“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, 'You are mad; you are not like us.” ― St. Antony the Great
Showing posts with label Bishop Athanasius Schneider. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bishop Athanasius Schneider. Show all posts
Wednesday 30 May 2018
Ours is the victory
Labels:
Abortion,
Bishop Athanasius Schneider,
Ireland
Wednesday 31 January 2018
Bishop Schneider invites world’s prelates to sign Profession of Immutable Truths
Bishop Athanasius Schneider has called upon the world's bishops to sign the Profession of Immutable Truths.
Who will stand up and be counted?
Who will confront the heretics to their faces?
Who will stand up and be counted?
Who will confront the heretics to their faces?
EXCLUSIVE: Bishop Schneider invites world’s prelates to sign Profession of Immutable Truths
ROME, January 30, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – In an exclusive interview two weeks after issuing a profession of immutable truths about sacramental marriage, Bishop Athanasius Schneider is inviting his brother bishops around the world to join in raising a common voice in defense of the sanctity and the indissolubility of marriage, in the midst of a “neo-pagan society” where divorce has become “a plague.”
In conversation with LifeSiteNews on Jan. 15, 2018, the auxiliary bishop of Astana Kazakhstan said: “God decides the time, and the time will come when the Pope and the episcopacy again will proclaim, with all clarity, unambiguity and beauty, the sanctity of marriage, and of the family, and of the Eucharist.”
Read the full exclusive report at:
Labels:
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
Wednesday 3 January 2018
Is the Dictator Pope about to launch an attack on the faithful Bishops of Kazakhstan - an attack of "fake news" and a media smear campaign?
From Fra Cristoforo at Anonimi Della Cruce. It is a computer translation on which I have done a little editing.
https://anonimidellacroceblog.wordpress.com/2018/01/03/spifferi-parte-lvi-la-quiete-prima-della-tempesta-cosa-sta-preparando-bergoglio-per-i-tre-vescovi-della-correzione-ufficiale-di-fra-cristoforo/
The quiet before the storm. What Bergoglio is preparing for the three Bishops of the Official Correction "of Fra Cristoforo
https://anonimidellacroceblog.wordpress.com/2018/01/03/spifferi-parte-lvi-la-quiete-prima-della-tempesta-cosa-sta-preparando-bergoglio-per-i-tre-vescovi-della-correzione-ufficiale-di-fra-cristoforo/
The quiet before the storm. What Bergoglio is preparing for the three Bishops of the Official Correction "of Fra Cristoforo
There was no imagining it; -- all this silence on the part of the
Vatican media (and those closely related to them) on the subject of the Official Correction. In fact, Bergoglio prepares his
counterattack.
My source in the Vatican told me that last night Bergoglio
stayed in Santa Marta with several Vatican "press officers" and
various "advisers" for a meeting on how to deal with this new
"unexpected" of the Correction of the Bishops of Astana. The source
told me that the Pope was furious and went on a rampage because he can not
stand any opposition. They heard him scream: "They will regret it! They
will regret it bitterly!". Of course, he referred to the courageous
Bishops who "dared" to contradict the neo-gospel of the neo-church: Amoris Laetitia.
My source was able to catch an interesting piece of news,
which we publish so that the three Bishops and those who join them can
prepare their defense. We will also ensure that this "draft" can be
delivered to interested parties as we did with our support link.
In short, Bergoglio and his acolytes are preparing a
"contrast program". Translated means: Bergoglio will not face the
"Correctors" Bishops frontally, but has given carte blanche to its
official and unofficial "press officers" to start a "media
campaign" that denigrates the Opponents. As we know, Vatican communication
is now in the hands of the Jesuits. Classic operation by the South American
dictatorial regime. For Bergoglio, therefore, it is very simple now to unleash
journalists.
This "campaign of denigration" will serve (in
their opinion) to "discredit" those Bishops, publishing perhaps
something of their past (true or not true), or building a "news" of
sound plant, to lose their credibility.
In short, a little 'how it was done and is done in communist
regimes when you want to "eliminate" a dissident.
In the next days surely these "press officers"
will start to publish something. Maybe even Bergoglio will surely run away a
few lines.
We have a duty to defend and shield these heroic bishops.
