Showing posts with label Evidence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Evidence. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 06, 2019
Hatred for the Latin Mass: Evidence of the demonic
Hatred for the Latin Mass, evidence of the demonic. See here.
This liberal hatred refuted here.
Have you ever encountered a priest, Bishop or layman who impugned the Latin Mass? Is such an attitude even Catholic? In a word, no. In his Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, Pope John Paul II said that, "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition."
And, in his book "Salt of the Earth," Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent."
To be sure, Vatican II called for an extended use of the vernacular. But nowhere did Vatican II call for the Latin language to be abolished from the liturgy. And anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or a liar. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) No. 36 states clearly that, "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."
Number 54 of this same Vatican II document teaches that, "In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and "the common prayer," but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.
Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them."
This is the teaching of Vatican II and the mind of the Church on the use of Latin and the attitude Catholics should have toward those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition.
Thursday, October 04, 2018
No evidence supporting accusations against Judge Kavanaugh
Regarding the FBI Supplemental Investigation into Dr. Ford's accusations against Judge Kavanaugh, Fox News Reports:
"A source familiar with the supplemental report told Fox News it shows no evidence corroborating the allegations of sexual assault or misconduct against the nominee. Other specifics from the report were not immediately available, but Fox News is told the review included interviews with nine people, along with a sworn statement from another. This went beyond the original Senate request for interviews with four people, though the FBI did not dive into Kavanaugh's drinking habits in high school, one area of contention, because the Senate did not formally request the information."
There is mounting evidence that Dr. Ford may have commited perjury during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.
See here for example.
Wednesday, October 08, 2014
Pope Francis' attitude toward dogma and his Brothers in the Episcopate: Evidence of Satanic pride?
"Pride is to be avoided, that pride of intellect which is more dangerous and more difficult to overcome than the pride of will, as Scupoli says.
This is the pride that renders faith and obedience to superiors difficult. One wants to be self-sufficient; the more confidence one has in one's own judgment the more reluctantly does one accept the teachings of faith, or the more readily does one submit these to criticism and to personal interpretation. In like manner, one so trusts to one's own wisdom, that it is with repugnance that others are consulted, especially superiors. Hence, regrettable mistakes occur. Hence comes also obstinacy of judgment, resulting in the final and sweeping condemnation of such opinions as differ from our own. Herein lies one of the most common causes of strife between Christian and Christian, at times even between Catholic writers. St. Augustine calls those who cause unfortunate dissensions, destructive of peace and of the bond of charity, 'Dividers of unity, enemies of peace, without charity, puffed up with vanity, well pleased with themselves and great in their own eyes.'*
To heal this intellectual pride: 1) we must first of all submit ourselves with childlike docility to the teachings of faith. We are undoubtedly allowed to seek that understanding of our dogmas which is obtained by a patient and laborious quest with the aid of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, especially St. Augustine and St. Thomas; but as the Vatican Council says, this must be done with piety and with discretion, following the maxim of St. Anselm: 'Faith seeking understanding.' Thus we avoid that hypercritical attitude that attenuates and minimizes our dogmas under pretense of explaining them. We submit our judgment not only to the truths of faith but to the directions of the Holy See.." (Fr. Adolphe Tanquerey, S.S., D.D., The Spiritual Life: A Treatise on Ascetical and Mystical Theology, p. 388, Tan Books).
Docility to the teachings of faith is a remedy for pride of intellect. But do we witness such docility in Pope Francis?
Recently he told an Argentinian newspaper that, “The world has changed and the Church can not withdraw into supposed interpretations of dogma."
Supposed interpretations? The Church's dogmas represent more than "supposed interpretations" of truth. As the Catechism explains in paragraphs 88 and 89.
It was Archbishop Fulton Sheen who said that, "The modern man must decide for himself whether he is going to have a religion with thought or a religion without it. He already knows that thoughtless policies lead to the ruin of society, and he may begin to suspect that thoughtless religion ends in confusion worse confounded.
The problem is simple. The modern man has two maps before him: one the map of sentimental religion, the other the map of dogmatic religion. The first is very simple. It has been constructed only in the last few years by a topographer who has just gone into the business of map making and is extremely adverse to explicit directions. He believes that each man should find his own way and not have his liberty taken away by dogmatic directions. The other map is much more complicated and full of dogmatic detail. It has been made by topographers who have been over every inch of the road for centuries and know each detour and each pitfall. It has explicit directions and dogmas such as, 'Do not take this road - it is swampy,' or 'Follow this road; although rough and rocky at first, it leads to a smooth road on a mountaintop.'
