Who has jurisdiction over RealCatholic TV? — UPDATED

After last month’s statement from the Archdiocese of Detroit — saying that Michael Voris isn’t authorized by the archdiocese to use the word “Catholic” — there seems to be some disagreement about who actually has jurisdiction over Voris’s work.  Details:

[Detroit] Archdiocesan Director of Communications Ned McGrath noted that concerns about Voris had been public since 2008; however, the release did not say anything about the nature of those concerns. To date the diocese has not made any specific allegations against RealCatholicTV or its programming.While the questions asked by most pertain to why the action was taken, the issue being discussed by canon lawyers is where jurisdiction over RealCatholicTV.com lies – with the Archdiocese of Detroit, where Michael Voris, the star of the show, lives and works, or in the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, where the owner and financier of RealCatholicTV.com, Marc Brammer, resides.

Fr. Mark Gurtner, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend in Indiana spoke with LifeSiteNews, acknowledging that the diocese did know of Mr. Brammer’s enterprise of RealCatholicTV.com.  When asked if the diocese had any complaints about RealCatholicTV.com, Gurner replied, “No, as far as I know there’s nothing.”

Speaking as a canon lawyer and not an official of the diocese, Gurtner also said he believes the jurisdiction of the case resides with the Indiana diocese. “It certainly seems to me that canonically Michael Voris would not be the one that this would be imposed on,” he said. “Even though he is the one that regularly appears on (the show) he, in a sense, is really just an employee of (RealCatholicTV.com).”

“It seems like if the Archdiocese of Detroit is trying to go after (Voris), that’s the wrong person to address this with, that would have to be with the owner of the website or blog,” he added.

“I suppose if this Marc Brammer is paying for and running, constructing his blog from our diocese in his home I suppose you could make the argument that we have jurisdiction canonically.”

When asked by LifeSiteNews what concerns the Detroit Archdiocese had about Voris and RealCatholicTV.com, Detroit Archdiocesan Director of Communications McGrath would not specify any concern other than the use of the word ‘Catholic’…

…Regarding the question of jurisdiction, McGrath directed LifeSiteNews to a blog post by canon lawyer Ed Peters, a professor at the AOD seminary, who has supported the archdiocese’s claims of having jurisdiction in the case.

In an initial blog post Peters, wrote, in his capacity as a canon lawyer and not as a representative of the diocese, about canon law 216, noting that the bishop has authority over the name Catholic. In a subsequent post, Peters took up the matter of jurisdiction, suggesting that Detroit is on “firm ground” in pursuing Voris.

“I have yet to see the ‘lack of jurisdiction’ claim being made by anyone who knows how canon law actually determines jurisdiction over persons and projects,” Peters wrote. “As a blog is not the place for me to attempt a pre-emptive tutorial on canonical jurisdiction, I’ll just say that, to the extent that jurisdiction is or might be an issue in this matter, I believe the [Archdiocese of Detroit] to be on firm ground.”

Read more.

UPDATE: Michael Voris released the following video statement late today:

YouTube Preview Image

UPDATE II: Canon lawyer Ed Peters has an update on the subject at his blog. He concludes with this compelling thought:

If the Church has an interest in what happens on the internet, then canon law has an interest in what happens on the internet. The task before us, then, is to apply those laws in such a way that, while respecting the rights of Catholics to share in the mission of the Church, we carefully preserve the freedom of the Church to proclaim as she decides best the Good News that Christ left in her care.

UPDATE III: But wait!  There’s more.  Mark Shea today offers a tidbit from a reader regarding the man financing RealCatholicTV, complete with links to a radio interview with the fellow.

  • OCBishop

    OK.. let’s get a grip. There are literally THOUSANDS of organizations in the world that use the word “catholic” in their title, name, and likeness that are not affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church. The church does not own the word Catholic, nor are they the only Catholic church in the world.

    Certainly, they can control who uses the term “Roman Catholic Church” in identification and branding, but not if someone chooses to call themselves “Bert and Ernie Catholic Church” the Roman Catholic Church has no authority and certainly no copyright or service mark on the word catholic, which means univeral.

    A good analogy would be: ABC Television”, “CBS Television” and “NBC Television.” Each network owns that service mark, but none of them own the word “television.”

    The bishop of Detroit should worry more about the homeless and profound blight and need of the people of his diocese and not testing his “authority” over the word “catholic.”

  • Patrick Sweeney

    It would be instructive to the other organizations in the Archdiocese of Detroit using the name “Catholic” to know what reasons Archbishop Vigneron had to authorize his communication director to issue a “statement” invoking the episcopal authority of Canon 212 against RealCatholicTV. What was the manifest harm done to the Catholic faithful in the Archdiocese by RealCatholicTV?

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

    This seems really prigish on the part of AOD. If Voris has been teaching contrary to the faith, then the bishop has a duty to correct the actual error and not go after the name of the organization.

    If Voris has been uncharitable in his treatment of the bishops, or if he has misrepresented their actions, then the bishops need to set the record straight, and not go after the name of the organization.

    If Voris is inciting rebellion in the faithful, then the bishops need to make their case, and not go after the name of the organization.

    If Voris is regarded as a Catholic son who loves his Church (which he is), then some bishop should sit and reason with him, not go after the name of the organization.

    Going after the title “Catholic” without making a case for why this is being done does nothing to bring clarity or correction, and is an act of uncharitableness toward Voris and his organization. It is tantamount to making vague and unsubstantiated allegations against Real Catholic TV.

    And that’s not Catholic.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Sweeney:

    “know what reasons Archbishop Vigneron had to authorize his communication director to issue a statement”

    A commentator, allegedly from Detroit, and posting under an anonymous handle, made some interesting observations about 2-days ago:

    1. The current Voris Kerfuffle is not being pushed by the Archbishop of Detroit.

    2. Rather this matter is being pushed by AOD employees and a Catholic blogger based in the AOD.

    3. The prominent Canon Lawyer, Peters, publicly commenting on this matter is himself an AOD employee.

    It is time, methinks, for the good Archbishop to step in and act the Good Shepherd.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Henry Karlson

    You mean, like the vague, unsubstantiated allegations Voris likes to make against the USCCB, Bishops, and the like?

  • Henry Karlson

    Seriously, I think the way RealCatholicTV has tried to divide itself, to have its production in an area where the “owner” does not live, (though as been shown, even that claim is too simple) was done on purpose so as to try to make confusion as to who has authority over it. That itself should tell people that something rotten is with RCT.

  • vox borealis

    His accusations are hardly vague, and are often (but not always) substantiated.

  • Henry Karlson

    No, Voris is often wrong, using poor logic (guilt by association) as a way to denounce someone. Or ignoring what the Vatican says when it doesn’t support Voris’ own ideology. I’ve caught him on many flubs as have many people who actually know the Church’s teachings. Voris engages political ideology to ignore Catholic teaching, then works with rather low gossip-style denunciations to prove he must be right. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way.

  • vox borealis

    You may think his accusations are wrong, but they are hardly vague. Moreover, while he may often be wrong, that does not deny that he may also often be correct.

  • Rudy

    Well said and agree. Why keep harping at this?

  • Dan S

    What Henry Karlson said bears repeating, IMO:

    “Voris engages political ideology to ignore Catholic teaching, then works with rather low gossip-style denunciations to prove he must be right. ”

    I completely agree.

  • Rudy

    Naked politics against an organization the clerics in Detroit don’t like. That is the reality of the whole affair.

  • craig

    Accepting that a bishop has the moral and canonical right to govern Catholic teaching and evangelism within his jurisdiction, it seems to me that a diocese’s first priority should be to uphold correct teaching by those in orders who have vowed obedience to their bishop; his second priority should be those on his payroll; those who are mere laymen should be no higher than third priority. If Detroit is anything like most dioceses in America, there is ample evidence that the first and second priorities have been neglected for decades.

    First take the plank out of your own eye, and all that.

  • naturgesetz

    Non-Catholics are not subject to Catholic canon law, but “Real Catholics” are.

