Hmm, the bishop is in serious need of our prayers. I do not doubt he is being sincere, but he could facilitate scandal quite easily with proclamations like that. Let’s hope and pray his audience could recognize that possibility and avoid it.
One needs not get past the first paragraph to see this. His whole comments on Vatican II are puzzling and could be completely misleading. As high level statements, John Paul and Benedict have been doing exactly as he seems to wish, to enable the points of Vatican II to come forth more clearly, not less. A lot of people since the Council have been using it as an excuse to advocate for their own distinctly extra-Catholic ideas, and as Catholics we should be proud that our Pontiffs are opening the windows or more aptly, keeping them open, to dispel that kind of misdirection and confusion. The highlighted “by them” overlooks that it is the job of all to be orthodox i.e., faithful, and that the Holy Spirit guides the Magisterium to do exactly this. It is one thing to teach the Faith and to admit “this is hard to understand, even for me”. It is another to teach heterodoxy as if it were orthodoxy. How is making this “forbidden” isn’t a bad thing? It is simply truth-in-advertising! Let’s be honest, this is what the real issues are about. If it were really something pastoral, something open to prudential judgment, then it would not have been described so cataclysmically, af two competing divisions of the Church, etc.
Nothing in the rest does not suggest that, or is even ambivalent. The final appeal to Ratzinger’s quote does not reflect a good catechesis. When the quote is seen in the context that is the job of the Magisterium (“official Church”) to inform consciences, indeed that the teachings of the Magisterium are the best ways to inform one’s conscience (always in conjunction with prayer), then one sees that the quote is really not applicable to the big things he seems concerned about. Perhaps on things like, should we spend money on 20 yards of red linen? one can argue against, but the rest of the article is misleading.
Other than anything authored by John Allen, I have always assumed anything from NCRep is not reliable enough to avoid at least covert attempts to introduce heterodoxy. I admit the possibility of exceptions, but this piece is certainly not one of them. With the Allen generalization in place, I would encourage the original poster to not use NCRep as a source (unless as potential examples of how the Evil One has had seeds planted into the minds of otherwise smart and well-meaning people) at the risk of being scandalized.
Social justice was afterall a particularly large aspect of Christ’s teachings along with love and peace. NCR must be mimicking Christ’s emphasis on social justice then, Tantum. He taught us a way on how to express our love for Him in righteousness in Matt 25:35-46. Basically He said if you are attentive to the social justice issues, you serve Him and shall have eternal life. 
Those folks at NCR must be in good shape! 
Peace.