Real Catholic Tv's Statement

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Roamin_Catholic' timestamp='1326484024' post='2368432']
Newsflash! Still a law unless something has overturned it.
[/quote]

And the application of the law is still unjust unless it is being applied equally.

Edited January 13, 2012 by KnightofChrist

[Roamin Catholic]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1326484160' post='2368433']
And the application of the law is still unjust unless it is being applied equally.
[/quote]

But it is still a law, and not following it is illegal.

[dominicansoul]

I believe that rep is wrong. the Roman Catholic Women-priests (note the word Catholic in their name) were not only reprimanded in 2008 but excomunicated... unless we've entered a time-warp, that was only 4 years ago??



i guess my point was, whether you are liberal or radical trad or a balanced Catholic with no leanings to the left or right, disobedience is disobedience... and no one really has an advantage when it comes to sin, do they?

Edited January 13, 2012 by dominicansoul

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Roamin_Catholic' timestamp='1326484270' post='2368435']
But it is still a law, and not following it is illegal.
[/quote]
So.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1326484778' post='2368441']
I believe that rep is wrong. the Roman Catholic Women-priests (note the word Catholic in their name) were not only reprimanded in 2008 but excomunicated... unless we've entered a time-warp, that was only 4 years ago??



i guess my point was, whether you are liberal or radical trad or a balanced Catholic with no leanings to the left or right, disobedience is disobedience... and no one really has an advantage when it comes to sin, do they?
[/quote]
Disobedience can be a virtue and a solemn duty. Tyranny is possible because of people who blindly submit to authority.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1326484933' post='2368445']
Disobedience can be a virtue and a solemn duty. Tyranny is possible because of people who blindly submit to authority.
[/quote]

yeah, that's what the women priests said, too...

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1326485163' post='2368451']
yeah, that's what the women priests said, too...
[/quote]
Right about something then.

[Papist]

[size=4][quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1326441002' post='2368257']
The law still isn't being applied fairly. Because there other groups, a great many likely, that use the name "Catholic" that actually dissent from the Faith who have not been asked to remove "Catholic" from their name. Remember RealCatholicTV is the ONLY group known in the last 20yrs in which this law has been applied by the AoD.

And note to those that would continue to attack the character of Michael Voris that Voris/RealCatholicTV/SaintMichaelsMedia produced a three part DVD series entitled “"Where Did The Bible Come From?” which was all fully endorsed by then Archbishop Raymond L. Burke of St. Louis. Strange that a man who is apparently a disobedient, arrogant, smug, holier than thou, Pharisee would get such an endorsement from such a loyal and faithful Archbishop.

Again, as for whether or not RealCatholicTV and it's members are disobedient or other personal judgement calls on their character being freely made here is for me a matter for the Ecclesiastical Courts and Canon Lawyers. Because there seems to be confusion on which Bishop has authority and it does not appear the law is being fairly applied.

Back to sleep. God Bless.
[/quote][/size]

[size=4]Seriously? There are many bishops cracking down. For example, [/size][left]Bishop Robert J. McManus's, of the Diocese of[/left]
[left][color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Worcester, [/font][/color]outspokenness[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][color=#000000] of Holy Cross?[/color][/font][/left]

[left][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][color=#000000]Just b/c you personally do not have knowledge of the bishop cracking his whip on a liberal group is not proof he is not. And just b/c some group is not stopping what they are doing doesn't mean that the bishop is 'allowing' it.[/color][/font][/left]

Edited January 13, 2012 by Papist

[MithLuin]

[b]K of C[/b]'s claim that the [i]current Archbishop of Detroit[/i] has not invoked this part of canon law in the past is based on a statement from someone who works for the Archbishop in that LifeSite article that states he cannot recall another time when the archbishop requested that someone stop using the name Catholic.

That doesn't mean he never has, it merely means he has rarely or not in this person's memory. The employee was very careful to say that he could not be sure it had never been done in the past 20 years, he simply couldn't think of another instance off the top of his head.

It is of course not my job to figure out when and under what circumstances the Archbishop of Detroit should call out a group for failing to request permission to use the name 'Catholic'. But as I have stated before on this issue, it is [i]not[/i] a matter of heresy or unfaithfulness to Rome that is meant to be the trigger. It is [i]independence[/i] - which a lay group with no ties to a parish or religious order would, naturally, have. It is lack of priests on the board of directors. Etc. If no one but yourself can vouch for your catholicity, then the bishop is very much unlikely to grant permission. If a group did not seek permission in the first place, then the bishop can call them on it.

A Catholic college is not going to be asked to withdraw the name 'Catholic' because the permission was sought and granted back in the day when the college was founded. A group which is suffering from excommunication is hardly going to get a tap on the shoulder and 'oh, and by the way...please change your name, too.' If a bishop thinks a group is not behaving in an appropriate manner, then a disciplinary reprimand can be issued. This request to change the name need not be viewed in that way - there is no accompanying statement saying that Voris or his group is behaving in a way that is not consistent with being Catholic.

Bishops do this to lay Catholic groups in good standing...and once they comply and change the name, [i]they remain lay Catholic groups in good standing.[/i] This is *not* something to go down in flames over. This is *not* a gag order from the bishop. Yes, it is possible his bishop doesn't like him. One could view this request for a name change as persecution. But, at the end of the day....it is *only* a request to change the name, and does not carry any condemnation with it.

One could view the situation as a test. If one wanted to find out if a group were legit or phishy, one could issue this request and see what happens. I hope that Voris is able to work out things with a canon lawyer so that, in the eyes of the bishop, he can still be viewed as someone who reps the pope. But I think the ball is in Voris' court, now.



