Tony, I notice that 'truthiness' is similar to the phenomenon connoted by the Oxford Dictionary word for 2016: [b]post-truth[/b]. From [link=http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/posttruth-named-oxford-dictionaries-word-of-the-year/news-story/da07b64694db8960397c70b124c094e8]news.com.au[/link]:
[citation2]According to Oxford Dictionaries, the first time the term post-truth was used in this context was Mr Tesich’s essay on the Iran-Contra scandal and the Gulf War, writing that “we, as a free people, have freely decided that we want to live in some post-truth world”.
The publisher said: “There is evidence of the phrase post-truth being used before Tesich’s article, but apparently with the transparent meaning ‘after the truth was known’, and not with the new implication that truth itself has become irrelevant.”
It pointed to the recent expansion in meaning of the prefix “post-”, saying that “rather than simply referring to the time after a specified situation or event — as in post-war or post-match”, in post-truth it had taken on the meaning of “belonging to a time in which the specified concept has become unimportant or irrelevant”.
[b]post-truth: relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.[/b] [/citation2]
'Truthiness' 'feels like the truth', and as you say, 'as long as you make it sound kinda plausible and repeat it, it'll fly.'
I'm not sure, though, that the letter of the four cardinals to the pope falls into this category. I would think that what they affirm about confusion among theologians and the faithful is a fact. 'True Catholic' gives the full text of the document signed by the 45 theologians from around the globe, and it would be a shock to anyone familiar with the content and methodology of traditional teaching up to Vatican II. Eleven propositions taken from [i]Amoris Laetitia[/i] are categorised as heretical, with another eight erroneous in lesser degrees. To the lay reader the justifications provided may seem quaint, but they are in fact serious matters that cannot be shrugged off.
I think the pope has gone out on a limb, challenging the thinkers in the community to face the fact that the old methodology, typified in the responses to the protestant reformation formulated by the Council of Trent, is overdue for a revision. The problem is how does an institution change its most basic methodology. For nearly 2000 years councils have defined matters of belief and practice (morals) in formulas that have had the force of law. Present day christians are finding these formulas inadequate and even contrary to the gospel.
It might be useful to illustrate the problem by comparison with the methodology in civil society. Constitutional democracies like Australia and the USA are bound by the words of their constitutions. It is the role of the High Court to interpret the constitution. Imagine the confusion if a group began to say that this system is not longer applicable, if a prime minster or president said the constitution no longer applies.
Note, I'm not saying the decrees of Church Councils form a constitution of the church. I am merely comparing the way the State depends on its constitution and the Church holds to truths as defined by Councils down the centuries. I assume there are many great minds working on this transition that the pope is heading towards. It would seem to require nothing less than a new understanding of the church as community, moving away from the traditional concept of church as institution founded by Christ.
True, Vatican II laid the foundation of this transition, but the actual process is something else again. For me (and this is my personal view), the church as an institution is no longer a valid concept. However it worked in the past, today it is caught in all the negatives that go with institutions.
Perhaps a graphic image will help: it is as if God were calling his people to leave their traditions, to walk out of their buildings, to disband their organisations, and their hierarchies, to move out into the desert, to an unprotected place where trust is tested daily because you've got nothing else. To a people in that situation, [i]Amoris Laetitia[/i] would be a very useful document for it provides guidelines to pastors and to individuals. Within the traditional institution of the Roman Church it is likely to cause a schism, or lead to the deposition of a pope.
We began with 'truthiness' and the world of 'post-truth'. Tony, I do not think the four cardinals can be accused of manipulating the truth or canvassing their personal bias, for they stand firm on long traditions. If anything, this is something that we on Catholica are prone to. We often appeal to emotion and personal beliefs, searching for new understandings but somewhat shy of serious debate. We have great tolerance for any comment that it is not too dogmatic or fundamentalist, and we do repeat our positions quite a lot, perhaps hoping that repetition will make them more convincing.