Friday, November 03, 2017

Brainwashing: Pope Francis, Fr. Weinandy, Cardinal Muller & the Fearful Bishops?

-Updated November 5, 2017-

"We need a total, I might say 'brain washing.'"

Yesterday, Governor Jerry Brown made the above quote on climate change inside the Vatican.

He was invited by Pope Francis's Pontifical Academy of Sciences. (The Sacramento Bee, November 4, 2017, "World needs 'brain washing' on climate change, Jerry Brown says at Vatican")

Are Pope Francis and his inner circle at the Vatican applying a type of cognitive re-definition management manipulation or brainwashing?

Brainwashing and thought reform are other labels for this type of management manipulation.

Richard J. Ofshe, Ph.D., gives a overview of the cognitive re-definition manipulation:

"Coercive persuasion and thought reform are alternate names for programs of social influence capable of producing substantial behavior and attitude change through the use of coercive tactics, persuasion, and/or interpersonal and group-based influence manipulations (Schein 1961; Lifton 1961). Such programs have also been labeled 'brainwashing' (Hunter 1951)."[https://culteducation.com/group/798-abusive-controlling-relationships/3260-coercive-persuasion-and-attitude-changes.html

Generally when thought reform is used in management manipulation it can be summed up as persons being pressured, usually by fear of losing their job or position in an organization, into changing their deepest beliefs.

(Management manipulation will be explained in more depth later by quoting cognitive re-definition expert Edgar Schein.)

Persons under this manipulation have only two choices.

They can stay with the organization so long as they are willing to change their deepest beliefs.

Or they must be willing to leave the organization to keep their most cherish beliefs.

Fr. Thomas Weinandy is an example of one who decided to lose his position with the USCCB instead of betray his beliefs.

The courageous Fr. Weinandy said in a letter to Pope Francis:

You "seem to censor and mock those who interpret Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia in accord with Church tradition... Many bishops are silent... Many fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worst." (National Catholic Register, "Full Text of Father Weinandy's Letter to Pope Francis," November 1, 2017)

The example of the other side of the management manipulation coin would be all the silent bishops and Cardinals who "fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worst" so they appear willing to betray their most cherish beliefs.

Vatican Expert Edward Pentin this year said "40 to 70 Cardinals" are silent because of their petrified fear of Pope Francis and his Vatican. Pentin said:

"I was told earlier this year by a senior prelate that there is great concern by a good number of Cardinals about this pontificate and I also heard from another well placed source that... their estimate of about 40 to 70 Cardinals want a change, they are very concern, but they are simply petrified about speaking out."
(Fr. Z's Blog, November 4, 2017, "Edward Pentin's talk at the Catholic Identity Conference 2017," Quote from video in post)

These Cardinals by their silence appear willing to betray their most cherish beliefs.

In fact, Pope Francis appointed Cardinal Blase Cupich said that bishops and Catholics must betray their most "cherished beliefs" which he associates with "and long-held biases" to follow Francis:

“It is our job to take up that discernment. It takes time. It involves discipline. Most importantly it requires that we be prepared to let go of cherished beliefs and long-held biases.” (November 2, 2017, LifeSiteNews, "Catholics must let go of ‘cherished beliefs’ to ‘discern’ like Pope Francis: U.S. Cardinal" [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholics-must-let-go-of-cherished-beliefs-to-discern-like-pope-francis-u.s])

A final example of the other side of the management manipulation coin is Cardinal Gerhard Muller.

Remember Cardinal Muller's interview that caused puzzlement among his co-workers according to an article by Vatican expert Edward Pentin.

The January 9, 2017 article for the National Catholic Register is titled "Cardinal Muller's TV interview Causes Bewilderment."

The Cardinal's Sunday interview in which he criticized the Four Cardinal's dubia is causing "bewilderment" because in it he contradicted "everything he said...on the matter until now."

Those who know and work with him in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) are puzzled by his behavior. Pentin wrote:

"Another senior official...told him personally...that what the cardinal states in the interview "is exactly the contradictory of everything which he has said to me on the matter until now" and he had the "impression of someone who was not speaking for himself but repeating what someone else had told him to say."[http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/cardinal-muellers-tv-interview-causes-bewilderment#.WHRXZHOIYwg]

The "bewilderment" of those who know the Cardinal best can only have grown greater after Muller's newest statement this week that those in adulterous second marriages can be sexually active if they according to scholar Steven O'Reilly have subjective "doubt as to the validity of the 'first' marriage, He [Cardinal Muller] writes:

'In a matrimonial annulment procedure, therefore, the real will of marriage plays a fundamental role. In the case of a conversion in mature age (of a Catholic who is such only on the certificate of baptism) one can say that a Christian is convinced in conscience that their first bond, even if it took place in the form of a marriage in the Church, was not valid as a sacrament and that their current marriage-like bond, prized by children and with a living relationship matured over time with their current partner is a true marriage before God. Perhaps this cannot be canonically proven because of the material context or because of the culture of the dominant mentality. It is possible that the tension that occurs here between the public-objective status of the “second” marriage and subjective guilt can open, under the conditions described, the way to the sacrament of penance and Holy Communion, passing through a pastoral discernment in internal forum.'(see here; emphasis in the original article)' 

"Though Cardinal’s Muller’s “answer” to the first dubia remains a “no” to communion for divorced and remarried whose first marriage involved a “valid marital bond;” he now seems to intend something of an escape clause where the validity of the bond is in doubt. Muller’s out clause in the quote above from his essay relies on the subjective belief of the individual – and the discernment of the internal forum – that there never was a “valid marital bond” in the first marriage. By this device, I suppose he thinks he does not run afoul of Familiaris Consortio 84."

"Now, in my opinion, Muller’s new (?) position on this sort of internal forum ‘annulment’ is no less destructive of the institution of marriage in the Catholic Church than is blessing the “yet, but” communion-for-public-adulterer cases where a valid marital bond certainly exists. Certainly, to the observer in the pew they are the same thing. The obvious temptation for divorced and remarried individuals in such a position would be to discover they ‘sincerely doubt‘ the validity of their own first marriage, thereby easing acceptance of their second. There are other problems in such a system, not least of which is the lack of transparency of process and justice for both parties to the first marriage – especially if the other spouse would contest the subjective conscience of the other party or the discernment of the internal forum. I just do not see how Muller’s position, if I understand it correctly, saves him from contradicting Familiaris Consortio 84 (FC 84. (romalocutaest.com, "Cardinal Muller, the Dubia and the Formal Correction," October 31, 2017, by Steven O'Reilly [Click to see whole article: https://romalocutaest.com/])

Muller appears to be saying one can self annul, with the help of an undefined "internal forum," a first marriage if one has subjective belief that the first marriage was never a "valid marital bond" and have sex in the "second marriage" which is not a valid marriage.

If Muller's confused argument was true then the couple would be committing fornication.

In reality, what Muller is saying is that those in adulterous relationships can be sexually active if their subjective conscience doubts.

Muller's confusion and bewildering reversal in beliefs and convictions might be explained by cognitive re-definition management manipulation.

Pope Francis and his inner circle appear to be using Edgar Shein's cognitive re-definition management manipulation which coercive persuasion and attitude change expert Richard Ofshe labeled "thought reform" and "brainwashing."

This manipulation is specifically being used on persons who disagrees with their apparent cognitive re-definition of Church doctrine in Amoris Laetitia, the Argentina letter and other papal actions covered in the Filial Correction.

Below is Jesus Christ's teaching on divorce and adultery, next is Pope Francis's apparent redefinition of Church teaching on divorce, adultery, conscience and reception of Holy Communion and, then, the doctrine of the Catholic of Church on these same subjects.

 St. Matthew 5:32 says:

But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery. 


Amoris Laetitia and the Argentina letter reveal Pope Francis's new teaching to be:

Divorced and "remarried" Catholics, in some cases, can receive Holy Communion.

The Church has always taught those in the intrinsically evil act of adultery can't receive Holy Communion.

So, Francis and his inner circle appear to have redefined conscience, intrinsically evil acts, Trent's infallible doctrine of grace and adultery in a way that is contrary to the 2,000 year infallibly doctrine of the Catholic Church.

They redefine the intrinsically evil act of adultery as a "irregular relationship" and say mortal sin is not mortal sin because of the ultimacy of conscience and the supposed lack of grace to change sinful behavior.

This redefinition of Catholic conscience tells the murderer, rapist, sex abuser, the person in adultery or anyone in objective mortal sin that "if they can't change their sinful behavior" (which contradicts Trent's doctrine on grace) or don't know it is wrong that they are not in mortal sin.

Therefore, they may receive Holy Communion without forming their conscience and changing their sinful behavior.

Their redefinition of conscience is wrong.

As St. Thomas said "An erroneous conscience may bind, but it does not excuse" as the great moral philosopher Ralph McInerny wrote:

"I think murder is wrong, but make up your own mind...It is pretty clear that we do not really accept the ultimacy of conscience in this way. That the rapist and the one raped have different views on the morality of rape does not much interest us when we consider the kind of deed it is...."

"Each agent is obligated to follow his conscience, but this is not tantamount to saying that every agent has a well formed conscience. It is erroneous to believe that theft is permitted. It is wrong to hold that adultery is all right...If it is erroneous, we will be interested in his changing it. Indeed, we often prevent people from acting on their real or alleged views when those views are erroneous. Professional thieves are not considered to have an interesting and defensible concept of private property. As Thomas put it, an erroneous conscience may bind, but it does not excuse." (Ralph McInerny, "Ethica Thomistica," 1982, 1997, page 110-111)

The Pope and every Catholic is obliged to have a well formed conscience and have a firm amendment not to commit mortal sin in order to receive Holy Communion. The infallible Church doctrine of Trent teaches that God gives everyone the grace to repent and overcome sinful behavior. 

