Fish Trap

For those that don't know how a fish trap works, let me explain. (For my Alaskan readers, this post could have also been called "Crab Pot.") You have a device, a cage of sorts, that you place bait inside of. There are openings of some sort that fish can easily swim or squeeze through to obtain the bait. Other fish then see and smell/taste the bait as it is being eaten, and then they too rush in. The problem for them is that the cage is nearly impossible to get out of. The trick to the fish trap is the ease by which one enters the trap. It doesn't seem a trap, they can't easily see the cage, and there appears to be an opening to get out of on both ends. If fish had any analytical skills whatsoever, they would still more than likely enter the trap because it isn't a trap until once they are inside. In fact, some traps a fish could get out of... if there weren't so many other fish filling up the space. The trap is in fact a trap of not a single fish but instead it utilizes the system itself to entrap the targets.

Several blogs (See generally; Abbey Roads, Te Deum, A Blog for Dallas Catholics, et al.) have linked to my post regarding my thoughts on the AOD-RCTV-Voris situation: "This is NOT about Canon Law." This has garnered some interesting comments, as well as some interesting statements made to me personally. There is a lot that could be said on this topic still, but I feel like it is all a fish trap. As more of us congregate to feed off of it, the more we attract, and the further we get stuck. As Diane said at Te Deum

One thing I don't care for, whether it comes from RCTV, or Curious Catholic, is insolence. As Christians, our conduct with respect to one another is "on display" for the world to see. It may not be gravely sinful to make use of insolence, but it is far from virtuous especially when used as a normal mode of operation.

She is right. We cannot let this situation, or any such one, drag us into things that are sinful. I have tried to write my posts in a way that keep us from thinking or saying sinful things. As I have noted, and Diane states as well, the Archbishop has not made any statements himself. This leaves a lot of us wondering and questioning this situation. So while I don't want to continue to write posts on this matter, which could bring us precariously close to the edge of sin, there are a few things I have to address due to the increased traffic here related to this issue.

PR War

†

To be clear: THIS IS NOT ABOUT CANON LAW.  This has been a PR war waged by the AOD, and by AOD I do not mean to imply the Archbishop himself. This may seem like an odd nuanced position, but I believe it to be the truth. I make my case for this in my previous posts.

I feel I have been bolstered by some newly found information. My main point is that if this were a purely  Canonical issue, which is all that Diocesan Chanceries should be concerning themselves with, then it would have been handled very differently. There wouldn't be press releases, plural, about an issue that is self-admittedly quite old. I make the argument, that this was meant to be a PR battle, which would take place in the blogosphere. This was merely conjecture until I came upon my most recent discovery: the website of the Archdiocese.

These recent developments have been placed
on the page of a 2008 Press Release.

The image I have captured from the Archdiocesan website is one that I stumbled upon accidentally. What I realized is that the AOD has cross-linked all of its releases on this matter, as well as listing Dr. Peters' commentary on the matter on those releases as well. Now while this definitely makes sense from a technological standpoint it makes a statement underneath the logistical aspect of it all.

What This Means

†

I asked myself, "Why would the AOD cross-link everything and link Dr. Peters blog posts?" The answer is simple. They want anyone searching for information to have all of the press releases on this matter in one place, and easily found. This also means that they support and agree with what Dr. Peters states on his blog. To take this thought a step further, it means that the AOD not only hope for people to find this information they expect them to be searching for it. This is pretty good evidence that they expect and or want this to be something that plays out on the internet and in the blogosphere. In fact, they link blog posts of Dr. Peters below the releases themselves.

As I have stated, this is a PR disaster. Dioceses should not be in the business of PR. They should be in the business of saving souls. While they may argue that this is the business of protecting and saving souls, it seems a misguided attempt. It pains me to write these posts, and I am sure that some will assume I am 'anti-AOD', which I am not. I am very grateful for what the Archbishop has done in Detroit especially in the Pro-Life effort, the squelching of groups such as Call to Action, and the promotion and support of the Usus Antiquior. That being said, it perplexes me to no end that a good, smart, and faithful Archbishop has let his Chancery staff run amok when it comes to this issue. I just hope that the PR battle ends soon, and the matter of resolving all of this comes about quickly. 

The Dr. Peters Connection

†

Some blogs have gone so far as to make statements against Dr. Peters. The question of whom he is employed to, and what that means, has become a side discussion. I don't really think any of that matters. In fact, I have zero problem with him commenting on this issue, and glad he has. I don't blame him in any way because he is doing his job, and fulfilling his vocation as a Canonist. It would be odd and unfortunate if he didn't post about this situation. 

That being said, I do find it curious that the AOD links him after he specifically states that he doesn't work for them. Therefore that means that the AOD links to him not as an employee but instead as a blogger that they agree with. This again goes to prove my point that this is a battle the AOD desires to have played out in the Catholic blogosphere. Otherwise, if this wasn't the case, they would ask Dr. Peters to make an official statement as a Canonist, and they could then issue it as a press release or put it on their site. Instead, they take the time to link his blog posts, state that he is on the faculty of SHMS (which has a logo-link a mere inches from this statement on the AOD website) and use it as "Canon Law Commentary." They make known that this is an official legal commentary, which it certainly is, clear to any who read the releases. So either the AOD is trying to muddy the waters and make it appear that he is an AOD official, or that he is specifically not an employee but a renowned Canonist that they agree with and link to his blog knowing that this is an issue which is occurring in the blogosphere. To me, this is another affirmation that this is a PR battle, and not a purely Canonical one to which the AOD seeks a quick, just, and truthful resolution to. 

A final note on this point. I hope that I have not made any statements which have offended Dr. Peters. I believe him to be a man of integrity (exhibited by his linking of an apology of another blogger) and a man of firm fidelity to the Church. I think his words should be taken at face value, and his conection to the AOD should not be seen as anything improper. In fact, I hardly think that the connection has much of an affect on what he has written about the matter. If I have posted anything to the contrary, or if I have sullied his image to anyone, I apologize to Dr. Peters himself, and to you the reader. That was not my intention, and shows the delicacy in which we must traverse this topic. 

Who are 'They'?

†

A point of order. I say 'they' and 'AOD' quite a bit, and I can see that it could be quite confusing. I do not mean, nor do I wish to have readers assume that I mean, that included in those terms do I mean to group the Archbishop himself. Now, before you accuse me of having it both ways, let me explain. 

I know how Dioceses work. I know how organizations take orders from the top down, but those orders usually come in the form of, "Go ahead with the idea you have on subject 'X'." I think that this case is a matter of certain Chancery officials and lay employees devising a strategy against RCTV to satisfy whatever ultimate end goal have been envisioned. What I don't know is how the AOD is specifically operating at this point. I don't know how hands on the Archbishop is with this matter. What we do know is that he has not made any official statements with his own named signed to them. In other cases around the country (Phoenix, Minnesota, El Paso, New York, etc...) we have seen the Bishop himself make official statements. So for those saying that Voris, RCTV, etc... are "disobeying their Bishop" I find that quite insincere. If Archbishop Vigneron wrote a letter which stated what the releases said, and then RCTV or Voris did something contrary to any lawful directives, then I would agree. That has not happened, and therefore I think it is wrong to say that any disobedience has occurred.  

In Conclusion

†

I know these posts are long. I know for many we have reached the point of Ad Nauseum. I do think this is important however. RCTV and Voris play an important role on the internet, and within the Church. Whether you agree with their method this matter is about their content. It is about the things they are saying and what those words mean. 

As Diane states:

IMHO, the Archdiocese of Detroit has created a PR disaster. Some RCTV fans speak of the Archbishop of Detroit as if he is clueless about what is happening; others fault Archbishop Vigneron directly, questioning his orthodoxy. Thus far, Detroit's archbishop remains silent and that silence is only inviting more speculation and rash judgments in every direction.

As this situation lingers, as the Archbishop remains silent, and as the AOD staff continue to make PR missteps, this situation gets worse and worse. That means Catholics fight amongst one another, souls are placed in precarious situations, and the truth becomes hidden by snares and trickery of the devil and all his evil spirits. Dioceses need to be in the business of saving souls, not winning PR battles against bothersome apostolates that make their life more difficult. Reality is: souls have eternal consequences placed upon them, we should all make it our duty within our station in life to ensure as many as possible make it to their eternal reward.

We must pray. We must always pray. Specifically we should ask that God find a resolution to this matter that allows both sides to come out of the fray in a manner in which they are both seen as champions of the faith and as leaders of truth. We cannot let this become a fish trap of the devil. We cannot let this small matter be one that divides the faith, that wedges into the Archdiocese of Detroit, that takes two sources that people find efficacious and turn them into enemies. If the devil can convince to come to this matter and fight over it, all the while we think that it is an exercise in truth-seeking, he might just find a way to cause souls to wander from Christ. We cannot have this. This matter is not about Canon Law, and even if it was supposed to be, or started out that way, it no longer is. I implore RCTV and the AOD to come together, find an amicable solution to this matter, and carry on with their proper business of saving souls.

†††