“Michael Voris…not authorized to use the word ‘Catholic’” — UPDATED

A statement on the Archdiocese of Detroit website (h/t New Advent):

The Church encourages the Christian faithful to promote or sustain a variety of apostolic undertakings but, nevertheless, prohibits any such undertaking from claiming the name Catholic without the consent of the competent ecclesiastical authority (see canon 216 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law). For some time, the Archdiocese of Detroit has been in communication with Mr. Michael Voris and his media partner at Real Catholic TV regarding their prominent use of the word “Catholic” in identifying and promoting their public activities disseminated from the enterprise’s production facility in Ferndale, Michigan. The Archdiocese has informed Mr. Voris and Real Catholic TV, RealCatholicTV.com, that it does not regard them as being authorized to use the word “Catholic” to identify or promote their public activities. Questions about this matter may be directed to the Archdiocese of Detroit, Department of Communications.

UPDATE: A commenter alerted me to this response from Team Voris:

Michael Voris, while he may be the star of RealCatholicTV’s programming, is not the owner of the website.  The owner is Marc Brammer who lives in South Bend Indiana in the diocese of Bishop Kevin Rhoades.

Brammer told LifeSiteNews, “I own RealCatholicTV.com. I contracted with Michael Voris to produce video content for that website and I pay him for it.  It is a business relationship between me and Michael. If all of a sudden now there’s this tussle over the use of the word ‘Catholic’ I’ll deal with it through competent ecclesial authority.”

Brammer noted that he had received a letter from the Archdiocese of Detroit acknowledging him as the owner of the website.  He responded to that letter with a request for a meeting with the Archdiocese.  He received no response. Brammer has not been asked by his bishop, Fort Wayne-South Bend Bishop Kevin Rhoades to cease using the word Catholic…

…Voris says that communication [with the Archdiocese of Detroit] was only one way – directives from the Archdiocese and refusal to meet with Voris or Brammer to discuss the matter.  Voris told LifeSiteNews that he has seven times requested a meeting with Archdiocesan officials to discuss the matter but each time he has been ignored or rebuffed…

…Voris notes that his conflicts with the Archdiocese of Detroit has more to do with its staffers than with the Archbishop.  Previous to his work for RealCatholicTV, Voris launched St. Michael’s Media and had various offers to air programs he produced, talks he was to give and television shows he was to be featured on canceled through the efforts of staff at the Archdiocese.  “They have waged a quiet war since the very first time we set foot into the public realm,” he said.

In response to the press release demand from the Archdiocese of Detroit, Voris told LifeSiteNews, “I don’t have ownership over the name of the organization. It’s not my organization.  The headquarters are outside of the diocese.” He concluded, “It’s the wrong person, and the wrong outfit asking the wrong person the wrong question.”

RELATED:

I think this has gone on long enough. Comments are closed.

Let’s remember what really matters during this holy time: “Behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people…”

  • Henry Karlson

    I’m sure the excuse will be “Some other bishop recognizes us…”

  • nate

    As I wrote on Mark Shea’s blog: I hope he obeys his bishop, keeps quiet about it, and leaves the comments as to the irony of it all to the blogosphere. Voris provides an interesting and, to my mind, important perspective, and it would be a shame to see him compromise his mission over this. Perhaps he could change his name to CealRatholicTV. Heh. :)

    On the other hand, I hope the good bishop changes his mind!

  • http://www.archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com Archbishop Cranmer

    Hmm…

    Does the Roman Catholic Church own the word? Is it a registered trademark? The Church of England calls itself Catholic and Reformed. Does it need papal dispensation to do so? Who is the ‘real Catholic’? Perhaps he might cast the first stone.

  • Klaire

    Does that mean if I wanted to start blogging as “Catholic Klaire” I would need bishop approval otherwise be in opposition of Canon Law?

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    Well, Canon Law is Canon Law (paging Ed Peters…want to weigh in here?) but I suspect there is more to this. I’d be curious to hear if anyone else knows more.

    Last I knew, Voris had not followed the necessary protocol to have his ministry approved as an apostolate in the Archdiocese of Detroit — and the archdiocese had taken the unusual step of actually having a written statement on file, stating that fact and making clear that Michael Voris spoke for no one but himself.

    Dcn. G.

  • Mark

    What a joke. Doesn’t the bishop understand that this simply gives Michael Voris and his site free advertising. Michael has got to love this move.

  • http://wilbystmary.org.uk Martyn

    I thought catholic meant ‘universal’, hence its use by many other denominations in the Nicene Creed? Maybe Rome can be appeased by simply spelling it with a small ‘c’?

  • naturgesetz

    While we wait for Dr. Peters to weigh in —

    Under the heading “Associations of the Christian Faithful,” Canon 300 says, in relevant part, “No association shall assume the name ‘Catholic’ without the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority … .”

    Mark, while it may give Voris a little boost, I think it’s more important for the bishop to let the faithful know that they shouldn’t assume that everything they hear from Michael Voris is consistent with the Faith.

  • eric

    Thank God the Bishop has taken this stand against someone who abuses the title “Catholic” to promote his own misguided and extremist views. He’s a disgrace to the church and someone I’m not proud to call my brother in Christ.

  • nate

    Interesting.

    Dr. Peters?

    Bueller?

    Inquiring minds want to know…

  • with-a-z

    I have to wonder why all those groups in the Archdiocese of Detroit that use the name “Catholic” but spew horrible anti-Catholic teaching, don’t have their own press releases out there condemning their existence? The only one I can remember in recent memory was for the Call to Action event that happened earlier this year, but that’s only because it was such a big deal. But the groups that operate in the Archdiocese that spew and support clearly anti-Catholic teaching on a daily basis – they don’t have press releases out there about them. Why is that?

    Oh —- I see. It’s because they are under the radar, quiet, and no one notices them, so they don’t bother anyone. Just let them do their thing, and no one will notice. But if they had a following of millions of people (check the YouTube stats), well THEN the AoD needs to say something. Because heaven forbid that a group of faithful Catholics, trying to save souls, has a large following that doesn’t have the rubber stamp of the Chancery, that ALLOWS clearly heretical groups to flourish…quietly and without interference.

    That’s BS if you ask me.

  • ron chandonia

    Several years back, a group here in Atlanta started look-alike churches that were aimed at drawing in Hispanic Catholic newscomers to the area. The effort was successful enough that the Archdiocese of Atlanta sued for trademark infringement. Somewhat to my surprise, the suit was successful. An account of that incident appeared in Slate in 2003:

    http://www.slate.com/articles/life/faithbased/2003/10/property_of_rome.html

  • Don Derham

    Does this mean a bishop has approved the National Catholic Reporter?

  • naturgesetz

    If it were simply a matter of “a group of faithful Catholics, trying to save souls,” who had merely failed to request approval, there would have been no problem. The problem seems to be that this self-styled “group of faithful Catholics, trying to save souls,” is deviating seriously enough from what the Catholic Church proclaims that “for some time, the Archdiocese of Detroit has been in communication with Mr. Michael Voris and his media partner at Real Catholic TV” and apparently they have been unable to persuade them to get with the program of the Church.

    I don’t know exactly what the problem is, because I don’t watch Michael Voris, but this does not seem like the sort of thing that would be done just because some bureaucratic i’s hadn’t been dotted and t’s crossed.

  • naturgesetz

    Oops!

    Rereading, I see the canon cited is 216: “All the Christian faithful, since they participate in the mission of the Church, have the right to promote or sustain apostolic action by their own undertakings in accord with each one’s state and condition; however, no undertaking shall assume the name Catholic unless the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority is given.”