A regime reigns in the Vatican. We know that the actions of
control of Bergoglio have become almost "obsessive". Mail, cell
phones under control, bugs around ... in the Vatican are the order of the day.
Consider that now the Holy See has established an App that
all the priests of the world can download, where every week there is already a
sermon ready for Sunday. Prepared by the Bergoglio delegates. With the themes
of Bergoglio. With the words of Bergoglio. Today, downloading this sermon is
optional. In a few months it will be warmly suggested. In a year "will be
imposed". Because all priests will be obliged to repeat, every Sunday,
only and exclusively the words of Leader Maximo.
Tuesday 2 January 2018
Bishops of Kazakhstan Issue stunning correction of Pope Francis' approval of heresy
From Gloria TV:
Pope Francis’ approval of the pastoral norms of the Buenos Aires Bishops has caused a considerable and increasing confusion among the faithful and the clergy, write three Kazakhstan Bishops.
They are Astana Archbishop Tomash Peta, Karaganda Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga and Astana Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider. Their statement is dated December 31, 2017.
It sees the pastoral norms as a means of spreading the “plague of divorce” even in the life of the Church. Legitimating a second liaison “represents a substantial alteration of the two thousand-year-old” sacramental discipline and doctrine of the Church.
The bishops quote from the Church Fathers up to recent popes who unanimous agree that a second liaison is never legitimate.
They conclude, “It is not licit to justify, approve, or legitimize either directly or indirectly divorce and a non-conjugal stable sexual relationship through the sacramental discipline of the admission of so-called ‘divorced and remarried’ to Holy Communion, in this case a discipline alien to the entire Tradition of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.”
Profession of the immutable truths
about sacramental marriage
about sacramental marriage
After the publication of the Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris laetitia" (2016) various bishops issued at local, regional, and national levels applicable norms regarding the sacramental discipline of those faithful, called "divorced and remarried," who having still a living spouse to whom they are united with a valid sacramental matrimonial bond, have nevertheless begun a stable cohabitation more uxorio with a person who is not their legitimate spouse.
The aforementioned rules provide inter alia that in individual cases the persons, called "divorced and remarried," may receive the sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion, while continuing to live habitually and intentionally more uxorio with a person who is not their legitimate spouse. These pastoral norms have received approval from various hierarchical authorities. Some of these norms have received approval even from the supreme authority of the Church.
The spread of these ecclesiastically approved pastoral norms has caused a considerable and ever increasing confusion among the faithful and the clergy, a confusion that touches the central manifestations of the life of the Church, such as sacramental marriage with the family, the domestic church, and the sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist.
According to the doctrine of the Church, only the sacramental matrimonial bond constitutes a domestic church (see Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 11). The admission of so-called "divorced and remarried" faithful to Holy Communion, which is the highest expression of the unity of Christ the Spouse with His Church, means in practice a way of approving or legitimizing divorce, and in this meaning a kind of introduction of divorce in the life of the Church.
The mentioned pastoral norms are revealed in practice and in time as a means of spreading the "plague of divorce" (an expression used by the Second Vatican Council, see Gaudium et spes, 47). It is a matter of spreading the "plague of divorce" even in the life of the Church, when the Church, instead, because of her unconditional fidelity to the doctrine of Christ, should be a bulwark and an unmistakable sign of contradiction against the plague of divorce which is every day more rampant in civil society.
The mentioned pastoral norms are revealed in practice and in time as a means of spreading the "plague of divorce" (an expression used by the Second Vatican Council, see Gaudium et spes, 47). It is a matter of spreading the "plague of divorce" even in the life of the Church, when the Church, instead, because of her unconditional fidelity to the doctrine of Christ, should be a bulwark and an unmistakable sign of contradiction against the plague of divorce which is every day more rampant in civil society.
Unequivocally and without admitting any exception Our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ solemnly reaffirmed God's will regarding the absolute prohibition of divorce. An approval or legitimation of the violation of the sacredness of the marriage bond, even indirectly through the mentioned new sacramental discipline, seriously contradicts God's express will and His commandment. This practice therefore represents a substantial alteration of the two thousand-year-old sacramental discipline of the Church. Furthermore, a substantially altered discipline will eventually lead to an alteration in the corresponding doctrine.
The constant Magisterium of the Church, beginning with the teachings of the Apostles and of all the Supreme Pontiffs, has preserved and faithfully transmitted both in the doctrine (in theory) and in the sacramental discipline (in practice) in an unequivocal way, without any shadow of doubt and always in the same sense and in the same meaning (eodem sensu eademque sententia), the crystalline teaching of Christ concerning the indissolubility of marriage.
Because of its Divinely established nature, the discipline of the sacraments must never contradict the revealed word of God and the faith of the Church in the absolute indissolubility of a ratified and consummated marriage. "The sacraments not only presuppose faith, but by words and objects they also nourish, strengthen, and express it; that is why they are called "sacraments of faith." (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, 59). "Even the supreme authority in the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in the obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1125).
The Catholic faith by its nature excludes a formal contradiction between the faith professed on the one hand and the life and practice of the sacraments on the other. In this sense we can also understand the following affirmation of the Magisterium: "This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age." (Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et Spes, 43) and "Accordingly, the concrete pedagogy of the Church must always remain linked with her doctrine and never be separated from it" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).
In view of the vital importance that the doctrine and discipline of marriage and the Eucharist constitute, the Church is obliged to speak with the same voice. The pastoral norms regarding the indissolubility of marriage must not, therefore, be contradicted between one diocese and another, between one country and another. Since the time of the Apostles, the Church has observed this principle as St. Irenaeus of Lyons testifies: "The Church, though spread throughout the world to the ends of the earth, having received the faith from the Apostles and their disciples, preserves this preaching and this faith with care and, as if she inhabits a single house, believes in the same identical way, as if she had only one soul and only one heart, and preaches the truth of the faith, teaches it and transmits it in a unanimous voice, as if she had only one mouth"(Adversus haereses, I, 10, 2). Saint Thomas Aquinas transmits to us the same perennial principle of the life of the Church: "There is one and the same faith of the ancients and the moderns, otherwise there would not be one and the same Church" (Questiones Disputatae de Veritate, q. 14, a. 12c).
The following warning from Pope John Paul II remains current and valid: "The confusion, created in the conscience of many faithful by the differences of opinions and teachings in theology, in preaching, in catechesis, in spiritual direction, about serious and delicate questions of Christian morals, ends up by diminishing the true sense of sin almost to the point of eliminating it" (Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitenia, 18).
The meaning of the following statements of the Magisterium of the Church is fully applicable to the doctrine and sacramental discipline concerning the indissolubility of a ratified and consummated marriage:
• "For the Church of Christ, watchful guardian that she is, and defender of the dogmas deposited with her, never changes anything, never diminishes anything, never adds anything to them; but with all diligence she treats the ancient doctrines faithfully and wisely, which the faith of the Fathers has transmitted. She strives to investigate and explain them in such a way that the ancient dogmas of heavenly doctrine will be made evident and clear, but will retain their full, integral, and proper nature, and will grow only within their own genus — that is, within the same dogma, in the same sense and the same meaning” (Pius IX, Dogmatic Bull Ineffabilis Deus)
• "With regard to the very substance of truth, the Church has before God and men the sacred duty to announce it, to teach it without any attenuation, as Christ revealed it, and there is no condition of time that can reduce the rigor of this obligation. It binds in conscience every priest who is entrusted with the care of teaching, admonishing, and guiding the faithful "(Pius XII, Discourse to parish priests and Lenten preachers, March 23, 1949).
• "The Church does not historicize, does not relativize to the metamorphoses of profane culture the nature of the Church that is always equal and faithful to itself, as Christ wanted it and authentic tradition perfected it" (Paul VI, Homily from October 28, 1965).
• "Now it is an outstanding manifestation of charity toward souls to omit nothing from the saving doctrine of Christ" (Paul VI, Encyclical Humanae Vitae, 29).
• "Any conjugal difficulties are resolved without ever falsifying and compromising the truth" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).
• "The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm [of the Divine moral law]. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).
• “The other principle is that of truth and consistency, whereby the Church does not agree to call good evil and evil good. Basing herself on these two complementary principles, the church can only invite her children who find themselves in these painful situations to approach the divine mercy by other ways, not however through the sacraments of penance and the Eucharist until such time as they have attained the required dispositions” (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 34).
