Wherein Fr. Z thanks Michael Sean Winters for support of all Pope Francis says

I’d like to thank Michael Sean Winters of the National Schismatic Reporter (the journal of record for all things schismatic, aka Fishwrap) for summarizing some points I made recently about the Holy Father’s remarks to a UN delegation, including his comment about “legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the State”.  HERE

For Winters, everything the Pope says is to be taken seriously (= accepted).  As MSW wrote:

Where to begin? Yes, Fr. Zuhlsdorf, many of us continue to take the Holy Father seriously on this and every topic.

I am gratified to read this from one of Fishwrap’s most prolific contributors!

I am delighted that MSW accepts and is ready to defend what Pope Francis wrote to Archbp. Marchetto:

I once told you, dear Archbishop Marchetto, and today I wish to repeat it, that I consider you to be the best interpreter of the Second Vatican Council. I know that this is a gift from God, but I also know that you made it bear fruit.

I am glad that MSW throws his considerable weight in to support, against all naysayers, what Pope Francis wrote to Card. Brandmüller, that is, His Holiness’ explicit endorsement of Benedict XVI’s “hermeneutic of continuity”:

Harking closely to the same Spirit, Holy Church in this age renews and meditates on the most abundant doctrine of the Council of Trent. In fact, the “hermeneutic of renewal” which Our Predecessor Benedict XVI explained in 2005 before the Roman Curia, refers in no way less to the Council of Trent than to the Vatican Council. To be sure, this mode of interpretation places under a brighter light a beautiful characteristic of the Church which is taught by the Lord Himself: “She is a ‘subject’ which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God” (Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Roman Curia offering them his Christmas greetings – 22 December 2005).

Far from “explaining away” what Pope Francis wrote, above, MSW will now adopt Francis’ positions as his own.  How could he do less after writing:

[I]t is precisely the fact that Pope Francis does not need a translator, that his meaning is quite clear, that it cannot be explained away, is what has the right all concerned.

Welcome aboard, MSW!


Check out Breitbart HERE.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Francis, Liberals, Lighter fare, Linking Back, Reading Francis Through Benedict and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Patrick-K says:

    That’s the same NCR that a few days ago published this:

    Pope Francis believes women religious should continue to do the work of the church while remaining obedient to the voice of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Women religious, on the other hand, believe their work and their faith demand that they remain radically obedient first and foremost to the voice of God.

    What may appear to be a conflict over feminism, culture wars and conscious evolution is, ultimately, a cosmic struggle over whose voice the sisters choose to follow.

    So when it’s Francis vs. Fox News, NCR are ultramontanes. When it’s Francis vs. liberal nuns, they’re effectively Protestants.

  2. mrshopey says:

    It is rigid thinking on their part due to blindness. They are groping in the dark and don’t realize the issues we do and can come together and collaborate on.
    The way Pope Francis presented his idea doesn’t work well in a free society. Not the extent (more taxation which is now just under 40%) is not the answer esp given to an already bloated and corrupt govt.
    The reason I stopped giving to some organizations for other countries is that the money usually goes to their govt which in turn gets stronger with the poor being worse off. I am embarrassed to say the US does that.

  3. AaronStreeting says:

    Having read MSW’s work for a long time (although I am by no means a fan), I am not certain that he would disagree with any of those statements by Pope Francis. That’s not to say he wouldn’t do his darndest to reconcile those statements with the Democratic Party platform, but I doubt he’d express disagreement with any of them (he only openly disagrees with the Pope when the Pope is urging world leaders not to bomb people). Most of his colleagues at the Reporter are another matter.

  4. Arele says:

    Wow, Winters really did call out by name Fr. Z, Bill Donohue and Breitbart in his column, complete with links!

    Does this mean that the NCR is going to follow ALL the church’s doctrines and all that the Pope says from now on? Are they going to hold themselves to the same standard of unquestioning and undiscerning obedience? Or are they going to cherry pick what works for their agenda.

    Breitbart did have an excellent comeback article. Well articulated and with the right heart.

    Kinda cool to be that famous that NCR calls you out publicly when they think they can get away with it I guess. Fr. Z, you’re in good company. And you are persecuted with Christ for the cause of truth.

    Thanks for holding and speaking to what is right and true and helping us who are trying to do the same!

  5. Jackie L says:

    If this is signaling a new spirit of obedience at the fishwrap, perhaps Winters will get onboard with Bp Helmsing and his successors, and the fishwrap will drop the word “Catholic” from its masthead. Or is Winters only obedient to the Pope…Francis that is…or at least the parts of what Francis says that he is able to misrepresent and spin to fit his own agenda.

  6. Salvelinus says:

    I posted a very honest question over there at NSR and I was instantly jumped all over and then promptly banned for life.

    I had asked the author why he continues to blend political idealism (the left or the right) with the mystical body of Christ.

    Their obsessed views on all things pelvic (divorce remarriage, contraception, homosexual this and that, abortion support, wymen priests, etc)… The Church is clear on all of this.
    Their arguments and discussions are nevet about “smarter” issues like theological or philosophical or metaphysical. Itd ALWAYS the same stufg over there and the readers and commenters appear lukewarm at best, and often more atheist and aging.
    So NCR and Mark Shea have both banned me… for literally just asking a question to ascertain general intent??
    Given the other comments on the aforementioned blogs its clear neither want discussion but rather spittle flecked political (generally earthly non Christian) web hits

Comments are closed.