  • Boston Bean

    Aha! Let’s see here now, every heretic and apostate priest and deacon in this bishop’s diocese can call himself a catholic priest and a catholic deacon. Every dissident catechist and theologian in the bishop’s diocese can call themselves catholic. Oh, but Voris can’t call himself catholic? What for?! I get it. The poor bishop doesn’t like having a lay person defend the catholic faith, when this poor bishop doesn’t have the backbone to do so himself.

    Hmmmmm…. this sounds like (anti) Cardinal Mahoney vs Mother Angelica. When will these lily-livered American Bishops get it???!!!! Methinks the USCCB should not be called Catholic until they prove that they are Catholic!

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    What has he ever said that is “extremist”?

    Everything he has ever said is 100% orthodox and in line with Church teaching.

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    ” deviating seriously enough from what the Catholic Church proclaims”

    “I don’t know exactly what the problem is, because I don’t watch Michael Voris”

    Well, there you go; if you had actually *watched* Michael Voris, you would never say he is “deviating seriously” from Church teaching, because he never has, and never will.

    How about getting the facts before accusing a faithful apostolate of heresy?

  • Mark

    If they actually did this on a consistent basis, Michael Voris would not have started or been popular. If you use these tactics to try to silence a critic, you bring more attention to them. I can think of about 10 organizations using “Catholic” that are often in open dissent. You could start with “Catholic” universites in many of the dioceses.

  • Mark

    Clearly not even close to the same thing Ron. Michael has simply brought attention to many things going on within the various organizations that fall under the Bishops that have been in open dissent of Church teaching. I think this is good news for Michael Voris. I have seen this now on many blogs and it has brought attention from many who never heard of him before. It looks like the Bishops that often can’t seem to shoot straight when it comes to abuse issues, can’t take a little heat when it is inside their own kitchen.

  • Andy

    I suspect, and it is a suspicion, the bishop took this step because Mr. Voris presents himself as a teacher of what the Church says and requires, and what he teaches may not be aligned with the Magisterium I find it interesting that many comments I have read about this action, at other cites present mr. Voris as greater in knowledge than the Bishop and a more in line with Catholic teaching than the Bishop and these are the self-same people who criticize the National Catholic Reporter. And then people wonder why many lay catholics are confused about what the Magisterium says and the role(s) of Bishops.

  • Henry Karlson

    Michael Voris often, quite often, opposes Church teaching with political beliefs. His constant strawmen against the USCCB ignoring the positions are in accord with Vatican teaching is an example of how he misconstrues the Church’s own declarations. Even if it is on a prudential level, and one can disagree with the prudential decision, one must at least recognize the unity of the USCCB and the Vatican on issues of prudence (Catholic Social Doctrine, Ecology, etc). I’ve seen many errors in Voris’ teaching, and that is why he is asked to temper his comments. He won’t.

  • Henry Karlson

    Luther said the same thing about himself.

  • Henry Karlson

    This is exactly a part of the problem. Voris is looked at as the Magisterium and his declarations more authoritative than the actual bishops and Magisterium. His dishonest representation of others, his constant ignoring of the Vatican when it differs from his teachings, his ad homimen criticisms of people who are teaching orthodoxy have caught up with him. Notice the Luther-like response.

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    “I’ve seen many errors in Voris’ teaching, and that is why he is asked to temper his comments.”

    Oh yes? Praytell, where are these “many errors” of which you speak? Are you a premium subscriber, with full access to all of RCTV’s content? Because I am, and I’ve watched most of those hundreds of hours, and have yet to see a single doctrinal error.

    But you have seen “many errors”, so you claim.

    Anyway, Voris responds to this latest controversy here, which turns out to be a non-controversy, as RCTV does not belong under the jurisdiction of the Detroit Archdiocese, but rather that of the Ft. Wayne-South Bend diocese.

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archdiocese-of-detroit-asks-michael-voris-to-stop-using-the-name-catholic

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine
  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    I haven’t watched him in a while, so decided to look at one of his Vortex episodes from a day or two before that statement came out. Check this out.

  • Henry Karlson

    Christine

    Often people watching him have little to no real background in theology. They don’t know where he is wrong. They confuse political leanings with orthodoxy. They have little to no knowledge of what the Vatican itself says.

    I’ve done many posts on Michael Voris on Vox Nova.

    Here are some I’ve done:

    http://vox-nova.com/2010/01/29/virtual-polemical-videos-not-real-catholic-tv/
    http://vox-nova.com/2010/11/20/st-athanasius-and-detraction/
    http://vox-nova.com/2010/02/22/marys-better-path-must-not-lead-to-a-rejection-of-the-world/
    http://vox-nova.com/2010/02/13/chesterton-must-be-an-anti-christian-socialist/

  • naturgesetz

    If Michael Voris promotes this sort of a protestant attitude toward the hierarchy and division between the flock and the shepherds God has given us, then he certainly has no right to call himself Catholic.

  • naturgesetz

    This is a neat evasion. “Real Catholic” TV’s operations are performed in the Archdiocese of Detroit, and this character claims that because his personal residence is outside the Archdiocese, the Archbishop of Detroit doesn’t have authority over what is happening in the archdiocese. I will defer to Dr. Peters, but it seems to me that this evasion won’t fly. It seems only reasonable that if a Catholic is owns an operation somewhere and calls it Catholic, the bishop where it happens is the one with jurisdiction, not the bishop where the “hands-off” owner happens to live.

  • justamouse

    When I was last at the church thrift store, the 5 older ladies running it were sitting in the front, with one of them telling the others how wonderful he was and how they go to his talks.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: Father Martin Luther

    The Augustinian Monk was right on many issues. He and other reformers (who remained Catholic) boldly scolded Bishops who had neglected their flocks. However Father Martin, on matters of faith and morals, eventually embraced error. He publicly and stubbornly held on tightly to his errors and refused all correction from just authority. In so doing Father Martin excommunicated himself.

    So far no Bishop has condemned Mr. Voris for holding a position contrary to Catholic faith and morals. Let us pray that Mr. Voris continues to embrace and proclaim the faith in its entirety.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: On Bishops & Obedience.

    It is important that Catholics obey their Bishops in all that is just and licit. It is also important that Bishops act with transparency, in accordance with Canon Law and, above all, with charity as good shepherds.

    Mr. Voris is not the owner of RealCatholicTV. He is an employee thereof. Mr. Voris has no legal control over the name of the company he works for. The owner of RealCatholicTV is not a member of the Archdiocese of Detroit. Perhaps the good Archbishop of Detroit could take this matter up with the Bishop who is the ordinary for the owner of RealCatholicTV?

    God bless
    Richard W Comerford

  • Boston Bean

    Since when is it Protestant to defend the Catholic faith? You got me there, man. Let’s try this as a theoretical example (not that this would EVER happen). Pope issues Sacramentum Caritatis in 2007. America (sic) Bishops ignore it. Layman publicly supports it. Layman is, therefore, accused of betting “not-Catholic.”

    How about this one: Pope issues Summorum Pontificum. Bishops ignore it and oppose it (usually through very cunning ways). Layman supports it. Layman is deemed “Protestant” for not going alone with the America (sic) Bishops.

    Kindly explain this… I am befuddled!!

  • Rudy

    Right on, Boston Bean!

  • Rudy

    BB YOU GOT IT!

