One month into the AOD-Voris/RCTV matter...

... Dr. Ed Peters, who has been following the situation closely, offers detailed comments, beginning with this introduction:


Just over a month has passed since the AOD – Voris/RCTV matter unleashed a flash flood of cyber-commentary. Much of that commentary struck me as thinly reasoned and off-point (and occasionally, ad hominem), but amid it all some reasonable questions surfaced, too. While debates attempted without agreed-upon rules or recognized referees (i.e., internet debates!), can never be 'won' or 'lost', good can nevertheless come from assisting others to think through certain issues rather than watching them simply react to them. To that end, my personal observations on this matter, now that things have calmed down a bit, follow.


Canon 216 states that "no undertaking is to claim the name Catholic without the consent of the competent ecclesiastical authority." Now, among the many reacting to the AOD statements on Voris/RCTV and Canon 216, no one, it seems, seriously questions that canon law prohibits any undertaking from assuming the name "Catholic" without prior ecclesiastical authorization, and no one, it seems, suggests that Voris/RCTV have such permission from the AOD or, apparently, from anyone else.


So what, exactly, has the flurry of commentary been about?


As far as I can tell, it's been about nearly everything except what canon law requires of the Christian faithful before claiming the name "Catholic" for their undertakings: ecclesiastical permission.


Continue reading on the "In the Light of the Law" blog.

 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on January 19, 2012 12:15
No comments have been added yet.


Carl E. Olson's Blog

Carl E. Olson
Carl E. Olson isn't a Goodreads Author (yet), but they do have a blog, so here are some recent posts imported from their feed.
Follow Carl E. Olson's blog with rss.