Archd. Detroit, Michael Voris and RealCatholicTV – a development

There is a development in the case of the Archdiocese of Detroit v the use of “Catholic” by Real Catholic TV and Michael Voris.

You will recall that the Archdiocese has required Mr. Voris and Real Catholic TV not to use the word “Catholic” in the name of their venture. On the other hand, Mr. Voris and Real Catholic TV think the Archdiocese doesn’t have the proper standing to make such a requirement.  Real Catholic TV seems to have more to do with the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend than it does with the Archdiocese of Detroit. We have several posts here on this blog, including some commentary by the canonist Prof. Peters.

Today I read at Life Site News this following with my emphases:

Archdiocesan canon lawyers differ on asking to drop ‘Catholic’ name

by John-Henry Westen

January 9, 2012 ( – Canon lawyers at two American dioceses disagree over the question of jurisdiction in the case of Michael Voris and RealCatholicTV, who were recently asked by the Archdiocese of Detroit to stop using the name “Catholic” in their work.

[…]While the questions asked by most pertain to why the action was taken, the issue being discussed by canon lawyers is where jurisdiction over 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, 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 When asked if the diocese had any complaints about, 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 (”

“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, Detroit Archdiocesan Director of Communications McGrath would not specify any concern other than the use of the word ‘Catholic’.

Asked if the archdiocese has asked any other group or individual in the archdiocese not to use the name Catholic, McGrath said he couldn’t remember any other cases during his 20 years with the diocese. “I don’t know. I’ve been here 20 years I can’t say that we’ve never done that in the history of the Archdiocese,” he said.

Pressed on the point, he said, “I wouldn’t want to say that definitively. But not any that I can recall recently, no.”

Fans of RealCatholicTV have noted that there are entities in the archdiocese, such as the Jesuit University of Detroit Mercy (UDM), which bills itself as “a Catholic university,” that regularly violate Catholic teaching but have been permitted to retain their “Catholic” designation without interference from the diocese. UDM has proposed abortion agencies as career opportunities for students; had links to pro-abortion groups on its website; retained a renowned pro-abortion, pro-same-sex “marriage” nun on its Board of Trustees; held an annual event called ‘sexapalooza’ with activities such as ‘safe sex games’, sex-tac-toe; and has professors that put stickers on their office doors indicating their support for abortion.

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

In an initial blog post Peters, a professor at the archdiocesan seminary, 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.

So!  The plot thickens.

On the site of RealCatholicTV we find this statement from Mr. Voris:


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Linking Back, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. wmeyer says:

    With parish churches being closed, and all the many other problems in the Archdiocese of Detroit, I am sure many of us can think of many other ways the Archdiocese might more profitably invest its efforts than in challenging a web source of solid Catholic teaching.

    But what do I know?

  2. Supertradmum says:

    The Life Site article and the video seem to hold the realistic position that the owner and operator of the company would be the responsible person. Can we compare this to dioceses who were forced into bankruptcy, like mine of Davenport, Iowa, when the priests were sued for sex-abuse? The priest were not responsible, the diocese was. Now, that was not an issue about using the term Catholic, but it shows a precedent for the larger grouping, or company, or diocese, as having the responsibility for its members or employees, rather than not.

    As Voris is an employee, why is he being attacked, rather than the company? And, I would like some clarity as to who is actually making allegations that the content is not Catholic? Names, please. And, what exact statement is not seen as Catholic? One should know one’s accusers, true or false,and the exact nature of the accusations.

  3. anilwang says:

    I don’t know how this will play out, but at the moment it seems that the Archdiocese of Detroit has overplayed its hand.

    In the past, they have called other dioceses to state that RCTV in their jurisdiction and is not Catholic and thus should not speak on Church Property. In the past RCTV has complied to be obedient to the Church and not cause scandal.

    But the Archdiocese of Detroit forced their hand to research their jurisdiction. If the RCTV is not in their jurisdiction, they no longer have a say in speaking engagements involving RCTV outside of the the Detroit archdiocese and it has an archdiocese willing to officially confirm this.

    Personally, I don’t know the details on imprimaturs other than the diocese of the author must approve any book the author writes. But it does seem there is a loophole in that the author can just as easily move to a diocese that will approve author’s book. If that’s the case, Mr. Voris resolve the matter beyond question since there are more than a few traditional Bishops willing to adopt him and there would be nothing else to link RCTV to Detroit.

