Author Topic: Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253  (Read 1457 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Geremia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2399
  • Reputation: +683/-116
  • Gender: Male
    • St. Isidore e-book library
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Randy Engel's "John Paul II and the 'Theology of the Body' - A Study in Modernism" (originally published in CFN) is a good analysis of the Theology of the Body (ToB) audiences. She agrees with Dörmann, who said "John Paul II did not hold to the truth of the Church’s doctrine on Original Sin."

    Fr. Luigi Villa says in "John Paul II Beatified?" that "the masculinity and femininity of the naked body, are for him [John Paul II] the greatest revelations of the human being for themselves and for others."

    John Paul II uses the very confusing phrase "revelation of the body", which encapsulates ToB's whole emphasis on spiritualizing the body ("conjugal spirituality" as he calls it in a later audience). Revelation comes from God, not the human body, although in some cases through the human body. JPII's view is consistent with his Modernistic disbelief of objective Revelation, something Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange criticized him about in the failed Angelicum thesis he directed.

    • He says Genesis 2:25 ("And they were both naked; to wit Adam & his wife: and were not ashamed.") is the "original revelation of the body" (source).
    • And «the "revelation of the body," helps us somehow to discover the extraordinary side of what is ordinary.» (source)
    • Conclusion: Being naked and not ashamed "helps us somehow to discover the extraordinary side of what is ordinary."! This is nudism!

    ToB is naturalistic. Man is mentioned far more frequently than God, too.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12396
    • Reputation: +6435/-1026
    • Gender: Male
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #1 on: July 10, 2014, 08:49:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Nothing new here.  JP2's overemphasis on the apotheosis of man and denial of Original Sin.  TOB is founded on a rejection of the disorder caused by Original Sin in terms of concupiscence.  He seems to ignore the fact that Adam and Eve were "naked and not ashamed" BEFORE they fell into sin.  After the Fall, if human beings are not ashamed of being naked then they're either absolute saints who've been rid by God of all their concupiscence or else they're perverts.  John Paul II thinks that it's the former when it's usually the latter.  Even in the former case, the saint would acknowledge that others are not quite so sanctified as themselves and so would still experience a type of shame due to the concupiscence of others.

    John Paul II, like most modernists, doesn't really believe in Original Sin.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12396
    • Reputation: +6435/-1026
    • Gender: Male
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #2 on: July 10, 2014, 08:55:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In encouraging lack of shame vis-a-vis concupiscence, JP2's TOB actually inflames concupiscence by encouraging people to behave as if they didn't have any.

    I saw a lecture by Christopher West on EWTN where he was mocking and holding in derision people who would keep custody of the eyes; that guy's a pervert who tries to legitimize lust by call it divine and "theological".  To show the level at which his mind operates, he claimed, for instance, that the immersion of the Pascal candle into the Baptismal water during the Easter Liturgy was a conjugal / copulative symbol.



    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14666
    • Reputation: +7431/-285
    • Gender: Male
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #3 on: July 11, 2014, 03:57:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Geremia

    • Conclusion: Being naked and not ashamed "helps us somehow to discover the extraordinary side of what is ordinary."! This is nudism!

    ToB is naturalistic. Man is mentioned far more frequently than God, too.




    How about this:

    Being naked and NOT being ashamed ...

    when even your DOG is scandalized!














    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Geremia

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2399
    • Reputation: +683/-116
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #4 on: July 13, 2014, 08:40:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    TOB is founded on a rejection of the disorder caused by Original Sin in terms of concupiscence.
    precisely
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    In encouraging lack of shame vis-a-vis concupiscence, JP2's TOB actually inflames concupiscence by encouraging people to behave as if they didn't have any.
    concisely and well said

    Quote from: Ladislaus
    To show the level at which his mind operates, he claimed, for instance, that the immersion of the Pascal candle into the Baptismal water during the Easter Liturgy was a conjugal / copulative symbol.
    That is true. Read this. The Novus (dis)Ordo's Easter Vigil is puritan.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre


    Offline Geremia

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2399
    • Reputation: +683/-116
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #5 on: July 13, 2014, 08:55:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • JPII appears to mention concupiscence on three occasions of ToB: here, here, & here, but does not connect it to Original Sin on those occasions.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Offline Geremia

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2399
    • Reputation: +683/-116
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #6 on: July 13, 2014, 09:09:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Look when he alludes to the remedium concupiscientiæ in the context of marriage:
    Quote
    Hermeneutics of the sacrament [of marriage]

    5. By means of the dimension of the sign proper to marriage as a sacrament there is confirmed the specific theological anthropology, the specific hermeneutics of man. In this case it could also be called the hermeneutics of the sacrament, because it permits us to understand man on the basis of the analysis of the sacramental sign. Man—male and female—as the minister of the sacrament, the author (co-author) of the sacramental sign, is a conscious and capable subject of self-determination. Only on this basis can he be the author of the language of the body, the author (co-author) of marriage as a sign—a sign of the divine creation and redemption of the body. The fact that man (male and female) is the man of concupiscence does not prejudice his capacity to reread the language of the body in truth. He is the man of concupiscence. But at the same time he is capable of discerning truth from falsity in the language of the body. He can be the author of the meanings of that language, whether true or false.
    There is nothing about grace helping a husband and wife overcome their concupiscence. The sacrament, according to him, just helps the husband and wife see each other differently while remaining a "man of concupiscence." He also makes it seem like the husband and wife have the sacrament only when they "self-determine" themselves to interpret the sacramental sign they "co-authored" in the correct way. This justifies annulment because if they stop "self-determining" themselves to be husbands and wives, well, then maybe the marriage didn't exist!
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Offline songbird

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3019
    • Reputation: +1147/-49
    • Gender: Female
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #7 on: July 13, 2014, 10:37:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ladislaus is only interested in warping the minds of the traditional.  He wants to spin wheels like the "Toast Masters".  He is a troll IMO.  He is a waste of time for us who would rather spend time in prayer for his soul.


