Real Catholic Communication: Voris vs. AoD

There’s lots of talk about the tension between the Archdiocese of Detroit and RealCatholicTV, but there seems to me to be a singular lack of communication.

For one thing, the AoD has released several statements (one in 2008, one on December 15, 2011, and one on January 3, 2012), all of which use similar phraseology with regard to RCTV:

“…is not authorized to use the name ‘Catholic’…”

“does not have the authorization required under Church law to  identify or promote itself as Catholic”

“does not regard them as authorized to use the word Catholic..”

I like things to be laid out clearly. I’m not always good at doing that myself, of course; and sometimes I’m too good at it, which is generally called “lacking in tact” or being “uncharitable”. Some think it’s “calling a spade a spade”. But I digress.

In none of its “communications” does the AoD say that RCTV has been asked to stop using the name “Catholic”. And yet, that is what we read everywhere! Even LifeSiteNews, which has given excellent coverage to the situation, uses the phrase “drop the ‘Catholic’ name”:  

Archdiocese of Detroit asks Michael Voris to stop using the name ‘Catholic’

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

Comments on blogs indicate that many people believe that Voris and company should “be obedient” to the Archbishop. Well…what is the command which they must obey? Where’s the letter to RCTV spelling out the directive? Where’s the communication?

Sorry, but to me there is a difference between these two statements:

“RCTV is not authorized by the AoD to use the name ‘Catholic’”

“The AoD has asked RCTV to stop using the name ‘Catholic’”

That second statement has not been issued by the AoD, as far as I can tell.

In my opinion, the vague “not authorized” statements simply allow posturing by the AoD: they allow and encourage the faithful to form a negative opinion about RCTV; they allow the media to suggest that RCTV is ignoring a direct order from the AoD; and they allow the question of motivation to be dodged.

The phrase “is not authorized” begs the question “by whom?” By the archbishop? Why isn’t he communicating? According to the first LifeSiteNews story on this topic,

Voris says that communication was only one way – directives from the Archdiocese and refusal to meet with Voris or Brammer to discuss the matter.  Voris told LifeSiteNews that he has requested a meeting with Archdiocesan officials seven times to discuss the matter, but each time he has been ignored or rebuffed.

Real Catholic communication from the AoD? I think not.

Of course, the question we all really want answered is, “Why?” That question has not been addressed by the AoD (although most of us think we know the answer!) The AoD issued its January 3 statement because it had received so many inquiries about the situation – and yet the January statement says little more than the December one. The January 9^th LifeSiteNews story notes that (my emphasis):

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’.

Real Catholic communication from the AoD spokesman?…NOT.

Dr. Ed Peters has weighed in on the side of the AoD as having “jurisdiction”, and he seems to have some good points. Interestingly, though, he consistently addresses the question using the phrase “authorization to use the name ‘Catholic’”. He says:

I can add, though, that the “lack of jurisdiction” claim implies that the AOD needed “jurisdiction” to state that it “does not regard [Voris/RCTV] as being authorized to use the word ‘Catholic’ to identify or promote their public activities (Dec 2011)” …

Since when, I ask, does the AOD need “jurisdiction” to reply to inquiries made to it by third-parties regarding Voris/RCTV or to anticipate the need to respond to more such inquiries in the future?

Good point, I think, about the AoD’s right to say that it has not authorized the use of the name “Catholic” by RCTV, especially if someone calls the office and says “Does the AoD recognized this as a Catholic enterprise?” or some such question.

But is that the same as saying the AoD has the right to ask that RCTV change its name (and has the AoD in fact done that)? Maybe I’m missing something, but I’ll say it one more time: I don’t see how “not authorized” necessarily translates as “must stop using”.

I just want people to be clear in what they are saying.

Clear, honest, meaningful communication. Is that too much to ask from…dare I say it...Catholics?

Oh, and by the way, here’s the response presented on The Vortex by Michael Voris on behalf of St. Michael’s Media and RCTV. I think it’s pretty clear.

Other posts on this issue: 

What's Not Catholic About Michael Voris?

