, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Quick post today.

Above is a clip from last Thursday’s World Over broadcast. EWTN literally BLASTED the US FrancisPervChurch on all fronts. And the commentary on contemporary events was a very doctrinally Catholic one. 

Nota bene: EWTN is very impressive these days and it would appear that their editorial line has decoupled from that of the USCCB.

At the other extreme, we have the responses to the “Covington Affair” controversy, wherein ALL the US Catholic Bishops, with the exception of two (Bps. Styka and Strickland) either criticized the young Catholics or remained silent. As Fr. Murray rightly points out, where is the JUSTICE!

The reason your humble blogger is bringing these occurences to your attention is due to the philosophical Law of Proper Thought known as the law of the excluded middle. The law of the excluded middle posits that: everything must either be or not be.

In other words, the two positions taken by EWTN and the USCCB respectively, cannot be reconciled.

In Platonic terms, one position must be True wherein the other, by default must be false.

Once again: (see here)

Regarding the law of excluded middle, Aristotle wrote:

But on the other hand there cannot be an intermediate between contradictories, but of one subject we must either affirm or deny any one predicate. This is clear, in the first place, if we define what the true and the false are.

Well, if this is the case, and it definitively is, then what is TRUE in terms of Catholic doctrine and what is FALSE, once again in terms of Catholic doctrine, is that the USCCB, with respect to the Covington affair, has found itself entrenched in a position that is doctrinally FALSE.

So the above is the theory.

Yet as we know, theories tend to have practical applications since they are, by defintion designed to resolve exiting problems.

And the practical application side is where the problem for the USCCB lies. Here is one recent example of this USCCB PROBLEM:

Now, why might it matter if Mr. Posobiec or Mr. Cernovich recognize and pronounce the demonic aspects behind the behaviour and decision making process of the USCCB?

One reason might be that Mr. Posobiec has a larger Twitter following than say …

Yes, that Tom Brokaw.

Now given that individuals like these above, openly commenting about the TRANSRATIONAL (as in formally irrational) behavior of the USCCB, are reaching more and more Catholics who are beginning to learn about what we in the Catholic blogosphere have been writing about all these years, this constitutes a major problem for the USCCB.

And it’s not a good development for the wider FrancisPervChurch and it’s not good on many different levels. One of these levels is once again the philosophical level, as posited by the Lex Armaticus’ Schmidberger Principle, namely:

Every abnormal situation inherently tends toward normalization. This is due to the nature of the matter.

In academic terms, this PROCESS is known as reverting back to the mean.

It is this PROCESS that we see in EWTN’s break with the editorial line of the USCCB. The simplist explanation for EWTN’s actions is that they need to revert back to doctrinally correct Catholicism in order to hold their viewership.

Numquam Ponenda est Pluralitas Sine Necessitate

Which would mean that if the USCCB continue on its present doctrinal trajectory, what they will soon learn is that they have a “post-conciliar church” without any followers.

Therefore, the danger for the USCCB is this: when the Schmidberger Principle starts to force the USCCB’s doctrinal side back to solid Catholic doctrine, there might not be that many followers left.

Which might be just what Francis, the depopulator of Rome has in mind…