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

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

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 ...

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...

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

 + 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...

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

 + 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...

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

 + 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...