RCTV statement, regarding AOD, issued.

  • Thread starter Thread starter jam070406
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no business incorporated in either Michigan or Indiana under the name Real Catholic TV. But Michael Voris’ own business is officially DBA as Real Catholic TV in Michigan.

dleg.state.mi.us/bcs_corp/dt_llc.asp?id_nbr=B13368&name_entity=REAL%20CATHOLIC%20TV

So it’s no stretch of the imagination then that Mr. Voris has been using the name Real Catholic TV in Michigan when referencing his own business, not just Mr. Brammer’s, which is DBA as Real Catholic TV in Indiana.
 
Nec5 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Can you show me the “equal protection” clause in Canon Law?

Can you also show me where an anonymous user on an internet forum is the adjudicator of this?

While you might be right on the “morality of principle” that does not change the facts, RCTV should be following Canon Law regardless of what others are doing. We are not privy to the internal workings of the archdiocese and we do not know what agreements there might be or what on going talks might be occurring and frankly we have no right to such information.
 
A few posts ago, I gave posted a link that responds to Voris’s statement from the OP.
thecuriouscatholic.blogspot.com/

The author plays a taped recording from Marc Brammer, but only excerpts that pertain to RCTV and his relationship with Voris. I logged on to the radio announcer, and curiously the interview “disappeared.” I would imagine CuriousCatholic has a copy of the entire tape, and I noticed Mark Shea’s blog referenced it as well. :hmmm:

Nevertheless, I listened to it personally from Shea’s link earlier, and Brammer stated clearly at 25:10, that from the many subscriptions (for profit), “It is on it’s own.” With Brammer beginning a new venture, and having supplied capital to get RCTV on their feet, it looks like Brammer is planting his feet in other soil. Of course, since Voris’s business address is for sale, maybe he will be moving to Indiana to join Brammer’s new media project. 🤷
 
jam070406 said:
Archbishop Vigneron was installed in 2009. Would you care to provide your proof that he has met with RCTV personally?
Click to expand...
Not the issue, never was. Voris met with the AoD. He had the information. He had no consent. He used the word, anyway. He is in violation of Canon law. This is is not complex. The Bishop is under no obligation to meet with him.
Canon law also goes on to say, regarding getting approval, that it must be equitably just for all.
Click to expand...
No it doesn’t.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PU.HTM
 
jam070406 said:
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.
Click to expand...
It’s irrelevant. What the Bishop or you or I think of the work is irrelevant. You must have consent to use the word “Catholic.” He doesn’t.
 
Sirach2 said:
A few posts ago, I gave posted a link that responds to Voris’s statement from the OP.
thecuriouscatholic.blogspot.com/

The author plays a taped recording from Marc Brammer, but only excerpts that pertain to RCTV and his relationship with Voris. I logged on to the radio announcer, and curiously the interview “disappeared.” I would imagine CuriousCatholic has a copy of the entire tape, and I noticed Mark Shea’s blog referenced it as well. :hmmm:

Nevertheless, I listened to it personally from Shea’s link earlier, and Brammer stated clearly at 25:10, that from the many subscriptions (for profit), “It is on it’s own.” With Brammer beginning a new venture, and having supplied capital to get RCTV on their feet, it looks like Brammer is planting his feet in other soil. Of course, since Voris’s business address is for sale, maybe he will be moving to Indiana to join Brammer’s new media project. 🤷
Click to expand...
I don’t know what happened but that radio show can be listened to at the blog you linked (this goes to the exact post thecuriouscatholic.blogspot.com/2012/01/curious-catholic-responds-to-michael.html and I just clicked that radio show in the blog, it works fine) and the Answering Voris video is easier to watch on YouTube, I think. youtube.com/watch?v=1sDlzdknd9U

So, we finally have an answer, and it came from Brammer: Voris has complete control over what appears on RCTV.com.

I guess that’s it, then.
 
Julia Mae,

I checked CuriousCatholic again - there are two links to the radio interview, so I though perhpas one of them was wrong. In clicking the second link, I get the same message. “Mal the error duck says Uh-oh” If you have another website link that works, could you please post it here?
 
Sirach2 said:
Julia Mae,

I checked CuriousCatholic again - there are two links to the radio interview, so I though perhpas one of them was wrong. In clicking the second link, I get the same message. “Mal the error duck says Uh-oh” If you have another website link that works, could you please post it here?
Click to expand...
Right in the middle of the page is a big picture of the interview. It’s not a picture, really, it’s some way to access the other site in the same blog post. You don’t need a link, you just click play right in the picture. Maybe leave them a note that their other link doesn’t work.
 
40.png
Spirithound:
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.
Click to expand...
Joe 5859:
One might speculate that this is all some elaborate liberal conspiracy intended to silence this brave Catholic warrior who boldly proclaims the Truth.
Click to expand...
Maybe I can reply to both of these posts together. I don’t believe the issue is limited to unlawful use of the name Catholic, but may include far more serious problems as well, as outlined in this Canon Law, and is not a matter of jurisdiction.

Can. 747 §2. It belongs to the Church always and everywhere to announce moral principles, even about the social order, and to render judgment concerning any human affairs insofar as the fundamental rights of the human person or the salvation of souls requires it.
  • We know, if you have followed these threads, that Voris has no intention of coming into compliance with the media protocols outlined by the AOD in 2006, though nearly six years have passed.
  • We know, too, that some of his teachings are not true to catholicism.
  • We know that he would prefer to retain autonomy and not be subject to any authority whatsoever, so he can “say what needs to be said.”
When it concerns the public broadcasting of material that may infringe upon the “salvation of souls,” I believe the AOD is going to step up the pressure on Voris in more ways than simply to enforce Canon Law 216.
 
Too long to elaborate, and not my job.

One poster previously mentioned in this thread that JimmyAkin proved he failed to teach correctly with regard to Holy Communion. The podcast can be viewed [here](http://jimmyak(name removed by moderator)odcast.libsyn.com/007-is-michael-voris-right-about-kneeling-?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+jimmyak(name removed by moderator)odcast+%28Jimmy+Akin+Podcast%29&utm_content=FeedBurner). Click the podcast symbol next to 007 in the title to listen. Voris misrepresented Cardinal Llovera’s words. It is not heresy, but neither is it the teaching of the Church regarding the discipline of the sacrament.
 
Canto said:
And his heresy would include…?
Click to expand...
in a number of threads on this topic sirach2 has made false accustations about vorris then failed to back them up when challenged. it’s become par for the course for this poster. we also have had julie mae calling for him to be excomunicated. reminds me of the pharises trying to catch Jesus out on the law to stop him preaching the way. overall it’s no wonder this thread has been closed 5 times.
 
Nobody has asked for this, Saveus, and I’m certainly not going to preview all of his videos and link to them here just to prove a point. I’m not going to do anybody’s homework for them.

If you fail to find anything wrong, similar to many others in your shoes, then well and good. You have either absorbed the wrong teaching without realizing it, or you never knew the true one in the first place. Many people don’t. Please refrain from your taunts, for they will not force me to do hours of research to meet your demand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top