Skip to main content

What the Halifax is Theology of the Body?

+
JMJ

As a 'traditionalist' I have occasionally been confronted and confused by the 'Theology of the Body' or ToB.

Firstly, the ToB body of knowledge (ToBBok) is based upon a series of Angelus talks given by Pope St. John Paul II.

Secondly, is it a binding teaching of the Church of Christ ... nope see Ite Ad Thomam link below.

Thirdly, what the heck is it?
See remnant references and Wiki.  Whatever StJP2 intended, the talks are simply used to continue to invert the priorities of marriage by exchanging procreation with conjugal love.

This obviously is my opinion and if anyone can provide a succinct explanation - please provide a comment.

Explanation of 'consultants': Whenever something is ambiguous or difficult to understand (more often the former than the latter) it engenders a cottage industry of people who make a living explaining the topic.

References:
Remnant: 2008 Theology of the Body
Remnant: 2009 Christopher West Show
Ite Ad Thomam: ToB
Wikipedia






Comments

  1. Randy Engel's "John Paul II and the 'Theology of the Body' - A Study in Modernism" (originally published in CFN) is another. 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.

    • 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.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Can one commit adultery with one's own wife‽

    JPII says:
    «Adultery in the heart is committed not only because man looks in this way at a woman who is not his wife, but precisely because he looks at a woman in this way. Even if he looked in this way at the woman who is his wife, he could likewise commit adultery in his heart.»
    (source)

    ReplyDelete
  3. In my experience, as with most post-conciliar teachings, there is a conflation of different ideas - an admixture of the Catholic Doctrine and Novelty.

    In this case, I believe that St. Thomas had something similar to say.

    Consequently the right answer to this question is that if pleasure be sought in such a way as to exclude the honesty of marriage, so that, to wit, it is not as a wife but as a woman that a man treats his wife, and that he is ready to use her in the same way if she were not his wife, it is a mortal sin; wherefore such a man is said to be too ardent a lover of his wife, because his ardor carries him away from the goods of marriage. If, however, he seek pleasure within the bounds of marriage, so that it would not be sought in another than his wife, it is a venial sin.

    Reply to Objection 1. A man seeks wanton pleasure in his wife when he sees no more in her that he would in a wanton.

    http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5049.htm#article6

    So while somewhat convoluted, the intention (as far as I read the quotation you provided) is not really a Novelty.

    P^3

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, that's the passage of St. Thomas I was thinking of, but he uses clear terminology; there is certainly no "admixture of the Catholic Doctrine and Novelty."

      JPII also throws away terms, saying, e.g., that the "remedium concupiscientiæ" is what "one used to say in traditional theological language" (source).

      The biggest problem with ToB, besides its exultation of the flesh, is its personalism/phenomenology, which contradicts Thomism. In his last book, Memory & Identity, he admits ToB's personalism/phenomenology has limitations:

      If we wish to speak rationally about good and evil, we have to return to St. Thomas Aquinas, that is, to the philosophy of being. With the phenomenological method, for example, we can study experiences of morality, religion, or simply what it is to be human, and draw from them a significant enrichment of our knowledge. Yet we must not forget that all these analyses implicitly presuppose the reality of the Absolute Being and also the reality of being human, that is, being a creature. If we do not set out from such 'realist' presuppositions, we end up in a vacuum.

      Delete
  4. Good point.

    Either way, the fault-lines are becoming clearer each day:

    SSPX et al: Lines are doctrinally based
    Cardinal Burke et al: Lines are more clearer on morality.

    Going to be an interesting year. I hope that Pope Francis saves his soul and we have another conclave this year! :-)

    P^3

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Spiritual Journey Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Extracts

+ JMJ I have posted these two chapters to provide context for the quote of: It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith. P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.ca Chapter II The Perfections of God We ought to remember during this entire contemplation of God that we must apply all that is said of God to Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God. We cannot separate Jesus Christ from God. We cannot separate the Christian religion from Jesus Christ, Who is God, and we must affirm and believe that only the Catholic religion is the Christian religion. These affirmations have, as a result, inescapable conclusions that no ecclesiastic authority can contest: outside of Jesus Christ and the Catholic religion, that is, outsi...

Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader

 + JMJ  A reader asked the following question in the 2015 version of the article on the Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (link) : 117: "In the state of fallen nature it is morally impossible for man without Supernatural Revelation, to know easily, with absolute certainty and without admixture of error, all religious and moral truths of the natural order." Where can you find this in the documents of the Church? ( Link to comment )  Here's the reference from Ott: The citation that Ott provided was Denzinger 1786 and the source document is Dogmatic Consitution Concerning the Faith from the First Vatican Council (Papal Encyclicals - link) : Chapter 2 On Revelation, Article 3: It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation , that those matters concerning God, which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone, without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error. Here's ...