These Catholic Church doctrines can't be redefined, even by the Pope, because they are part of Revelation.

  on the The Deus Ex Machina Blog calls this type of cognitive re-definition: gaslighting. He said:

"GASLIGHTING is defined as:
a form of psychological abuse in which a victim is manipulated into doubting their own memory, perception, and sanity."

"What we are a witness to is Francis, the bishop of Rome engaging in a form of PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE whereby he is manipulating the Faithful “priests” into doubting their understanding of the meaning of the passage contained in Holy Gospel according to St. Matthew 5:32, among others, thereby trying to get them to doubt not only the OBJECTIVE TRUTH that the Catholic Church has taught for two millennia, but also their own memory, perception and sanity (rationality and healthiness of the human mind, like the ability to recognize objective truth)."[https://sarmaticusblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/13/the-soap-bubble-papacy-the-battle-is-in-your-mind-francis-gaslighting/]

As stated earlier, Richard J. Ofshe, Ph.D., shows that the cognitive re-definition process is another label for gaslighting or "brainwashing":

"Coercive persuasion and thought reform are alternate names for programs of social influence capable of producing substantial behavior and attitude change through the use of coercive tactics, persuasion, and/or interpersonal and group-based influence manipulations (Schein 1961; Lifton 1961). Such programs have also been labeled 'brainwashing' (Hunter 1951)."[https://culteducation.com/group/798-abusive-controlling-relationships/3260-coercive-persuasion-and-attitude-changes.html]

They redefine the meaning of words which have objective meaning in morals, faith and reason through association and repetition with this coercive persuasion, then isolate those who don't accept the new definitions, after which they ostracize the good name of any person or group that doesn't accept the new "culture" and isn't a "team player."

The ostracized Dubia Cardinals have experienced this part of cognitive re-definition.

It appears possible that Cardinal Muller has been influenced by this persuasive process because he has "a career investment in the organization" of the Vatican even after he was dismissed by Francis.

Muller appears to still hope that Francis might bring him back to the Vatican or as least be in his good grace and not be ostracized and pressured like the Dubia Cardinals.

The very respected management scholar Edgar H. Schein of MIT Sloan School of Management, who Ofshe considers very important in thought reform or brainwashing research, explains the pressuring procedure in Organizational Learning as Cognitive Re-definition: Coercive Persuasion Revisited:

"It may seem absurd to the reader to draw an analogy between the coercive persuasion in political prisons and a new leader announcing that he or she is going 'to change the culture.'

"However, if the leader really means it, if the change will really affect fundamental assumptions and values, one can anticipate levels of anxiety and resistance quite comparable to those one would see in prisons. The coercive element is not as strong. More people will simply leave before they change their cognitive structures, but if they have a financial stake or a career investment in the organization, they face the same pressure to 'convert' that the prisoner did. ... Consider, for example, what it means to impose a 'culture of teamwork' based on 'openness and mutual trust' in an individualistic society."

This is a process some corporate executives and gay ideology leftists, such as Pope Francis appointee Fr. James Martin, with media marketing ability learned they could use to create massive peer pressure – some would call it a "mob mentality," which changes the worldview of people with weak morals and weak faith.

These types of people see themselves as the "elite" because they accept the "culture of teamwork" and have "openness" to the new definitions.

Catholics who are open to the redefinition of "mercy" to mean the ultimacy of conscience may cease to be Christians because they deny that the Incarnate God-man Jesus Christ died to save us from our sins.

Pope John Paul II's Veritatis Splendor warns against the ultimacy of conscience in the third part called "Lest the Cross of Christ Be Emptied of its Power."

The ultimacy of conscience denies mercy because if there is no objective sin to be forgiven and if one doesn't have by grace the power to overcome sin then the cross of Christ is emptied of its power.

Pope Francis and his inner circle who are ostracizing the Dubia Cardinals for questioning the parts of Amoris Laetitia that appear to reject Veritatis Splendor are apparently rejecting the cross of Christ and saying it has lost its power.

They talk alot about atheistic secular issues and social work, but rarely or never about life after the death of the body, salvation and damnation.

Francis and his inner circle say Jesus had authority because he was (past tense) a servant, but rarely if ever that Jesus has authority because he is (eternal now) God.

One reason that they rarely or never talk about the four last things is that apparently in making individual conscience supreme, they deny truth, the authority of God and implicitly the existence of God.

Pope John Paul II said in Veritatis Splendor:

"Certain currents of modern thought...are explicitly atheist. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment...about good and evil...in this way the inescapable claims of truth disappear."