The simple map is very easy to read, but those who are guided by it are generally lost in a swamp of mushy sentimentalism. The other map takes a little more scrutiny, but it is simpler in the end, for it takes you up through the rocky road of the world's scorn to the everlasting hills where is seated the original Map Maker, the only One who ever has associated rest with learning: 'Learn of Me...and you shall find rest for your souls.'
Every new coherent doctrine and dogma add to the pabulum for thought; it is an extra bit of garden upon which we can intellectually browse; it is new food into which we can put our teeth and thence absorb nourishment; it is the discovery of a new intellectual planet that adds fullness and spaciousness to our mental world. And simply because it is solid and weighty, because it is dogmatic and not gaseous and foggy like a sentiment, it is intellectually invigorating, for it is with weights that the best drill is done, and not with feathers.
It is the very nature of a man to generate children of his brain in the shape of thoughts, and as he piles up thought on thought, truth on truth, doctrine on doctrine, conviction on conviction, and dogma on dogma, a very coherent and orderly fashion, so as to produce a system complex as a body and yet one and harmonious, the more and more human he becomes. When, however, in response to false cries for progress, he lops off dogmas, breaks with the memory of his forefathers, denies intellectual parentage, pleads for a religion without dogmas, substitutes mistiness for mystery, mistakes sentiment for sediment, he is sinking back slowly, surely, and inevitably into the senselessness of stones and into the irresponsible unconsciousness of weeds. Grass is broad-minded. Cabbages have heads - but no dogmas." (The Electronic Christian, pp. 74-74).
We have a pope who says that he likes to argue with "conservative" Bishops (read orthodox, political terms do not belong in the Church). Does this suggest humility or pride?
This is the pride that renders faith and obedience to superiors difficult. One wants to be self-sufficient; the more confidence one has in one's own judgment the more reluctantly does one accept the teachings of faith, or the more readily does one submit these to criticism and to personal interpretation. In like manner, one so trusts to one's own wisdom, that it is with repugnance that others are consulted, especially superiors. Hence, regrettable mistakes occur. Hence comes also obstinacy of judgment, resulting in the final and sweeping condemnation of such opinions as differ from our own. Herein lies one of the most common causes of strife between Christian and Christian, at times even between Catholic writers. St. Augustine calls those who cause unfortunate dissensions, destructive of peace and of the bond of charity, 'Dividers of unity, enemies of peace, without charity, puffed up with vanity, well pleased with themselves and great in their own eyes.'*
To heal this intellectual pride: 1) we must first of all submit ourselves with childlike docility to the teachings of faith. We are undoubtedly allowed to seek that understanding of our dogmas which is obtained by a patient and laborious quest with the aid of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, especially St. Augustine and St. Thomas; but as the Vatican Council says, this must be done with piety and with discretion, following the maxim of St. Anselm: 'Faith seeking understanding.' Thus we avoid that hypercritical attitude that attenuates and minimizes our dogmas under pretense of explaining them. We submit our judgment not only to the truths of faith but to the directions of the Holy See.." (Fr. Adolphe Tanquerey, S.S., D.D., The Spiritual Life: A Treatise on Ascetical and Mystical Theology, p. 388, Tan Books).
Docility to the teachings of faith is a remedy for pride of intellect. But do we witness such docility in Pope Francis?
Recently he told an Argentinian newspaper that, “The world has changed and the Church can not withdraw into supposed interpretations of dogma."
Supposed interpretations? The Church's dogmas represent more than "supposed interpretations" of truth. As the Catechism explains in paragraphs 88 and 89.
It was Archbishop Fulton Sheen who said that, "The modern man must decide for himself whether he is going to have a religion with thought or a religion without it. He already knows that thoughtless policies lead to the ruin of society, and he may begin to suspect that thoughtless religion ends in confusion worse confounded.
