Fratelli Tutti- I interview Pedro Gabriel of WherePeterIs.com in response to recent criticism of the Encyclical

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Lilllabettt said:

Come now ... you don't know "what" the Holy Father has stated, do you... no one does. Maybe the truth is, you are just professing obedience to the interpretation that tickles your ears?

Another sweeping generalization i.e. "no one does".  You may not know what you are against, I would not know.  I certainly know what I am supporting.  And no one can tell me what I know and do not know in this instance i.e "Come now ... you don't know "what" the Holy Father has stated, do you" (see comment on bottom of this post)

Obedience for Catholics is submission of intellect and will to what the Church teaches re faith and morals. A Catholic can't submit intellect and will to a hypothetical, to "whatever the Pope meant by that."  

Spot on.  However, I guess, technically a Catholic could choose to submit as you describe above.  It possibly would not make any sense to human reasoning however. "Man judges appearances, but The Lord knows the heart" (Book of Samuel)

I understand my obedience but I do not owe anyone any explanation.  Not to owe them one anyway i.e. compelled.  I certainly do understand those statements Pope Francis has made which became controversial and understand in the larger context, the big picture, as I understand it.  What is controversial is a few trees in a very large wood.

"The type of obedience you are describing isn't Catholic, because there's no "there" there."

No idea what you mean.

It is true the Pope is not a robot, and can't be compelled, for example,  to answer directly if he is suspected of covering up sex abuse. It is true that if he gave a direct truthful answer his haters would still hate him. Still, it remains the right thing to do, a moral obligation he took on as part of the position he freely accepted, Servant of the servants of God - servant of the laity in other words.

It is a presuming that Pope Francis is not acting in the best interests of the Laity, in this instance, and as a Servant of The Servants of God.  As Laity and even further, some only are presuming that they know what is best and trying to force it on to PF - i.e.bullying or mobbing.  I can indeed wonder if the silence by our Holy Father is due to a refusal to submit to bullying or mobbing 'techniques' - i.e. to surrender to an oppression technique, which is a means adopted to control a person and/or situation.

 

__________________

"Come now ... you don't know "what" the Holy Father has stated, do you" - Relentlessly difficult people exert power and control by defining your reality for you. Covert verbal abuse happens when someone tells you how you feel, what you think, or what you need or want. It’s sneaky." HERE

Re obedience.  After a bit of thought reflecting on how to put it.  Both in the world and in The Church there are those who promise or vow to obey a person, without knowledge of what that person will in future command.  The proviso is obedience is promised/vowed in all that is not against the law or sinful.

Edited November 29, 2020 by BarbaraTherese

[Aloysius]

she didn't assert how you feel, which would have been more ad hominem, she asserted what you know or not, and what could be known based on the evidence out there, a perfectly legitimate thing to say ad argumentum.  while she did suggest the possibility that your interpretation was just the one you wanted to be true, that's still a rather legitimate discussion point--all of us should pay attention to our own biases.  that exact accusation of bias in interpretation has been lobbed against her and her side by others--and when it was it was also a valid point to make, whether it's true or not is a matter of debate.

suggesting that this was "abuse" is just unhelpful.  it's not 'abuse' to tell someone they're wrong when you're having a disagreement or debate, that's sort of the whole point of the debate is it not?

as far as the version of obedience you're proposing, in terms of your own personal peace of mind there is nothing quite wrong with it--but it is a problematic thing to assert to others to deflect their crticism of the individual pope in terms of things they are troubled by.  especially since JPII there has been this problematic conflation of the man and the office, with the thought that somehow the man holding the office should be held in high regard for his personal holiness or his personal wisdom.  but when we address the Pope as "your holiness", we're not calling him personally holy; in a way, that phrase is quite the opposite.  by saying "your holiness" we're saying, "we're not addressing the man Jorge Borgoglio now, we're addressing the holy thing that you possess--ie the Papal Office itself"--we're basically talking to the fisherman's ring, we're talking to the miter.  our obedience is due to this office, to 'his holiness', not to 'him'.

you are right to say that obedience would not just be about following the letter of the law and finding loopholes in it.  but people who have a legitimate criticism of something that it appears to them the pope is doing wrong aren't just called to be quiet and obey and ignore their lying eyes and ears--they are meant to assent to Catholic doctrine, pray for the pope, and unite to their fellow Catholics through the pope's office; but they can certainly say "I think this pope's blurring the lines here" or "I think he's being unclear there", or "he really ought to clarify here" or, for instance if they were a medieval catholic speaking of a medieval pope for instance, "he really ought to stop being so corrupt".  we don't follow popes because they're particularly wise, but because in the office of peter we are unified.

now all that said, we all should be reminded to have a bit of humility in our critique, and charity for the Holy Father, and I think in many ways that's what you mean to suggest by your reference to obedience, and on that regard I hope the point is well taken.  but certainly don't use it to suggest we should just accept the pope's words and actions, or that we're wrong to say he has an obligation to his flock to be clarifying things he's widely misinterpreted in saying.