    Offline songbird

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3019
    • Reputation: +1147/-49
    • Gender: Female
    Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #8 on: July 13, 2014, 10:42:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I am sorry Ladislaus, I confused you with Trickster.  So, sorry, my apolgizes!!

    Offline Geremia

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2399
    • Reputation: +683/-116
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #9 on: November 06, 2017, 11:02:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Fr. Luigi Villa says in "John Paul II Beatified?" that "the masculinity and femininity of the naked body, are for him [John Paul II] the greatest revelations of the human being for themselves and for others."
    However, Fr. Villa is wrong when he claims (PDF p. 82):
    Quote from: Fr. Villa
    Speaking of the resurrection of the body, he [JP2] said that human beings would rise still retaining its attribute of masculinity and femininity, each with their own sex.
    This is true:
    according to St. Thomas: Summa suppl. q. 80 a. 1 arg/ad 1:
    Quote from: Whether all the members of the human body will rise again?
    Objection 1: It would seem that not all the members of the human body will rise again. For if the end be done away it is useless to repair the means. Now the end of each member is its act. Since then nothing useless is done in the Divine works, and since the use of certain members is not fitting to man after the resurrection, especially the use of the genital members, for then they "shall neither marry, nor be married" (Mt. 22:30), it would seem that not all the members shall rise again.

    Reply to Objection 1: The members may be considered in two ways in relation to the soul: either according to the relation of matter to form, or according to the relation of instrument to agent, since "the whole body is compared to the whole soul in the same way as one part is to another" (De Anima ii, 1). If then the members be considered in the light of the first relationship, their end is not operation, but rather the perfect being of the species, and this is also required after the resurrection: but if they be considered in the light of the second relationship, then their end is operation. And yet it does not follow that when the operation fails the instrument is useless, because an instrument serves not only to accomplish the operation of the agent, but also to show its virtue. Hence it will be necessary for the virtue of the soul's powers to be shown in their bodily instruments, even though they never proceed to action, so that the wisdom of God be thereby glorified.

    and Summa suppl. q. 81 a. 3 c.:
    Quote from: Whether all will rise again of the male sex?
    I answer that, Just as, considering the nature of the individual, a different quantity is due to different men, so also, considering the nature of the individual, a different sex is due to different men. Moreover, this same diversity is becoming to the perfection of the species, the different degrees whereof are filled by this very difference of sex and quantity. Wherefore just as men will rise again of various stature, so will they rise again of different sex. And though there be difference of sex there will be no shame in seeing one another, since there will no lust to invite them to shameful deeds which are the cause of shame.

    We do not become angels when we obtain our resurrected bodies; we become like the angels.
    Quote from: Matt 22:30
    For in the resurrection they shall neither marry nor be married, but shall be as [sicut] the angels of God in heaven.
    So Fr. Villa's conclusion doesn't follow:
    Quote from: Fr. Villa
    So, for John Paul II, the new state of eternal life will be in the same line of life that men had in Paradise Lost.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14666
    • Reputation: +7431/-285
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #10 on: November 06, 2017, 11:32:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • However, Fr. Villa is wrong when he claims (PDF p. 82):This is true:
    and Summa suppl. q. 81 a. 3 c.:
    We do not become angels when we obtain our resurrected bodies; we become like the angels.

    So Fr. Villa's conclusion doesn't follow:
    "So, for John Paul II, the new state of eternal life will be in the same line of life that men had in Paradise Lost."
    .
    What line of life did men have 350 years ago in John Milton's epic poem?
    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline Viva Cristo Rey

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6171
    • Reputation: +1732/-59
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #11 on: November 06, 2017, 07:49:25 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • They are teaching this stuff to teenagers in classes.

    And these young people dont even know the Ten Commandments or how to pray the Rosary.  They don't know who St Ignatius is.
    To live with the Saints in Heaven is all bliss and glory....To live with the saints on Earth is just another story!  (unknown)

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14666
    • Reputation: +7431/-285
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does JPII really promote nudism in Theology of the Body8253
    « Reply #12 on: November 06, 2017, 08:32:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In encouraging lack of shame vis-a-vis concupiscence, JP2's TOB actually inflames concupiscence by encouraging people to behave as if they didn't have any.

    I saw a lecture by Christopher West on EWTN where he was mocking and holding in derision people who would keep custody of the eyes; that guy's a pervert who tries to legitimize lust by call it divine and "theological".  To show the level at which his mind operates, he claimed, for instance, that the immersion of the Pascal candle into the Baptismal water during the Easter Liturgy was a conjugal / copulative symbol.
    .
    I have a friend who saw Christopher West in person, and came away from the presentation convinced he had just seen a soft porn show.  I have never met a single person who believes that West in any way promotes chastity or virtue. His whole program is making prurient interest excusable. 
    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16