Has the 'EWTN schism' begun?

https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/distinctly-catholic/has-ewtn-schism-begun
MGB: I would not call the reactionary bishops schismatic. They are simply heirs to those at Vatican II who opposed change. At the time, their hero was Karol Woijtila, now known as St. John Paul.  While the Saint publicly supported the Council, his papacy was a counter revolutionary attempt to cop-opt it. He was only partially successful, as the election of Pope Francis shows.  The counter revolutionaries are more Anachronistic than Traditionalist.

Anachronism is not new in the Church. It has always resisted democracy, loss of authority over Academy (both Catholic and non-Catholic) and the emergence of sexual teaching from its asexual bubble, which they call modernism. They have twice published a list of errors, supporting the encyclicals Qunata Cura and Pascendi Dominici Gregis. both of which are largely incoherent. The last the more so in constructing its modernistic straw man, whose main significance was a network of informants which lasted until Vatican II.

The Council largely dismantled the tools Pius put in, but the Anachronists put them back. Francis has cast them aside and they do not like it one bit, responding pubicly against him using all tools necessary, including reactionary web sites and EWTN.

What was condemned as Americanism was the fear that American democracy would create habits of mind that would demand accommodation in applying Catholic doctrine. It was an attempt to preserve Mirari Vos, Gregory XVI's attempt to fight Garibaldi and the end of the Papal States. Gregory failed at this. At the time, there was no desire for special treatment of the American Church, however democracy was contagious, as was the respect for individual rights, leading to the Council's Dignitas Humane and its anachronistic dissenters.  The Church that had fought against evolution in Humanae Generis had surrendered to the idea that the Church should no longer claim a monopoly on truth.

The counter revolution, having lost on democracy shifted to sexuality. Modern society would have none of it and the attempts by the asexuals  in the clergy (who are, like homosexual, not disordered, but simply different) have largely been rejected by people in the pews. This counter revolution will not end with a bang, but a whimper. They will simply die off, along with the racists who support Donald Trump (as if the groups are mutually exclusive). The inevitable removal of King Donald will mark their loss of power, but they will resist to the last man in their generation, while their children will become as irrelevant as the Libertarian Party.

The Anacrhronists are right about one thing. The Church's progress in accepting reality will result in what they most fear - and end to the Medievalism in the Church. It simply cannot be governed as it is now and they know if they do not nip progress at the bud, the hierarchy will lose its worldly powers and comforts. They are not wrong about that. However, like the humiliation of Piux IX, the loss of such power will improve the moral authority of the Church, which will renew itself as it always has.