Skip to main content

The Gullible Theme - Part 2: Examining the Calgary SSPX School Policy - Introduction, Perspective and Principles

+
JMJ



Introduction

Gullible made a number of comments regarding the SSPX school in Calgary and the wording that they were compelled to add to the school policy.

Actually, as noted here, Gullible made lots of comments, but they don't contain the reflections on why these proof texts are important and how they apply.

This is where I find most people (even myself upon occasion) fall short.  In essence, when we just react (posting proof-texts) we become the blog equivalent of script kiddies. Context is king and if you don't make the message explicit you lose your impact ... and your readers.

There is one thing worse than not communicating your message, it is communicating the wrong message.

However, there is a problem.

Humans read correspondence through a perceptual lense.  This lense causes them to misinterpret and even miss whole sections of the text.  Why?  Is it on purpose?  Not usually,  its just that our brain continually seeks the most efficient way to process information and uses mental models to accomplish this goal.

When something doesn't align with the model, there's a good chance it will get dropped or re-framed.

For example ...

Recently, I was involved in a negotiation via email.  It wasn't small potatoes either, each party represented organizations with thousands of members.  One morning I received a copy of the latest position from the 'other side'.  I read the first sentence and got angry and frustrated.  I stopped reading.  The next day I picked up the email and managed to get through two sentences before the same thing happened.  Again, I set it down to look at later.  It took me four days before I could read the entire email without being upset.  The result: I noticed something that the other half-dozen reviewers had missed - an offered compromise.

What's my point?

People allow emotions to skew their perception of what they are reading, hearing, seeing.  In some cases, they re-frame information to align with what they WANT to read / hear / see.

That's how wars get started.

That's how the 'resistance' got started and continues to perpetuate itself, inspite of its doctrinal errors the 'resistance' keeps on claiming that they are 'following the line of Archbishop Lefevre'.

I mean seriously, the claim is ludicrous - especially for the sede and benny vacantist factions.  They have departed from the line of the Archbishop because he always abided by the doctrines of the Catholic Church.

I digress.

So, in order to make certain that I really understand a piece (written or otherwise) I try to be aware of how it is affecting me emotionally (NB: I am still working on this ...).  I've even read some criticisms of my posts by 'resistance' authors and in one case I can see how I missed an aspect of the question that was posed to me. In the other, they simply had re-framed what I said.

Perspective


Now how does this apply to Gullible et al?

The 'resistance' has, like many Traditional Catholics, an automatic emotional response to anything that 'sounds' modern.

Which is ok ... if they don't stop there. What's happening is their subconscious is alerting them to something that falls out of tolerance.  The next step is critical: Think.

Yep, you read it right, I quoted Bishop Williamson.  Unless someone is attacking you, you don't need to react, you need to respond. In order to respond you need to stop and think.  Easy acronym:  Don't answer until you've SAT on it for a while.

When we think and re-construct the context around what we are thinking about, we are more likely to come to valid conclusions and make good decision.

That is what I'm going to do as I review the principles, context and text of the 'Calgary School Question'.

Principles

As any regular reader will know, I take Catholic Doctrine seriously.

The principle that I will use as a reference point is obedience.  I've studied and written a number of articles on obedience that can be found here.

I summarized it in the above matrix.  The left hand part of the matrix is clear - if sin is involved then a Catholic MUST disobey the order.  If no sin is involved, obedience is subject to whether the order is within the sphere of the superiors authority.

It is that simple.

P^3




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ 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

Church Militant TV and the SSPX - Again

+ JMJ The old narrative used to be that the SSPX was 'schismatic' and 'excommunicated'. Now the excommunication has been lifted for a number of years and the only ones who think it still has effect are the 'resistors'. That leaves the other opponents of the SSPX with the label 'schismatic'. Make it clear, the conservative Catholics have issues with the SSPX probably because they violate some of their assumptions about the Faith and this crisis of the Church. Church Militant TV is one of these the exists along the Catholic thought spectrum. They like the Traditional Mass but must ensure that they don't get tarred with the same 'schismatic' brush that the liberals use against the SSPX.  So what do they do, they use the same brush against the SSPX. The funny thing is that even when the Church does speak, they don't want to listen and persist in calling the SSPX 'schismatic'. Here's a transcript of the latest s...

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too th...

The Position of the SSPX on Canonizations by the Saint Factory

+ JMJ I have sometimes been criticized for including 'St' as a title for Pope John Paul II et al. I've given my reasons here  in a discussion with Alex Long. The question is one of prudence in discussions with ntCatholics and in some cases with tCatholics. In discussions with:  ntCatholics, I will use the title in order to continue the discussion and help them arrive at a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. tCatholics, I will use the title in order to broaden their perspective on the doctrine of dogmatic facts. This broader perspective is, in my opinion, essential maintaining a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. So from a doctrinal position, I have written the article Dogmatic Fact of Fancy  and includes a reference on canonizations. Now, I know the position of the SSPX is that the canonizations are doubtful (see references below) and I also know of at least one non-SSPX theologian who agrees with the level of doubt du...