The problem is simple. The modern man has two maps before him: one the map of sentimental religion, the other the map of dogmatic religion. The first is very simple. It has been constructed only in the last few years by a topographer who has just gone into the business of map making and is extremely adverse to explicit directions. He believes that each man should find his own way and not have his liberty taken away by dogmatic directions. The other map is much more complicated and full of dogmatic detail. It has been made by topographers who have been over every inch of the road for centuries and know each detour and each pitfall. It has explicit directions and dogmas such as, 'Do not take this road - it is swampy,' or 'Follow this road; although rough and rocky at first, it leads to a smooth road on a mountaintop.'
The simple map is very easy to read, but those who are guided by it are generally lost in a swamp of mushy sentimentalism. The other map takes a little more scrutiny, but it is simpler in the end, for it takes you up through the rocky road of the world's scorn to the everlasting hills where is seated the original Map Maker, the only One who ever has associated rest with learning: 'Learn of Me...and you shall find rest for your souls.'
Every new coherent doctrine and dogma add to the pabulum for thought; it is an extra bit of garden upon which we can intellectually browse; it is new food into which we can put our teeth and thence absorb nourishment; it is the discovery of a new intellectual planet that adds fullness and spaciousness to our mental world. And simply because it is solid and weighty, because it is dogmatic and not gaseous and foggy like a sentiment, it is intellectually invigorating, for it is with weights that the best drill is done, and not with feathers.
It is the very nature of a man to generate children of his brain in the shape of thoughts, and as he piles up thought on thought, truth on truth, doctrine on doctrine, conviction on conviction, and dogma on dogma, a very coherent and orderly fashion, so as to produce a system complex as a body and yet one and harmonious, the more and more human he becomes. When, however, in response to false cries for progress, he lops off dogmas, breaks with the memory of his forefathers, denies intellectual parentage, pleads for a religion without dogmas, substitutes mistiness for mystery, mistakes sentiment for sediment, he is sinking back slowly, surely, and inevitably into the senselessness of stones and into the irresponsible unconsciousness of weeds. Grass is broad-minded. Cabbages have heads - but no dogmas." (The Electronic Christian, pp. 74-74).
We have a pope who says that he likes to argue with "conservative" Bishops (read orthodox, political terms do not belong in the Church). Does this suggest humility or pride?
Monday, March 24, 2014
New evidence that Hitler was a homosexual...
In an article which may be found here, Paul Bedard writes:
Newly discovered notes from a U.S. Army interview of former Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler doctors reveal that the madman had homosexual tendencies, did not sleep in girlfriend Eva Braun's bedroom, and was doped up with multiple drugs including female hormones.
Written in erratic shorthand, Army interrogator Herman Merl, a Vienna-born medical technician enlisted to interview Hitler's doctors, Karl Brandt and Theodor Morell, scribbled "Homosex" in his notebook where he sized up the mass murderer's sexuality.
He then wrote: "Eva Braun = separate rooms" before adding "female hormone - injection 50,000 units." Elsewhere he wrote, "His sexual life and intercourse with Eva Braun was told to me."
The notebooks are going up for auction later this month at one of the nation's leading sellers of historical artifacts, Alexander Historical Auctions of Chesapeake City, Md. Alexander has offered other important Third Reich relics, including a tea set from Hitler's mountain hideaway and Josef Mengele's diaries. Often the items are sold to Jewish collectors and museums.
Merl's notes further confirm other post-war interviews with Hitler's caretakers that he was "hysterical," a "megalomaniac," and suffered from several ailments, notably flatulence for which he took drugs to stop passing gas. He also suggested that Hitler had Parkinson's disease.
A previous Alexander auction included notes detailing how Hitler was shot up with bull semen. The new notes add that bull semen shots were used to regulate his level of testosterone. But proving that his doctors used many experimental treatments on Hitler was Merl's mention that the fuhrer was also receiving female hormones. Those can be used to treat various ailments, but are dangerous and often interfere with male sexual functions.
Alexander President Bill Panagopulos told Secrets that there are five notebooks for sale and he expects the sale price to be $5,000-$7,000. He noted that Dr. Morell was Hitler's primary physician and a rival of Dr. Brandt, an SS officer who also headed the Nazi euthanasia program.
The push to portray active homosexuals as victims of systematic Nazi attack contrasts with a recently growing body of evidence indicating wide-scale Nazi embrace of homosexuality.In her 2006 study “The Pink Swastika as Holocaust Revisionist History,” renowned expert on sexuality Judith A. Reisman of the Institute for Media Education revealed that the 1995 “The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party” by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams demonstrates that many key actively homosexual Nazi officials protected many homosexual individuals from harm.
