RCTV statement, regarding AOD, issued.

  • Thread starter Thread starter jam070406
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Julia_Mae said:
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.
Click to expand...
The fact is, you don’t know one way or the other if the Archbishop approves of his work because the Bishop has not spoken on it or met with them personally.
 
Okay, after overnight thought:
  1. Childish stunt on the video.
  2. RealCatholicTV doesn’t have a Bishop’s approval to use the word Catholic
  3. Michael Voris is a real Catholic and knows that he is appearing for an organization that is not authorized to use the word Catholic.
  4. MIchael Voris should stop appearing for said organization.
 
PaulinVA said:
Okay, after overnight thought:
  1. Childish stunt on the video.
  2. RealCatholicTV doesn’t have a Bishop’s approval to use the word Catholic
  3. Michael Voris is a real Catholic and knows that he is appearing for an organization that is not authorized to use the word Catholic.
  4. MIchael Voris should stop appearing for said organization.
Click to expand...
My thought, the AOD should allow a personal audience between RCTV and the archbishop to discuss the situation and seek what approval or correction RCTV needs to make to use the word Catholic.
 
jam070406 said:
My thought, the AOD should allow a personal audience between RCTV and the archbishop to discuss the situation and seek what approval or correction RCTV needs to make to use the word Catholic.
Click to expand...
Oh. And I would also like to see the competent authority in the AOD declare that Dignity Detroit and Elephant In the Room can no longer use the word Catholic.
 
jam070406 said:
My thought, the AOD should allow a personal audience between RCTV and the archbishop to discuss the situation and seek what approval or correction RCTV needs to make to use the word Catholic.
Click to expand...
It seems that meetings have been held in the past and RCTV does not wish to comply with what came out of those meetings. Why should another meeting be held? Should they just get meetings until they get the result they want?
jam070406 said:
Oh. And I would also like to see the competent authority in the AOD declare that Dignity Detroit and Elephant In the Room can no longer use the word Catholic.
Click to expand...
You keep bring up these red herrings. How other groups are treated has nothing to do with this.
 
ByzCath said:
It seems that meetings have been held in the past and RCTV does not wish to comply with what came out of those meetings. Why should another meeting be held? Should they just get meetings until they get the result they want?

You keep bring up these red herrings. How other groups are treated has nothing to do with this.
Click to expand...
No, you miss the point. Those groups have an affect on how Voris is treated. Listen to the RCTV statement again. And to want Voris silenced is basically taking their side, as he also points out in the statement.
 
I think that some are overblowing the scope of what the AoD statement was doing. They’re not “silencing” anyone but simply pointing out a fact: RCTV has not obtained the permission of the local ordinary per canon 216 to use the word “Catholic” in describing their ministry.

For an apostolate to promote themselves as “Catholic”, per Canon Law, they need the local ordinary’s permission. This permission is not to be assumed. It is not the case that a group can go around promoting themselves as Catholic and they are just fine so long as the local bishop doesn’t step in and say otherwise.

So it really doesn’t matter if one thinks that AoD or South Bend-Ft Wayne has jurisdiction. AKAIK, neither bishop has given them permission to use the word “Catholic” for their apostolate. AoD is simply the only one who has issued a statement in light of the questions they have received.

Discussions of Voris’ orthodoxy and discussions of the lack-there-of of other entities in the AoD are irrelevant. Voris could be a living saint and a sage prophet. That doesn’t change the fact that he has not received permission from any bishop per canon 216 to use the word “Catholic” for his enterprise. Whether or not any other group “deserves” to use the word “Catholic” is a completely separate discussion and bringing it into this one only confuses things. It has no bearing on the bishop’s authority in this specific case.

One might speculate that this is all some elaborate liberal conspiracy intended to silence this brave Catholic warrior who boldly proclaims the Truth. But, again, that is irrelevant. Canon Law rightly gives the bishop this authority to safeguard the use of the word “Catholic” by various groups. We might disagree that the bishop exercises this authority well, but that doesn’t change the fact that it is his authority to exercise.
 