  • naturgesetz

    The top priority should be those who have the biggest audience, since they have the greatest potential for harm.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Dan S:

    “Voris engages political ideology to ignore Catholic teaching”

    If Mr. Voris is in error then it is the duty of every Good Shepherd, pastor & Bishop, to protect their flocks and correct Mr. Voris’ errors in faith & morals. So far our Shephedrs have remained silent on this matter.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson:

    “I think the way RealCatholicTV has tried to divide itself, to have its production in an area where the “owner” does not live, (though as been shown, even that claim is too simple) was done on purpose so as to try to make confusion as to who has authority over it”

    This may or may not be another vast right wing conspiracy. However if this is also a matter of error on points of faith & morals on Mr. Voris’ part then it is not a matter of jurisdiction. Every Bishop has to defend his flock from error. And since Mr. Voris is on the internet then every Ordinary has not only a right but a duty to correct Mr. Voris.

    So far the Bishops have remained silent.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford.

  • Henry Karlson

    Again, as has been pointed out, there is even confusion in official documents as to what the “owner” means. Many people have already pointed out the duplicity here. It’s not a “conspiracy.” It’s just a fact that RealCatholicTV is more than a little underhanded. Remember when it has problems while Michael Voris was overseas? Again and again, one can look and see more and more the dishonesty being used to promote RCT.

  • Henry Karlson
  • Henry Karlson

    BTW, Ed Peters is right. I read his originally comments which dealt with the “jurisdiction” problem. And he once again hits it in his response in the update here. He is also pointing out the confusion which is being used and the consequences it would have on the internet and Catholicism. What he does not say is that RCT did this “split” on purpose. I still feel that is there. The consistent problems RCT has been having in identifying itself properly seems to happen too often for it to be a mistake.

  • http://awashingtondccatholic.blogspot.com/ awashingtondccatholic

    I think that AoD has really lost the arguement, even with Mr. Peter’s statements, and is really looking foolish. Simply stating that it is the word “Catholic” w/o any substantive examples, reminds me of the person who says: “I don’t like it.” When asked why? The answer is” “Because.”

    I also hate to say this, but I think (and this is only…only my opinion) that Mr. Peters, not stating up front that he was an employee of AoD, really hurts himself in the minds of many. Why? I thought that he was weighing in on this as an impartial observer at first.

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    Here’s what I don’t understand.

    If I’m a layman and a faithful Catholic and the archdiocese where I live tells me I’m not authorized to use the word “Catholic” in my very public ministry, why not just change it? If the person who owns and finances the franchise is in another diocese, so what? Why not pick up the phone and say, “We need to change the name…”?

    Even if you disagree with the decision, and believe you are right to use the word “Catholic” and the archdiocese is wrong, why wouldn’t you want to make that small bow of obedience to ecclesial authority? Especially if it doesn’t affect, at all, the content you are continuing to produce, or the message you are continuing to broadcast.

    And, from the other side: if I’m the bishop and I don’t want someone using the word “Catholic” in his ministry without my approval, why not just come out and say so, and order the name to be changed, and explain why, and be done with it?

    This is beginning to look more and more like a war of wills and egos, and no one is going to win.

    Remember the old proverb: When the elephants fight, the grass suffers.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson:

    Yews they have – so far.

    The Statement:

    “The Diocese of Scranton has determined that Mr. Voris will not be allowed to speak in a Diocesan or parish facility. After these engagements were scheduled, the Diocese became aware of concerns about this individual’s views regarding other religious groups. In videos posted on the Internet, Mr. Voris makes comments that certainly can be interpreted as being insensitive to people of other faiths. The Catholic Church teaches us to respect all people, regardless of their faith tradition.

    Although the Diocese shares Mr. Voris’ support of efforts to protect human life, his extreme positions on other faiths are not appropriate and therefore the Diocese cannot host him.”

    1. The Statement is not signed by the Bishop. Indeed the link you provided shows no signature.
    2. The Statement cites anonymous sources complaining about non-specific statements.
    3. The Statement does not explain nor define words & phrases like: “insensitive, respect, faith tradition” nor does it clearly teach the Church’s position on said matters; nor does it cite the CCC..
    4. Finally the Church teaches us to love our neighbor. This is much harder than “respecting” him.

    Catholics are not bound to obey faceless Church bureaucrats. It is time for our Bishops to act like Good Shepherds on this matter.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Rudy

    Dear Deacon K:

    Perhaps on the principle of the thing and on the clear and intentional vindictiveness of the whole thing of the part of the A of D. Bishops should be pastors, not political infighters against those who they don’t like because of their opinions. But, again, that is my own opinion.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson

    “What he does not say is that RCT did this “split” on purpose. I still feel that is there. The consistent problems RCT has been having in identifying itself properly seems to happen too often for it to be a mistake.”

    It could be a vast right wing conspiracy. It could also be a fact of life in the 21st Century USA.

    And this fact of life is not a problem. If Mr. Voris is teaching error on faith and morals then any Bishop who’s flock is affected by said error may intervene – and use 21st Century communications to do so. So far no Bishop has spoken.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • naturgesetz

    What “argument?” The AoD spokesman said RCTV never received the consent referred to in the final clause of Canon 216 to use the name Catholic. RCTV has never claimed that they have received that consent — whether from the Archbishop of Detroit or from any other bishop whom they believe to be the “competent ecclesiatical authority.”

    So it seems they don’t have the consent, since nobody says they do; and there is no argument. AoD is correct.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson:

    “It’s just a fact that RealCatholicTV is more than a little underhanded. Remember when it has problems while Michael Voris was overseas? Again and again, one can look and see more and more the dishonesty being used to promote RCT.”

    In that case there are remedies in both state (criminal & civil) and Church Courts. So far Mr. Voris has neither been indicted nor served nor corrected by a Bishop for teaching error.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Henry Karlson

    Let’s see, there are several ways I can respond. First, I think Michael Voris has trained you well. Look for associations and use that to denounce what is said by someone. But you know, that is a fallacy, right? It sounds good, but it doesn’t get into the right or wrongness of what Ed Peters has said.

    Second, it is interesting that you ignore the substantial issue, Canon Law and what it says and doesn’t say. Canon Law here is quite important. The Vatican itself has stated the need for this kind of action to be done – to help regulate the new media and make sure the Catholic Name is legitimate. Of course those who are not Catholics do not have to follow Canon Law, but Catholics — do. And this is about Catholicism. The fact that Voris and his supporters seem to care less about the Vatican’s own interest in regulating the way Catholicism is addressed online, since they seem to have no interest in Canon Law and the substantial point at hand, it makes one wonder how REAL their Catholicism is.

  • Henry Karlson

    Well, it’s funny — Michael Voris talks about the vast conspiracy in the USCCB… however, he is the one who is constantly being found to work with an organization which both secular and ecclesial authorities find to be riddled with problems.

  • Henry Karlson

    See, Richard, we know how you play it. Just like the people who ignore bishops when bishops denounce apparitions… same tactic. Doesn’t work.

  • Rudy

    All these canon law arguments are ridiculous. Its about Kulturkampf.

  • naturgesetz

    “Teaching error” was not the issue. The issue mentioned by the AoD was consent to use the name Catholic which an “undertaking” is supposed to get from the competent ecclesiastical authority before it starts calling itself Catholic. The question of whether Mr. Voris is teaching error is a red herring. It is not the issue which the AoD raised. An undertaking which teaches nothing but the truth in perfect charity is still required to get the bishop’s consent before it calls itself Catholic, and RCTV has never claimed to have done so.

  • naturgesetz

    You’re making that up. Are you doing so because it’s what you want to believe because you want to undercut the hierarchy of the Catholic Church? Are you rebellious and contumacious?

  • Chris

    A couple of points to address here.
    1. With all due respect to Dr Peters, when he came out with his initial blog posting defending the AOD he gave no indication that he is also an employee of the Archdiocese. When I initially read the post I had the impression he was a neutral party.

    It wasn’t until I read follow up posts that this was mentioned. It was really brought home by the lifesite article. The problem is the initial post imparts a “first impression” regarding the whole situation. I am not saying Dr Peters had bad motives, but it is a MAJOR detail that was left out. I am in no way calling into questions his integrity; however it is fair to say that Dr Peters is not a neutral party. Nothing wrong with that, it’s just something that needs to be recognized.