Who Cares About Canon Law?

What's Not Catholic About Michael Voris?

I think we all know that, while the Archdiocese of Detroit is saying that RealCatholicTV cannot use the name “Catholic”, they are directing their criticism at Michael Voris. (The ins and outs of the canonical situation are out there; you can google it, or go to this one, which is very good, especially if you read all the comments.)

But…what’s NOT Catholic about Michael Voris?

I’ve seen some negative comments on various blog posts about Voris, but haven’t seen any substantive criticisms. Push come to shove, it’s just darn hard to say that the guy is not speaking Catholic truths.

Catholic Culture, though, does offer a review of RealCatholicTV, with some criticisms that they back up with a few examples. You can read their full review at the link, but the main thrust seems to be that the programs are too critical of the Church and of Church leaders, and purport to present “the real Catholic” position on various issues. “Thus, those who disagree find their Catholicism put in question”.

Well, no one denies that Michael Voris – especially in “The Vortex” episodes – is often “in your face”.  But few can deny (and keep a straight face while doing so) that he is right. You simply find very, very few critiques saying he is wrong – and giving evidence thereof – about what he preaches and teaches. 

Basically, I think, it comes down to the fact that Michael Voris’s style offends some people. And his content offends others. Michael Voris holds up the “ugly mirror”, to use a term of my new bloggy friend, Wendi. She says, “Ugly mirror is a term my husband came up with to describe the act of convicting someone about their actions.  It's harder to rationalize sin when someone holds a mirror in front of you and you can see it reflecting back at you.”

Indeed. And when that mirror is held up on “The Vortex” or other RCTV programming, people do notice…whether they consider themselves “liberal” Catholics, or “orthodox”, or “traditional”. There’s always room for progress toward holiness.

Michael Voris says it best himself, in this “Vortex” episode, which was released last April to respond to the Scranton, PA situation, when a Voris conference had to be moved to a secular site from the “Catholic” college site where the talks had been originally scheduled. Be sure to watch all the way through – the most cogent remarks are in the last two minutes.

 Regarding the general issue of orthodox priests and laity alike being treated like criminals, “Tantamergo” sums it up nicely in this excerpt from his blog (my emphasis):

Why are the orthodox often given rough treatment, if not outright dismissed/ignored?  So many faithful Catholics are outraged or severely disappointed by so many actions taken by ordinaries, from allowing heterodox, apostate “catholycs” to be employed and corrupt the minds of Catholics at local universities, to allowing Sr. Militant New Age Lesbian Feminist to lead a parish retreat.  We’re not blind.  We’re not stupid (well, we are, in a way, more later).  We see what goes on.  Many are outraged.  Why are we having to do what is in actuality their job?  Why are the bishops often attacking (or ignoring, or blacklisting, or…..) those faithful Catholics, who, in the words of Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand, should be their very pride and joy?

We are sort of suckers, though.  Many of us keep going back to that parish with the new age nun DRE, or the heterodox vicar, or whatever.  Most of all, we keep sending in the checks.  If you want to see change in your local church, wherever it may be, MOVE.  Stop going to or supporting in any way heterodox parishes. Most of all, stop giving them your money.  Find an orthodox parish and go there.  It’s infinitely more important for you to go to a faithful parish than it is to “be loyal” to your neighborhood/town parish.  The latter is a fool’s game.  And, no, we don’t go to Mass or to a parish to “witness” to others- we go there to get holy and get saved.  It is the job of the priest to lead us in sanctification.

If you want change, stop going to the bad parishes.  If the whole diocese is bad, pick out the least worst one you can find and assist at Mass there, but send your money to an orthodox religious order like the Benedictines of Norcia or our good Carmelites here locally.  Stop sending money.  Attendance is one thing, but if you want to see change, stop sending in money – make sure you let them know why. 

I couldn't have said it any better! Go there and read the rest of the post, and the comments.(And Michael Voris made some of the same remarks on a recent “Vortex” episode, which I discussed here.)

Pray. Fast. Fight the good fight.