Ya know, it would be great if they could just change the name or get the ordinary’s permission…
 
Well, there is a now video response to Voris’s video, Prayer for Detroit, that the OP linked to. The video is full of authentic documentation that undeniably points the finger where it belongs. It is not toward the AOD.
thecuriouscatholic.blogspot.com/

In addition, I found an interesting fact about the origin of the RCTV’s name and who the obvious author is. Read comment #10 at the linked website.
Good work, CC! This is only the tip of the iceberg, but a very good beginning until the rest of the work is concluded. To show the intent of Voris to use the name ‘catholic’ many years prior to embellishing it with the word REAL, here’s a video (one of several) showing the producer, Voris, with the name (scroll to the end of the video) Catholictelevision.org.
youtube.com/watch?v=oZ5OIHUsg_Y

Since Brammer was merely the backer with capital admitting no control over Voris’s venture, there remains no doubt that the name originated in Voris’s mind. It is curious why the name was changed to One TRUE faith afterwards, and it may have been the AOD who objected and called for removal. Try linking to Catholictelevision.org and read the quick bleep.
Click to expand...
 
Sirach2 said:
Well, there is a now video response to Voris’s video, Prayer for Detroit, that the OP linked to.

I have watched for developments at this blog ever since it was posted here at CAF. The video is full of authentic documentation that undeniably points the finger where it belongs. It is not toward the AOD.
thecuriouscatholic.blogspot.com/

In addition, I found an interesting fact about the origin of the RCTV’s name and who the obvious author is. Read comment #10 at the linked website.
Click to expand...
It never was against the AOD. It was against elements in the Curia that impede Archbishop Vigneron’s ability to dispell doctrinal dissent.
 
40.png
Jam070406:
It never was against the AOD. It was against elements in the Curia that impede Archbishop Vigneron’s ability to dispell doctrinal dissent.
Click to expand...
That is purely your opinion for which you have no factual proof. It is a typical cry of those who feel their voice is not being heard, coming from one like yourself who is very heavily biased and vested in the matter.

Be assured, Jam, that there are just as many, if not **more **people who take the opposite view of this situation. It will soon be all over the blogosphere with a lot of opinions that fall in either camp. Bottom line: the AOD will handle it, whether or not it is to your liking in the end. 😉
 
jam070406 said:
My thought, the AOD should allow a personal audience between RCTV and the archbishop to discuss the situation and seek what approval or correction RCTV needs to make to use the word Catholic.
Click to expand...
There is not reason for the bishop to personally meet with him. That’s the reason for the staff which no doubt includes a priest and deacon or two that carry the ordinary’s message and authority. To do otherwise elevates Voris to a status undeserved.
 
Sirach2 said:
That is purely your opinion for which you have no factual proof. It is a typical cry of those who feel their voice is not being heard, coming from one like yourself who is very heavily biased and vested in the matter.

Be assured, Jam, that there are just as many, if not **more **people who take the opposite view of this situation. It will soon be all over the blogosphere with a lot of opinions that fall in either camp. Bottom line: the AOD will handle it, whether or not it is to your liking in the end. 😉
Click to expand...
It is indeed not my opinion. It comes from the RCTV statement. Who, having dealt with the situation in Detroit would know better then you. But I agree, Truth will prevail. And I pray for my Archbishop, like Pope Benedict, to be spared from the wolves.
 
FAB said:
There is not reason for the bishop to personally meet with him. That’s the reason for the staff which no doubt includes a priest and deacon or two that carry the ordinary’s message and authority. To do otherwise elevates Voris to a status undeserved.
Click to expand...
Point taken. It is in God’s hands. I will speak no more of this issue.

God bless!
 
jam070406 said:
It is indeed not my opinion. It comes from the RCTV statement. Who, having dealt with the situation in Detroit would know better then you. But I agree, Truth will prevail. And I pray for my Archbishop, like Pope Benedict, to be spared from the wolves.
Click to expand...
i hope catholic tv gets it sorted out. i would hate for all and or any heretics trying to take souls with them to hell to get their wish and he ends up getting silenced.
 
ByzCath said:
How other groups are treated has nothing to do with this.
Click to expand...
Unless it is special treatment. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Equal protection. The morality of principle (what is right is right for all and not selectively enforced).

If this is a case of special treatment, it calls into question the original law/edict/principle. If Person A steals a candy bar and is allowed to get away with it but Person B steals a candy bar and gets punished, then either the enforcement arm is broken/corrupt or the law of stealing should be amended.

The church could clear all this up with some simple declarative statements regarding RCTV and their tone/judgments. But alas, it’s all hush hush and sort of vague.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top