• "The Church's firmness in defending the universal and unchanging moral norms is not demeaning at all. Its only purpose is to serve man's true freedom. Because there can be no freedom apart from or in opposition to the truth"(John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, 96).
• “When it is a matter of the moral norms prohibiting intrinsic evil, there are no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the "poorest of the poor" on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal" (emphasis in original) (John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, 96).
• "The obligation of reiterating this impossibility of admission to the Eucharist is required for genuine pastoral care and for an authentic concern for the well-being of these faithful and of the whole Church, as it indicates the conditions necessary for the fullness of that conversion to which all are always invited by the Lord“ (Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration on the admissibility to the Holy Communion of the divorced and remarried, 24 June 2000, n. 5).
As Catholic bishops, who - according to the teaching of the Second Vatican Council - must defend the unity of faith and the common discipline of the Church, and take care that the light of the full truth should arise for all men (see Lumen Gentium, 23 ) we are forced in conscience to profess in the face of the current rampant confusion the unchanging truth and the equally immutable sacramental discipline regarding the indissolubility of marriage according to the bimillennial and unaltered teaching of the Magisterium of the Church. In this spirit we reiterate:
As Catholic bishops, who - according to the teaching of the Second Vatican Council - must defend the unity of faith and the common discipline of the Church, and take care that the light of the full truth should arise for all men (see Lumen Gentium, 23 ) we are forced in conscience to profess in the face of the current rampant confusion the unchanging truth and the equally immutable sacramental discipline regarding the indissolubility of marriage according to the bimillennial and unaltered teaching of the Magisterium of the Church. In this spirit we reiterate:
• Sexual relationships between people who are not in the bond to one another of a valid marriage - which occurs in the case of the so-called "divorced and remarried" - are always contrary to God's will and constitute a grave offense against God.
• No circumstance or finality, not even a possible imputability or diminished guilt, can make such sexual relations a positive moral reality and pleasing to God. The same applies to the other negative precepts of the Ten Commandments of God. Since “there exist acts which, per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 17).
• The Church does not possess the infallible charism of judging the internal state of grace of a member of the faithful (see Council of Trent, session 24, chapter 1). The non-admission to Holy Communion of the so-called "divorced and remarried" does not therefore mean a judgment on their state of grace before God, but a judgment on the visible, public, and objective character of their situation. Because of the visible nature of the sacraments and of the Church herself, the reception of the sacraments necessarily depends on the corresponding visible and objective situation of the faithful.
• It is not morally licit to engage in sexual relations with a person who is not one’s legitimate spouse supposedly to avoid another sin. Since the Word of God teaches us, it is not lawful "to do evil so that good may come" (Romans 3, 8).
• The admission of such persons to Holy Communion may be permitted only when they with the help of God's grace and a patient and individual pastoral accompaniment make a sincere intention to cease from now on the habit of such sexual relations and to avoid scandal. It is in this way that true discernment and authentic pastoral accompaniment were always expressed in the Church.
• People who have habitual non-marital sexual relations violate their indissoluble sacramental nuptial bond with their life style in relation to their legitimate spouse. For this reason they are not able to participate "in Spirit and in Truth" (see John 4, 23) at the Eucharistic wedding supper of Christ, also taking into account the words of the rite of Holy Communion: "Blessed are the guests at the wedding supper of the Lamb!" (Revelation 19, 9).
• The fulfillment of God's will, revealed in His Ten Commandments and in His explicit and absolute prohibition of divorce, constitutes the true spiritual good of the people here on earth and will lead them to the true joy of love in the salvation of eternal life.
Being bishops in the pastoral office those, who promote the Catholic and Apostolic faith ("cultores catholicae et apostolicae fidei", see Missale Romanum, Canon Romanus), we are aware of this grave responsibility and our duty before the faithful who await from us a public and unequivocal profession of the truth and the immutable discipline of the Church regarding the indissolubility of marriage. For this reason we are not allowed to be silent.
We affirm therefore in the spirit of St. John the Baptist, of St. John Fisher, of St. Thomas More, of Blessed Laura Vicuña and of numerous known and unknown confessors and martyrs of the indissolubility of marriage:
It is not licit (non licet) to justify, approve, or legitimize either directly or indirectly divorce and a non-conjugal stable sexual relationship through the sacramental discipline of the admission of so-called "divorced and remarried" to Holy Communion, in this case a discipline alien to the entire Tradition of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.
By making this public profession before our conscience and before God who will judge us, we are sincerely convinced that we have provided a service of charity in truth to the Church of our day and to the Supreme Pontiff, Successor of Saint Peter and Vicar of Christ on earth .
31 December 2017, the Feast of the Holy Family, in the year of the centenary of the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima.
+ Tomash Peta, Archbishop Metropolitan of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
+ Jan Pawel Lenga, Archbishop-Bishop of Karaganda
+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
Tuesday 6 December 2016
Our generation's Athanasius contra mundum! "Schism already exists"
Laudetur Jesus Christus!
Bergoglio's henchmen and minions are akin to the Soviets or even maybe, the Gestapo?
Perhaps some of our readers saw this picture last evening surface on Twitter. It is of Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider speaking before a packed room in Rome's Centro Lepanto.
You can bet that it was all over Rome, that which was discussed, before those thugs, minions and hangers at the Vatican settled down for a rub down at one of Rome's more particular establishments with their gaystapo boytoys.because they sure weren't praying their Office or doing a Holy Hour! Why, you ask? Because if they did these things, they would not do what they do.
Courtesy of LifeSiteNews, here are the key quotes:
As I wrote yesterday, they are "mad" in the sense of angry and deranged that we will not stop exposing the lies and manipulations that began at the first Synod, continued into the second and continue today.
The deal breaker for these Cardinals, in my view. was when Bergoglio confirmed the heretical statement by the Bishops of Buenos Aires compounded by those of the Vicar of Rome.
Bergoglio cannot hide from this. He must answer the dubia which will either nullify his attempts to change Divine Law on Holy Communion or expose himself as a heretic.
That's it friends, there's just no other way around it.
Make a mess, indeed.
You can bet that it was all over Rome, that which was discussed, before those thugs, minions and hangers at the Vatican settled down for a rub down at one of Rome's more particular establishments with their gaystapo boytoys.because they sure weren't praying their Office or doing a Holy Hour! Why, you ask? Because if they did these things, they would not do what they do.
Courtesy of LifeSiteNews, here are the key quotes:
“When Christ preached 2,000 years ago, the culture and reigning spirit were radically opposed to Him. Concretely religious syncretism ruled, also Gnosticism among the intelligent leaders, as well as permissibilism among the masses — especially regarding the institution of matrimony. […] The sole purpose of the Son of God was to reveal the truth to the world.”
“The formulation of dubia, as the Cardinals here have expressed in their own terms, has been a common practice in the Church,” he explained. “We need to be able to ask questions openly without being afraid of repressions.”
“The reaction to the dubia is a proof of the climate in which we actually live in the Church right now,” Bishop Schneider said. “We live in a climate of threats and of denial of dialogue towards a specific group.”
“dialogue seems to be accepted only if you think like everyone else - that is practically like a regime.”
+Schneider brought up his experience in Russia, where he was born in the time of the Soviet Union. His parents were sent by Stalin to work camps, or “Gulags,” after the Second World War. “If you didn’t follow the line of the party, or you questioned it, you couldn’t even ask. That is for me a very clear parallel to what is happening now in the reactions to the dubia — questions — of the Cardinals.”
“This is a very sad experience especially since everybody is speaking about a ‘dialogue of culture’ after the Second Vatican Council. While bishops openly teach heresies and nothing happens to them, that is truly a grave injustice and very sad,” Bishop Schneider added.
Cardinal Burke is quoted:
Cardinal Burke has said a “formal correction” might be in order to resolve the situation of uncertainty. “In the language of moral theology, fraternal correction is an act of love — if it is given in obedience and with reason,” Schneider commented. “We have to return to this familiar way of dealing with it.”
As I wrote yesterday, they are "mad" in the sense of angry and deranged that we will not stop exposing the lies and manipulations that began at the first Synod, continued into the second and continue today.
