The Catholic Message Board

What to do to fight weaponized ambiguity?

Explain what you mean by "weaponized ambiguity"

Weaponized ambiguity is if something is written in an ambiguous manner - it could be interpreted either orthodox or heterodox - it is written so on purpose. This allows the heterodox to push their agendas, because they can claim to be in conformance with X document issued by the Church.

First of all, there is really no such thing as an unambiguous document, no matter how clearly you think you have written someone will fail to understand it.

Second, ambiguity is the result of compromise which is usually the result of disagreement over some issue by the committee writing the document or of desire not to resolve an issue that ought not be resolved.

A classic example of the latter is in Munifcentissimus Deus, the document that defines the dogma of the bodily Assumption of Mary. The document states “The Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heaven”.

So did she die? It doesn't say, it is intentionally ambiguous because the answer is unknown and the Church has no authority to decide the question. The answer to that question is simply not part of the deposit of faith.

So if a question is ambiguous on purpose, there is probably a good reason for it, and you need not assume that the purpose was malevolent, that is not a Catholic way of thinking, it is a Protestant way of thinking.

Doom wrote: ↑Sun Dec 24, 2023 7:22 pm So if a question is ambiguous on purpose, there is probably a good reason for it, and you need not assume that the purpose was malevolent, that is not a Catholic way of thinking, it is a Protestant way of thinking.

Not all ambiguity is good. How many times have we had something ambiguous put out in some document and heterodox types are making big hay about it. When dubia are asked to the proper authorities, they are as clear as mud.

So what do you think of the saying "Weaponized ambiguity is the favorite tool of the modernist"?

Do you mean like John 6?

52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day, 55 for my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which the ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.” 59 He said these things while he was teaching in a synagogue at Capernaum.

60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?”

Stella wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:04 am Do you mean like John 6?

52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day, 55 for my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which the ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.” 59 He said these things while he was teaching in a synagogue at Capernaum.

60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?”

Except Jesus wasn't being intentionally vague or ambiguous at all in this passage. He wasn't intentionally being coy about what he meant for political purposes either. He wasn't trying to elicit some sort of state of emotional vulnerability that He would then use to manipulate them.

In fact He was being quite clear about what He said and how it was to be understood.

IOW the teaching wasn't difficult because He was being vague or ambiguous, it was difficult because He wasn't.

BobCatholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 10:24 pm So what do you think of the saying "Weaponized ambiguity is the favorite tool of the modernist"?

As a saying, I don't think it is a good one. In fact, I'd venture it's a bad one. Anytime you have to explain a saying, perhaps the saying should still be tweaked before using.

BobCatholic wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 12:42 am What to do to fight weaponized ambiguity?

What is the situation at hand?

Jack3 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2024 10:15 am

BobCatholic wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 12:42 am What to do to fight weaponized ambiguity?

What is the situation at hand?

As I mentioned - we have ambiguous teachings in various Church documents which are being used to promote heresy.

Who are "we"? It's not a one-size-fits-all answer.

If I'm a prelate, then I can submit a dubium, or I can issue a statement for whatever portion of the Church is under my jurisdiction.

If I'm a theologian, I can write journal articles and give lectures applying Catholic principles to the point at issue.

If I'm a theology teacher, I can teach my classes clearly.

If I'm a priest, I can answer questions as best as I can.

If I'm a layperson who's been approached by someone else with questions, I can try to find answers. If the person doesn't want to listen, then so be it.

If I'm a layperson who's concerned in general, I can support people and organizations who are trying to gain clarity.

Sooooooo boring

Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote: ↑Sun Jan 07, 2024 9:28 pm Who are "we"? It's not a one-size-fits-all answer.

I mean "we" as members of the Church, and an example is the thread about blessing of same-sex unions. The ambiguous wording of documents that promote this scandalous.

"Oh look! The Catholic Church is so LGBTQ+ friendly toward same sex sex unions!"

ugh.

But as I pointed out, various people in various stations have different responses available to them. For most of us, that response is to pray.