It may be a valid question to ask those who promote these redefinitions: Do you even believe in the Incarnation and salvation since you appear to deny the very words of Jesus Christ and his Church that he died to save us from our sins?

These persons of weak faith and weak morals wishing to be part of the "culture" or "team" are open to the managers semantic redefinition of "good or bad." Schein explains how it works:

"'Cognitive redefinition' involved two different processes. First, concepts like crime and espionage had to be semantically redefined. Crime is an abstraction that can mean different things in different conceptual systems when one makes it concrete. Second, standards of judgment had to be altered. Even within the western concept of crime, what was previously regarded as trivial was now seen to be serious. The anchors by which judgments are made are shifted and the point of neutrality is moved. Behavior that was previously judged to be neutral or of no consequence became criminal, once the anchor of what was a minimum crime was shifted. These two processes, semantic re-definition and changing one's anchors for what is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, are the essence of cognitive re-definition."[Organizational Learning as Cognitive Re-definition: Coercive Persuasion Revisited]

Fr. Antonio Spadaro who is called the "mouthpiece" of Pope Francis unwittingly pointed to where cognitive re-definition leads to by using a Doublethink phrase from the novel 1984. 

Doublethink is a process that uses "peer pressure" and other "programmes" on "thought-criminals." Spadaro Tweeted:
Theology is not #Mathematics. 2 + 2 in #Theology can make 5. Because it has to do with #God and real #life of #people...
— Antonio Spadaro (@antoniospadaro) January 5, 2017

 Wikipedia explains:

-"The phrase 'two plus two equals five' ('2 + 2 = 5') is a slogan used in many different forms of media, most notably in Part One, Chapter Seven of George Orwell's book Nineteen Eighty-Four; therein, it is used as an example of an obviously false dogma one may be required to believe, similar to other obviously false slogans by the Party in the novel. It is contrasted with the phrase 'two plus two makes four,' the obvious—but politically inexpedient—truth."

Orwell's protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if the State might declare 'two plus two equals five' as a fact; he ponders whether, if everybody believes it, does that make it true? The Inner Party interrogator of thought-criminals, O'Brien, says CV of the mathematically false statement that control over physical reality is unimportant; so long as one controls one's own perceptions to what the Party wills, then any corporeal act is possible, in accordance with the principles of doublethink."[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_%2B_2_%3D_5]

-"Doublethink is the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts.[1] Doublethink is related to, but differs from, hypocrisy and neutrality. Also related is cognitive dissonance, in which contradictory beliefs cause conflict in one's mind. Doublethink is notable due to a lack of cognitive dissonance — thus the person is completely unaware of any conflict or contradiction."

"George Orwell created the word doublethink in his dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (published in 1949); doublethink is part of newspeak. In the novel, its origin within the typical citizen is unclear; while it could be partly a product of Big Brother's formal brainwashing programmes,[2] the novel explicitly shows people learning doublethink and newspeak due to peer pressure and a desire to 'fit in', or gain status within the Party — to be seen as a loyal Party Member."[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink]

The above could be an example of how the cognitive re-definition and/or the Doublethink process worked on Muller.

Cardinal Muller had cognitive dissonance, according to those who know him at the CDF, about Amoris Laetitia teachings which contradicted with Church doctrine.

But, now it appears that he is "completely unaware of a conflict or contradiction" between Amoris Laetitia and the 2,000 year old doctrines of the Church.

To Muller's credit in the face of the tremendous peer pressure, until now, was saying couples in adulterous sexual sinful behavior are not allowed to receive Communion despite his cognitive dissonance between Amoris Laetitia and Church teachings.

Sadly, Muller is no longer in cognitive dissonance, but his new position is total confusion.

As stated before, he appears to be saying one can self annul a first marriage if one has subjective belief that the first marriage was never a "valid marital bond" and have sex in the "second marriage" which is not a valid marriage.

If Muller's confused argument was true then the couple would be committing fornication.

In reality, what Muller is saying is that those in adulterous relationships can be sexually active if their subjective conscience doubts.

Sadly, how many millions of Catholics are having cognitive dissonance and are beginning to deny that adulterous sinful behaviors are mortally sinful because of Francis, his inner circle, the many fearful bishops and now Muller?

How many are in danger of hell because of their gaslighting?

Francis and his inner circle are responsible for all the souls in danger of hell because of their teachings.

The Dubia Cardinals are, also, responsible for those souls if they don't do all in their power to rebuke and correct those false teachings.

The Dubia Cardinals need to issue the correction for the sake of those millions of Catholics who are in danger of losing their souls to hell and also for their own souls.

They need to remember that Dante said:

"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

Pray and do penance so the Dubia Cardinals will issue the correction. Say one Our Father for that intention right now.

No comments: