that’s what I meant. What I wrote was confusing.
The Bishops released statements previously. Do we stand with those?
Now they release opposing statements ... if we stick with the original and stand with the bishops ... we oppose those Bishops if we stand with Elizondo today. He speaks for himself and that committee and his diocese. Nothing more.
Add Cardinal Kasper and bishops who agree with him to the mix, and we have even more confusion and division. Should German Catholics who want to be faithful stand with their own bishops who are pushing for sacrilegious Communion and who publish porno, or with the African bishops? Should Americans stand with Cardinal Wuerl, who removed a priest for refusing Holy Communion to a lesbian Buddhist, or should we stand with Cardinal Raymond Burke who refuses to concede to those who demand the right to sacrilegious Communion? Should we in the U.S. whose bishops operate chanceries that serve as adjuncts to the democrat party stand with the uncompromisingly pro-life African bishops or with our own, even if they undermine the sanctity of life through their words and actions?
The logical choice in this period of chaos is to "stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle" and those bishops throughout the world who teach and defend the Faith as it has always been taught.