  4. With all due respect to Dr. Peters (whom I sincerely admire), I do not understand how AOD has jurisdiction. RealCatholicTV is an enterprise that could easily have presenters, writers and other personnel together with production facilities spread over every diocese in America, with Michael Voris being only 1 person in 1 location. On what basis does that give AOD authority over the name of the entire enterprise?

    Additionally, I am still trying to figure out the source of this action. Is it the Archbishop or someone else? Finally, of the huge quantity of hours of RealCatholicTV programming, what exactly is raising the red flags? Are there specific corrective actions requested by AOD that RealCatholicTV could undertake that would make them suitable to use the name “Catholic” within their name?

  5. BaedaBenedictus says:

    This reminds me so much of Mother Angelica’s spat with Cardinal Mahony a few years ago.

    There are traitors in diocesan chanceries and Catholic universities across this country. Groups like St. Michael’s Media want very much to back our bishops up in their efforts to clean out these Augean stables—at least those bishops who think cleaning is necessary. As for those bishops who don’t, well, at least there are lay groups who will speak the truth when their shepherds refuse.

  6. Supertradmum says:

    I like Voris’ new suit. Is it white or light gray? A bit of media savvy.

  7. mrose says:

    I found Rorate’s recent editorial on this topic informative and helpful. I tried to post the link, but my comment must have gotten flagged. It was posted on rorate dash caeli dot blogspot dot com on January 5, 2012.

  8. So, Detroit Archdiocesan Director of Communications Ned McGrath says that in the 20 years that he’s been there, they’ve NEVER GONE AFTER ANYONE ELSE for using the name “Catholic”? Seriously?

  9. priests wife says:

    What is the reasoning behind this? Are we scientologists with a copyright on a name? Are they also going after Old Catholics and women who call themselves Catholic priests?

    This is like the Archdiocese ordaining deacons- ‘allowing’ them to help at Masses and doing hours of baptism and marriage prep- all for free- but they aren’t allowed to ever wear a collar. Poor lay people might be confused.

    As a baptized Catholic, I must educate myself about what is Catholic. Just because something is named that doesn’t make it so. I might come to the conclusion that RealCatholic TV doesn’t stand with the Church- or maybe I will decide that it does. Perhaps there should be an imprimatur for media.

  10. Frank H says:

    Two questions:

    1. Has Voris & company even requested church approval of the name?
    2. Why don’t they just change their name to “RCTV”!? AT&T long ago changed their name from American Telephone and Telegraph to just the initials AT&T.

  11. QMJ says:

    Concerning jurisdiction I am inclined to agree with Dr. Peters. At the very least he could easily give a compelling case for why AOD has jurisdiction. The owner of RCTV may live in and run his blog from the Diocese of Fort Wayne/South Bend, but his production facility is located in the Archdiocese of Detroit. Jurisdiction isn’t settled simply on the residence of the owner of a company. Furthermore, while Mr. Voris is not the owner of RCTV, he is definitely not a mere employee. He is the president and is responsible for the majority of its output which comes from Ferndale, Michigan, in the boundaries of the AOD, not from Fort Wayne/Southbend. If there were more production facilities I would say that jurisdiction should be determined by headquarters. However, in this case there is only one production facility. To call somone’s house the headquarters of a company when they have a production facility is a stretch. One thing is definitely clear from all of this. The Code of Canon Law needs to be updated to account for the changes in apostolic work due to the internet.

  12. DisturbedMary says:

    A new Archbishop has to rely on the old hands to bring him up to speed when he takes over. I think poor Archbishop Vigneron has inherited some doozies who are giving him awful advice.

  13. anilwang says:

    QMJ, the key thing to understand is are we dealing with “The Catholic Faith” or “The Detroit Denomination of the Catholic Faith”.

    This is key. If Catholicism is just a series of local Churches with their own take on what Catholicism means, then of course jurisdictional particularities do count. If the Catholic Faith transcends particular Churches jurisdictional particularities cannot count. At the very least, if the jurisdiction of the owner accepts RCTV and the jurisdiction of the president does not, there has to be a unified court of appeal to settle the issue (I’m guessing Rome).