  • naturgesetz

    Deacon Greg linked one video of his, and I find his vague, broadbrush characterization of unnamed people and places useless, but, because it deals in generalities, a calumny against every valid parish outreach to gay people.

    He need not be precisely a heretic to be guilty of gravely wounding the unity of the Church.

  • naturgesetz

    This was intended to be a reply to Christine’s comment at 6:41 on December 23.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: On Bishops & Obedience

    Whether or not our Bishop is in full communion with the Vicar of Christ we still owe him obedience in all things just and licit. The problem here is that the good Archbishop of Detroit is publicly addressing this matter to the wrong person. Mr. Voris is simply an employee of RealCatholicTV. One would hope that the good Archbishop will soon realize this if he does not already.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: Outreach to gay people

    Sodomy is a terrible sin. So terrible that the Church teaches that the act of sodomy is intrinsically evil. The best outreach to any sinner attracted to an intrinsic evil is to clearly and bravely teach the that the attraction is evil and to provide through the sacraments the graces to resist said attraction.

    We are all sinners .We are all in need of grace.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • naturgesetz

    The linked article says, “[Marc] Brammer told LifeSiteNews, ‘I own RealCatholicTV.com. I contracted with Michael Voris to produce video content for that website and I pay him for it. It is a business relationship between me and Michael.’”

    That is not an employer-employee relationship. Since, according to Mr. Brammer, Michael Voris is the one who produces the content of “Real Catholic TV,” and apparently disseminates it from within the Archdiocese of Detroit, it makes perfect sense to say that it is the work of Michael Voris and under the jurisdiction of the bishop where it is happening.

    And what’s with this innuendo, “Whether or not our Bishop is in full communion with the Vicar of Christ”? Are you talking about Abp. Vigneron? What basis do you have for suggesting that he is not in full communion with the Vicar of Christ? And why do you think that a bishop who has broken communion with the Vicar of Christ is still owed obedience? Did the Catholics of England owe obedience to the bishops who broke away under Henry VIII or to the Pope?

  • Patrick Sweeney

    It is simple enough to reproduce it here “Can. 216 Since they participate in the mission of the Church, all the Christian faithful have the right to promote or sustain apostolic action even by their own undertakings, according to their own state and condition. Nevertheless, no undertaking is to claim the name Catholic without the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority.”

    For the decree to have any meaning it would have to establish that “RealCatholic TV” is under the competent ecclesiastical authority of Archdiocese of Detroit. I don’t think that’s been done. Also, Can. 216 is the nuclear option, and the last place I saw it used was at St Joseph’s in Phoenix for one and perhaps several abortions. But even in the St. Joseph’s case, the “authority” of the Diocese of Phoenix was acknowledged and the process open in terms of the demands made by the diocese and the hospitals response.

    How deep does Archbishop Vigneron expect the support for this decree to be if the reasons for it are not public? If there were actual or potential of harm to the Christian faithful from RealCatholic TV, why wouldn’t we be informed of it as soon as it was apparent to the Archdiocese?

  • naturgesetz

    This is entirely beside the point of what I wrote.

  • John King

    I believe all of the saints were “extremists”. You need to look beyond the last 50 years of Catholic history. You may be surprised.

  • John King

    I my opinion. The day before the Protestant Revolt, all guilty parties were Catholics in name only, much like what we see today! So who’s Protestant now?

  • Richard W Comerford

    “That is not an employer-employee relationship.”

    It does not matter. The question is who has the legal right to title the enterprise “RealCatholicTV”?

    “it makes perfect sense to say that it is the work of Michael Voris and under the jurisdiction of the bishop where it is happening.”

    The good Archbishop is not criticizing the work of Mr. Voris; but rather the name of the enterprise of which Mr. Voris is not the owner.

    “Are you talking about Abp. Vigneron?”

    No.

    “And why do you think that a bishop who has broken communion with the Vicar of Christ is still owed obedience?”

    A Bishop who has not been removed from his seat by the Vicar of Christ is owed obeisance in all things just and licit.

    “Did the Catholics of England owe obedience to the bishops who broke away under Henry VIII or to the Pope?”

    St. Thomas Moore was still obedient to his Bishop on matters that were not in violation of faith and morals.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    “This is entirely beside the point of what I wrote.”

    It is never beside the point to uphold the Church’s teaching on a point of faith or morals.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    “Often people watching him have little to no real background in theology. They don’t know where he is wrong.”

    If Mr. Voris is publicly holding a point of faith or morals contrary to the Church’s teachings then it is the duty of Mr. Voris’ Bishop to correct him. Mr. Voris has been holding forth on Catholic faith and morals on an almost daily basis for several years now. So far there is no evidence that his Ordinary has corrected Mr. Voris on any point of Catholic faith or morals.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • naturgesetz

    The Archbishop’s decree does not need “deep support” to make it valid.

  • Richard W Comerford

    “The Archbishop’s decree”

    The Archbishop did not issue a “decree” Rather his communications director issued a “Statement”.

    See: http://www.aodonline.org/AODOnline/News+++Publications+2203/Press+Releases+2303/2011+18610/RCTV.htm

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • naturgesetz

    “The good Archbishop is not criticizing the work of Mr. Voris; but rather the name of the enterprise of which Mr. Voris is not the owner.”
    The good archbishop is saying that the enterprise may not be called Catholic because of the work Mr. Voris does.

    “A Bishop who has not been removed from his seat by the Vicar of Christ is owed obeisance in all things just and licit.”
    The Catechism of the Catholic Church links the teaching and governing authority of the diocesan bishop to his communion in the college of bishops with the head of that college, the Pope. I don’t think the distinction you imply between not being in communion with the Pope and being removed from his see is valid, but even if it is, per the Catechism the bishop’s authority depends on his being in communion with the Pope.

  • Richard W Comerford

    “The good archbishop is saying that the enterprise may not be called Catholic because of the work Mr. Voris does.”

    The statement issued by the Archdiocese director of communications made no mentions of Mr. Voris’ work.See http://www.aodonline.org/AODOnline/News+++Publications+2203/Press+Releases+2303/2011+18610/RCTV.htm

    “I don’t think the distinction you imply between not being in communion with the Pope and being removed from his see is valid”

    A Bishop may err on faith and morals, be corrected by the Holy Father and still remain in his diocese even if he does not accept the correction in which case the faithful still owe him obedience in all things just and licit.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    Richard…

    I’m sure you’re aware that just because someone is offering orthodox teaching, that doesn’t mean that he does it well, or effectively.

    Michael Voris is brilliant, courageous, outspoken, intelligent and articulate — obviously, a gifted communicator.

    But his public persona is also sarcastic, glib, arrogant, judgmental, incendiary. He’s sharply critical of Church authority, especially some bishops. One repeatedly gets the impression that he thinks he knows better than the hierarchy what it means to be Catholic. “Bull in a china shop” is a phrase a friend of mine used recently to describe him.

    Not hard to see why some people in the Archdiocese might have a problem with that. Not hard to see, either, why they might not want the public to think the Archdiocese endorses either Voris’ message or his methods.

    Finally, the Archdiocese has on file a statement describing what Michael Voris needs to do to have his apostolate approved.

    Seems he could have resolved this by filling out some paperwork to be in compliance with the protocols of the USCCB. But then it might be harder for him to criticize them. I get the impression he likes being an outsider, and prefers to be independent. Okay. But, clearly, that comes with a price.

    Dcn. G.

  • Barbara P

    A statement like “LGBT minisitries are little more than gay pick up joints with a Cross on the wall” is what you consider proper and authentic Catholic outreach? I do not hear the fruits of the Spirit in Mr. Voris’ words or his tone. I applaud the ArchBishop.