    2. As someone who regularly watches Mr. Voris on the Vortex, I have never seen him make an unsubstantiated claim. You may agree or disagree with what he says, but I have yet heard him level a false or fabricated accusation.

    3. I think any of us being accused of wrong doing would like the benefit of specific examples of such wrong doing. I think it’s fair for us to ask for specific examples of where RCTV has gone wrong. This would be a wonderful teaching moment to point to specific examples and say “look, here is where Voris is wrong, this is why he is wrong, and this is what’s correct”.

    To date no one has done such. If anyone can please point to specific examples with links, please do so for my own good. I don’t want to be learning anything in opposition to Church teaching and I mean that!

    4. Regarding the Diocese of Scranton, I used to live in that diocese and teach CCD. A couple of things to mention as it’s not a fair example. The wonderful Bishop Martino was driven out of that Diocese not too long ago. If you did not live there you have no idea how viciously he was attacked in the news, both print and television. He was a “gasp” conservative bishop who spoke boldly against abortion and the shenanigans going on in the Diocese among the “Catholic” colleges and organizations such as the sons of Ireland.
    I went to the “Catholic” college University of Misecordia where homosexuality was promoted by at least one religious sister in a position of authority. Also I was pretty much required to attend a rabid liberal seminar for class points hosted by a nun and another fellow.
    Many problems with the Diocese that need to be addressed, Bishop Martino began that process but met a brick wall. He had to step down, and it was a sad day for the Diocese.
    In fairness to Voris, the Diocese of Scranton they never actually pointed out any wrongdoing, but banned him from Church property off the recommendation of the Archdiocese of Detroit.

  • naturgesetz

    None of the matters you raise has anything to do with the case. It is a question of RCTV having obtained the consent which canon 216 requires them to get before they use the name Catholic in their title. This requirement applies to the most error-free, charitable, and submissive undertaking in the world. RCTV is not claiming that they ever obtained that consent from anybody, which I think we can fairly take to mean that they haven’t. So why don’t they just request the consent they are supposed to have, and be done with it, instead of raising all the irrelevancies they do?

  • naturgesetz

    All this has nothing to do with the case. Canon 216 says that no undertaking may call itself Catholic unless it has received consent from the “competent ecclesiastical authority” to do so. They do not claim to have that consent from anybody. Therefore canon 216 forbids them to use the name Catholic, no matter how error-free they are.

    Saying, as AoD did, that RCTV doesn’t have consent to use the name Catholic is not an accusation of wrongdoing. All the talk about whether Voris has said something wrong is totally beside the point.

  • Henry Karlson

    Funny, Scranton has shown where Voris goes wrong in his rejection of the Vatican’s declarations on religious liberty (and respect we should show to those of other religions). This can be found in Nostra Aetate and several declarations from the Vatican since the time of Vatican II. That alone shows that someone HAS answered where Voris goes wrong.

    Second, Voris often engages gossip and poisoning the well to denounce something he doesn’t like. I remember when he went on how a “lesbian” talked about health care with the USCCB as an excuse to ignore the USCCB on health care. That again goes against the Vatican, which says we are to respect gays and lesbians and listen to them. Moreover, whether or not she is a lesbian has nothing to do with the points raised about health care and health care reform. Now, if people ever did a search on the Vatican on pro-life concerns, one will see medicine/health care is there. Voris consistently ignores what the Vatican says while he criticizes the USCCB, showing a dishonest method of engagement of complex issues.

    Thus, when Voris goes about the mission of the Church, his unholistic anthropology does not allow him to realize working for the temporal good (dignity of the human person) is connected with and not separate from the salvation of their soul. That he splits them up is quite telling.

    Just some examples.

  • Henry Karlson

    Of course, as I said, the canon is the canon, but discussing why the concern engages the issue of Voris’ selective reading of ecclesial documents. When one sees he is misrepresenting Church teaching as a means to contend against bishops, I think that helps also explain why the concern with him instead of others.

  • Rudy

    LOL, that’s all I can say….

  • Rudy

    Be specific, or quit your mongering.

  • Henry Karlson

    Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yMjsOYDcfE

    Just an example.

    Or how about this:

    In a corresponding way, there is an increased sense of the need for repentance: an awareness of certain exclusions which seriously harm fraternal charity, of certain refusals to forgive, of a certain pride, of an unevangelical insistence on condemning the “other side”, of a disdain born of an unhealthy presumption. Thus, the entire life of Christians is marked by a concern for ecumenism; and they are called to let themselves be shaped, as it were, by that concern.

    vs
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-U_ijm5r8E

    I have given examples of statements of Voris in my comment above. If you want you can read more here:

    http://vox-nova.com/2010/01/29/virtual-polemical-videos-not-real-catholic-tv/

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Kalrson:

    “See, Richard, we know how you play it. Just like the people who ignore bishops when bishops denounce apparitions… same tactic. Doesn’t work.”

    Actually it does work. The Holy Father, both as Cardinal and Pope, has repeatedly told us that what we need is less structure (or bureaucracy) and more Holy Spirit. These bureaucratic structures the Holy Father has told us have no foundation in their faith. They are merely man made constructs.

    However our Bishops are descendents of the Apostles. Without them the faith cannot survive. What they teach in union with the Holy Father on faith and morals is all important.

    I am eagerly awaiting a brave Bishop to teach us authoritatively on this matter.

    As to apparitions I do not follow them so I cannot comment on the matter. Maybe they are a CIA plot?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson

    “When one sees he is misrepresenting Church teaching as a means to contend against bishops”

    If Mr. Voris is teaching error as a means of contending against the Bishops then I imagine the Bishops (and not their bureaucrats) will tell us so.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Henry Karlson

    Scranton officially has. You officially choose to ignore it.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr Karlson:

    “Scranton has shown where Voris goes wrong in his rejection of the Vatican’s declarations on religious liberty”

    The anonymous Church bureaucrat from Scranton mentioned not the Vatican’s declarations on religious liberty.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • craig

    I disagree that the greatest potential for harm is determined merely by the audience size. Putative authority also matters: it is important to establish whether the speaker could be construed to officially represent the views of the organization in question. I don’t have any particular like for ‘Real Catholic TV’, but I do not think a casual observer would intuit that Voris speaks as anything other than a private citizen voicing his personal opinion.

  • Henry Karlson

    “The Catholic Church teaches us to respect all people, regardless of their faith tradition.”

    This can be found in Nostra Aetate among other places. The declaration didn’t have to make specific quotes to be official and to be working through Nostra Aetate. Again, your tactic is trying and false.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr Karlson:

    “Scranton officially has. You officially choose to ignore it.”

    Quite the contrary. I paid close attention to the Scranton statement. I noticed that said statement is unsigned & anonymous (as were the complainants). I also noticed that it failed to cite the CCC nor clearly state that Mr. Voris was teaching error on faith and morals. Nor did it explain what “insensitive meant.

    I eagerly await the Bishop of Scranton to teach us authoritatively on this mater.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Andy

    Rudy
    Henry was very specific – the Scranton Diocese was clear about how Mr. Voris does not follow what eh church teaches. World Youth Day went to the extreme measure of saying that Mr. Voris was not part of the WYD – they were clear that only those who received support from their local bishop and only those who taught approved doctrine were invited.
    Mongering refers to espousing something that is not pleasant – you may find the comments unpleasant, but Mr. Karlson is not mongering.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson

    Re: Respect in Nostra Aetate

    The document in question reads:

    “Since the spiritual patrimony common to Christians and Jews is thus so great, this sacred synod wants to foster and recommend that mutual understanding and respect which is the fruit, above all, of biblical and theological studies as well as of fraternal dialogues.”

    Are you saying that Scranton is alleging that Mr. Voris is opposed to bible study & dialogue with our elder brothers in the faith?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Andy

    Mr. Comerford – It has been my experience that no document of this import – denying a person the right to teach or appear at a Catholic event is issued without the authority knowing of it and approving it. In following the way the church deals with issues such as this we see the pattern of starting with a statement from the PR area, or a functionary of some low level. In doing this the authority is allowing the issue to be treated without the need to resort to “stronger” measures. Look at the recent issues with Mr. Corapi, et al.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Andy”

    “the Scranton Diocese was clear about how Mr. Voris does not follow what eh church teaches”

    In that case the anonymous bureaucrat from Scranton has an obligation in justice & charity to cite those portions of the CCC that Mr. Voris has violated regarding faith and morals.