[Guest]

Permissions

Instructions

Corrections

[Guest]

 

Hi @HumilityAndPatience

I have finished the video above.  Thank you very much, once again, for posting it.

Overall, I thought that the anchor person asked excellent questions and deserves a pat on the back   As for Pedro Gabriel, I thought he was truly excellent in answering the  questions.  He had a real clarity of thought without resorting to unnecessary six syllable words, as it were.  I had Google Search open with the video but I hardly had to use it really to understand meaning of words.    Pedro not only had clarity of thought, but he was really well educated, quite knowledgeable on his subject -  and communicated some really excellent information.  Information new to me.........not that that is difficult.

He was quite clear that it was his reflections he shared, i.e. his opinions.  I thought that the comment on the Our Father was awes.ome.  If God is Our Father, then we are all brothers and sisters.  I thought that was absolutely brilliant in its simplicity.  One could even possibly miss it as it was very short and to the point.  I have never heard it before.

His comment towards the end of the video when asked about legitimate criticism of FRATELLI TUTTI, he was particularly humble, I thought, in that he felt that there could indeed be legitimate criticism of a long and complex Document by PF.  He did feel, however that current criticisms might be coming from a pretext for, and in support of, an anti Pope Francis narrative.  He felt that legitimate criticism can only come from long study of the Document, all of it, putting concepts into the context of the entire Document.  There was no inference that he was even qualified at this point to be coming from long study of FT.  Rather he made comment to the contrary that he was not coming from sufficiently long study of the whole Document, which he called "rich and complex".

Pedro to me is an excellent speaker.  I certainly had no quarrel or problem with anything he stated.  I thought that his overall knowledge was expressed with clarity and his simplicity was commendable.  I even found the sound of his soft, yet clear, voice with a slight accent easy to listen to.

Thank you too for the website "Where Peter is".  I have had only a quick glance through here and there and reading bits and pieces the same way.  I am looking forward to be able to have really good perusal.

I will, of course, in due course be listening to the video again.

Amazing commentary on Pope Francis and also FRATELLI TUTTI.   10/10 from me! 

Catcha again, HAP, somewhere or other on the rounds I daresay.....regards......Barb  

[HumilityAndPatience]

14 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

Amazing commentary on Pope Francis and also FRATELLI TUTTI.   10/10 from me! 

Catcha again, HAP, somewhere or other on the rounds I daresay.....regards......Barb  

Thanks so much for the feedback @BarbaraTherese, it really is appreciated and quite humbling to receive such thorough and positive feedback. On some of my other videos I have received quite a lot of negative feedback, so encouragement and affirmation is welcome very much, particularly when it is from someone I respect- your views on the Phorum have likewise greatly assisted me.

 

14 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

Thank you too for the website "Where Peter is".  I have had only a quick glance through here and there and reading bits and pieces the same way.  I am looking forward to be able to have really good perusal.

Yes- I too have only relatively recently discovered their website. I think ironically (in the context of this thread we are in) @Lilllabettt mentioned them(!) in an old and unrelated thread and thus began my journey down that rabbit hole too... So I owe @Lilllabettt a thank you (: 

[Guest]

Looks like I have run out of reactions.  Thank you for your post @HumilityAndPatience.  I really appreciate the video and am heaps more informed now probably on all the subjects that came up.   What I will be doing is listening again, I have decided, with Word open and make a note of the subject and at what time it can be located - my memory truly is poor.

Edited November 29, 2020 by BarbaraTherese

[Guest]

Just recalled the following and thank you for your "thank you post". 

From my personal preferences, I thought that the cover of the video cheapened it, although others might not feel that at all.  I expected (expectations) from the cover that it would be commentary from either the extremes of those for the anti-Francis narrative - or those extremes against it.

Although, when I noted you had posted it, I did call my expectations into question and rightly so!

What I discovered was that it is a balanced, intelligent and really well informed Q&A.  A video I am now going to keep as a reference source.  I would have chosen a 'quiet' dignified cover.  But just me!

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2020 by BarbaraTherese

[HumilityAndPatience]

18 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

From my personal preferences, I thought that the cover of the video cheapened it, although others might not feel that at all.  I expected (expectations) from the cover that it would be commentary from either the extremes of those for the anti-Francis narrative - or those extremes against it.

Although, when I noted you had posted it, I did call my expectations into question and rightly so!

What I discovered was that it is a balanced, intelligent and really well informed Q&A.  A video I am now going to keep as a reference source.  I would have chosen a 'quiet' dignified cover.  But just me!

Thank you- very valid, useful and valuable feedback @BarbaraTherese. I agree with you, the cover does tend to the sensational in that it picks up the contentious topics. I will bear this in mind for future videos (: 

[Guest]

My quite personal problem was more with the diverse rather bright colours on the cover.   But that is just me!  My personal taste is for subdued colours in both clothing and décor - at any time really.   Others might be totally different.