“Lively and Abrams… document the homosexual movement as the agents that ensconced National Socialism (the Nazi party) and Adolf Hitler, thus triggering a holocaust which engulfed all of Europe,” wrote Resiman." (Source: http://www.lifesitenews.com/).
Two Harvard-educated homosexuals, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, authored what can only be described as a blueprint for marketing the radical homosexual agenda in the United States. In their book entitled "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90's," the authors recommend demonizing those who are morally opposed to homosexuality, painting them as evil as possible until the general public comes to view such people as intolerant and bigoted and avoids them. To achieve this goal, the authors suggest that Christians and others who are opposed to homosexuality should be labelled Klansmen, Nazis, racists or unbalanced freaks.
What is most ironic is that supporters of the homosexual lifestyle should be exhorted to label those who oppose homosexuality as "Nazis." As the LifeSiteNews article explains:
"While Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” degraded Jews, Marxists, Negroes, Chinese, Arabs, women, and Eastern Europeans, the Fuhrer had no negative remarks for homosexuality.
Instead, Hitler chose actively homosexual men as influential youth leaders.
An actively homosexual teacher, Karl Fischer, founded the 'Wandervogel' boys’ group that became the Hitler Youth in 1933 under renowned pederast, Hans Blueher. Similarly, convicted Nazi pederast Edmund Heines was given leadership over Schill Youth.
Other homosexual and bisexual leaders cited by these and other authors included Bladur von Schirach, Hitler Youth Leader; Hans Frank, Hitler’s Minister of Justice; Wilhelm Bruckner, Hitler’s adjutant; Walther Funk, Hitler’s Minister of Economics; friend and advisor Hermann Goering, Hitler’s second in command (who dressed 'in drag and wore camp make-up')..."
Propaganda and revisionist history. Two of the tools employed by advocates of the homosexual hate movement.
Tuesday, September 03, 2013
The assault at Camp Lennox in Otis, Massachusetts: Why is the media downplaying the male-on-male component?
By now most of you have heard about the rapes which took place at an athletic camp in Western Massachusetts. The Associated Press reports that, "Prosecutors say the assaults occurred Aug. 25 at Camp Lenox in Otis, where Somerville High School was holding an annual team-building retreat. Authorities say the three juniors assaulted the freshmen in a cabin.
Massachusetts state police detectives arrested 17-year-old Galileo Mondol and two 16-year-old boys Friday. Mondol faces numerous charges, including aggravated rape of a child, assault with intent to rape a child, and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The juveniles face similar charges. Their names were not released."
Interestingly, almost every newspaper and television account have neglected to mention that this was a case of male-on-male sexual assault. Now why is that? Because the same liberal mainstream media which has bought into the radical homosexual agenda will often do everything possible to suppress inconvenient facts which would prove harmful to their agenda. See here for example. I discussed this in a recent post.
This explains why the mainstream media has no problem exposing incidents of heterosexual rape in the military but virtually ignores the fact that the number of homosexual assaults in the military has been three times greater. See here.
Read the statistical data which I have provided here and ask yourself why the mainstream media refuses to consider the evidence.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
The slow whining death of Johann Hari's credibility...and that of attorney/theologian Daniel Shea
Catholic News Service is reporting that, "A high-profile federal lawsuit accusing Pope Benedict XVI of covering up sexual abuse has been withdrawn.
Lawyers for the plaintiff in John Doe 16 v. Holy See filed a notice of voluntary dismissal Feb. 10, bringing the case effectively to an end.
The lawsuit was filed in April 2010 in the U.S. District Court in Milwaukee by an unnamed Illinois man who claimed he had been molested by Father Lawrence Murphy during the latter's time on the staff of Milwaukee's St. John's School for the Deaf.
The lawsuit claimed that the Vatican "has known about the widespread problem of childhood sexual abuse committed by its clergy for centuries, but has covered up that abuse and thereby perpetuated the abuse."
The lawsuit also sought to prove that the Vatican is a global business empire, engaging in "commercial activity" in Wisconsin and across the United States, and holding "unqualified power" over each diocese, parish and follower.
Jeffrey S. Lena, an American attorney for the Holy See, welcomed the withdrawal of "fallacious allegations of Holy See responsibility and liability for John Doe 16's abuse."
