Skip to main content

Truth, Fact, Opinion, Suspicion, Fiction

Image
By
+
JMJ

Doctrine and Dogmas are 'artifacts' of the Catholic Faith.  You can read them in various Theological texts, but Catholic Culture exists in people as values but primarily as assumptions.


Since assumptions are the result of continuous learning they are stable and if contradicted will result in a strong emotional response.  As long as the assumptions are aligned with what the Church actually teachings / believes, then a person is in calm waters. The real trouble occurs when there is a misalignment between what a person believes (assumes) the Church teaches and what is really Dogma/Doctrine.


As an example, I encountered a person with the pseudonym 'Catholicam' on the now defunct forum Ignis Ardens.

Catholicam made the following statement:
Lumen Gentium: "But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the ONE and merciful God"
To say that the Church of Christ prays to, or adores a solitary pagan God is indeed a blasphemy against the Holy Trinity, and the First Commandment.
In reply I posted the following:

12 Q. Who are infidels? A. Infidels are those who have not been baptized and do not believe in Jesus Christ, because they either believe in and worship false gods as idolaters do, or though admitting one true God, they do not believe in the Messiah, neither as already come in the Person of Jesus Christ, nor as to come; for instance, Mohammedans and the like.  (Catechism of Pope St. Pius X)
Infidel: in ecclesiastical language those who by baptism have received faith in Jesus Christ and have pledged Him their fidelity and called the faithful, so the name infidel is given to those who have not been baptized. The term applies not only to all who are ignorant of the true God, such as pagans of various kinds, but also to those who adore Him but do not recognize Jesus Christ, as Jews, Mohammed; strictly speaking it may be used of catechumens also, though in early ages they were called Christians; for it is only through baptism that one can enter into the ranks of the faithful.  (Catholic Encyclopedia)
Obviously, the infidels who 'admit the one true God' are not lumped in with those who believe in and worship false gods.  So the meaning of this phrase is that the Jews and Muslims direct their worship to the "one true God". This worship is, of course, false worship because it neither compliant with how God wants to be worshiped, nor do they accept the revealed Truths of the Catholic Faith.

Now Catholicam's reaction to these quotes (I concealed their origins) was as follows:
That is liberal ecumenist hogwash, straight from Vatican II. ...This is an entire waste of time.
When I revealed the source (pre-dating V2 by decades) ... his reply:
I told you, I am through discussing this with you. It is an entirely fruitless effort, and a waste of time.
He then broke contact (the full article is here).  When a person's assumption is challenged it creates mental pain / frustration / anguish that is called cognitive dissonance. In order to reduce this dissonance, there are three choices.
  • Change Action: In this case, the 'action' is reality.  One cannot change reality as it is outside of onesself.
  • Change Belief: This involves unlearning our belief (which is painful) and learning a new belief.  The stronger the belief is held, the harder it is to humble ourselves and accept that we were mistaken.  
  • Change Perception of Action: Basically, this is warping how one understands the 'action' in order to make it consistent with the belief that one is attached to.  Of the various biases, and tricks that we play on our minds to get our way (pride) confirmation bias is the bias of first resort.


So what happens?  Well a person alters their perception of an action using confirmation bias. However, reality has a way of impinging upon this altered perception of reality.  So there arises a need to seek more confirmation that the selected perception is right. Hence proselytization, the seeking of converts to the cause in order to reaffirm the new perception of reality.

Putting this in context of the crisis of the Church.

  1. Facts: Proven Truths
    1. The documents of the Second Vatican Council are ambiguous and appear to contradict pre-conciliar doctrine.
    2. The New Mas is deficient in its exposition of the theology of the Mass.
  2. Truth: Generally accepted outcome or reasoning
    1. The Second Vatican Council precipitated the crisis of the Church
  3. Opinion: A judgement about something
    1. The SSPX believes the Pope is the Pope but 'resists' certain ares of the doctrines / reforms emanating from the Second Vatican Council
    2. The Neo-Catholics believes the Pope is Pope and that he must be obeyed in all circumstances.
    3. The Sede-Vacantists believes that the Pope cannot possibly still be Pope and disregards him completely.
  4. Suspicion: Feeling or thought that something is possible, likely or true.
    1. In spite of what Bishop Williamson thinks, suspicion is not the truth, it isn't even really good opinion.  For example the suspicion that Bishop Fellay was (is) going to compromise and 'sell-out' the SSPX has resulted in a loss of trust in Bishop Fellay by some people. The problem is that there is nothing in the doctrine of obedience about trust of the superior.  It is all centered on the command being issued.
  5. Fiction: When unhinged by suspicion, I've noticed that people will jump to the creation of all sorts of fictions.  For example, when i was fully engaged in forum based discussions my opponents created the following fictions:
    1. he must be in the pay of Menzigen
    2. one person cannot be generating this must information, it must be at least 5 people using one account.
This progression from what is real (Facts), believed to be real with rational basis (truth), judgements (opinion), feelings (suspicions), and altering the perception of reality, is consistent with minds that are unhinged from reality from the get-go.  Bishop Williamson is the most commonly used example, but Fr. Pfeiffer and the other members of the resistance are equally infected with suspicion and fiction.  

So how does one keep a good perspective?
  • Being aligned with reality is the first step.  Accept the facts for what they are and don't try to alter their perception to suit ones opinions and suspicions.
  • Ensure that our 'Truths' are based on verifiable facts and that the data we use is actionable.  Conspiracy theories rarely contain actionable data.
  • Be careful in forming judgments that are not emotionally based.  Otherwise accepting them as wrong in the face of contrary evidence will be very difficult.  Depending on the topic one may end up looking very silly or ___ or both.
  • Do not give way to a suspicious mindset, it will erode all respect for authority.
  • Do not make up a new reality of what was, is and / or should be.  
Just some rambling thoughts for this evening.

P^3


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

By
I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ 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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

By
 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...
Post a Comment
Read more

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

By
 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

By
 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...
Post a Comment
Read more