The deal breaker for these Cardinals, in my view. was when Bergoglio confirmed the heretical statement by the Bishops of Buenos Aires compounded by those of the Vicar of Rome.
Bergoglio cannot hide from this. He must answer the dubia which will either nullify his attempts to change Divine Law on Holy Communion or expose himself as a heretic.
That's it friends, there's just no other way around it.
Make a mess, indeed.
Wednesday 23 November 2016
Bishop Athanasius Schneider on the matter of the four Cardinals' Dubia to Pope Francis
“We cannot do anything against the truth,
but only for the truth” (2 Cor. 13: 8)
A Prophetic Voice of Four Cardinals of the
Holy Roman Catholic Church
Out of “deep pastoral concern,” four
Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, His Eminence Joachim Meisner,
Archbishop emeritus of Cologne (Germany), His Eminence Carlo Caffarra,
Archbishop emeritus of Bologna (Italy),
His Eminence Raymond Leo Burke, Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of
Malta, and His Eminence Walter Brandmüller, President emeritus of the
Pontifical Commission of Historical Sciences, have published on November 14,
2016, the text of five questions, called dubia (Latin for “doubts”), which
previously on September 19, 2016, they sent to the Holy Father and to Cardinal
Gerhard Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
along with an accompanying letter. The Cardinals ask Pope Francis to clear up
“grave disorientation and great confusion” concerning the interpretation and
practical application, particularly of chapter VIII, of the Apostolic
Exhortation Amoris Laetitia and its passages relating to admission of remarried
divorcees to the sacraments and the Church’s moral teaching.
In their statement entitled “Seeking
Clarity: A Plea to Untie the Knots in Amoris Laetitia,” the Cardinals say that
to “many — bishops, priests, faithful — these paragraphs allude to or even
explicitly teach a change in the discipline of the Church with respect to the
divorced who are living in a new union.” Speaking so, the Cardinals have merely
stated real facts in the life of the Church. These facts are demonstrated by
pastoral orientations on behalf of several dioceses and by public statements of
some bishops and cardinals, who affirm that in some cases divorced and
remarried Catholics can be admitted to Holy Communion even though they continue
to use the rights reserved by Divine law to validly married spouses.
In publishing a plea for clarity in a matter
that touches the truth and the sanctity simultaneously of the three sacraments
of Marriage, Penance, and the Eucharist, the Four Cardinals only did their
basic duty as bishops and cardinals, which consists in actively contributing so
that the revelation transmitted through the Apostles might be guarded sacredly
and might be faithfully interpreted. It was especially the Second Vatican
Council that reminded all the members of the college of bishops as legitimate
successors of the Apostles of their obligation, according to which “by Christ’s
institution and command they have to be solicitous for the whole Church, and
that this solicitude, though it is not exercised by an act of jurisdiction,
contributes greatly to the advantage of the universal Church. For it is the
duty of all bishops to promote and to safeguard the unity of faith and the
discipline common to the whole Church” (Lumen gentium, 23; cf. also Christus
Dominus, 5-6).
In making a public appeal to the Pope,
bishops and cardinals should be moved by genuine collegial affection for the
Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ on earth, following the teaching of
Vatican Council II (cf. Lumen gentium, 22);, in so doing they render “service
to the primatial ministry” of the Pope (cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry
of Bishops, 13).
The entire Church in our days has to
reflect upon the fact that the Holy Spirit has not in vain inspired Saint Paul
to write in the Letter to the Galatians about the incident of his public
correction of Peter. One has to trust that Pope Francis will accept this public
appeal of the Four Cardinals in the spirit of the Apostle Peter, when St Paul
offered him a fraternal correction for the good of the whole Church. May the
words of that great Doctor of the Church, St Thomas Aquinas, illuminate and
comfort us all: “When there is a danger for the faith, subjects are required to
reprove their prelates, even publicly. Since Paul, who was subject to Peter,
out of the danger of scandal, publicly reproved him. And Augustine comments:
“Peter himself gave an example to superiors by not disdaining to be corrected
by his subjects when it occurred to them that he had departed from the right
path” (Summa theol., II-II, 33, 4c).
