RCTV statement, regarding AOD, issued.

[Graubo3]

If St. Michael’s Media is in Michigan but RealCatholicTV is a registered business in Indiana then the use of “Catholic” in RealCatholicTV falls under the Bishop over South Bend, not Detroit. RealCatholic TV follows Indiana laws and pays Indiana taxes even if they use vendors in Michigan much or all of their content.

• Marty Lund

Possibly, or maybe just make it brick and mortar where one is welcome?

Peace, Graubo

 

[Tigg]

You do not need to be a canon lawyer. You are to be obedient to your ordinary. It matters not what other bishops say when your bishop speaks you listen, unless he is leading you to sin.

We are bound in conscience to follow our own bishop but that is not to say the teaching Magisterium of the Church is not the entire College of Bishops in union with the pope. My observation was that the bishops, on many levels relating to faith and morals, do not agree. (To give specifics would throw this thread off topic.) This odd occurrence seems to be happening more frequently than in times past.

 

[PaulinVA]

Archbishop Vigneron was installed in 2009. Since then he has been busy with his Changing Lives Together initiative, to be implemented at every Parish, looming debt and the task of restructuring the Archdiocese with mergers and closing. I highly doubt, if he knows who he is, that going after Voris was a top priority. Hence, no official word from the Archbishop. And easy deflection to avoid a meeting between the two.

Does the canon say that a bishop has to entertain requests for the use of “Catholic” in a ministry’s name in his diocese?

A refusal to meet is a refusal by competent authority to grant consent.

How hard would it be to submit to the Bishop of South Bend and ask for consent?

Has RealCatholicTV asked* any* Bishop who could be termed “competent authority” to use the name Catholic and been granted consent?

 

[jam070406]

Does the canon say that a bishop has to entertain requests for the use of “Catholic” in a ministry’s name in his diocese?

A refusal to meet is a refusal by competent authority to grant consent.

How hard would it be to submit to the Bishop of South Bend and ask for consent?

Has RealCatholicTV asked* any* Bishop who could be termed “competent authority” to use the name Catholic and been granted consent?

I dunno. The article seemed to suggest that there was no issue with South Bend.

 

[PaulinVA]

I dunno. The article seemed to suggest that there was no issue with South Bend.

“I have had no issue with you driving on my streets” is different from “you have a license to drive on my streets”.

The canon says you have to have the consent of competent authority. I don’t think consent is passive - that is, it is not up to the Bishops to shut down organizations with Catholic in their name, it is up to the organization to ask for consent.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

We are bound in conscience to follow our own bishop but that is not to say the teaching Magisterium of the Church is not the entire College of Bishops in union with the pope. My observation was that the bishops, on many levels relating to faith and morals, do not agree. (To give specifics would throw this thread off topic.) This odd occurrence seems to be happening more frequently than in times past.

There are areas where differences of opinions are allowable. Not everything is dogmatic.

I would have to see a genuine case where a bishop is teaching against the faith, usually it is just the understanding of those reading it that think this is happening.

But as you have said, this is throwing the thread off topic. I will gladly participate in such a discussion if you start it.

This is not such a case. It is clearly laid out in Canon Law. The issue is does this bishop have jurisdiction or not.

 

[Spirithound]

canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/some-thoughts-on-the-jurisdiction-question-in-the-aod-vorisrctv-matter/

Ed Peters has made 3 blog posts about this issue, but I have a concern that (I think) he has not addressed.

He has repeated 3 times that those people who are questioning whether the Archdiocese of Detroit has jurisdiction over RealCathlic TV are in fact assuming that the AoD needs jurisdiction in order to make a comment.

While I appreciate his point, it is my understanding (or perhaps assumption) that the AoD is not merely making a statement, but in fact seeking to enforce some remedy upon RCTV, and for that, it is my assumption that they would then need jurisdiction.

Could anybody help me out?

 

[FAB]

canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/some-thoughts-on-the-jurisdiction-question-in-the-aod-vorisrctv-matter/

Ed Peters has made 3 blog posts about this issue, but I have a concern that (I think) he has not addressed.