    Anonymous Church employes have no teaching authority. Cannot the Bishop of Scranton find time in his busy schedule to teach the faithful?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Andy

    Chris
    If you look at Mr. Peters’ website it clearly states that he works for the AOD. I think suggesting that this means that he is not offering a neutral observation does him a great disservice. He reported what the canon says and nothing more.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr Andy

    “Look at the recent issues with Mr. Corapi, et al.”

    Indeed. Let us look at it closely. Massive confusion over authority, jurisdiction, obedience etc. No clear teaching on this matter from any Ordinary.

    Our Bishops, to be Good Shepherds, cannot hide behind PR guys and lawyers. That is what in part, caused the Great Scandal.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr Andy:

    “Mr. Peters’ website it clearly states that he works for the AOD”

    In lawyer small print Lawyer Peters on his website clearly states that he teaches at a seminary in Michigan.

    It would be helpful if lawyer Peters would simply begin his discourses on this matter with “I make my living working for AOD.”

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson

    “The Vatican itself has stated the need for this kind of action to be done – to help regulate the new media and make sure the Catholic Name is legitimate.”

    In cases like this, when they finally reach the Vatican, Rome has always upheld orthodoxy. See Joan of Arc.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Rudy

    Michael Voris and his organizations have rights and duties under Canon Law. And some of the overriding rights and duties are Canon Law articles 211, 212/3, 221/1, 221/3 among others. This is not a “clear cut” issue where Michael Voris can be just “oredered” by the Bishop. He, as a Catholic Christian under the jurisdiction of Canon Law has rights and responsibilities.

  • friscoeddie

    I don’t know Real Catholic at all. But take a look at a “catholic’ website everyone knows, and has been financed by the NY Achdiocese….Catholic League… take a look at the cartoon of a wailing baby that refers to survivors. SEE support of Cardinal Dolan for the CL press release.. makes the RealCatholic dust up a minor league error. The hierarchy says the CL speaks for us all..[not me, ever]
    http://www.catholicleague.org/boston-victims%E2%80%99-summit-bombs/

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. friscoeddie:

    “The hierarchy says the CL speaks for us all”

    Neither the Universal Church nor a local Church has ever made the above captioned statement.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson:

    Neither Church nor state authority has yet to arrest, indite, prosecute or even accuse Mr. Voris of criminal wrong doing or teaching error departing from the CCC.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • friscoeddie

    Richard..No Speak?? Then have them apply the canon law BS and force removal of the ‘Catholic’ from CL. .. isn’t that the subject of this tread?

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson

    “Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.”

    You are citing a Church document? Perhaps you could identify it? Otherwise you might be accused of acting like Mr. Voris.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Rudy

    “Pastoral care is to be fostered above all, and to that end both the legislation and its application are to be characterized by charity, moderation, humanity, and equity as well as justice. Exhortation and persuasion are to be preferred to an insistence on rights.” Synod of Bishops on the Guiding the Work of the New Code of Canon Law

    Canon 221 §1 Christ’s faithful may lawfully vindicate and defend the rights they enjoy in the Church, before the competent ecclesiastical forum in accordance with the law.

    §2 If any members of Christ’s faithful are summoned to trial by the competent authority, they have the right to be judged according to the provisions of the law, to be applied with equity.

    §3 Christ’s faithful have the right that no canonical penalties be inflicted upon them except in accordance with the law.

    Canon 216 Since they share the Church’s mission, all Christ’s faithful have the right to promote and support apostolic action, by their own initiative, undertaken according to their state and condition. No initiative, however, can lay claim to the title ‘Catholic’ without the consent of the competent ecclesiastical authority

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr friscoeddie:

    I know very little about the Catholic League. However it posses no binding teaching authority on faith and morals apart from the Bishops who are in full communion with the Holy Father.

    If the League is teaching something contrary to faith & morals we are quite free to ignore the League.

    God bless

    Ri

  • Andy

    Mr. Comerford
    I am not saying that the path is the correct path – beginning with a lower level functionary – I believe that a direct statement from an authority would do much to eliminate problems – however, for whatever reason – pastoral, legal, organizational – who knows – that is the way the church seems to proceed. Thus I reiterate that the AOD is not acting inappropriately from their point of view.

  • Rudy

    BTW is there a difference between “Catholic” and “Catholics”? For example, “Catholics for Choice”. If instead of being “Real Catholic” the name would be “Real Catholics” would that be OK with the A of D?

    I still think this is motivated by the dislike from the Curia in Detroit to the opinions of Real Catholic. But if someone who knows the law can comment?

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    Frisco…

    Where does it say it’s been financed by the Archdiocese of New York? The website for CL says it’s entirely member-supported.

    Dcn. G.

  • naturgesetz

    And under canon 216 Voris and RCTV have the responsibility to obtain the bishop’s consent to use the name Catholic for their undertaking. They have failed to fulfill their responsibility. And until they fulfill that responsibility, they do not have the right to use the name Catholic.

  • Henry Karlson

    And there you have it, once again. The Vatican supports orthodoxy. Every dissident, however, claims “we are the orthodox ones.” Luther also followed that tactic for awhile. The supporters of Corapi have followed that tactic. The supporters of all kinds of false apparitions have followed that tactic.

    However, as has been shown, the Vatican’s own teaching is in opposition to what one finds with Voris. One just needs to see his mockery of social justice and compare it to the Vatican’s definitive declarations to note, once again, where Voris is leading people away from the Vatican’s own teachings.

  • friscoeddie

    CL was housed at the chancery for years. My kids call free rent a subsidy.

  • Deacon Steve

    Rudy I think adding an “s” isn’t going to change the issue all that much. Catholics for Choice in your example has been repeatedly called out by the USCCB for their name, and has stated that they are not an authentic Catholic organization, the Canadian Bishops have done the same. In 1996 the Bishop of Lincoln, NE issued an interdict forbidding Catholics in his diocese from belonging to the group, giving them 1 month to renounce their membership or be excommunicated. Given the responses to the group you chose as an example I don’t think changing the name from Catholic to Catholics is going to affect the outcome. What has happened most likely is that the following became large enough and his statements at times being questionable that this group came to someone’s attention. It isn’t like the bishops run around looking for groups to have them ask permission to use the name “Catholic” per canon 216. But when something does come to their attention they move to deal with it.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr friscoeddie:

    According to the NYT the League paid rent:

    ^ a b c d e f g h Hu, Winnie (1999-11-02). “An Outspoken Church Defender”. The New York Times. Retrieved 2011-07-14.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr Andy:

    “Thus I reiterate that the AOD is not acting inappropriately from their point of view.”

    But who is the AOD? So far we have heard from the AOD PR guy. A Detroit Catholic blogger. And a lawyer who works for the AOD; but claims that he is not advising the AOD on this matter.

    We have no obligation to listen to, much less obey, PR guys, bloggers and opining lawyers without a client in the dispute.

    We must listen to, and obey in all that is just and licit, our Bishops. Without them we do not have a Church in the USA.

    Where is the good Archbishop of Detroit?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • naturgesetz

    “Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.” is a quote from the second paragraph of No. 3 in “Nostra Ætate” the second Vatican Council’s Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions. I’m surprised you needed to be told that.

  • Rudy

    Thanks! The responsibilities of a Bishop are very great, also his power. But it must be exercised with charity (I think) even if the other side doesn’t.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr naturgesetz:

    “is a quote from the second paragraph of No. 3 in “Nostra Ætate” the second Vatican Council’s Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions. I’m surprised you needed to be told that.”

    Well, I am an uneducated dummy. So it helps us unwashed masses if quotations from Church Documents are actually put in quotations marks and the documents cited and identified.

    So what is the point? Are you claiming that Mr. Voris is teaching that we NOT work for “mutual understanding” with our Muslim brothers?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    Frisco…

    My office is in the chancery for the Archdiocese of New York (aka the New York Catholic Center).

    We’re a papal agency. And we pay rent.

