Elderly man wearing a face mask

Catholics and Conspiracy Theories

Strange Disorienting Times

The strange times we live in are exactly that – strange. It is difficult some days to tell up from down, left from right, and reality from unreality. We are living through a time wherein billions of people have been led to believe that they must stay locked in their homes – even if not sick – in order not to spread a disease that they don’t have, to people they are required to stay 6 feet away from. In addition, the current election cycle in the USA is proving to be an exercise on behalf of the mainstream media in how to openly lie to the public on a daily basis.

We receive information coupled with interpretation. The latter has a greater influence and is easily biased because of information sources having completely opposite foundations. One’s principles and values dictate the information one provides and how one provides it. For example, the one who favors abortion presents Margaret Sanger as a heroine and emphasizes positive things about her. Yet, the one who knows the evil she has caused brings up her impure, eugenic, racist and genocidal principles.

I have said on this platform and others that I believe the true virus that has descended on the world is a diabolical virus, which is far more dangerous than a mere physical one. There is a spirit of confusion that reigns over the minds of most in today’s world; and depending on which media sources we consult, we can appear to one another as if we are living in an ‘alternate reality.’ The diabolical disorientation, to use a term coined by Sister Lucia, is very real.

Alternative Media Sources

So, what are we to do? Unless we adopt an “off-the-grid” lifestyle, wherein we detach from most of society, we do in some fashion have to find a way to inform ourselves of the relevant societal information. Whether it be in the workplace, in our families, or in the Church, conversations about politics seem to rule the roost. We cannot rely on the mainstream media sources for useful information; furthermore, we cannot rely on the mainstream sources for any moral content that is consistent with our faith. Therefore, we may be in a position to consult alternative sources.

Alternative sources of media are, generally speaking, independent journalists or organizations that work outside of the normal way of operating. Millions of people have “cut the cord” (discontinued cable TV services) and now use websites, YouTube channels, and podcasts as their sources for information. The Fatima Center has always operated according to a similar model, by independently producing content on the full truth of the Message of Our Lady of Fatima, and then finding ways to deliver it to our supporters and spreading it to as many people as possible. These alternative sources can be edifying; however, there is no silver bullet to the problem of misguided media, and we must therefore be vigilant with all sources.

“Conspiracy Theories”

Often, people dedicated to the mainstream media will label alternative sources as places fomenting “Conspiracy Theories.” The term “conspiracy theory” is usually a red herring, amounting to nothing more than a pejorative insult. Conspiracies are real things, and are even used in legal language, such as in the serious crime of “conspiracy to commit murder.” And the word “theory” is often used interchangeably with the word “hypothesis,” which is basically a way of describing a set of ideas you may have about how something has come to pass, or how something will work.

Taking these definitions into account, a basic understanding of a so-called conspiracy theory would be akin to how we look at the work of a detective. For example, a detective finds and studies evidence, with a particular aim as to how it might be linked to form a clearer understanding of what is hidden (like pieces in a puzzle). Experienced detectives also learn to “follow their gut.” Many a crime has been solved on account of what began as a ‘hunch.’ Once a detective suspects a particular individual, he will look even more closely for supporting evidence. If he finds sufficient, reasonable, and convincing evidence, along with compelling and ample opportunity, the detective will formulate a theory, or hypothesis, as to how the crime took place. Yet, we would never accuse the detective of being a “conspiracy theorist.”

For those who question the official narrative about the Consecration of Russia,[1] you are probably used to being called a “conspiracy theorist” for believing that there has been a sort of cover-up at the Vatican, and that the content of the Third Secret is still partly hidden.

So, with alternative media sources, the question is not whether or not they are seen as sympathetic to “conspiracy theories,” but what matters most is whether or not the information they present is true. If the evidence is correct, then one might still challenge the accompanying interpretation, but one must do so with clear reason and supporting evidence.

Sometimes the evidence is simply too strong to refute, as in the case of the alleged Consecration of Russia. In such cases, those opposed to the truth will do their best to hide or discredit the correct information, spin confusing webs of deceit and illusion, and insult and denigrate those who are striving to proclaim the truth. Sound familiar?

Are There Dangers Associated with “Conspiracy Theories”?

Again, whether or not something is labeled by the mainstream media as a “conspiracy theory” is irrelevant for the purpose of trying to find out the truth. However, there are dangers associated with certain alternative media sources. Inherent in the world of alternative sources is a certain skepticism. Now, this skepticism is useful when questioning the “official” narrative, but unless the journalist is enlightened by faith, then that skepticism is often directed against the faith as well.

I recently listened to a podcast from a source usually associated with “conspiracy theories” that discussed the coronavirus and the lockdown measures. It was a great interview, and I agreed with virtually everything that was said, and almost nothing was against the fundamental truths I hold dear as a Catholic… that is, until the end of the show. Once the interlocutors digressed from political and medical factoids, they then began to discuss what they believe is the nature of the human person. The interviewee began to espouse some nonsense about how the human person is some sort of frequency in a larger “consciousness”, etc. I rolled my eyes and turned off the gnostic garbage.

Overall, I’d say it was a good show. I learned things that I would almost never hear from a mainstream source, so I was generally pleased. As long as you are grounded in the dogmas of the Faith, and you can recognize error when you see it, there is no more danger in consulting alternative “conspiracy” sources than there is in consulting any of the nonsense from the mainstream media.

As with all things, use your prudential judgment and do not look for Divine Wisdom in secular sources. Be alert to error in all media, and do not allow yourself to be consumed with things that will take you away from the Catholic Faith.

[1] It was not until 1989 that all Catholic media outlets began to hold the position that the ceremony performed by John Paul II on March 25, 1984 was, in fact, Heaven’s supposedly requested Consecration of Russia. Why did it take five years? Well, because in July 1989 Fatima expert Father Messias Coelho revealed that Sister Lucia had just received an anonymous “instruction” from unidentified persons in the Vatican that she must now say that the Consecration of Russia was accomplished in the ceremony of 1984 – even though Russia was never mentioned and the world’s Catholic bishops did not participate, and even though the corresponding and irrefutable evidence did not exist, namely the conversion of Russia to the one, holy Catholic Church and the period of peace promised by Our Lady.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email