    Personally, I think the issues is pretty straightforward. If the publisher of a book got an imprimatur from one diocese, I don’t believe they lose it if the author moved to another. If the founder of a hospital is from one diocese got permission to use the Catholic name, I don’t see how hiring a president from another diocese or even adding an additional owner in another diocese could cause affect the permission of the original diocese. If it did, then Catholic hospitals that are corporations would have to get permission from the diocese of all shareholders in order to use the Catholic name. It would be a mess.

  14. Stu says:

    Regardless of who is right or wrong here, Archbishop Vigneron doesn’t seem to be getting good counsel. If the AOD is wrong in this, then they have certainly erred. But if they are correct in everything, they have severely handled this in a poor manner.

    Might be time for some job shuffling in the chancery.

  15. Denis says:

    Are the Archdiocese officials still refusing to meet with Voris & co? If no, how are they supposed to ask for permission to use “Catholic”?

    Then again, I’m just a ‘combox jockey.’

    I did think that it was a bit odd that Mr. Peters gave his analysis on a matter on which he, presumably, is the designated Canon Lawyer. I had the impression that he was giving his expert opinion on some issue in which he wasn’t personally involved. In the end, he seemed to have been defending…himself? his employer? his colleague? It’s not clear.

  16. HeatherPA says:

    This case is very odd. As was pointed out in the original, if the Diocese has many other entities that are flagrantly out of communion with official Church doctrine, yet use the term “Catholic”, it is absurd that such an effort is made in this matter, with a apostolate that is in communion with the Church. As God will bring a greater good out of trials, wrongs, et al., one may hope that if the issue resolves against the favor of RealCatholic TV, then a demand for all the true dissident offenders will be forced and rendered accordingly.

  17. JKnott says:

    What a huge embarrassment on the part of the Archdiocese of Detroit and associates!
    The minions behind this farce have just proved Michael Voris correct.

    God bless Michael Voris and RCTV.. “If they hated Me, they will hate you.”

    Fix your seminary, your Jesuit Cathylc University etc. , etc. etc, and then worry about a code number for a name for a faithful apostolate whose one aim is to save souls.

  18. BillyHW says:

    I agree Dennis. I don’t recall Ed Peters disclosing his position with AoD in his earlier analyses, though perhaps I just missed it. In any case, he’s hardly an independent judge of the matter, and his conflict of interest in this case should be disclosed.

  19. KAS says:

    I think a lot of our Bishops get too much of their information on what is going on in their diocese from their staff. I doubt they have the time to read their own mail, so even there they likely only get to see those letters their secretaries CHOOSE to give them.

    Priests can have this same problem if their office staff is “protective” and take it upon themselves to decide if a call deserves to be passed on to the priest or the person be told to call back later (long story, personal experience, when I finally did manage to contact our parish priest he did NOT know his calls were being screened and juggled his staff so that it would not happen again).

    Pray for our priests and bishops– they have to work with us laypersons flawed as we are!

    I think it is far more often the Bishops getting bad advice, or only getting information skewed by the prejudices of the staff, that is the problem.

    So praying for our Bishops and Priests is the BEST response we can have.

  20. Singing Mum says:

    Doesn’t the AOD get how bizarre and heavy handed this looks to the average Catholic?
    No specific reasons given, and no other organization asked to remove the title ‘Catholic’ in 20 years? There has to be more to the story… at least I hope there is for all the singular fuss made.
    How long, O Lord? When will dioceses put a proper premium on PR?!?

  21. Finally, some good sense applied to this sad situation – and by someone who is a position to matter.
    Ft. Gurtner pretty much nails it, it seems to me. Note the striking difference between his brief but clear statement and the long expostion of Dr. Peters.

    Perhaps justice is better served by clear application of justice and good judgement by those in a position to actually apply it than by a long, minutia-laden, dissertation by those – however qualified academically – who are in a position to make statements but no judgements.

    And “combox jockey” or not, I too find it a bit disturbing that Dr. Peters position with the AOD went unmentioned in his earlier comments or statements.

  22. Allan says:

    I believe Michael Voris should stay the course. If anything “must” be done, he could simply change the name to RealTV for Catholics, and cut the legs from under the wannabee some other religion folks.

