MIKE LEWIS AT “WHERE PETER IS” AKA, “WHERE POPE FRANCIS WAS” IS REALLY, REALLY CONFUSED AS IS MASSIMO FAGGIOLI WHOM HE QUOTES

😂😢

 You can read Mike Lewis’ hilarious full commentary HERE. The following is just but one joke:

The alternate magisterium

This is the problem we founded Where Peter Is to address. As I wrote in 2022, our original concern was not primarily the Latin Mass or the SSPX. It was the transformation of mainstream conservative Catholicism following the release of Amoris Laetitia. The dubia, the attacks on Francis’s teaching on the death penalty, the resistance to Fiducia Supplicans, and the constant denunciations of synodality gradually created an alternate magisterium and effectively rendered the primacy of the successor of Peter as worthless. Catholics who had once defined orthodoxy as fidelity to John Paul II and Benedict XVI learned to treat open resistance to Francis as normal.

Mike Lewis has a very long, long, and very wrong, wrong commentary on traditional Catholics where he denigrates the synodal process of listening, especially to Cardinals Mueller and Burke and others who have a right to speak and with authority even if it questions some aspects of certain papacies. 

We saw that in plain daylight during the Vatican synodal meetings that not only were certain popes criticized but even the Deposit of Faith and Morals. 

The paragraph above shows Mike Lewis is quite wet behind the ears and with extreme naive youthfulness—he’s really a know nothing, to say the least.

Prior to Pope Francis, and beginning in 1968 with St. Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae, cardinals, other bishops, clergy and religious have questioned not only that but most other defined teachings of the Church to include obedience to the pope. The mantra was if you disagree with the pope follow your conscience and be an individual. 

Disobedience to the Pope was put on steroids with the election of St. Pope John Paul II and later Pope Benedict. There was real hatred for them both from the heterodox left. Most will remember the Sister of Mercy and many other religous at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington when John Paul II visited there standing throughout his talk in protest of his magisterium and refusal to ordain women to Holy Orders.

Today, the greatest disobedience isn’t from those who question so many confusing and polarizing teachings of Pope Francis, like in Fiducia Supplicans and Amoris Laetitia, but those who reject outright Humanae Vitae, the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church that is clear that women can’t be ordained to Holy Orders, marriage can’t be redefined according the the LGBTQ+++ ideolgies in the Church and that any and all kinds of sexual relationships can be lived in God’s grace without repentance.

The Mike Lewis commentary would be a laughing stock if not so sad. 

Sadly, Mike Lewis doesn’t know how to use AI technology on the internet to fill in the gaps of his complete ignorance on post-Vatican II questioning of popes, especially St. Pope Paul VI.

So I provide an AI summary for Mike Lewis:

When Pope Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae in 1968, it prompted unprecedented and open dissent from several cardinals and bishops. Rather than an outright rejection of the pope, many of the hierarchy protested by expressing extreme discomfort, urging tolerance for dissenters, or issuing statements that allowed Catholics to follow their consciences. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

The most notable figures and episcopal bodies involved in the protest included:

Cardinal Leo Jozef Suenens (Belgium): One of the most vocal critics among the hierarchy. He publicly questioned the encyclical and urged the pope to reconsider his position. [1, 2, 3, 4]
The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops: In September 1968, the Canadian bishops issued the famous Winnipeg Statement. While acknowledging the teaching, the bishops included a paragraph asserting that couples who sincerely tried but failed to follow the papal directives could still receive the sacraments in good conscience. [1, 2]
The Austrian Bishops' Conference: The Austrian bishops issued a declaration emphasizing the primacy of individual conscience, noting that Catholics could disagree with the document because it was not an infallible teaching. [, 2]
The Dutch Hierarchy (Netherlands): The Dutch bishops were among the most liberal in their response, openly criticizing the encyclical and defending the right of Catholics to follow their own formed consciences on the matter of birth control. [1, 2]
The French and Scandinavian Bishops: Several national conferences released pastoral letters that were seen as "minimalist," heavily softening the blow of the encyclical by focusing on the rights of conscience and pastoral leniency rather than enforcing the ban on contraception. [1, 2, 3]
Cardinal Patrick O'Boyle (Washington, D.C.): Interestingly, he was on the opposite end, acting as a strict enforcer of the encyclical. When 19 priests in his archdiocese publicly dissented from Humanae Vitae, Cardinal O'Boyle suspended them—a decision that was later contested by the Vatican. [1]
And this challenge from Sister Kane to JPII in 1979:
Sister Theresa Kane, a Sister of Mercy, famously challenged Pope John Paul II in 1979 during his visit to the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., advocating for the inclusion of women in all church ministries.
Sister Theresa Kane's Challenge to the Pope
Sister Theresa Kane's bold address marked a significant moment in church history.
• Historical Context — On October 7, 1979, Sister Kane welcomed Pope John Paul II and urged him to allow women to serve in all church roles.
• Public Reaction — Her remarks received both praise and criticism, with some viewing her challenge as impertinent.
• Legacy — Kane's advocacy for women's ordination has inspired many within the Catholic community to continue pushing for gender equality.
• Role in the Church — As a prominent member of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, she represented a progressive voice within the Catholic Church.