Skip to main content

Sins of the Tongue

Image
By
+
JMJ


In the years since Rome started to compromise its position and acquiesce to the SSPX's conditions, there's been a fair amount of vile words cast against the SSPX Superior General.   Not to mention against anyone who tried to be a voice of reason.

The same thing can happen whenever someone holds a belief so strongly that they get violent when something or someone does not agree with their belief.

When a person goes 'irrational' attempts to rationally discuss their belief results in them holding it even more and starts the cognitive dissonance death spiral (Fig 1). Since changing the belief would require an alteration in their behaviour, the 'irrational' person will resort to altering their perception of the belief.




Fig 1: Cognitive Dissonance Model with Confirmation Bias Death Spiral
Why is the confirmation bias a 'death spiral'? 

Because a person who alters their perception of an action by resorting to confirmation bias is cutting themselves off from any information the dis-confirms their belief.

One way to detect a confirmation bias death spiral is that the expression of the belief escalates.

For example, because Bishop Fellay dis-confirmed the 'resistance' narrative of an imminent betrayal by basically following Catholic Principles.

Those of us who are still rational have noted that it is now 18+ years since the rumours of 'betrayal' were uttered by various 'resistors' young and old.  

There is one thing that is consistent, in order to re-affirm their beliefs resistors have to amp-up the narrative every time it is dis-confirmed and seek affirmation by gaining "believers".  In doing so they commit a number of sins. More often than not, they will resort to two specific sins: Detraction and Calumny.
Detraction: The unjust damaging of another's good name by the revelation of some fault or crime of which that other is really guilty or at any rate is seriously believed to be guilty by the defamer. Catholic Encyclopedia: Detraction

Calumny: The unjust damaging of the good name of another by imputing to him a crime or fault of which he is not guilty.Catholic Encyclopedia: Calumny
The difference is simple a person is accused of a 'crime' or sin of which they may or may not be guilty.

The effect in both cases is the same: The damage to the reputation of the person in question.

That is the litmus test: Do the stories (true, lies or half-truths) damage the reputation of someone else?  

If the stories fail this test, plug your ears and run away screaming, because this kind of sin if a contagious virus.

P^3


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

By
+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...
Post a Comment
Read more

Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin - July 6, 1988

By
There has been some discussion (read lots) about the term 'Conciliar Church'. I have posted this letter written by the Superior General and District Superiors of the SSPX after the 1988 Consecrations. Of particular interest is that the 'Conciliar Church' being referred to as a system. My paraphrase would be that the SSPX regards the 'conciliar Church' as an error within the Church. Source Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops
Post a Comment
Read more

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 6b: Principles and Rules for Surviving this Crisis of the Catholic Church (Principle 1)

By
 + JMJ Principle 1: Realize that something is amiss in the Catholic Church The world in which I had my Traditional Awakening, is one in which practically anything pre-Conciliar such as liturgy, doctrinc, and even dogmas are either suppressed, ignored or re-framed to be acceptable to the ‘world’. What is more, the people adhering to these pre-conciliar teachings and liturgy are persecuted by other members of the Catholic Church. The things that non-Trads say about Trads can be quite extreme. For example, accusations against Traditionalists include that they are: A revival of the Jansenists (link) , Schismatics, Heretics, Uncharitable, Lefebrists Radicals Integrists When one group of Catholics is persecuted by the others for simply wanting to live as Catholics before them did for generations … well something is wrong. Further, we need to realize that when what was previously condemned is now promoted and what was previously promoted as the trut...
Post a Comment
Read more

How is the SSPX prepared to accept the Second Vatican Council??? - Reblogged and Updated.

By
+ JMJ The Archbishop remained steadfast. In the 1980s, in his correspondence with then-Cardinal Ratzinger, Archbishop Lefebvre stated his position that the criterion for interpreting Vatican II in light of Tradition comprises three elements: 1) He and the SSPX would accept anything in Vatican II that is clearly consistent with Tradition; 2) Any ambiguous texts of Vatican II must be interpreted strictly according to Tradition; according to the consistent teaching of the Church throughout the centuries. 3) Anything in the Council that cannot be interpreted according to Tradition should be revised. The Archbishop laid this out explicitly in his letters to Cardinal Ratzinger in 1982 and 1985. CF News: Rome-SSPX: Background to the Doctrinal Discussions CF News: The April 15 Deadline A few years ago Tony La Rosa (aka ecclesia militans a Toronto based 'resistor') had a difficult time accepting this approach to the council. He held that it must be completely tossed as...
Post a Comment
Read more