"A case like this one against the Holy See, which was held together by no more than a mendacious web of allegations of international conspiracy, amounted to a misuse of judicial process and a waste of judicial resources," Lena said in a statement..." (Full article here).
A couple of years ago I challenged homosexual journalist and mental midget Johann Hari to back up his assertion that, "There is now overwhelming evidence that Joseph Ratzinger, the Pope, was involved for over twenty years in an international criminal conspiracy to cover up the rape of children by priests in his Church." See here for full article.
Mr. Hari never did provide us with his "overwhelming evidence." Back in 2005, I challenged attorney Daniel Shea when he said essentially the same thing. Mr. Shea asserted that "Ratzinger and company" were engaged in an "international conspiracy to obstruct justice." And after seven years, attorney Shea, who has been described by one publication as a theologian, still hasn't produced the slightest shred of evidence to corroborate his reckless and irresponsible claims. I still have an email written by this "theologian" falsely asserting that the Vatican's website doesn't even carry the documents of the Second Vatican Council. Actually it does. And when I replied to his email and told him where to find them he never responded. It took me all of 30 seconds to look them up.
Facts are inconvenient to some. Especially anti-Catholic conspiracy theorists. But don't expect an apology from Johann Hari or attorney/theologian Daniel Shea. One thing is certain. We are witnessing the slow, whining death of their credibility.
Related reading here.
Lawyers for the plaintiff in John Doe 16 v. Holy See filed a notice of voluntary dismissal Feb. 10, bringing the case effectively to an end.
The lawsuit was filed in April 2010 in the U.S. District Court in Milwaukee by an unnamed Illinois man who claimed he had been molested by Father Lawrence Murphy during the latter's time on the staff of Milwaukee's St. John's School for the Deaf.
The lawsuit claimed that the Vatican "has known about the widespread problem of childhood sexual abuse committed by its clergy for centuries, but has covered up that abuse and thereby perpetuated the abuse."
The lawsuit also sought to prove that the Vatican is a global business empire, engaging in "commercial activity" in Wisconsin and across the United States, and holding "unqualified power" over each diocese, parish and follower.
Jeffrey S. Lena, an American attorney for the Holy See, welcomed the withdrawal of "fallacious allegations of Holy See responsibility and liability for John Doe 16's abuse."
"A case like this one against the Holy See, which was held together by no more than a mendacious web of allegations of international conspiracy, amounted to a misuse of judicial process and a waste of judicial resources," Lena said in a statement..." (Full article here).
A couple of years ago I challenged homosexual journalist and mental midget Johann Hari to back up his assertion that, "There is now overwhelming evidence that Joseph Ratzinger, the Pope, was involved for over twenty years in an international criminal conspiracy to cover up the rape of children by priests in his Church." See here for full article.
Mr. Hari never did provide us with his "overwhelming evidence." Back in 2005, I challenged attorney Daniel Shea when he said essentially the same thing. Mr. Shea asserted that "Ratzinger and company" were engaged in an "international conspiracy to obstruct justice." And after seven years, attorney Shea, who has been described by one publication as a theologian, still hasn't produced the slightest shred of evidence to corroborate his reckless and irresponsible claims. I still have an email written by this "theologian" falsely asserting that the Vatican's website doesn't even carry the documents of the Second Vatican Council. Actually it does. And when I replied to his email and told him where to find them he never responded. It took me all of 30 seconds to look them up.
Related reading here.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Quod scripsi scripsit or "I'm inflexible and refuse to consider evidence"
After writing his insightful analysis of Charles Pierce’s sophomoric article entitled “What I Believe” which appeared in the Boston Sunday Globe Magazine, Joe Sacerdo invited Mr. Pierce to his Blog to comment and to clarify his views. Mr. Pierce responded by writing, “Thank you for giving the piece such a careful reading. I’ll pass, I think….I’ll let the piece speak for itself. Quod scripsi scripsit, as someone once said.” (See here).
That someone was Pontius Pilate. The same bright light who quipped, “What is truth?” and walked away without waiting for answer (John 18: 38). This is the attitude of the ideologue, the person who refuses to reconsider his opinions and who prefers to live without self-criticism. In his allegory of the cave (Republic 8.514-17), Plato compares this desire to believe what is convenient and to act on false opinions with living in a cave, a world of shadows and illusions rather than the world of daylight, of reality.