  • naturgesetz

    A.) I was using the word Patrick Sweeney used, so you would have done better to quote the original source, “this decree,” rather than the secondary one.

    B.) The Statement says, ” The Archdiocese has informed Mr. Voris and Real Catholic TV, RealCatholicTV.com, that it does not regard them as being authorized to use the word ‘Catholic’ to identify or promote their public activities.” This informing of the parties is what we are calling a “decree.” If you have a better word for this exercise of diocesan authority, fine, but I think that, colloquially, “decree” works just fine.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: On authority

    There is a significant difference between a “decree” issued by an Archbishop and a “statement” issued by his communications director.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • naturgesetz

    “A Bishop may err on faith and morals, be corrected by the Holy Father and still remain in his diocese even if he does not accept the correction in which case the faithful still owe him obedience in all things just and licit.”
    What is your source for this assertion? Documentation, please.

  • naturgesetz

    Yes. Are you too dull to have noted or understood the distinction I made between the statement, and the informing of Mr. Voris et al. referred to in the statement? Because your reply to me is non-responsive to what I said.

  • naturgesetz

    And if you are not too dull, why did you ignore the distinction? Were you simply trying to score some invalid debaters’ points?

  • naturgesetz

    My apology, Richard. I let my emotions get the better of me. What I should have said, in the sentences where the word “dull” appears, is:
    “Did you not note or understand the distinction I made … ”
    and
    “And if you did note it, why … “

  • Richard W Comerford

    “I do not hear the fruits of the Spirit in Mr. Voris’ words or his tone.”

    “A statement like “LGBT minisitries are little more than gay pick up joints with a Cross on the wall” is what you consider proper and authentic Catholic outreach?”

    I do not thnk the statement in question was intended as “outreach”.

    “I do not hear the fruits of the Spirit in Mr. Voris’ words or his tone.”
    But the fruit of the Spirit is charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, [23] Mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity. Against such things there is no law.— Galatians 5:22-23. Kindly note the words: modesty, continency, chastity – essential to gay or any type of outreach.

    “I applaud the ArchBishop.”

    The good Archbishop has made no mention of gay outreach. Indeed he has in his own name issued no statement of any kind regarding Mr. Voris.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: Debating Points

    If the good Archbishop warns the faithful not to listen to Mr. Voris because Mr. Voris is preaching heresy then any faithful Catholic, whether a member of the Archdiocese or not, has a grave responsibility to listen to the good Archbishop.

    On the other hand if the Archdiocesan communications director warns the faithful not to listen to Mr. Voris because he is using the word “Catholic” without Archdiocesan authorization than any faithful Catholic, whether a member of the Archdiocese or not, has a far less grave responsibility to listen to the communications director.

    Distinctions matter.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: Joseph R Kohn

    The statement in question was issued by Joseph R Kohn who is the director of Public Relations (not communications) for the Archdiocese.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Steven D

    Doesn’t Voris know that speaking the truth will get one in trouble?

  • Richard W Comerford

    Deacon:

    I am not sure what you are getting at.

    The owner of RealCatholicTV, who does not reside in the Archdiocese, apparently has never asked for, nor does he desire, authorization from the Archdiocese to use the word “Catholic”. However the Director for Public Relations for the Archdiocese has recently issued a “Statement” wherein he claims that Mr. Voris and RealCatholicTV are not authorized to use the word Catholic “in identifying and promoting their public activities”.

    The question here is “what does this Public Relations statement mean to an unimportant Catholic like myself?” Am I now morally obligated to ensure that me and mine never listen to Mr. Voris & company until he fills out a USCCB form?

    The Holy Father has repeatedly said that what we need now is more Holy Spirit and less structure or bureaucracy in the Church. This PR Statement is the height of bureaucracy. If the good Archbishop thinks that Mr. Voris & company are acting wrongheadedly then the good Archbishop needs to act like a shepherd and publicly, in his own name, wack Mr. Voris and company over the head with his shepherd’s staff – not send out his PR guy to make a whiny statement about “authorization” and the need to filling out some USCCB form.

    Times have changed. The fall out from the Great Scandal means that a Bishop can no longer act like the CEO of a Fortune 500 company and expect to be heard when he speaks of the good news of Jesus Christ.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Common sense please.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Kelley

    I questioned him on one of his misguided and extremist videos on YouTube and be blocked me. I wear that as a badge of honor. :)

  • Eric

    It all sounds like a Corapi re-run to me. Looks like we’ll have another black sheep dog to sit in judgement over the rest of us not as perfect as they are.

  • Henry Karlson

    And many could have said “so far no one condemned Luther” even when Luther was citing errors. If one watches Voris, and compares what he says in relation to what the Vatican teaches, what Popes say, one can find great differences. His mockery of Catholic Social Doctrine and dishonest presentation of it is enough to earn the bishop’s response.

  • Henry Karlson

    Mother Angelica lost, you do remember, right? She was completely in the wrong.

  • Henry Karlson

    Richard

    Let me get this right. Michael Voris has a right to speak out against bishops but no one has a right to speak out against him but a bishop?!?!?!

  • Henry Karlson

    I have got to love the basic premises being used to support Michael Voris (and RealCatholicTv).

    Premise #1: Detroit has no authority over RealCatholicTV. Ok, fine. Does the owner show HIS bishop approving the name of Catholic for RealCatholicTV? No, he is just questioning Detroit. In other words, the point made is still the same. By what authority does it take on the name Catholic in such a public manner (“tv station”)? And Michael’s bishop is a relevant authority over Michael, and it is clear Michael takes little to no sense of obedience to his bishop.

    Premise #2: Michael Voris has a right to speak out. It’s just “speaking the truth.” No one has a right to correct him but a bishop. But this is ridiculous. By what authority does he have a right to speak out against bishops and act as if he is correcting them? Seriously, if he has a right to speak, then others have a right to speak out against Voris’ errors, and they don’t have to be bishops. Now, in speaking out against his errors, obviously they are doing so as laity with no ecclesial authority — but that is a different question — what is the consequence of Michael’s errors? That is for the bishops to decide. And look — we are seeing actions and what is the response? How dare the bishop!

    Premise #3: Michael is just speaking the truth and says nothing against the faith or morals. However, the people saying this are his true believers, and so end up in circular reasoning. However, those who do know theology and explore his comments will see 1) some things he says is fine 2) some things he says he says bad which lead to bad implications that people follow through with but not properly stated 3) some things he says bad with actual, outright distortion (either of people or their positions), and this is indeed scandalous. 4) finally some things he says is just outright wrong, and demonstrates (as is often the case) political ideology being imposed as orthodoxy. So many think “ah, his opinions agree with mine, so it must be orthodox.” But often it is not — look to the Vatican’s position on climate change, for example, and the theology the Vatican uses behind it (this includes Popes) and see what Michael Voris says… you will see a sharp difference.. and Voris is clearly following a political ideology here and uses political talking points to ignore the Church. 5) to make his points, he often engages false dichotomies — either the Church is to save souls or it’s going to do social justice — sorry, in doing social justice, the Church saves souls, it is not an either/or Michael.

  • Stu

    Henry said…By what authority does it take on the name Catholic in such a public manner (“tv station”)? And Michael’s bishop is a relevant authority over Michael, and it is clear Michael takes little to no sense of obedience to his bishop.
    ————————–
    The same authority that one assumes when naming their blog, podcast, etc with the descriptor “Catholic.” Mr. Voris makes programming for the channel. He doesn’t own it. Seems if the Bishop has a problem with such, then he should really contact the owner and discuss it with him instead of using a press release.