  23. tcreek says:

    Why do opponents of Voris have to resort to the legalize of Canon Law? Why don’t they just charge that Voris is not entitled to use “Real Catholic” because he is preaching error?
    Easy answer. The “have to” because he ain’t.

  24. Johnno says:

    From everything we’re getting it’s pretty clear what’s going on… Don’t let all the technicalities of the whole canon law discussion fool you. Even if the AoD got it right in terms of jurisdiction, which I don’t believe they do, what’s present for all to see is that there are BAD PEOPLE working in the AoD who HATE AUTHENTIC CATHOLICISM, and are working to PERSECUTE A FAITHFUL CATHOLIC LAY ORGANIZATION and WILLFULLY IGNORE MORE GRAVE IMMORAL REBELLION ELSEWHERE. Period! All the sophistry and complicated jargon in the world won’t hide that fact.

  25. eulogos says:

    I remember that Dorothy Day always said that she would stop publishing the Catholic Worker immediately if her bishop told her to do so.

    Even though this is grossly unfair, even though Voris IS Catholic, and so many others who use the name are, well, much less so, still, I think it would be a better witness if he obeyed the bishop and just changed the name of his enterprise.

    Susan Peterson

  26. Richard W Comerford says:

    Ms. Peterson

    “I think it would be a better witness if he obeyed the bishop and just changed the name of his enterprise”

    However the Archbishop, to date, has not made any comment on this matter & his PR guy only sadi that RCTV is not authorized to use the word “Catholic”.

    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

  27. Brian K says:

    There is an interesting analysis at

    “I believe Dr. Peters has overlooked a Canon which also applies to this dispute. Canon 221 states that “[t]he Christian faithful can legitimately vindicate and defend the rights which they possess in the Church in the competent ecclesiastical forum according to the norm of law.” Canon 221 goes on to say “[i]f they are summoned to a trial by a competent authority, the Christian faithful also have the right to be judged according to the prescripts of the law applied with equity” (emphasis mine). A google search for “Catholic blog” yields almost 38 million hits. A google search for “Catholic media” yields more than 38 million hits. Undoubtedly, some of these are based in the Detroit Archdiocese. If the only Catholic blog or Catholic media organization, out of what is surely a total of thousands, that the Detroit Archdiocese seeks to prohibit from claiming the name of “Catholic” is the one belonging to Mr. Voris, can the Detroit Archdiocese claim to be applying canon law with equity?”

  28. Richard W Comerford says:

    Mr Brian K:

    “There is an interesting analysis”

    However to date Mr. Voris & Company have not been ordered by either the good Archbishop of Detroit or his employes to do anything. Indeed the good Archbishop has yet to speak. There is no Canonical or Church case yet. And, as in these matters, Rome has always (so far) sided with Orthodoxy it may be very difficult to get any Church inflicted penalties to stick with Mr. Voris & Company. The AOD should know this. So why they started this Kerfuffle is beyond me.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  29. paulbailes says:

    I recall Mr Voris has been critical of the SSPX in the past.

    Maybe this episode of experience with the tyranny of the Newchurch has helped him to understand why the SSPX is compelled to “disobey” in order to remain faithful.

  30. MrTipsNZ says:

    Um….. why is this an issue? If RealCatholicTV is a entity is registered outside Detroit, then this discussion is irrelevant because its base is in Fort Wayne-South Bend. In terms of secular and canon law, that is the jurisdiction it falls under.

    Michael Voris runs St Michael’s Media from Detroit – that’s an entirely different issue it would appear.

    I’m in New Zealand and its obvious from this far.

  31. New Sister says:

    LifesiteNews seems to ascribe the AOD effort to silence M. Voris as a “Catholic” largely to the latter’s criticism of Church leadership. I have wonder though, given that we’ve just entered an election year, if it’s not M. Voris’ criticism of Obama that is driving their effort…. Saint John the Baptist, OPN.

