Skip to main content

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

Image
By
+
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




Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
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...
8 comments
Read more

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

By
+ 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...
16 comments
Read more

Spiritual Journey Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Extracts

By
+ 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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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

By
 + 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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more