Is Father Rosica saying that the Catholic Church should become Protestant?

Following last year's Synod and Kasper's disgusting comments about Africans that "they should not tell us too much what to do" lead me to think that what these men may suggest is a form of Church restructuring that would devolve matters to episcopal conferences. I was right.

Yesterday, Father Thomas J. Rosica, CSB is quoted as recorded in Zenit:

"Regarding the idea of divorced remarried Catholics being able to receive communion, he noted how some assert it would be more difficult to come up with a universal response, but instead makes sense to come up with a regional treatment. He said it may make sense to examine and perhaps treat the situation on a more local, regional, even continental level."

"Certain other issues, he shared, may also make sense to consider locally, such as polygamy."

Our disadvantage is that we do not know, because the Pope has prevented us from knowing, the daily discussions. We don't know if a bishop said this, which one said it or if this is just Rosica's interpretation of what was said. 

But let us consider for a moment exactly what it is that he has said.

The first is, that the Catholic Church could devolve into something akin to the quickly collapsing Anglican Communion with each bishops' conference, even on a "continental level," sorting out the matter of Holy Communion for the adulterists (let's call it what it is) individually. Good heavens, what is to stop each parish from deciding how it will go. This is a Congregationalist model, it is certainly not Catholic.

The second is what comes next. Is the Pope' spokesman saying that a bishop's conference could decide that "polygamy" is acceptable?

Is that what he is is saying?  Because if this is what he is saying then it is heresy. The Church cannot do this and be the Catholic Church. 

Bishop's Conferences have no authority, they are bureaucratic coordinators, that is all. Authority rests with the Pope and the Bishop in union with him. Period! 

Today's press conference did not have Father Rosica sitting beside Federico Lombardi, instead it was Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput who answering a question from an Italian reporters said:

“Diversity is always in the service of unity in the Catholic Church to be truly united. It would not be appropriate for certain bishops conferences to decide matters of doctrine and things like that because it would be counter the very notion of the Church which is always in the service of unity and faith” 

We also have now Father Paul Nicholson reporting that:

"Yesterday, during a press conference at the Holy See office, the English spokesman transmitted transmitted to the media sentiments that sounded like consensus in the Synod.  He stated that there must be an end to "exclusionary language", "in particular in regards to homosexuals and gay persons" (We discovered today, October 7th, that in fact, only one or two bishops actually mentioned homosexuality, it wasn't a broad consensus as reported)."

Father Nicholson's comment is confirmed by none other than Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput. 

"One or two people that mentioned that, it was not a dominant part of the conversation."

Father Rosica's words are not only, not Catholic, they are even heretical. But are they his words? The article certainly presents them as so. Are they the words of a bishop? Catholics have a right to know whose words these really are.

Do Father Rosica's words reflect accurately the discussion and if so, which bishop said it or are they his words and his own personal views or interpretation?

Pope Francis has a responsibility to provide clarity and he must do so now because the last time I looked, Tom Rosica was not wearing the papal tiera or the red shoes.