He has repeated 3 times that those people who are questioning whether the Archdiocese of Detroit has jurisdiction over RealCathlic TV are in fact assuming that the AoD needs jurisdiction in order to make a comment.

While I appreciate his point, it is my understanding (or perhaps assumption) that the AoD is not merely making a statement, but in fact seeking to enforce some remedy upon RCTV, and for that, it is my assumption that they would then need jurisdiction.

Could anybody help me out?

Talk about getting into legalities. It does seem that the AoD does have some jurisdiction. The point in the discussion should not be lost. Vois is in violation of canon law, no matter what diocese the jurisdiction falls an if he is a good Catholic, as he claims and not just causing trouble, should freely and gladly put his buisness into compliance.

 

[Spirithound]

Talk about getting into legalities. It does seem that the AoD does have some jurisdiction. The point in the discussion should not be lost. Vois is in violation of canon law, no matter what diocese the jurisdiction falls an if he is a good Catholic, as he claims and not just causing trouble, should freely and gladly put his buisness into compliance.

Well, it’s not just “legalities”. It’s really the difference between the AoD making a public announcement for the edification of the people, while tacitly acknowledging a lack of jurisdiction over the principals of the dispute, and the AoD making an announcement which they plan to follow with canonical sanctions.

For the record, I agree with you that Voris should comply with his Ordinary.

 

[Havard]

Ugh. In today’s Vortex video, Voris makes fun of his right to use the word “Catholic.”

youtube.com/watch?v=3IpAmq0TdXE&list=UUsUgCCaaOfESPA4REUfZ33g&index=2&feature=plcp

(Relevant portion is between 1:25-1:40)

Even if he has a sound canon law basis, it’s depressing to see Voris taking jabs at the AoD for the amusement of his audience.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Ugh. In today’s Vortex video, Voris makes fun of his right to use the word “Catholic.”

youtube.com/watch?v=3IpAmq0TdXE&list=UUsUgCCaaOfESPA4REUfZ33g&index=2&feature=plcp

(Relevant portion is between 1:25-1:40)

Even if he has a sound canon law basis, it’s depressing to see Voris taking jabs at the AoD for the amusement of his audience.

That eye rolling comment of his shows that the organization has no desire to work with the Church.

 

[PaulinVA]

Ugh. In today’s Vortex video, Voris makes fun of his right to use the word “Catholic.”

youtube.com/watch?v=3IpAmq0TdXE&list=UUsUgCCaaOfESPA4REUfZ33g&index=2&feature=plcp

(Relevant portion is between 1:25-1:40)

Even if he has a sound canon law basis, it’s depressing to see Voris taking jabs at the AoD for the amusement of his audience.

That was fast. It’s been removed…

 

[Havard]

That was fast. It’s been removed…

One can only hope it’s because they realized the joke was petty and beneath them.

I hope to just see nothing more on this matter, aside from a statement saying “All parties concerned are working together to swiftly find a positive resolution.”

 

[Canto]

That was fast. It’s been removed…

I just watched it on youtube.

The blurb reads:
Christianity, and therefore Catholicism made this nation into what it is today, and its principles should not be stifled, particularly in the political arena.

If I live in Sydney and start True Catholic Radio and I employ someone from St Raphael’s Media in Melbourne to make programs from my radio show, can staff from the Archdiocese of Melbourne tell me not to use the name, or is it up to the Archbishop of Sydney???

 

[Julia_Mae]

I would prefer that RealCatholicTV work this out, because they have no consent to use the name Catholic from any competent authority under the meaning of canon 216. The AOD asserts authority, but since RealCatholicTV disputes jurisdiction - they should proactively obtain consent (not an unofficial “no problems with them”) from the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend.

Plain and simple.

I keep thinking about Voris knowing all along he wasn’t authorized to use Catholic and not taking the most plain and simple and obvious solution: add an “s.” How hard is that? Real Catholics TV. No problem.

It’s just… at least shortsighted.

 

[Julia_Mae]

but I have never heard him NOT uphold authentic Catholic teaching or praise the good priests and bishops when the occasion merits. And he always, but always, **submits to Rome and the Holy Father. **.

