Unity Or Not?

It was the JungleWatch Nation who invited Bishop Athanasius Schneider to Guam as a guest speaker.  According to Andrew Camacho of CCOG:

Andrew CamachoJanuary 13, 2020 at 12:05 PM  An enormous THANK YOU to Lou Klitzkie who had the idea of inviting Bishop Schneider to Guam more than two years ago. Lou has worked tirelessly to make this visit become a reality. May God bless Lou and everyone who works for the good of His Church.

The good of the Church is to bring healing and unity to Guam's Catholics. In fact, Archbishop Byrnes expressed this many times.  According to news report:

"One of the things the Holy Father (Pope Francis) invited me to focus on is healing."

Byrnes, from Detroit, said his job was to act as "a bridge, to reunite and solidify the unity of the Catholic community".

To bring about unity and healing, Archbishop Byrnes instructed the NCW to celebrate the Eucharist inside the church building and to consume the Body of Christ immediately.  The NCW followed this change. However, Bishop Schneider, who was invited by CCOG, is well-known to be highly critical of both Pope Francis and the Neocatechumenal Way (See the articles here and here).  Bishop Schneider is entitled to his misinformed and false opinions of the NCW.  After all, I believe in freedom of expression.  However, one must ask himself/herself....is the jungle truly seeking healing and unity?  What was their true intention of inviting Bishop Schneider more than two years ago?  

Ironically, Bishop Schneider along with other like-minded bishops mentioned in his criticism of Pope Francis, saying: 

One must keep in mind the fact that the Apostle Paul publicly reproached the first Pope at Antioch in a matter of a lesser gravity, compared to the errors which in our days are spread in the life of the Church. St. Paul publicly admonished the first Pope because of his hypocritical behavior and of the consequent danger of questioning the truth that says that the prescriptions of the Mosaic law are no longer binding for Christians. How would the Apostle Paul react today, if he would read the sentence of the Abu Dhabi document which says that God wants in his wisdom equally the diversity of sexes, nations and religions (among which there are religions which practice idolatry and blaspheme Jesus Christ)!   

First of all, the statement in the document has been twisted.  The document never said "God wants, in his wisdom equally the diversity of sexes, nations, and religions,"  That is only what Bishop Schneider and other bishops claimed the document stated in their criticism of the pope. The document quoted in news report stated (the bold is mine):   

The bishop told LifeSiteNews that he had a direct exchange with Pope Francis on a declaration signed last month by the Pope and the Grand Imam of Abu Dhabi. The document states that the “pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings”.

So, the document never said that God wanted the diversity of religions.  It stated that the diversity of religions (along with color, sex, race, and language) was willed by God. In fact, the words "willed by God" was even in the document. This means that different religions exist with the permissive will of God.  There is no error in this statement.  After all, God even allowed bad things to happen.

Finally, the criticism also stated: "St. Paul publicly admonished the first Pope because of his hypocritical behavior and of the consequent danger of questioning the truth that says that the prescriptions of the Mosaic law are no longer binding for Christians.  How would the Apostle Paul react today...." 

Many Protestants use this biblical scripture of St. Paul rebuking St. Peter (the first Pope) as evidence that Catholics should rebuke our pope for any hypocritical behavior or perceived errors in Catholic teaching.  What these Protestants (and now bishops) do not realize was that St. Paul copied the same "hypocritical behavior".  

After James and his friends came in, Peter removed himself from sitting with the Gentile converts and sat with the Jews in order to avoid conflict with the Jews.  The other disciples followed Peter.  However, St. Paul rebuked Peter for this behavior.  Later, St. Paul copied the same behavior in order to also avoid conflict with the Jews.  

Acts 3:16  Paul wanted to have him go on with him. And he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in that region, for they all knew that his father was Greek.

Lo and behold!  The Apostle Paul was the one who preached that circumcision, which was a Mosaic law, was not necessary; yet, he had Timothy circumcised to AVOID conflict with the Jews who lived in that region.  This was the same reason St. Peter removed himself from the Gentile converts and sat with the Jews......to AVOID conflict.

The lesson learned from this scripture is NOT that one should rebuke or criticize the Pope. The lesson learned is that conflicts need to be resolved rather than avoided. The Council of Jerusalem settled the conflict. Continuing to avoid a conflict does not solve anything.  By choosing a side, the Council of Jerusalem resolved the conflict.  And now today, there comes a time when one needs to decide where to stand.  Should one side with the persecutors or with the persecuted?    

So, is the jungle really looking for the good of the Church?  Are the bishops who call out for the resignation of Pope Francis also looking for the good of the church?  Like Pope Francis, I believe constructive criticism can be useful, but there are also criticisms whose only goal is to mislead and destroy.  According to Pope Francis in a news report:

Criticism, he insisted, can be a constructive tool.  When a person issue a criticism that isn't fair, the pope said, he or she should be ready for a response and to dialogue about it. 

On the other hand, Francis said, a critic who cloaks his or her objections behind a facade is "an arsenic pill, a bit like throwing a stone and hiding our hand.  This doesn't help, and it comes from closed [minded] people who don't want to hear the answer." 

Recently, the NCW had brought families together through the festivities of the Three Magis.  Does this bring healing and unity?  Of course it does.  All Catholics came to enjoy the festivities regardless of whether they were walking in the NCW or not.  We celebrate together as one people of God.  So, what is the intention of the jungle for inviting a bishop who is vehemently opposed to the people of the Way? If this bishop speaks a word against the Way in their fundraising event, would that bring healing and unity?