    Now, maybe he has but it doesn’t appear that way and I am very open that I don’t know the full story here. Regardless, the actions of the Archdiocese look a bit ham-handed here. I would like to hope that the Bishop would pick up the phone and call Mr. Voris and talk to him directly. That would be good leadership.

  • Henry Karlson

    Stu

    The bishop has been long trying to deal with Michael Voris. The whole ownership question is beside the point — as I pointed out, if the owner says “I’m in South Bend” but the work is not done there, then where the work is being done is relevant. And also, the owner seems to have no concern in getting their own bishop to do approval — why not? That would be an easy answer to it all. But no.

    And the fact that they are promoting themselves as “Real Catholic TV” it is more than a mere blog with opinions from people who are Catholic. They take themselves as a serious Catholic organization/apostolate, and doing work which is relevant to a bishop’s attention. But of course, since they have already set themselves in opposition to “those liberal bishops” anyway, and people listen to them over the bishops, perhaps just perhaps there is a serious concern here. But hey, I expect things to go Corapi real soon.

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    “Often people watching him have little to no real background in theology.”

    I’ve got a master’s degree in theology from Oxford University, but thanks for the heads up, anyway.

    I’m well aware of your left-leaning social and political views and that of Vox Nova, Mr. Karlson. I think I’ll bypass your commentary on Mr. Voris, if that’s all right with you…

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    According to the article, Michael Voris has attempted to meet with his Archbishop 7 times–and each time he’s been rebuffed.

    The diocesan chancery in Detroit is staffed by a bunch of liberals and dissenters, relics of pro-homosexual activist Bishop Gumbleton’s reign. They can’t stand Voris and his orthodoxy, particularly his strong speech condemning the gay lifestyle, and have been doing whatever they can for years to silence him.

    I doubt the archbishop has any problem with Voris, and would rather like his straightforward approach. The chancery staff, however, is another matter…

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    “He need not be precisely a heretic to be guilty of gravely wounding the unity of the Church.”

    Oh please! Seriously? Seriously??

    If you think teaching that sin is sin “gravely wounds the unity of the Church,” then perhaps we should all just hold hands around the campfire and sing “Kumbayah” in order to restore such “unity”…

    It’s clear you, Deacon Greg, and others here have seen a handful of Vortex videos and have made up your minds based on those. RealCatholicTV is comprised of MUCH more than this–apologetics, church history, theology, exegesis, etc. The Vortex comprises maybe 10% of what they do (and the commentary is meant to be pithy, biting, and provocative). Before making sweeping generalizations about Mr. Voris, how about familiarizing yourself with RCTV’s content and getting the facts from the source?

  • Henry Karlson

    Christine

    First, I am not “left leaning.” But nice fallacious argument, typical of the Voris crowd!

    Second, I know many people with degrees with little knowledge that one would expect with said degree. Looking at your own blog, which I did, I saw little sign of theological acumen. But hey, I’m a leftist according to you, so well, what do I know?

    So again, I will say, most people I know following Voris have little real theological knowledge. That I do know. I’ve seen it. A few people with higher degrees than Voris who likes his work does not change that fact. The responses people give — often filled with fallacious rhetoric and lack of knowledge of what theology teaches says enough. The confusion with political ideology with orthodoxy would not happen if people knew theology.

    The fact that the Vatican supports Catholic Social Justice, that the Pope himself speaks of wealth redistribution, that the Pope consistently points out the need to deal with climate change (in union with the Ecumenical Patriarch), and the like are the kinds of things which are glossed over and mocked by Voris. If one looks, one sees a political agenda being used to ignore Catholic thought. Social Justice is central to the message of the prophets, continued by Jesus, and consistently declared by the great saints of history (i.e., Basil, John Chrysostom, Caesarius of Arles, Anthony of Padua, et. al.) and yet mocked by Voris. And he is “real Catholic”? Sorry, no go.

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    It was only a matter of time before someone brought up Fr. Corapi. Perhaps Fr. Pavone’s name will be brought up as well? Then Fr. Maciel? And then Hitler?

  • Henry Karlson

    Christine says,

    “According to the article, Michael Voris has attempted to meet with his Archbishop 7 times–and each time he’s been rebuffed.”

    Well, again, let’s let facts go as they will. The fact is Voris wants to meet on his own terms. Note:

    “For some time, the Archdiocese of Detroit has been in communication with Mr. Michael Voris and his media partner at Real Catholic TV regarding their prominent use of the word ‘Catholic’ in identifying and promoting their public activities disseminated from the enterprise’s production facility in Ferndale, Michigan.”

    Again, Voris only wants his way or he ignores communication. Sorry, that is not how it works.

    Now, the claims of liberals, gays, in a crusade against Voris, hating him — again, this conspiracy theory mentality never allows for personal correction. Even if true, Catholic theology historically has said, the response still is obedience and respect to the bishop because of the office.

    Pride comes before a fall. Humility is what is expected.

  • Henry Karlson

    Schismatics, even if not preaching heresy, highly wound the unity of the Church. Or, if one is not a schismatic, nor a heretic, one can be a sinner and still cause scandal – such as in the case of creating scandal. This is rather basic for people who know Church history and theology…

  • Henry Karlson

    And I love the defense of “Well, Michael Voris is only 10% of the channel.”

    First, that might be true. So what? He is the most vocal aspect of it, the one most people see, the one who has the most influence on the shape and direction of how RealCatholicTV is perceived and the ideas people get from RCT.

    Second, if I gave you a cookie which was 90% fine and 10% poison, would it be a good defense to say, “I gave you 90% good product, why are you complaining about the rat poison which you ate?” Clearly not.

    Heretics often speak “mostly good things,” and often use “these truths” as a means of creating heresies. They ignore other truths, downgrade them, while over-emphasizing some particular aspect of the truth. They defend themselves by saying “see, what I said is true, look here, you can see this saint saying what I said.” But they won’t get the saint going in the direction the unbalanced presentation of the truth the heretic creates.

    For example, in Christology, it is easy to say “see, look to these saints talking about Jesus’ human nature here, here, and here. That’s all I am doing in saying Jesus is human. Humans sin. Jesus must have been a sinner.” See how that works? But just because someone believes some aspect of the truth doesn’t mean their whole message is of the truth. Please stop with the weak defensive remarks.

  • vox borealis

    I’m late to this thread, but I am absolutely fascinated by how obsessed folks are one way or another with Michael Voris. This one individual has now drawn fire not only from his bishop but also the organizers of World Youth Day. Really? Seriously? So many Catholic institutions and individuals habitually promote activities of, er, dubious Catholicity, and yet Voris is the ONE person in the entire Catholic media sphere who warrants singling out for….not filing paperwork?

    The mind boggles.

    PS—I haven’t watched Voris’ stuff in a couple of years…it grew a little old for me. So I am no great fan. I am more curious about the process playing out now.

  • Melody

    I don’t watch Voris’ videos, and have little sympathy for right-wing, shock-jock stuff anyway. The bishop seems well within his rights and duties to say that this isn’t in accord with mainstream Catholicism. However I am a bit uncomfortable with the way that he has chosen to deal with it, which is to say that Voris doesn’t have the right to use the word “Catholic” for his broadcasts. As several have pointed out in this thread, the word catholic is not confined to the Catholic Church.
    This seems to frame the fight as a copyright violation; the misuse of a corporate trademark. There are a lot of organizations and individuals across the spectrum who use the word “Catholic” as their description. I don’t think the bishops can go after all of them; and is the Church as a corporation really the message they want to send?
    Why doesn’t the bishop just say what he really means, which is that Voris spouts a lot of junk theology which is misleading to the people who listen to it and who may assume that he actually knows what he is talking about?