I never understand this part. Who appoints Bishops? Is it not authentic Catholic teaching to obey Canon law? What’s the law? You have to have consent to use the word Catholic to promote your activity. He doesn’t. Never did. He uses it all the time. Has for years now with no consent. That’s disobedience. Willful.

I so do not get this.

 

[Julia_Mae]

The Archbishop has not spoken directly to RCTV. And on numerous attempts RCTV has been denied access to the competent authority to clear the issue.

Wait. Michael Voris has been talking to the AoD since 2006 and had a string of meetings. That’s a long time and he knew the law. The AoD doesn’t owe him another meeting, they had meetings, and he wouldn’t comply with whatever the media rules were.

Bishops speak. We listen. NOT a democracy.

If St. Michael’s Media is in Michigan but RealCatholicTV is a registered business in Indiana then the use of “Catholic” in RealCatholicTV falls under the Bishop over South Bend, not Detroit. RealCatholic TV follows Indiana laws and pays Indiana taxes even if they use vendors in Michigan much or all of their content.

• Marty Lund

But we had this information another thread. RealCatholicTV is a business in Michigan Voris owns. He registered that name himself in 2010 under his Concept Communications company as 'assumed" I think they call it there. He IS RCTV. The contact info and the phone number on the site are in Michigan. He is in Michigan. He makes the content in Michigan and uploads it from Michigan.

And, it doesn’t matter. He never had permission from anyone. Ever.

This is like having an argument about whether a guy is guilty of stealing a car because it has Ohio plates, he stole it in Florida and abandoned it in Arizona and no one is sure who should prosecute. He still stole the car!

 

[jam070406]

Wait. Michael Voris has been talking to the AoD since 2006 and had a string of meetings. That’s a long time and he knew the law. The AoD doesn’t owe him another meeting, they had meetings, and he wouldn’t comply with whatever the media rules were.

Bishops speak. We listen. NOT a democracy.

But we had this information another thread. RealCatholicTV is a business in Michigan Voris owns. He registered that name himself in 2010 under his Concept Communications company as 'assumed" I think they call it there. He IS RCTV. The contact info and the phone number on the site are in Michigan. He is in Michigan. He makes the content in Michigan and uploads it from Michigan.

And, it doesn’t matter. He never had permission from anyone. Ever.

This is like having an argument about whether a guy is guilty of stealing a car because it has Ohio plates, he stole it in Florida and abandoned it in Arizona and no one is sure who should prosecute. He still stole the car!

Archbishop Vigneron was installed in 2009. Would you care to provide your proof that he has met with RCTV personally?
From what I understand the issue in 2006 was that they asked to use the diocese media sources and were denied, so they got their own resources. But I would love to see your proof that they were denied to use the name Catholic coming from those “meetings” and your proof that’s what the discussions of the meetings were about, like you seem to claim.
Canon law also goes on to say, regarding getting approval, that it must be equitably just for all. Can you give proof that every single media source, etc. using the name Catholic has gotten permission and been approved by the diocese?

 

[jam070406]

I keep thinking about Voris knowing all along he wasn’t authorized to use Catholic and not taking the most plain and simple and obvious solution: add an “s.” How hard is that? Real Catholics TV. No problem.

It’s just… at least shortsighted.

If you thought about this so much you’d realize Voris doesn’t own the name. And the owner of the name is in the South Bend diocese.

 

[jam070406]

Wait. Michael Voris has been talking to the AoD since 2006 and had a string of meetings. That’s a long time and he knew the law. The AoD doesn’t owe him another meeting, they had meetings, and he wouldn’t comply with whatever the media rules were.

Bishops speak. We listen. NOT a democracy.

But we had this information another thread. RealCatholicTV is a business in Michigan Voris owns. He registered that name himself in 2010 under his Concept Communications company as 'assumed" I think they call it there. He IS RCTV. The contact info and the phone number on the site are in Michigan. He is in Michigan. He makes the content in Michigan and uploads it from Michigan.

And, it doesn’t matter. He never had permission from anyone. Ever.

This is like having an argument about whether a guy is guilty of stealing a car because it has Ohio plates, he stole it in Florida and abandoned it in Arizona and no one is sure who should prosecute. He still stole the car!

Please don’t use such uncharitable and poor analogies any more.