    Dcn. G.

  • Richard W Comerford

    “The supporters of Corapi have followed that tactic.”

    Are you claiming that Mr. Corapi taught heresy?

    “The supporters of all kinds of false apparitions have followed that tactic.”

    Sorry unfamiliar here with apparitions here. Have not seen any lately.

    “However, as has been shown, the Vatican’s own teaching is in opposition to what one finds with Voris.”

    I am not sure what you mean by the “Vatican” Only the Holy Father, and Councils in union with the Pope, are protected from error in teaching faith and morals by the Holy Spirit.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • naturgesetz

    The video which Henry Karlson linked showed no desire whatever for mutual understanding. It was a polemical rant. The Council urged us to forget the past, but Michael Voris, rather than forgetting it, was harping on it.

  • Kevin

    Let’s all get Voris! So mean spirited.

  • naturgesetz

    Thus?

  • naturgesetz

    Mr. Comerford,

    your attempt to evade what was said by pretending that it doesn’t count because it was the PR guy, not the archbishop, won’t work. It is common practice for large organizations and important people (such as congressmen and bishops) to hire someone to issue statements for them. Since their employer pays them and has at least general supervision, we reasonably presume that what they say represents the mind of theor employer. If they make a mistake and say something their employer doesn’t agree with, a correction is promptly issued.

    So if the PR guy was in error when he said that Michael Voris had not received consent to use the name Catholic for “Real Catholic TV,” Archbishop Vigneron would have told him to make a correction. Since there has been no correction, reasonable people cam be morally certain that Abp. Vigneron agrees that Voris did not receive that consent.

    We listen to PR guys when we care about what their employer’s take on things is. In this particular case, the PR guy hasn’t given or passed on any orders, so there is nothing to obey. Just be aware of the fact that Michael Voris has not complied with Canon 216.

  • naturgesetz

    When you say, “Neither Church nor state authority has yet to arrest, indite, prosecute or even accuse Mr. Voris of criminal wrong doing or teaching error departing from the CCC.”, it seems you are beginning to get my point. Just take it one step further. Since they have not accused him, the whole question of whether he is in error is really beside the point. You certainly shouldn’t think it has anything to do with whether the AoD PR guy’s statement was correct or incorrect.

  • naturgesetz

    Yeah, he is.

  • Oregon Catholic

    There is stating the facts of Catholicism and presenting them in a spirit and tone, i.e. angry, caustic, and sarcastic, that is anything but Catholic. The CL turns me OFF even though I am a Catholic and I turn BD OFF anytime he shows up on my TV. And it irritates me no end that people think he speaks for me or my Church. The fact that he is often called on by the media to present the “Catholic” viewpoint means that many think he is an official spokesman.

  • Henry Karlson

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

    A statement from the 3rd.

    But what is interesting: http://thecuriouscatholic.blogspot.com/

    You see how this is exactly the shell game I mentioned earlier?

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr naturgesetz:

    “The video which Henry Karlson linked showed no desire whatever for mutual understanding.”

    “Showing” as opposed to clear statements contrary to Church doctrine is in the eye of the beholder. The Holy Father has frequently condemned the religious murders of Christians by Muslims and called upon Muslim governments to protect their Christian citizens.

    “The Council urged us to forget the past”

    The latest round of the Muslim persecution of Christians did not occur in 630 AD. Just asks our Coptic brothers living in 2012 AD Egypt.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr Karlson:

    “You see how this is exactly the shell game I mentioned earlier?”

    RCTV could indeed be part of a heretical vast right wing conspiracy or a CIA plot. But if it is then the good Archbishop must condemn RCTV as the NCR was condemned by its Bishop for using the word Catholic:

    “In fairness to our Catholic people, I hereby issue an official condemnation of the National Catholic Reporter. Furthermore, I send this communication to my brother bishops, and make known to the priests, religious and laity of the nation my views on the poisonous character of this publication.”

    See: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00Cofv

    One way or another we need brave Bishops. courageous Shepherds. We cannot survive without them.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Henry Karlson

    Once again, Richard, you are also playing a shell game. Not dealing with the content and trying to take the discussion and bait it with something different from what the issue at hand.

    Look to what is on the post. It says that in 2010, Michael Voris took (according to Michigan) the name of RealCatholicTV as his own. That has significant value in relation to the discussion at hand.

    It’s funny. You are playing a game. First, you are trying to do the “who has the authority to make a statement” game. Then, when that is being addressed, you change to the “what’s wrong with what he teaches” game. When that is addressed you go back to the first game.

    This moving goalposts is exactly what happens when one has nothing to offer. Good day.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr naturgesetz:

    “your attempt to evade what was said by pretending that it doesn’t count because it was the PR guy, not the archbishop, won’t work.”

    The only thing the PR guy said was that Mr. Voris & company were not authorized to use the word Catholic. So what? Christ did not give us the 12-PR guys or the 12 lawyers. He gave us the 12-Apostles.

    The Bishops, not their lawyers, accountants or house keepers, are our Shepherds and the successors to the Apostles. Without Bishops we cannot have local Churches. If you wish to base your faith on following the pronouncements of a public relations specialist then good luck.

    I will listen to the successors to the Apostles.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Karlson:

    “Once again, Richard, you are also playing a shell game. Not dealing with the content and trying to take the discussion and bait it with something different from what the issue at hand.”

    Boy I did not realize how cleaver I am.

    “It says that in 2010, Michael Voris took (according to Michigan) the name of RealCatholicTV as his own.”

    It does? And this means what?

    “you are trying to do the “who has the authority to make a statement” game.”

    Not me. We have a Canon Lawyer who works for AOD publicly claiming that AOD has jurisdiction. Then we have a Canon Layer from another Diocese publicly claiming AOD does not have authority. And of course I imagine that Mr.Voris has his own Canon Lawyers in this Kurfuffle.

    “Then, when that is being addressed, you change to the “what’s wrong with what he teaches” game.”

    The possible teaching of heresy or error by Mr.Voris is of the utmost importance. I am eagerly awaiting what our Shepherds have to say on this matter.

    “This moving goalposts is exactly what happens when one has nothing to offer.”

    What I have to offer is nothing. What our Bishops, successors to the Apostles, have to teach in union with the Pope is everything.

    My ears are open.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Chris

    Chris
    If you look at Mr. Peters’ website it clearly states that he works for the AOD. I think suggesting that this means that he is not offering a neutral observation does him a great disservice. He reported what the canon says and nothing more.

    Again, I am not accusing Dr Peters of ill intent. If it was “clear” he worked from the AOD I would have seen it. I did see it when he mentioned it in his future posting regarding it. If he felt it was something he should mention in later postings, he should of mentioned earlier. It is a big deal.

    Considering he works for AOD mean he is not “neutral”. He may be correct, but he is not neutral. Although as we have read from the article Fr. Mark Gurtner, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend in Indiana says something different. This is not clear cut. Obviously differences of opinion exist and I for one would like more clarity regarding the situation

    The fact that they don’t want them to use the word Catholic IMPLIES wrong doing. Let’s not pretend otherwise.

  • Chris Sullivan

    Richard,

    You are correct that ultimate authority rests with the Bishop.

    But we need to be recognise that the Bishop usually exercises his authority through the normal diocesan structures whose statements and actions are also due respect.

    God Bless

  • Chris

    a good read:
    In this, as in most cases involving serious Catholics in the past decades, what irks people, even if they somehow do not know how to express it, is precisely this: the injustice in the application of the law by dioceses or even by Higher Authority. There is nothing in law more prone to abuse than an apparently “clear” or “plain” law, precisely because it demands great care in its application, that is not supposed to be simply uniform, but must be equitably just for all. Do all remember how the “clear” and “plain” “abrogation” of the Traditional Mass was defended by most Canonists for decades, and how abuses became norms in the Pauline Mass, while the Traditional Mass was persecuted with no quarter?…

    http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/01/matter-of-equity-and-justice-draft.html

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr Chris Sullivan

    “But we need to be recognise that the Bishop usually exercises his authority through the normal diocesan structures whose statements and actions are also due respect.”