  • Stu

    Henry Karlson says: The bishop has been long trying to deal with Michael Voris. The whole ownership question is beside the point — as I pointed out, if the owner says “I’m in South Bend” but the work is not done there, then where the work is being done is relevant. And also, the owner seems to have no concern in getting their own bishop to do approval — why not? That would be an easy answer to it all. But no.
    ———–
    Apparently the bishop for the “actual owner” has no issue. And has the Bishop tried to deal with Voris? Voris claims that he has tried to meet with the Bishop to no avail. I don’t know the whole the truth and can only comment on the use of a press release to make a point. It may be “high tech” but it’s certainly not “high touch.” If the Bishop has an issue with Voris (which may be absolutely legitimate) then I would like to see the Bishop speak with Voris and counsel him directly. That’s the kind of leadership I learned as a naval officer.

    Henry Karlson says: And the fact that they are promoting themselves as “Real Catholic TV” it is more than a mere blog with opinions from people who are Catholic.
    —————-
    Big deal. You don’t like the name. While I understand your point, caveat emptor. There are all manner of “Catholic” blogs, newspapers, podcasts, publishing outlets that carry about air of authority or “authentic” Catholic teaching that have much to be desired. I can think of one in particular where the author is actually correct 99% of the time (in my personal estimation) but he comes across as a sad, bitter and overly caustic little man in his presentation. Plenty of truth but little charity. (Same charge I suppose that is made against Mr. Voris.) Now, I am still open that the Archbishop’s objection here might be warranted and my baseline position is with him given his office, but he hasn’t made the case enough in my mind nor is he going after the right person.

  • Andy

    If this were the first time Mr. Voris has heard that what he is doing is not an approved apostolate I might think a mistake, but there are at least two other times he has heard this message – World Youth Day and from Scranton, Pa Diocese. Maybe just maybe the Church itself is trying to send a message – what you are saying and/or how you are saying it is not the way to go. I do not think the issue is the word Catholic. It is how that word is perceived – in the context of RealCatholic Tv – as if the rest of us are not real Catholics.
    I find it interesting that the defenders of Mr. Voris are resorting to tearing down people who disagree with him – a Bishop, in this case. Yet it appears in the recent past the Bishops who have “taken on” a public hero figure have been right. Maybe, just maybe, they, the bishops know their stuff in terms of theology and teaching of theology? Don’t know just saying… Maybe let this play out and see where it goes.
    A quick note even though the document may have come from the Director of COmmunications for the Archdiocese, I’m going out on a limb here, but I suspect the Bishop knows what was said in the communication and approves of it. There are layers of communication in any organization, and usually the organization starts at the lowest level of communication, and usually in an effort to stave off acrimony and anger, which in this case given what I read here and in other places didn’t work.

  • vox borealis

    Melody, I am confused. What does it mean to be “in accord with mainstream Catholicism.” There is simply Catholicism, no more, no less. Do you mean that Voris’ teaching does not agree with what most Catholics believe, which polls show is (sadly) significantly not in accord with Catholicism?

  • vox borealis

    I will add that the obsession goes beyond Voris being singled out by the proper (?) ecclesial authorities. He also seems an object of fascination on Catholic blogs, and when something about him is posted, it results in a firestorm in the combox every time.

    I just don’t get it.

  • naturgesetz

    I’ve realized that some of us, myself included, have been approaching this from the wrong point of view. It is not a matter of people being allowed to call their undertaking Catholic, but if the bishop finds what they are doing faulty, he orders them to stop using the word. Under the wording of canon 216 they’re not supposed to even begin to call their undertaking Catholic until they have approval for it from the bishop.

    So it really doesn’t matter whether the competent bishop is in Detroit or in Fort Wayne-South Bend. They don’t have the required permission, so using the word Catholic violates canon law.

    To me it seems that they are in a position analogous to that of a Catholic theologian who starts teaching theology without a mandate from the bishop.

  • naturgesetz

    Oops! I only wanted to make the word “begin” bold.

  • Stu

    naturgesetz,

    Given such, where is the line drawn? Do blogs count? Podcasts?

    If that is the standard, then I applaud it and support it. But at the same time, I would like to see it applied across the board.

    If RealCatholicTV is smart, they would actually comply and then begin to call for the standard to be applied evenly.

  • Barbara P

    Mr. Comerford,
    So you agree with me that the fruits of Mr. Voris’ words and tone are not of the Spirit? Jesus said that there would be many false prophets coming in His Name.

  • Stu

    A cynic would observe that discussions about Voris drive up web traffic.

    Beer and shampoo.

  • Stu

    Andy,

    I agree that the fact of this being a press release in no way counters that this is from the Bishop.

    That being said, I think, given the nature of this issue, the Archbishop needs to be a bit more hands on and open about his objection.

  • Henry Karlson

    How do you know the owner’s bishop has no problem? Does he even know the owner and the association with RCT? I think most assume it is under Detroit. Second, and as has been pointed out, the issue is that RCT if they want to connect as they do, as an apostolate, they need permission to use the title Catholic to be seen as Catholic. Period.

    It’s not just the name. It is the promotion of themselves as television. They do that, and if you read the Vatican’s own directives on communications, this becomes serious.

  • Henry Karlson

    Web logs tend to be based upon the private opinions and thoughts of people who happen to be Catholic on Catholic matters. If someone takes further initiative and designates oneself as an authentic teacher with authority, then they need to show that authority — that is where problems emerge.

  • Henry Karlson

    Notice, for example, how the Vatican itself promotes blogging — remember when it had a blogging conference? It’s quite clear the difference between blogging and someone on the lecture circuit, giving retreats, with a “television” station.

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    Richard…

    The fact remains: Voris is answerable to no one. He’s not clergy or a member of a religious order, so he hasn’t made a promise of obedience to anyone, and he can pretty much say or do whatever he wants, however he wants. Canon Law has in place guidelines to keep people like this from setting up parallel churches, operating without ecclesiastical authority.

    (Frankly, I imagine if someone like this set up their own TV operation and called it “Real Mormon TV,” without any church approval or authority, it might stir similar reactions from elders in Utah…)

    The answer to your question — “what does this Public Relations statement mean to an unimportant Catholic like myself?” — is that you should know, and other Catholics (and non-Catholics) should understand, that Voris has no official sanction within the Church and doesn’t speak for the Archdiocese or any Church authority. He is a church of one.

    Dcn. G.

  • Stu

    How do you know that he does have a problem? I’ll look for evidence in the affirmative as proof. Absent such, I will assume all is well.

    I understand all of the issues, concerns and rules. However, it is evident that such things are not universally applied. Now that being the case, why the laser beam-like focus here? What’s different?

    I think, in the interest of good leadership, the Archbishop should explain such even as I assume that he has a good reason.

  • Stu

    Henry,

    The standard is either good for all or not good. I like the standard and would like to see it used for everyone, not selectively. You attempts to make distinctions simply aren’t convincing given modern media.

  • Andy

    I tend think as well the Archbishop should clarify his objections – it might preclude the anger; but then I think of the abuse heaped upon other Bishops and think as human how much savaging can I endure?

