I wrote the Vatican Secretariat of State to ask why Michael Voris had to change the name of his station to ChurchMilitant TV from Real Catholic TV. I received a letter back informing me that “Mr. Voris does not speak for the Catholic Church and his opinions are only his own.” I am gravely disappointed as I had been led to think by you and others that he was defending the faith and find that I cannot trust him or you to tell me the truth. The Vatican Monsignor wrote that “faithful Catholics take their teaching from their bishops and those who are delegated to speak for the Church.” Now I don’t know who to believe, but it certainly isn’t you or Mr. Voris.
"Does not speak for the Catholic Church" simply means that Voris and many of us are not OFFICIAL (that is, designated by the Church) spokespersons for the Church. Have you ever (I hope) spoken up for the Church? Well, you don't speak for the official Church, either - that's not an insult, it just speaks of a formal relationship.If you want to use our "unofficial" status with the Church as an excuse not to consider what is said, that's your decision. But I challenge you to take what we've said, compare it with your copy of the Catholic Catechism and see what may be "off". You might find us more in line with the Magisterium than, say, Catholic Campaign for Human Development. Have you written to Secretariat about them?? After all, they bear the "Catholic" designation even though they've funneled millions to organizations completely at odds with the Magisterium.
I have watched Michael Voris faithfully for three years now and I will tell you where he differs from The Catechism of the Catholic Church.1. His negative assessment of the “New Mass”—the reforms of the Liturgy under Paul VI2. His comments about other Christian denominations and non-Christian religions, Judaism and Islam in particular3. His ideas on monarchy and limiting democratic participation to faithful Catholics 4. His dismissal of legitimate concerns for responsible stewardship of the environment. Moreover his open contempt and disdain for certain bishops who are in full communion with the Holy See undermines the authority of the episcopacy and that, in turn, undermines the au-thority of the Holy Father. I can well understand why he is not allowed to use the word “Catholic” in his programming and why so many dioceses do not allow him to be invited as a speaker.
Anonymous, in addition to the points made by Mary Ann, I think we may differ on what constitutes "responsible stewardship" of the environment. Please have your smelling salts handy as I utter this sentence - "Catholic Climate Change" is NOT "responsible stewardship". It's all about social engineering and "population control". Moreover, the dioceses that don't allow him are quite likely operating out of guilty consciences.Your attempts to discredit Voris and his very real voice for Catholicism have fallen flat on their faces. Nice try, though!
Goodness, Anonymous, I wonder what you think of St. Catherine of Siena who scolded the pope and instructed him to return to Rome from Avignon. Was she showing "disdain" for the pope? Was St. Thomas Aquinas an apostate for defending the right of the laity to confront a cleric in public for serious scandal? Bishop Bruskewitz, former bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska, talked about the Tridentine Mass offering a corrective to some of the abuses in the Novus Ordo. Was he out of communion with the Holy See? And tell me, are there no bishops who deserve criticism? Have you forgotten the English bench of bishops who went along with Henry VIII when he declared himself head of the Church? Who was right, them or Bishop John Fisher and Thomas More? Was Bishop Bruskewitz showing contemp and disdain for certain bishops at the Dallas meeting when he spoke to the laity and described "this pitiful bench of bishops?"I don't agree with everything Mike Voris says, but what you accuse him of in your finger-pointing style (hiding behind anonymity) are matters of prudential judgment, not intrinsic evils or violations of Church teachings. He has a right to prefer the Tridentine Mass. I have never heard him deny the validity of the Novus Ordo. You can disagree with him as he may disagree with you. But since when do you have the authority to declare him out of communion with the Church? Who made you pope?
And when did I declare him to be out of communion with the Church--this is very typical of you Mrs K for a "woman of truth: you continually distort and twist what people say. When Mr Voris is canonized I will compare him to Saint Catherine of Siena--I won't wait until he is made a doctor of the Church--but until then I am no longer trustful of his interpretation of the faith. I stand by what I wrote that his criticisms of the Liturgy, of Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue and other religions, of Dignitatis Humanae and other Conciliar Decrees makes him out of step with the magisterium
You accused Voris of "undermining the authority of the episcopacy and the Holy Father". Perhaps that's how she got that idea. I notice that you did not address the specific points that she rose in speaking of Bishop Bruskewitz et al. And again, much of your objection to Voris has to do with prudential judgment. Say it how ever often you wish, his criticisms do not place him "out of step with the magisterium".
Please be respectful and courteous to others on this blog. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate courtesy and/or those that promote dissent from the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.