Alcala 1958

by the Freud ian sand popula rize d thr ough their eno rmou slite rature (whi chis en tir ely out of proportion to the ir sc ien tif iccon ­ trib utio ns ), is pop ula rly ide nt ifi ed with Fr eud ian ism .Thi s we can not tole rate , thi s we con demn . Why ? Be cau se Fr eud ian ismis abo ut 95 per cen t un tru e. By the wa y, th is is my op ini on ,but I ca n sub stan tiat eit. We ca n nev er app rov e the gre ate r partof Freudi an­ ism with out stu lti fy ingour reas on, bec ause it is unt rue , becau se it is ag ain st rea son , and reas on is our God-g ivenfac ulty for dis­ cov eri ngtru th. On the oth er hand , we hol d an d teach that moder nps ych iat rywit h all its rel iab le fin di ng s— tru e analy tic al or depth psy­ chi atr y— the se cannot, wil l not , ne ver wil l conf lic t with the tea ch ing s of Cat holi c Ch ris tianit y. Why ? Be cau se truth is one , an d God is Tru th, an d all tru e th ing s derive the ir tru thfu lnes s ult imate ly from God . The re­ for e the va lid tea ch ing sof psychi atr ycan­ not fai l to harmo nize with Chr istia n the olo gy,nat ura lmor alit yan d philo sop hic al psy cholo gy . This true doc trin e abo ut sc ien tif icps yc hia tryis wheat. Fr eud ian ism is mostly ch af f. MAR GI E: Pa rd onthe pau se. I think I was just spe echless , bec ause tha t wa s put so pro fou ndly and yet so clearl y, Fat her Cik rit. Now tell us, "I s the re les s conf lic t betwee n the con fes siona lbox andana lys t's cou ch than is pop ula rlyas sume d? " 7 FR . C IK R IT : Th e Co ron et editor put s thi s sta rtli ng,shoc ki ngstat ement right ove rthe titl e of the ar tic le. The compar isonbet wee n the confe ssionalbox and theana lys t's cou ch is oft en cal led and con sid ered a true an al og y;but to a thi nk ingCath olic suc h a compar ison is bla sph emous ,sac ril eg ious.It ma kes him jus tly ind ign an t.Why ?Be cau se the re is no br idge po ssib le betwee n the two; and the aut hor , exp res sly try ing to bu ild thi s br idg e between the neth erworld ians a rized ous t w c ely tific - utions), l rly tified ianism. is , n. ? se ianism t e. , i i ion, tiate approve art o ia • ltifying e, se it st , iven f l • ing t . , n i try le ings - l tical • y - s l , li t ings lic i tianity. ? se , t , s t f lne ately . • l ings o try - l nize i l gy, l lity hilosophical ology. i e tific i try i ianis f . GIE: o s . l , f ndly ly, it. li t si al d l t's rly ed ?" . RIT: T et tling, ing t r t ticle. iso i al d the l t's couch re logy; b i g li iso e ou , ileaious. i ant. ? se i ge le n o , sly i orld

,

But psy chiatry is one thi ng , and Freud- ian ism or Fre udi an psy cho ana lys is is qu ite ano ther . Pur e wh ite is ne ve r a ver y black gra y. The Co ron et aut hor identif iesthem . Tha t's hi s most ser iou s, mos t fundamenta l erro r. Su ch oft-rep eate d equa tin g and ide nt ify ing of rea lly sc ien tif ic psy chiatr y wit h the fak e pse ud o-s cie nti ficFre udi an psy cho ana lysi srenders hi s rea son ing and hi s argum ent in fav or of Fre ud ian ismuse­ less , un con vin cin g,rid icu lou s. It is just as inco rrec t and inv ali das if he were try ing to ide nti fythe who le of San Di eg owit h one of its stre ets, esp eci ally a dir ty, slumm y, immoral stree t, an d try ing to conv inc eus that beauti fulSan Di eg owa s no thing mor e than Mud All ey and that the se two dis­ sim ilar , disp ara te ent itie s we re rea lly one and the same thi ng . Her e is ano ther inv alid Fre ud ian iden ti­ fic ati on . The Fre ud ian s ha ve unj ust ly app ropriat ed a ver y an cie nt and a ver y goo d Greek term, psy choana lys is, and bra­ zenl y and shame less ly ide nt ifi ed it with Fre udi ani sm,that is, wit h Fr eudia nthe orie s and pra ctic es, wh ich are mo stly bas ed on fals ehoods and fan cif ul, irra tion al moon ­ shi ne . Psy cho analy sis ,etymo log ically ,in its origin alGreek me ani ng , sig ni fie s a stu dy or inv esti gat ion or dis sec tion psy cho log ic­ all y of the psy che or sou l and its beh avi or and prob lems — an an aly sis and study that is not som eth ing dis cov ere d by the Freudi ans, but that ha s bee n done from time imm emo rial — ever sin ce a fat her studie d the beh avi or pro blems of his chi ld or hi s own. Th is clev er, cunn ing ma nip ula tion of wor ds is dec ept ive sop his try an d inco rrec t arg ument atio nwhe rein a par t is sub stit uted for the whole : where one sys tem of psy­ chi atr y, Fre udi an, is iden tified with and ma de to stan d fo r all the sys tem sof psy chi­ at ry ; whe re a cou nte rfe it,pse udo-s cie nce is ma squ era din g as the true sc ien ceof psy chi­ atr y ; so that tod ay , thi s wo rd, psycho ­ ana lysis, whi ch wa s unj ust ly app rop riat ed i try i i analysi i . . et tifies . t's i s, e tal . ted ti g tifying ll tific y i e o-scientif c F analysis ing e t ianis • , vincing, i lous. t li i tify l o t , al y t , y, l , i i ce ful o - , te iti s ll . ia i- ion. ians l riated t , oanalysi , - les ly tified ianism, i n i s ctices, i l ods iful, ti al • . analysi , e logically, al ing, signif es a st tion ti n logic- l s - l sis ing red ans, rial - i l s . is , ing i ulation s tive try t e tation i te : - y, ian, tifie s o - ; rfeit, o-science erading ce o i- ; , , - tly riated

e

i

il

,

l

7 O p. cit ., p. 108 . 7 0 . ., .

26