  • Stu

    It would certainly make communication better. Openness in such matters goes far in my opinion.

    Perhaps the Archbishop could do a short internet video with a catchy theme song while twisting a pencil in the air to make his point. ;)

  • Henry Karlson

    I wonder how many people critical of this also responded similarily to Bishop Olmsted when he declared St Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center can’t designate themselves as Catholic, using the same canon?

  • Henry Karlson

    Well, we don’t have him giving permission for the use of the term Catholic, do we? This is what is required.

  • Stu

    Henry,

    You raise a good point. But again, consider how Bishop Olmstead took such action. There as no doubt as to why. That’s what is missing. Archbishop Vigneron simply needs to be more open as to what is going on.

  • Stu

    It may be what is required but it is not universally enforced. That’s what causes the confusion and controversy.

  • HMS

    This comment is meant to be a reply to Deacon Greg’s. (There is no reply button after the deacon’s comment.)

    “He is a church of one.”

    The use of the title, “Real” Catholic by Michael Voris gives the impression that “he” (and perhaps only he) can and is speaking with authority.

    There are always dangers with that attitude.

  • vox borealis

    Henry,

    The same canon was used, but the rationale was rather different. Olstead essentially revoked the Catholic title from St. Joseph’s because it clearly violated church teaching, was repeatedly warned, and ignored the warning. Meanwhile, Voris’ outfit is being denied the title Catholic for violating…well, not for violating anything. Rather, the title is being denied because, apparently, Voris et al was never granted the right to call their organization Catholic to begin with.

    That’s fine, I guess. I do wonder if this is the beginning of a new era of bishops actively ferreting out all of those bloggers and Youtubers who use the word Catholic in an unauthorized manner. Who’s next…Catholic and Enjoying It (to name one example)? I assume Shea has the proper ecclesial authorization to teach on his blog. Maybe all bloggers should now have to present an imprimatur on their sites?

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    A reader raised an interesting question in an email a few minutes ago:

    How much of RCTV traffic is generated by The Vortex? How much by other programming?

    Check the stats. Monitor the YouTube hits. You might be surprised. For all intents and purposes, Michael Voris IS Real Catholic TV. No other personality on the channel comes close.

  • vox borealis

    An interesting thought, then I’ll bow out. What would happen if Voris (or whoever is boss) simply changed the name of the outfit. How about Real Cathl’c TV? Or maybe RealCath? In his videos, then, Voris would simply have to stop speaking *for* Catholicism and instead speak *about* Catholic. Through these simply verbal maneuvers, it seems to me that the bishop would lose his authority over the organization? Or no?

  • Deacon Mike

    Had never heard of this guy until this whole controversy erupted. Went and watched one of his videos, on which he claims that today’s Jews are not REAL Jews. Then watched another one in which he said everyone in heaven would be Catholic. He’s a very well spoken individual who sounds like he knows exactly what he’s talking about. However, as with much of what we find on the web, he’s spewing simplistic, narrow-minded, legalistic, divisive rhetoric that he is dressing up as “Catholicism”. It’s his ugly, hateful, us vs. them version, and it’s terrible. It is full of arrogance, disdain and self-righteousness. I’d have a hard time seeing any loving, compassionate God putting His stamp of approval on this fellow’s garbage. I’m glad the Bishop spoke up so that people wouldn’t start thinking he was legitimate.

  • kevin

    This is incredible to me. They target a little guy like Voris while many of the so-called “Catholic” universities refuse to follow Ex Corde Ecclesiae and bestow honorary degrees on people who favor legalized abortion. All without any consequence or sanction from the local bishops. Comical.

  • vox borealis

    Right, but remember Kevin, those Catholic Universities are not “mean” or “divisive.” Don’t forget the two great commandments of the New Covenant: “Be Nice” and “Don’t Rock the Boat.”

  • Melody

    As I said above, I don’t watch Voris. So maybe I shouldn’t comment. However; I’m assuming that mainstream Catholicism means what the bishops teach, in union with the pope. My main point is, who has a lock-down on the term “Catholic”? I don’t think it can really be used like a corporate trademark. It would be more effective teaching by the bishop if he said specifically what he disagreed with Voris over, and why people should take these things that people do on their own initiative with a grain of salt.

  • Andy

    The pencil and In full ecclesial garb I hope. I agree though the Bishops in general have to learn how to communicate in an open fashion. The bishops in general need to learn communicate in an open fashion – but this may not happen because that does not seem to be how the current structure of the leadership is built. Have a Blessed and Merry Christmas.

  • kevin

    And “Ignore the Pope.”

    Fulton Sheen once said if you want your children to lose their Catholic faith, send them to a Catholic college. If you want them to keep it, send them somewhere else.

    I’d like the chancery in this case to provide one example of Voris misrepresenting the teaching of the Church on anything. Odds are we will hear crickets.

  • Andy

    Kevin – Read the announcement – it says nothing about what Voris is teaching. It says that he does not have the right to use the word Catholic as he does not have approved apostolate. I guess instead of listening for crickets you might want to read.

  • kevin

    Henry, you really are insufferably arrogant. Your prose is also painfully verbose.

  • vox borealis

    Andy,

    Context, context, context. Why is THIS particular individual (or corporation) being singled out for not being an approved apostolate (i.e., not getting permission to use the word Catholic) when literally hundreds if not thousands of others (mainly bloggers in the religious blogosphere) have not been singled out, and when many approved CAtholic apostolates have in recent years drifted far from Catholic teaching with seemingly no repercussion?

    THAT is the interesting question.

    The answer, I think, lies much in what Deacon Greg wrote way back up near the top of the comment thread.

  • naturgesetz

    IOW you’re making it up. And I’ve already noted that the Catechism of the Catholic Church leads to a different conclusion.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: On Bishops

    Each Bishop is the successor of an Apostle. He is the head of the local Church answerable on earth only to the Holy Father. One of the heaviest burdens of the Bishop (one of many) is to guard and transmit the deposit of the faith. Every faithful Catholic must pay attention when any Bishop warns that a member of his flock is teaching error.

    However if Mr. Karlson alleges that Mr. Voris is teaching error then faithful Catholics are free to ignore either Mr. Karlson or Mr. Voris as they wish.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Henry Karlson

    Nice, Kevin. All you have is an ad hom in response?

    I admit, I’m not a great writer. So what?

    As for arrogance… really? Watch Michael Voris on film. See arrogance.

    However, it is funny. People are allowed to use labels like “left leaning” which are completely and utterly false, and it is not the ones using such labels which are arrogant — no.. it can’t be them…

  • kevin

    Ok let’s have Voris fill out the paperwork. And when that’s done, let’s see the bishops order Notre Dame, Georgetown, Holy Cross, Boston College, etc., stop using the word “Catholic” until they comply with the mandates of Ex Corde Ecclesiae.

  • http://www.gerardnadal.com Gerard Nadal

    Going after the name of the program, and not the content seems to me a strange opening gambit. If Mike changes the name of the organization, will we hear no more from the archbishop?

    Have any bishops sought to sit with Mike and discuss his programming? Where is all of this leading?

    I agree with Kevin that nothing is done with Catholic colleges who ignore Ex Corde Ecclesiae, while Voris gets gunned down. Perhaps this is tacit recognition that Voris has more influence over the faithful than the Catholic colleges?

    If this move by the archbishop was intended to test whether Mike practices what he preaches, it was a good move indeed. However, Universities and Colleges who call themselves Catholic are governed by the same canon applied to Voris, and must either live up to the standards of Ex Corde Ecclesiae, or face removal of their mandate.