  32. vox borealis says:

    But of course the issue is not so obvious. By analogy, let’s say that a doctor sets up a business in Pennsylvania—that is where the business is based, where the headquarters are, and where he is licensed, etc.—but then he travels to New York and practices medicine there out of his car. NY State clearly has jurisdiction over his practice of medicine within the state, regardless of the fact his business is based in another state. Further, his licensing in Pennsylvania has no validity in NYS. It’s an imperfect analogy, as all analogies are, but it gets at the issue with Voris and RCTV. I am a fan of Voris but he does seem to be playing a bit of a shell game here. Anyway, maybe he’s right, maybe not. The case is obviously no so obvious as many make it out to be.

  33. Supertradmum says:

    Michael Voris is watched throughout Europe. People I know in several countries follow him. In this day and age of the Internet, any attempt to silence or change the name to something other than Catholic will make ripples elsewhere, and frankly, make the Archdiocese of Detroit look inept. The person who started all of this is, at least, very parochial and shortsighted. As to Voris, Luke 4:24 “And he said: Amen I say to you, that no prophet is accepted in his own country.” If Christ and St. John the Baptist, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, etc. were treated this way by their own people, what can we expect? Strong words always hurt somebody’s feelings, but to make a statement about the use of the word Catholic is a bit much. Whose feelings did Voris hurt in the chancery office?

  34. Supertradmum says:


    You stated,
    “I recall Mr Voris has been critical of the SSPX in the past.

    Maybe this episode of experience with the tyranny of the Newchurch has helped him to understand why the SSPX is compelled to “disobey” in order to remain faithful.”

    In matters relating to Rome, one can never disobey in order to remain faithful. That is the rhetoric of Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and thankfully, the SSPX has not gone as far as to completely break with Rome. Let us pray this will never be the case, as our souls are protected by Holy Mother Church. The excommunications have been lifted, and the ball is the court of the SSPX.

  35. wmeyer says:

    vox borealis: Dr. Dean Edell is heard giving medical advice in all 50 states, yet I am confident is not licensed to practice in all of them. Your analogy falls down because a doctor cannot practice without contact with the patient.

    Frank H: The good Dr. Peters appears to be opening the door to a free for all on many issues. If, indeed, jurisdiction is not a requirement, then the bishop of Bismarck is as free to demand the Fishwrap stop using Catholic in their name as is the ordinary of the diocese in which they are based. Not that I think it is likely, but this would seem to enable Archbishop Chaput to require Notre Dame to cease and desist on all manner of issues.

  36. vox borealis says:

    wmeyer, I guarantee that Dr. Edell used to broadcast a disclaimer at the beginning or end of the show. Regarding Dr. Peter’s statement that jurisdiction is not a requirement to comment, I think you have missed his point. He did not argue that the Archbishop of Detroit could demand that Voris stop using the name “Catholic” even if he did not have jurisdiction. Rather, he argued that the Archbishop certainly had the authority to comment on the appropriateness of Voris’ content even if he did not have jurisdiction over him. This is analogous to Archbishop Chaput (in your analogy) telling his faithful in Philadelphia that they should not read the NAtional Catholic Reporter because it does not meet the standards of a legitimate and faithful Catholic publication. He certainly does not have authority to order NCR to change its name, but that in no way limits him from commenting on the publication and admonishing his flock.

  37. anilwang says:

    Dr. Peters new argument that jurisdiction falls flat on its face.

    This is not a new issue. Catholic corporations exist and are already dealt with. We don’t have to imagine how to deal with it. Shareholders may be from around the world. Who currently determines if the corporation is Catholic? If the bishops from all shareholders have jurisdiction, then it would be impossible to trade shares in a Catholic corporation without contacting your bishop and asking if he approves of the Catholicity of the corporation. It would turn Bishops into bureaucrats. To my limited knowledge, this is not a requirement on Catholics. If Dr. Peters is correct, a single bishop in a remote village with a strong anti-capitalist prejudice could force all Catholic corporations around the world to shut down. That is madness and I have not heard of a single case of this happening. So current practice disavows both possibilities.

    So who has jurisdiction? The Vatican?

  38. vox borealis says:

    analwang, it’s clear that you do not understand what Peters argued.

  39. Colleen, priest’s wife:

    A competent lawgiver has the discretion to enforce proper norms in any situation they see fit. There is no provision in such enforcement, nor is there anyone delegated with oversight, as to how even-handed they may or may not be.