    You mean as in the Bishop Finn case? Or what about the actions over the last 50-years when the “normal diocesan structures” enabled & protected sexual predators? Or how about when the “normal diocesan structures” ignored Humanae Vitae?

    We owe obedience in all that is just and licit to the Ordinary, the successor to the Apostles. We are not obliged to respect or trust either the statements of actions of some guy or gal who draws a monthly check from the chancery.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Deacon Steve

    A big part of what is being missed in this action regarding canon 216 is that it really isn’t about controlling the use of the word “Catholic”. What it is about is that any group of faithful representing themselves as “Catholic” in the title of their group needs to be in dialogue with their bishop or his appointed representative. I just finished a semester long class on Canon Law for Pastoral Ministry and it was pointed out to us that when the canons call for approval of something by the bishop that it isn’t about control, but about dialogue. When the two parties are in dialogue with each other, then misunderstandings can be minimized or prevented. If the bishop is only interested in controlling, then he isn’t keeping with the spirit of canon. If the other party isn’t willing to be in dialogue with their bishop their motives become suspect. It seems that they are trying to hide something. The statement on Jan 3rd by the AOD says nothing about teaching error, and makes no accusations other than the group is operating identifiying themselves without following canon 216 which requires authorization from competent eccliastical authority. My understanding is that AOD would have a claim based on where Mr. Voris lives because he seems to be the principle party running the endevour depsite not being the owner. The diocese where the owner lives would also have a claim because both parties have their domiciles in the corresponding diocese. I believe it works the same way with an author needing the imprimatur he or she can go to their bishop, or the bishop where the publishing house is located. Either would be the competent ecclisastical authority. I am not a canon lawyer, and this may just be proof that a little knowledge is dangerous, but I think it is correct.

  • Andy

    It does appear that the AOD says that Mr. Voris does not have permission to use the word Catholic in the label of his organization. It can be as simple as filing out some paperwork or indeed it may be a more severe concern. To pretend otherwise is silly, but there are levels of wrong doing.

    As far as Mr. Peters goes he is not a canon lawyer employed by the diocese to handle this case – he teaches for the diocese. That is a far leap from offering advice to the diocese. That is why I used the word neutral. As far as it being clear – I noted it the first time I saw his website. I always look for the credentials of the person who making a statement not in these com-boxes. I find that it saves me much consternation.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Deacon:

    “What it is about is that any group of faithful representing themselves as “Catholic” in the title of their group needs to be in dialogue with their bishop or his appointed representative.”

    A very good point. However as you may know both Mr. Voris and the owner of RCTV both allege that the AOD so far has rebuffed their efforts at dialogue.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Deacon Steve

    If the AOD is indeed not willing to open the dialogue then they are not following the intent of the canons. The dialogue has to go both ways and be respectful in both directions. Hopefully both sides will open up to meaningful dialogue to end this matter in a mutually beneficial way.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Deacon:

    Let us hope this is simply a matter of massive miscommunication. The person who counts here is the Ordinary. Catholic Church USA can survive without Mr. Voris, Mr. Corapi, Father Pavone et al. It cannot survive without Bishops. Courageous Bishops.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Barbara P

    The post on Mark Shea’s blog regarding the financing for RCTV (see the Deacon’s third update above) is very interesting and if true disturbing. I didn’t understand what Voris’ end game could be until I read the post – it seems it always comes down to that Watergate direction – “follow the money”

  • naturgesetz

    Mr. Comerford,

    “The only thing the PR guy said was that Mr. Voris & company were not authorized to use the word Catholic.”

    Precisely.

    I don’t understand why you think you need the archbishop to tell you that before you’ll believe it.

  • Phyllis Zagano

    Both Fort Wayne-South Bend and Detroit have jurisdiction:Fort Wayne-South Bend because of who owns and pays for the programming, and Detroit because of where the programming comes from. See http://ncronline.org/blogs/just-catholic/lay-preaching-bishops-and-new-evangelization

  • kevin

    now what are the bishops going to do stop National Catholic Reporter from using the word Catholic? I wait with baited breath.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr naturgesetz:

    “I don’t understand why you think you need the archbishop to tell you that before you’ll believe it.”

    I do believe it. Mr. Voris & Company appear not dispute it either.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Kevin

    In 1968 the local Ordinary:

    I hereby issue an official condemnation of the National Catholic Reporter. Furthermore, I send this communication to my brother bishops, and make known to the priests, religious and laity of the nation my views on the poisonous character of this publication.

    Sadly since 1968 Bishop’s, Priests and Religious continue to patronize NCR to include an aggressive auxiliary Bishop who pedals heterodoxy on the pages of the NCR. And the heterodox Bishop? Who he is and where is he from? Why it is Bishop Gumbleton from the Archdiocese of Detroit of course!

    Small world.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Barbara P

    Will someone explain to me what if any connection there is between Brammer and Voris on the one hand and this E. Michael Jones guy? And what about Brammer’s statement during that radio interview Mark Shea links that the mission is to purify the Church through RCTV and then purify the world through his Institute for New Media? I listened to that whole interview, did I hear that correctly? Is Voris a closet SSPX guy? Brammer is going to use young Catholic college students to work for free to spread his message? Mr. Comerford, you seem to be a Voris apologist, can you provide any explanations? Is it time for the tin foil hats?

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

    this letter from the Scranton Vicar general to a member of the diocese is posted on web sites friendly to Mr Voris. It is clear that in a diocese as small as scranton and with such a high profile person involved – the Bishop himself was well aware of the situation an approved of the actions taken. You can agree or disagree with Bambera but this didn’t fly under the radar

    Sent: Sat, Apr 9, 2011 1:35 pm
    Subject: Response from Bishop Bambera

    Mr. and Mrs. Ciaccia,

    I have been asked by Bishop Bambera to respond on his behalf regarding the cancellation of Michael Voris as a guest speaker in the Diocese of Scranton. After concerns regarding Mr. Voris were brought to the Bishop’s attention, we at the Diocese were asked to look into the situation. It was expressed to us by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) that there have been a number of controversies which have occurred as a result of Mr. Voris’ presentations.

    We next contacted Mr. Voris’ home diocese, the Archdiocese of Detroit, for their opinion. We were given a statement referring to St. Michael ’s Media and Real CatholicTV, both focusing on the opinions of Mr. Voris. Neither enterprise has been granted approval by the Archdiocese which referred to a lack of cooperation and issues of non-compliance with basic archdiocesan protocols as well as those of the USCCB.

    It is because of these responses in conjunction with other concerns that Bishop Bambera chose not to allow Mr. Voris to speak at any diocesan institution. Since Mr. Voris’ own bishop has not given approval or endorsement to his opinions, allowing him to speak at a diocesan facility would imply that Bishop Bambera is endorsing his views. Bishop Bambera chose to exercise the same caution shown by the Archdiocese of Detroit.

    While this may be disappointing to you and others in the Diocese of Scranton, the Bishop has an obligation to safeguard Catholic teaching especially when a speaker from outside the Diocese with whom the Bishop is unfamiliar is expressing personal opinions.

    Sincerely yours,
    Fr. Brian Clarke
    Vicar General

  • Chris Sullivan

    Richard,

    No, we are not at liberty to just ignore diocesan staff when they are assigned by their bishop to communicate official diocesan decisions on matters such as Vorris’ authorization to present his material as Catholic. Our presumptive opinion, unless the bishop indicates otherwise, ought to be that the officially appointed diocesan staff speak with the authority of the Bishop.

    As Ed Peters has pointed out, whatever may or may not have happened in other cases one might care to name is irrelevant. It is not a valid defense to those inclined to ignore ecclesiastic authority to argue that everyone else is doing it.

    God Bless

  • Rudy

    Not as mean spirited as those hunting him.

  • Andy

    Maybe some history will help – from the AOD a 2008 statement –
    In 2006, St. Michael’s Media of Ferndale, Michigan, through its chief executive, Michael Voris, and his associates, requested approval of its media enterprise and programming from the Archdiocese of Detroit. The Detroit archdiocese responded to their initial submission and gave them direction as to the additional information and steps that would be need to be taken. At issue was and is compliance with our basic archdiocesan media protocols and those of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). While there have been some discussions, the matter with St. Michael’s Media remains unresolved; it is not an approved apostolate.