[b]K of C[/b], life is not fair. Sometimes, you get in trouble for something that 'everyone else' gets away with. Telling the officer or the judge that all the other drivers were also speeding is not going to get you off the hook for paying your traffic ticket. If you broke the rule, you have to face the consequences. You can argue that the rule is not valid, or that you had a really good reason for breaking it, or even that you should be given a second chance and shown mercy. But to acknowledge that the rule is a perfectly valid rule (this is canon law we're talking about) and then turn around and say 'But they *never* enforce it!' as an excuse for breaking the rule is a childish response. Is unequal enforcement unjust? Sure. But the solution to that is to enforce it more frequently and consistently, not to let the current person off the hook. [As you'll note in my continuation of the analogy, I *did* say the principal would be likely to instruct the teacher to be more consistent in enforcing the rules. But the kid still serves detention.]

You seem to think this incident with the archbishop is meant to be a punishment. It is not. This part of canon law is meant to protect the integrity of the name 'Catholic' and to prevent the faithful from being fooled by a rogue group. Any faithful Catholic who wishes to call his or her enterprise 'Catholic' must request the bishop's permission so that the bishop is aware of what is going on in his diocese. Requests are not always granted, and are much less likely to be granted to a group that is not strongly affiliated with the diocese directly, a parish in particular, or a religious order that has permission to operate in the diocese. A lay group such as the Knights of Columbus would also be fine, as the bishop knows who they are and what they're about. A 'start up' group, though, will likely have to go through a trial period before being granted permission to use the name Catholic. As an instance of when you can use the name, Renew International developed an adult catechesis program for parishes called 'Why Catholic?' which was a study guide for discussion groups based on the Catechism. This parish program is used when the bishop approves of its use in his diocese, and tends to be done in a concerted way (meaning, the parishes all do it at the same time). Since the bishop approves the program, it's okay to call it 'Why [b]Catholic[/b]?'

Thus, Voris qualifies [i]exactly[/i] as the type of person who would be asked not to use the name 'Catholic'. It's not a matter of questioning his orthodoxy - the archbishop has not done that (to my knowledge).



I agree with [b]LD[/b] that blind assent in all things turns quickly into 'I was only following orders.' If one has taken a vow of obedience to one's bishop (ie, all diocesan priests and deacons), then one had best consider *very carefully* before choosing to dissent. If one is a layman, it becomes a matter of conscience, not a vow. But again...disobeying legitimate authority should never be done lightly or for a frivolous reason.

Humility is best, so if it has to be done, at least one's disobedience does not spring from stubborn pride.

Edited January 14, 2012 by MithLuin

[tinytherese]

Let's please spend more time praying for the situation instead of arguing about it.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1326474278' post='2368368']



[img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png[/img]

[/quote]

I was just going to post the EXACT same cartoon, but you beat me to it!!!!

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1326484933' post='2368445']
Disobedience can be a virtue and a solemn duty. Tyranny is possible because of people who blindly submit to authority.
[/quote]

how do you reconcile this with the Christian call to obedience? How do you know when authority is unequivocally wrong vs, your ego being too big?

I think in this case, even if Voris is truly right, and is being unjustly attacked, this is not a battle worth fighting for him. Really, all he needs to do is change his name, not his message or his style. He's playing the martyr.

I personally think if your conscience comes in conflict with authority, then by all means follow your conscience, but not in the loudest, most disruptive manner possible. I don't see how changing his name to remove "Catholic" will pave the way for tyranny. Hence a battle not worth engaging in.

[Papist]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1326484933' post='2368445']
Disobedience can be a virtue and a solemn duty. Tyranny is possible because of people who blindly submit to authority.
[/quote]

Sounds like my children.

[FutureCarmeliteClaire]

[quote name='tinytherese' timestamp='1326584109' post='2369158']
Let's please spend more time praying for the situation instead of arguing about it.
[/quote]
I'm seconding this, that's why I got off this thread.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1326632749' post='2369482']
how do you reconcile this with the Christian call to obedience? How do you know when authority is unequivocally wrong vs, your ego being too big?

I think in this case, even if Voris is truly right, and is being unjustly attacked, this is not a battle worth fighting for him. Really, all he needs to do is change his name, not his message or his style. He's playing the martyr.

I personally think if your conscience comes in conflict with authority, then by all means follow your conscience, but not in the loudest, most disruptive manner possible. I don't see how changing his name to remove "Catholic" will pave the way for tyranny. Hence a battle not worth engaging in.
[/quote]
I don't accept a call to obedience that entails fideism in doctrine or the surrender of conscience in matters of conduct. Catholicism, as I understand it, involves neither of these things. (To the second question, I am sure you realize that there is no mechanical formula for discernment of this kind. That's an even worse rabbit hole discussion.) I don't claim to know jack about the Voris situation. The fact that I'm against blind obedience to authority (from the shackles of religious fundamentalism and cults to the "banality of evil" and all that croutons), and that people who value this kind of authoritarianism make my skin crawl, is just opinion sharing time - not an argument for or against Voris. I had communicated where I'm coming from a few pages back. Anyway, what I was rejecting with the above comment was domsoul's apparent attitude about the alleged sin of disobedience. My view is that blind submission to authority is dubious. I hardly consider this to be a controversial claim. This simple fact doesn't mean that women priest activists are correct or that Voris is correct; it means that I reject the apparent premises of post number 108.