    Wittingly or unwittingly, the Archbishop has opened the door of scrutiny less on Voris and more on himself and his brother bishops. Either he backs down, or he goes all the way. If he does neither, he will have come off as a prig, and that miter will look overly large upon his head, waiting for someone with the maturity to grow into it.

    Mike needs to show obedience and respect here, and the Archbishop needs to show unbiased application of the law.

  • Henry Karlson

    I do think it is quite telling. You asked about the errors I’ve seen coming from Voris. I pointed out some (of the various) discussions I’ve provided on Voris before. Your response is: “I’m not going to look.”

    There we have it.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Re: “The fact that the Vatican supports Catholic Social Justice”

    The Church, as evidenced by the solemn teachings of Popes and Councils, has always proclaimed that all men have an obligation to love their neighbor. This love extends to the material needs of our neighbor in this world. In modern times the Vicars of Christ, starting with Pope Leo XIII, have taught us with more exactitude our Christian duties in this area. However Catholic laymen are free to pursue this obligation of love without joining or supporting a particular political program or party.

    Social Justice transcends political ideologies.

    Of interest the premiere proponent of Catholic Social Justice in English speaking North America was and remains the Rev. Charles Coughlin. His most recent biography was titled the “Father of Hate Radio”.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • kevin

    Agree.

    After this mini-controversy is settled, maybe the USCCB can brush the cobwebs off ECE:

    § 2. All teachers and all administrators, at the time of their appointment, are to be informed about the Catholic identity of the Institution and its implications, and about their responsibility to promote, or at least to respect, that identity.

    § 3. In ways appropriate to the different academic disciplines, all Catholic teachers are to be faithful to, and all other teachers are to respect, Catholic doctrine and morals in their research and teaching. In particular, Catholic theologians, aware that they fulfil a mandate received from the Church, are to be faithful to the Magisterium of the Church as the authentic interpreter of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition(50).

    § 4. Those university teachers and administrators who belong to other Churches, ecclesial communities, or religions, as well as those who profess no religious belief, and also all students, are to recognize and respect the distinctive Catholic identity of the University. In order not to endanger the Catholic identity of the University or Institute of Higher Studies, the number of non-Catholic teachers should not be allowed to constitute a majority within the Institution, which is and must remain Catholic.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Deacon

    “you should know, and other Catholics (and non-Catholics) should understand, that Voris has no official sanction within the Church and doesn’t speak for the Archdiocese or any Church authority. He is a church of one.”

    Both Mr. Voris and the Archdiocese have made it clear that he (Voris) is not authorized to speak for the Detroit or any other Diocese. Indeed Mr. Voris and company appear to go out of their way to ensure that they are not to authorized, sanctioned or approved by any Bishop or the USCCB.

    So are you saying that me and mine have a moral obligation to ignore Mr. Voris because he is not authorized, sanctioned or approved by any Bishop or the USCCB?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    “I’m glad the Bishop spoke up so that people wouldn’t start thinking he was legitimate.”

    Sadly (or not) the good Archbishop has not spoken up. He has condemned neither Mr. Voris’ presentation of Catholic faith and morals nor his style in doing so. All we have so far in public is a Statement from the good Archbishop’s PR Man that Mr. Voris & company are not authorized to use the word “Catholic”.

    Not exactly in the spirit of going forth and boldly proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ is it?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    “I wonder how many people critical of this also responded similarily to Bishop Olmsted when he declared St Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center can’t designate themselves as Catholic, using the same canon?”

    Mr. Voris & Company have yet to murder any babies.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    “So it really doesn’t matter whether the competent bishop is in Detroit or in Fort Wayne-South Bend.”

    It matters in that a faithful Catholic is usually responsible to obey only two bishops: his local ordinary and the Bishop of Rome.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    “you’re making it up”

    No. Do you actually think that every Bishop is in full communion with the Holy Father every day of the year? We see in the Western World constant accusations that this or that Bishop is (allegedly) a heretic. Whether a Bishop is or is not a heretic until he is removed by the Holy Father we owe him obedience and respect in all things just and licit.

    Again, a little common sense please.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Diakonos09

    Coming late and 132 comments into this topic so I may be repeating something but…I clearly recall that many years back the bishop of the diocese where the National Catholic Reporter is published told them the same thing: you may not use the word “Catholic” in your title due to that paper’s tendency towards dissdent. As far as I know they ignored the deirective and as well all know ‘Catholic’ is still in their title.

  • Richard W Comerford

    “So you agree with me that the fruits of Mr. Voris’ words and tone are not of the Spirit? Jesus said that there would be many false prophets coming in His Name.”

    What I think is unimportant. However what Mr. Voris’ Bishop thinks is very important indeed. So fa,r as I write, Mr. Voris’ bishop has not condemned neither Mr. Voris’ orthodoxy nor his presentation of same.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • http://balancingtheledger.blogspot.com/ Joe Cleary

    Based upon the earlier back and forth with his Bishop, Voris would appear to act/ think he does not have to answer to his archbishop ( thus the website is in another diocese defense). Most dioceses have far more pressing issues to worry about then chasing down every use of the word Catholic. Gerard I am thinking that the “unbiased application” would come when any such group ignores a direct correction from the Bishop.

    A happy holiday reminder that slander repeated here over and over doesn’t make it fact. And as certain as groups like the Cardinal Newman Society are that they alone define compliance, stating – to use one example- “Boston College” is out of compliance with Ex Corde Ecclesiae should reference a link or statement from the Archdiocese of Boston. If I am incorrect, I welcome the cannon lawyers who parse statements here to correct me and define who else is responsible for implementation and monitoring of Ex Corde Ecclesiae in the Archdiocese of Boston.

    ( sadly – in my observation the CNS makes broad stroke ( an in many cases misleading and deceptive ) indictments of the majority of Catholic universities so as to push its agenda of a few “so-called pure institutions” and in the process demeans and slanders the staff, faculty and students at a majority of the Catholic colleges and universities in the united states whose campus life would hardly would be confused with the average secular university.)

  • Richard W Comerford

    “Mother Angelica lost”

    How does one win or loose in these matters? EWTN is rolling along supported by a convent full of young nuns, having a world wide impact; and the Mass is not authorized in the extraordinary Dorm throughout the Latin Rite.

    And as far the Archdiocese of LA and the good Cardinal Mahoney? One is bankrupt and both continue to dodge criminal investigations.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    “If one looks, one sees a political agenda being used to ignore Catholic thought.”

    Physician, heal thyself.

  • Henry Karlson

    Funny thing — I don’t do it, I follow Catholic thought not political ideology. The continued example of your responses indicate all one needs to know of you.

  • http://laudemgloriae.blogspot.com Christine

    “Why doesn’t the bishop just say what he really means, which is that Voris spouts a lot of junk theology which is misleading to the people who listen to it and who may assume that he actually knows what he is talking about?”

    That’s because the bishop can’t say that, because Voris does NOT spout junk theology.

    But that would only be known by people who are actually *familiar* with the content of RCTV, rather than a handful of Vortex videos.

  • Pingback: Michael Voris, RealCatholic TV, and canon law « The Deacon's Bench

  • Pingback: Who has jurisdiction over RealCatholic TV? — UPDATED « The Deacon's Bench

  • Pingback: More on Michael Voris and “safeguarding ‘Catholicity’” « The Deacon's Bench

  • Pingback: Michael Voris update: RealCatholicTV changes it name to ChurchMilitant.TV... - Christian Forums


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X