    In 2008, a Web-based video provider named RealCatholicTV.com was launched, with Michael Voris as the primary host and senior executive producer utilizing new and archive program material produced and provided, primarily, by St. Michael’s Media. RealCatholicTV.com has yet to present itself or receive approval of its media enterprise from the Detroit archdiocese.

    Therefore, the catechetical presentations and the interpretations of Catholic teachings or positions presented by St. Michael’s Media and/or RealCatholicTV— be they audio, video, or exclusively Web-based— cannot be approved or endorsed by the archdiocese at this time.

    It appears that the AOD did ask for clarification and discussion – in 2006, and in 2008 Mr. Voris formed RCT. It strikes me that waiting 2-4 years for clarification is a more than sufficient amount of time to demonstrate a desire to be supportive. This appears to have an all too familiar ring from the recent past.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Mr. Chris Sullivan:

    “we are not at liberty to just ignore diocesan staff”

    Ever heard of Scribes & Pharacies?

    “when they are assigned by their bishop to communicate official diocesan decisions on matters such as Vorris’ authorization”

    How do you know “they are assigned by their bishop”? When both Bishop Finn & B XVI claim that they knew nothing about how their subordinates handled allegedly abusive priests are we to believe them?

    “Our presumptive opinion, unless the bishop indicates otherwise, ought to be that the officially appointed diocesan staff speak with the authority of the Bishop.”

    Prior to WW II Chancery staffs could often literally be counted on one hand – and that is for a major Archdiocese. Now some American Diocesan staffs are larger than the Vatican’s – and no seems to know who is in charge.

    “whatever may or may not have happened in other cases one might care to name is irrelevant”

    Really? A lawyer dismissing case law as irrelevant? That is a first!

    “It is not a valid defense to those inclined to ignore ecclesiastic authority to argue that everyone else is doing it.”

    You are quite wrong. When President Carter tried to lower the speed limit to 55 MPH on federally funded highways the motorists continued to drive at 65 MPH. In response the Feds funded task forces made up of local cops to ticket motorists traveling over 55 MPH. However ticketed motorists who fought it out in Court claiming “everyone else was driving over 55″ invariably won. If a law is not enforced it inevitably looses its authority and subsequent selective enforcement is discrimination.

    AOD employee lawyer Peters should know this.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Ms. Barbara P:

    “Mr. Comerford, you seem to be a Voris apologist, can you provide any explanations? Is it time for the tin foil hats?”

    It is always time for tin foil hats. I myself usually wear at least two.

    However although I am always inclined to defend the undergo what is important here is not Mr. Voris, or Mr. Corapi or Father Pavone – our Church can survive without them; but our Bishops – our Church cannot survive without them. And since 1899 when Pope Leo XIII warned us of the heresy “Americanism” (wherein Catholics surrendered points of faith & morals in order to better fit into society but still called themselves Catholic & remained in the Church) there has been a suspicion on the part of some that our American Bishops have not always been courageous Pastors & Good Shepherds.

    The indisputable events over the past 50-years, where all too many Bishops & their bureaucrats enabled & protected predators, has strengthened that suspicion. The Voris case is really a test, a key test, for our Shepherds. It does not matter whether Voris is a NAZI or another St John of the Cross (who got caught up in another case of conflicting authority, Canon Lawyers & bureaucrats). What matters is whether the Bishops involved will act as courageous Shepherds or as cowardly corporate CEO’s.

    The problem here as I see it is that a follower of Jesus Christ should strive to carry his own cross walking (and falling frequently) exactly in his Master’s footsteps veering neither to the political LEFT or RIGHT. IMO Mr Voris likes to veer to the political RIGHT. While many of his critics like to veer to the political LEFT. Much of this kerfuffle appears to be more about secular politics than faith & morals.

    The great hurdle here for AOD is the 1986 condemnation of the National Catholic Reporter by the local Ordinary and the stripping of its right to use the name “Catholic”. See: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00Cofv. Amazingly since 1968 the AOD has been one of the principal pillars of NCR through the actions of its now retired Auxiliary Bishop Gumbleton.

    How can AOD justly make a public issue of the use of the word “Catholic” by Mr. Voris when the picture of its own Auxillary Bishop appears on the front page of every NCR edition – a publication which has been formally stripped of its right to use the word Catholic by lawful Church authority?

    Time for the AOD Archbishop to play the Good Shepherd.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • http://www.canonlaw.info Ed Peters

    Chuckle chuckle. Will any post mentioning my name NOT be replied to by Richard W Comerford? Just wondering.

  • Richard W Comerford

    Lawyer Peters:

    “Will any post mentioning my name NOT be replied to by Richard W Comerford? Just wondering.”

    The post in question was addressed to me:

    “Richard,…
    As Ed Peters has pointed out, whatever may or may not have happened in other cases one might care to name is irrelevant. It is not a valid defense to those inclined to ignore ecclesiastic authority to argue that everyone else is doing it.”

    If I have time I generally reply to posts addressed to me.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Mark

    Here goes Henry again, but what is this statement Henry but what you accuse others of:

    “Voris is often wrong, using poor logic (guilt by association) as a way to denounce someone. Or ignoring what the Vatican says when it doesn’t support Voris’ own ideology. I’ve caught him on many flubs as have many people who actually know the Church’s teachings. Voris engages political ideology to ignore Catholic teaching, then works with rather low gossip-style denunciations to prove he must be right. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way.”

    Can anyone count up the unsupported items Henry is throwing out here to attack Voris? How about a little proof Henry to support your own attack comments

  • Mark

    Richard, Henry has a way of throwing things out without facts. Your post is correct. I have yet to see a bishop get involved in this mess.
    As to changing the name of the site, why should they if they have done nothing wrong especially if within this same compaining diocese there are many using the name and putting out dissent and error to Catholic teaching when you are doing none of that.

  • Mark

    Right on Richard. time for the bishops to get involved and get the often dissenting office folks back in line. Many of the largest stories on Real Catholic involve diocese personnel supporting things Catholics should not be supporting. They have been caught outright so often, that these dissenting employees in many diocese are starting to feel the burn where they could once hide their work in the darkness. Nothing like shining some light on the rats to see them start to get anxious and go on the attack.

  • Mark

    Henry can’t be specific. When in doubt, he uses the term social justice which can in fact mean anything at all as defined by the party of death. When one brings up the 54 million babies killed by abortion, Henry says social justice trumps this without being specific as to what and how it is proportional in any reasonable way or what it means.

  • Mark

    Since my wife was a former CEO with a couple thousand employees, if there was something that happened by one of the employees that was indeed sanctioned by the CEO and there was doubt about it, she as CEO would quickly make it known that indeed it did have her backing and support. Since this has been hanging out there for a while and the bishop has not poked his head out, either the Bishop is hiding or they are uninformed. Why else would you leave doubt hanging out there on the issue as to if the Bishop is involved and supporting the action? It certainly would send a message that the leader is not backing up their people. In my view, this was an action by some underling and the Bishop is hoping it goes away and if so that in itself is sad.

    Richard is right. Time for a lot of the Bishops to show they have some courage and conviction.

  • Mark

    Real CAtholic TV operates on the internet. Does this mean that every post needs to get the OK of every possible dioceses in the USA or around the world. RCTV is not based in the Detroit dioceses.
    Deacons Greg blog post has the name Catholic in it and it is on the internet. Does he have the OK to use Catholic in his blog leader page from every dioceses where the internet reaches? The same is true of anyone who operates with anything with Catholic being used by the site on the internet.

    This is a foolish deal all the way around and the reason for it is transparent. Voris puts some light on those trying to do things behind the scenes and when they get caught, they squeal.

  • Mark

    Oregon, where is it in canon law or church teaching that one has to have the right tone or spirit and who judges that tone when it is on the internet? Is it one dioceses or do all have to be involved? Should it be a PR person in one diocese who judges them or should it at least be a Bishop? Catholic League operates on the donations of Catholics from all over the country who want an organization out there defending the onslaught of attack from the government and the liberal media. Bill does a great job in the view of a lot of Catholics just as Voris does. They exist with the support of other Catholics. Why is it that many of the left side of issues always want to shut down those who disagree with them? You seem them in total panic over a network like Fox while you do not see the more conservative calling for the shut down of stations, but going out and providing an alternative viewpoint. The left wanted to shut down conservative radio and when that failed, thought they would build their own with Air America. When it failed because they have no views worth listening to, they are back trying to silence the conservatives. I notice that MSNBC put Buchanon on suspension for what he wrote in a book when others on that station have had far worse things to so on the tv program and also in print.

