then, giggling in another like a group of silly adolescent schoolgirls, who had just been naughty. Their manner of dress would make a true Bride of Christ blush with shame. And yet they wonder why vocations are falling off. What young lady in her right mind would enter an order like this; what sense of satisfaction would she find; what possibilities for sacrifice and penance; how could she possibly behave like a Bride of Christ surrounded by women like this?

It is surely time someone with some basic common sense in the Vatican, called a halt to this type of nonsense. There are nuns in the post conciliar church who are still living the ideals of their vocation, but then there are orders such as this who have moved so far away from any basis of spirituality, as to make their continued existence or otherwise of little consequence. This order should be wound up. Quite obviously it has nothing to offer the life of the Church.

If we have any doubt left as to whether Vatican II was in fact a scourge for the Church then these scenes should confirm it for us. Thank God there are, in a number of traditional societies, pious nuns whose prayers and penances will, we hope, go some way to making reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for this shameful behavior.

God Bless these good traditional Sisters who are true Brides of Christ and whose lives give witness to the virtues of Mary Most Holy.

     Yours faithfully,

     C.P.

TIA,

I got this e-mail and am passing it on. I thought you should alert readers with families to beware of these two books.

If you have children or grandchildren, work with children at church, or you have neighborhood children whose parents you know, please take note of the information below and pass it along to others. Schools are distributing this book to children through the Scholastic Book Club.

Two particular books are, Conversations with God and Conversations with God for Teens, written by Neale D. Walsch. They sound harmless enough by their titles alone. The books have been on the New York Times best sellers list for a number of weeks, and they make truth of the statement, "Don't judge a book by its cover or title."

The author purports to answer various questions asked by kids using the "voice of God". However, the "answers" that he gives are not Bible-based and go against the very infallible word of God. For instance (and I paraphrase), when a girl asks the question "Why am I a lesbian?" - his answer is that she was "born that way" because of genetics (just as you were born right-handed, with brown eyes, etc.). Then he tells her to go out and "celebrate" her differences.

Another girls poses the question "I am living with my boyfriend. My parents say that I should marry him because I am living in sin. Should I marry him?"

His reply is, "Who are you sinning against? Not me, because you have done nothing wrong."

Another question asks about God's forgiveness of sin. His reply "I do not forgive anyone because there is nothing to forgive. There is no such thing as right or wrong and that is what I have been trying to tell everyone, do not judge people. People have chosen to judge one another and this is wrong, because the rule is "judge not lest ye be judged."

Not only are these books the false doctrine of the Devil, but in some instances quote (in error) the Word of God.

And the list goes on. These books (and others like it) are being sold to schoolchildren through The Scholastic Book Club.

     Sincerely,

     J.K.

TIA,

I noticed in the picture of your article on hand kissing, that Paul Newman is heavily placing his lips upon the hands of the lady.

My mother taught me (male) that we should place the weight of the kiss on our chin, so as to not allow the lips to give a "big smack" to the ladies hand; ideally no lip should touch the hand. Was my mother wrong?

     Yours in Jesus, Mary, and Joseph,

     P.M.V.



TIA responds:

P.M.V.,

It seems that there are two schools regarding the kiss on the hand, depending on whether you are kissing the hand of either a lady, to which you refer, or that of of a priest or bishop. In the first school, one actually kisses the hand making light contact with the lips. In the second one, which your mother appears to be following, one makes only a gesture of a kiss, bowing one's head to the height of the lady's (or the ecclesiastic's) hand without the lips touching the hand.

Followers of the second school justify their position toward ecclesiastics, whose hands at times are perspiring after a Mass on a hot day or even dirty, if they have just done some manual work. So, the simple gesture of kissing the hand demonstrates the intention to pay respect to their sacred mission and consecrated hands, but avoids the embarrassment of having to kiss a not-so-clean hand.

It seems to us that when greeting ladies at parties or on solemn occasions, this inconvenience is much less frequent than when meeting clerics in their day-to-day lives. So, the first school - the actual kissing of the hand - may be followed as a preferred custom. In daily life, however, a sense of convenience and some discernment are indispensable. No one should kiss the hand of a lady who is coming from the kitchen after peeling onions or just dismounting a horse...

You are right about your criticism on Paul Newman. His kiss is a little bit exaggerated, too Hollywood in style. At any rate, even though not perfect, it is still a good American example to be praised.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

Follow us

  Flamenco-dancing Nuns

  Who are these Dancing Ladies?

  Missionary of Charity Playing the Drums

  Massages by Contemplative Cistercian Nuns

  Do Kiss the Hands of Ladies

  Let's not Forget the Greeting

  Proper Behavior for Visits

  Embraces Between Married Persons and Friends