It was Socrates who said that “an unexamined life is not worth living.” Which is why Dignitatis Humanae of the Second Vatican Council tells us that, “It is in accordance with their dignity as persons – that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility – that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth.” (Dignitatis Humanae, No. 2).
The ideologue rejects this notion. Crippled in personality, he stubbornly refuses to change his mind even when presented with objective truth. He is inflexible rather than certain. Dr. Montague Brown explains the difference between certainty and inflexibility thusly: “Certainty pertains to knowledge: it is knowing without doubt that something is so. Certainty is a result of having considered the matter thoroughly and having found sufficient evidence to justify our position. Although certainty is something that I have within me, it is outward looking. That is, I appeal to objective criteria to substantiate my position. If I refuse to change my mind, it is because no objective evidence has been given, nor can I conceive of any, that would shake my certainty. Certainty is not a consequence of being proud or overbearing; rather, it is the result of being humble before the truth….
Inflexibility pertains to will: it is a decision not to consider that we might be wrong. It is a refusal to be convinced by any amount of evidence against our position, no matter how overwhelming it may be. Unlike certainty, which is outward looking, inflexibility is a turning inward. That is, my understanding of objective truth does not cause my inflexibility; it is caused by a subjective attitude: my desire to be right. The reason I do not change is that I do not want to change. Since my inflexibility is not based on evidence, even if new evidence surfaces that proves me to be mistaken, I still will not change.” (The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 6-7).
This is a teaching moment for Catholics in and around Boston and beyond. Joe Sacerdo has examined Mr. Pierce’s article with fairness and objectivity. Even Mr. Pierce acknowledged this when he wrote, “Thank you for giving the piece such a careful reading.” But Mr. Pierce refuses to examine evidence which might prove him wrong. Therefore he writes, “Quod scripsi scripsit” – What I have written I have written.
Some people prefer to live in Plato’s cave.
Related reading: Making an accusation and failing to support that accusation with sufficient evidence.
That someone was Pontius Pilate. The same bright light who quipped, “What is truth?” and walked away without waiting for answer (John 18: 38). This is the attitude of the ideologue, the person who refuses to reconsider his opinions and who prefers to live without self-criticism. In his allegory of the cave (Republic 8.514-17), Plato compares this desire to believe what is convenient and to act on false opinions with living in a cave, a world of shadows and illusions rather than the world of daylight, of reality.
It was Socrates who said that “an unexamined life is not worth living.” Which is why Dignitatis Humanae of the Second Vatican Council tells us that, “It is in accordance with their dignity as persons – that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility – that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth.” (Dignitatis Humanae, No. 2).
The ideologue rejects this notion. Crippled in personality, he stubbornly refuses to change his mind even when presented with objective truth. He is inflexible rather than certain. Dr. Montague Brown explains the difference between certainty and inflexibility thusly: “Certainty pertains to knowledge: it is knowing without doubt that something is so. Certainty is a result of having considered the matter thoroughly and having found sufficient evidence to justify our position. Although certainty is something that I have within me, it is outward looking. That is, I appeal to objective criteria to substantiate my position. If I refuse to change my mind, it is because no objective evidence has been given, nor can I conceive of any, that would shake my certainty. Certainty is not a consequence of being proud or overbearing; rather, it is the result of being humble before the truth….
Inflexibility pertains to will: it is a decision not to consider that we might be wrong. It is a refusal to be convinced by any amount of evidence against our position, no matter how overwhelming it may be. Unlike certainty, which is outward looking, inflexibility is a turning inward. That is, my understanding of objective truth does not cause my inflexibility; it is caused by a subjective attitude: my desire to be right. The reason I do not change is that I do not want to change. Since my inflexibility is not based on evidence, even if new evidence surfaces that proves me to be mistaken, I still will not change.” (The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 6-7).
This is a teaching moment for Catholics in and around Boston and beyond. Joe Sacerdo has examined Mr. Pierce’s article with fairness and objectivity. Even Mr. Pierce acknowledged this when he wrote, “Thank you for giving the piece such a careful reading.” But Mr. Pierce refuses to examine evidence which might prove him wrong. Therefore he writes, “Quod scripsi scripsit” – What I have written I have written.
Some people prefer to live in Plato’s cave.
Related reading: Making an accusation and failing to support that accusation with sufficient evidence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