    I would suggest (and speaking strictly in general terms here, not with respect to this particular matter), that in the course of determining which organizations to “go after,” that the lawgiver (that is, the local bishop or his delegate) wants to be reasonably certain, that any decree they issue is more likely than not to be obeyed, so as not to either raise scandal, or simply make that lawgiver appear foolish. The errant theologian at a university will ignore his bishop, call a press conference, speak at conventions, gain support of a portion of the Catholic press, and/or arouse the ire of others in his field, with certain collateral effects on that bishop’s ability to accomplish this or any other objectives. On the other hand, a group of laymen operating an independent apostolate dedicated to toeing the line, will continue toeing it without question when issued a simple directive.

    That is a rather dysfunctional way of seeing things, in my opinion, but it is what may be the modus operandi of more than a few bishops.

  40. Richard W Comerford says:

    Mr. wmyer:

    Re: Jurisdiction

    Lawyer Peters, an employee of the AOD, argues essentially that the AOD has jurisdiction in this matter. He is right. If Mr. Voris is indeed teaching error on points of Catholic faith & morals then the Archbishop of Detroit not only has a right but the duty to correct Mr. Voris & in so doing guard his flock from error. And, as Mr. Voris, has a trans-Diocese appeal then every Good Shepherd has a right & duty to protect their flocks. And so far the Bishops have remained silent.

    As to the jurisdiction question regarding the word “Catholic” so far we have heard only from AOD employees and a Detroit blogger. The Archbishop has remained silent on this matter too. In the end only the Bishops count. So who cares?

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  41. Denis says:

    @supertradmom: ‘In matters relating to Rome, one can never disobey in order to remain faithful. That is the rhetoric of Luther, Zwingli, Calvin’

    Well, yes and no. Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin weren’t just disobeying Rome. They were disagreeing with ‘Rome’ on the fundamentals of the faith: the nature of the Mass, salvation, the priesthood, etc. Of course, as soon as they became creative with doctrine they also began disagreeing with each other… The SSPX is doing nothing of the sort. There are other examples of disobedience–‘orthodox’ disobedience–in the history of the Church. St. Athanasius, St. Joan of Arc are the typical examples. No, I’m not comparing either Voris or the SSPX to these saints; I’m just suggesting that there are other historical comparisons.

  42. St. Athanasius was a bishop himself — in fact, a patriarch of Alexandria. He fought the Emperor and various bishops and patriarchs, but he never fought Rome.

    St. Joan of Arc was only in the bishopric of Rouen as a prisoner, the bishop was a puppet of the English, and the whole trial was against church law in a lot of different ways. That’s why, when the Pope and the French bishops reopened the question after her death, she was exonerated. Even so, Joan went to a great deal of trouble to try to be obedient to the local church authorities during her imprisonment and trial.

  43. anilwang says:

    vox borealis, where have I misunderstood his argument?

    I’ve simply said that this is not a new issue and it has been dealt with in the past namely the Catholic Corporation (or more appropriately the Catholic Multinational Corporation). Common precedence goes against what Dr Peters states. Do you have any real examples to the contrary?

  44. PostCatholic says:

    To me, this whole thing looks like a slap fight between ill-tempered conjoined twins.

  45. Richard W Comerford says:

    Mr. PostCatholic:

    “To me, this whole thing looks like a slap fight between ill-tempered conjoined twins.”

    Sadly this is not a dispute between conjoined twins. Rather since 1899, when Pope Leo XIII warned us of the heresy he titled “Americanism”, there appear to be two separate and very different groups in the USA that call themselves “Catholic”.

    Only courageous Bishops can sort this mess out. Let us pray for them.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  46. Marcus de Alameda says:

    I second this post with an edit:
    “Fix your seminary, your Jesuit Cathylc University etc. , etc. etc, and your Call To Action new priesthood groups, and then worry about a code number for a name for a faithful apostolate whose one aim is to save souls.”

  47. Christine111 says:

    Bottom line: Michael Voris has no authority to change the name because he does not own RCTV–he is an employee of this company that is owned by Marc Brammer, who lives in another diocese. It’s like telling a journalist who works for a newspaper to change the name of the newspaper he works for; the journalist has no authority to do that.

  48. Christine,

    Gary Michael Voris owns Concept Communication LLC which is licensed to do business by the state of Michigan under the assumed name “Real Catholic TV.”

Comments are closed.