    You do not have to support Catholic League in any way or watch it and you can clearly say it does not represent your viewpoint. However, you go to far when you say it is not Catholic.

  • Mark

    Kind of like following the money with regard to an administration using tax money to “invest” in green technology and following that money into the pockets of those supporting the administration, right Barbara?

    Is there any factual evidence of who is providing what money to whom and for what purpose?

  • Mark

    How about all the various diocese it goes to on the internet? If the local bishop where it comes from has no issue with the product or company, but another bishop has huge issues with it, do they have no say in the matter? This is too big an issue for some local diocese PR guy to be handling. It might not have appeared that way in the beginning, but it certainly is developing into one today.

  • Mark

    chuckle chuckle, while those who work for the diocese and then bounce around taking the diocese position make sure this is known with each of their posts?

  • Richard W Comerford

    Ms. Barbara P:

    I listened to the 50-minute radio interview if Mr. Branner linked from Mr. Shea’s website.

    “is very interesting and if true disturbing”

    Yes. Interesting. Why disturbing?

    “it seems it always comes down to that Watergate direction”

    Are you suggesting that there is a criminal conspiracy here?

    “follow the money”

    Certainly. A successful Catholic guy with money has openly funded Mr. Voris. There is no suggestion of illegality. He (the money guy) is also funding another not-Catholic-specific media venture. He (the money guy) is so non-conspiratorial about it that he (the money guy) spends 50-miniues on public radio talking about his two media business ventures in great detail.

    No Opus Dei albino monk assassins here.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  • Richard W Comerford

    Deacon:

    “Mark Shea today offers a tidbit from a reader regarding the man financing RealCatholicTV, complete with links to a radio interview with the fellow.”

    The link to Mr. Shea’s blog read in part:

    “It sounds like Brammer, at the time of this interview, was already planning his exit strategy from RealCatholicTV. If you continue listening after 45:55, you will hear him explain that the Institute for New Media will not quote the Bible or the Catechism, and so–he says this explicitly–it will not need to be under the jurisdiction of abishop.”

    I listened to the radio interview in question. Three points struck me:

    1. Mr. Brammer (the money guy) is funding two separate media ventures. One specifically Catholic (Mr. Voris & Company) and one specifically non-Catholic (Institute for New Media). Mr. Brammer (the money guy) clearly stated during the interview that “everything Catholic should be under the Bishop”. Good for him

    2. There was nothing conspiratorial, mysterious or secret about Mr. Brammer’s (the money guy) ventures. He spent 50-minutes literally broadcasting to the world his business plans, organization, funding and vision.

    3. However, disturbingly, one of Mr. Brammer’s (the money guy) future associates in his second (Non-Voris) venture may be one E. Michael Jones. I might be doing Mr. Jones a disservice but I have read some portions of Mr. Jones’ works regarding the Jews. I think that there is something very wrong in Mr. Jones’ work regarding the Jews. But I also admit that I am a knuckle dragger and not an intellectual.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

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

  • Lionel Andrades

    Friday, January 20, 2012
    The issue is also the Eucharist in the diocese of Fort Wayne South Bend, Indiana, USA
    A comment on a website says the bishop canonically has the right to ask Real Catholic TV.com to remove the name Catholic.

    The issue is also the Eucharist in the diocese of Fort Wayne South Bend, Indiana, USA.Does the bishop have the right to offer Holy Mass according to Canon Law? Is the Mass he offers a public sin?

    In the Nicene Creed we pray: “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin”. The baptism of water is needed to remove Original Sin. The baptism of water is given to adults with Catholic Faith.

    The bishop at Fort Wayne South Bend cannot say in public that Judaism is not a path to salvation and that Jews need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell (for salvation).

    He is denying the Nicene Creed and the Athanasius Creed.He is also not affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and is putting aside Dominus Iesus and other magisterial texts including Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14).This is public manifest heresy, of the first class, it entails the Creed.

    In this sin the bishop has the right to offer Holy Mass and canonically call himself a ‘Catholic’ ?

    St. Teresa of Avila saw Jesus in pain when a priest in mortal sin held the Eucharist at Holy Mass. St. Faustina Kowalski saw Jesus in pain when a lady in mortal sin received the Eucharist at Holy Mass.

    The issue is the Eucharist. Canon Law does not permit the bishop to offer Holy Mass or receive the Eucharist.

    I am just a layman. I am not judging him. I am just pointing out to what the Church teaches.The teaching of the Church is the same for priests, bishops, cardinals and the pope.The Sacrament of Reconciliation is available for all.

    I had written to the bishop and the issue is now all over the internet. It is up to him to affirm the Catholic Faith as a bishop. He can answer the four questions asked of him.

    1. Bishop Kevin Rhoades is denying an ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Outside the Church No Salvation). http://catholicism.org/category/outside-the-church-there-is-no-salvation

    2. He is refusing to say that Judaism and other religions are not paths to salvation.

    3. He is refusing to say that Jews need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation (to avoid Hell).

    4. The Bishop in Indiana is assuming that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are defacto known to us in the present times, since he considers them exceptions to the dogma and other magisterial teachings.Are these cases explicitly known to us ?

    5. Bishop Kevin Rhoades is assuming that there is some magisterial text which claims that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are defacto exceptions to the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.Some magisterial text says these cases are exceptions to the dogma ?

    Are not prayers of reparation needed here?
    -Lionel Andrades.
    CANON LAWYER IN INDIANA NEEDS TO BE ASKED : IS BISHOP KEVIN RHOADES JURIDICALLY A CATHOLIC ?
    Evidence of the Fort Wayne Bend bishops denial of the Catholic Faith is on a website.
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/01/canon-lawyer-in-indiana-needs-to-be.html

    BISHOP KEVIN RHOADES DENIES THE CATHOLIC FAITH
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/01/bishop-kevin-rhoades-denies-catholic.html

    JEWISH CATHOLIC DAY OF REFLECTION TODAY
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/01/jewish-catholic-day-of-reflection-day.html

    Will Bishops Allen Vigneron and Kevin Rhoades give permission for a website against Michael Vorris?
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/01/will-bishops-allen-vigneron-and-kevin.html

    Questions for the Canon Lawyers:Can Archbishop Allen Vigneron and Bishop Kevin Rhoades be considered Catholic if they refuse to affirm in public the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/01/questions-for-canon-lawyers-can.html

    It’s a Free Country.. : A Catholic who rejects a defined dogma like outside the church no salvation is automatically excomunicated. He has no right to use the word ‘Catholic’.
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/01/its-free-country.html

    ERRORS IN THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: OUTSIDE THE CHURCH NO SALVATION
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/search?q=Errors+in+the+Catechism+of+the+Catholic+Church

    ERRORS IN THE CATECHISM ?
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/search?q=Errors+in+the+Catechism+of+the+Catholic+Church

    In the Catechism of the Catholic Church why did Cardial Joseph Ratzinger not mention that the baptism of desire is not a defacto exception to the dogma outside the church no salvation nor to Vatican Council II ?
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/01/in-catechism-of-catholic-church-why-did.html

  • http://http//www.vivificat.org Teófilo de Jesús

    Well, I dropped the word “Catholic” from my logo in order to avoid any future unpleasantry by anyone seeking to do me harm because of my personal opinions. I also make clear on my site that my opinions are my own and not the Church’s, and that I submit the same opinions to the Church for judgment.

    Having said that, I fail to see why the archdiocese is going after Voris. Sure, some of the things he says have ruffled feathers, but it would be more honest, more transparent, if his bishop were to tell us clearly what’s wrong with Voris. One gets tired of parsing obscure warnings and statements. Let the authorities speak clearly on this issue so that our consciences are truly enlightened.

    +JMJ,
    ~Theo


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X