Pope Francis often calls for an outspoken
and fearless dialogue between all members of the Church in matters concerning
the spiritual good of souls. In the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, the
Pope speaks of a need for “open discussion of a number of doctrinal, moral,
spiritual, and pastoral questions. The thinking of pastors and theologians, if
faithful to the Church, honest, realistic and creative, will help us to achieve
greater clarity” (n. 2). Furthermore, relationships at all levels within the
Church must be free from a climate of fear and intimidation, as Pope Francis
has requested in his various pronouncements.
In light of these pronouncements of Pope
Francis and the principle of dialogue and acceptance of legitimate plurality of
opinions, which was fostered by the documents of the Second Vatican Council,
the unusually violent and intolerant reactions on behalf of some bishops and
cardinals against the calm and circumspect plea of the Four Cardinals cause
great astonishment. Among such intolerant reactions one could read affirmations
such as, for instance: the four Cardinals are witless, naive, schismatic,
heretical, and even comparable to the Arian heretics.
Such apodictic merciless judgments reveal
not only intolerance, refusal of dialogue, and irrational rage, but demonstrate
also a surrender to the impossibility of speaking the truth, a surrender to
relativism in doctrine and practice, in faith and life. The above-mentioned
clerical reaction against the prophetic voice of the Four Cardinals parades
ultimately powerlessness before the eyes of the truth. Such a violent reaction
has only one aim: to silence the voice of the truth, which is disturbing and
annoying the apparently peaceful nebulous ambiguity of these clerical critics.
The negative reactions to the public
statement of the Four Cardinals resemble the general doctrinal confusion of the
Arian crisis in the fourth century. It is helpful to all to quote in the
situation of the doctrinal confusion in our days some affirmations of Saint
Hilary of Poitiers, the “Athanasius of the West”.
“You [the bishops of Gaul] who still remain
with me faithful in Christ did not give way when threatened with the onset of
heresy, and now by meeting that onset you have broken all its violence. Yes,
brethren, you have conquered, to the abundant joy of those who share your
faith: and your unimpaired constancy gained the double glory of keeping a pure
conscience and giving an authoritative example” (Hil. De Syn., 3).
“Your [the bishops of Gaul] invincible
faith keeps the honourable distinction of conscious worth and, content with
repudiating crafty, vague, or hesitating action, safely abides in Christ,
preserving the profession of its liberty. For since we all suffered deep and
grievous pain at the actions of the wicked against God, within our boundaries
alone is communion in Christ to be found from the time that the Church began to
be harried by disturbances such as the expatriation of bishops, the deposition
of priests, the intimidation of the people, the threatening of the faith, and
the determination of the meaning of Christ’s doctrine by human will and power.
Your resolute faith does not pretend to be ignorant of these facts or profess
that it can tolerate them, perceiving that by the act of hypocritical assent it
would bring itself before the bar of conscience” (Hil. De Syn., 4).
“I have spoken what I myself believed,
conscious that I owed it as my soldier’s service to the Church to send to you
in accordance with the teaching of the Gospel by these letters the voice of the
office which I hold in Christ. It is yours to discuss, to provide and to act,
that the inviolable fidelity in which you stand you may still keep with
conscientious hearts, and that you may continue to hold what you hold now”
(Hil. De Syn., 92).
The following words of Saint Basil the
Great, addressed to the Latin Bishops, can be in some aspects applied to the
situation of those who in our days ask for doctrinal clarity, including our
Four Cardinals: “The one charge which is now sure to secure severe punishment
is the careful keeping of the traditions of the Fathers. We are not being
attacked for the sake of riches, or glory, or any temporal advantages. We stand
in the arena to fight for our common heritage, for the treasure of the sound
faith, derived from our Fathers. Grieve with us, all you who love the brethren,
at the shutting of the mouths of our men of true religion, and at the opening
of the bold and blasphemous lips of all that utter unrighteousness against God.
The pillars and foundation of the truth are scattered abroad. We, whose
insignificance has allowed of our being overlooked, are deprived of our right
of free speech” (Ep. 243, 2.4).
Today those bishops and cardinals, who ask
for clarity and who try to fulfill their duty in guarding sacredly and
faithfully interpreting the transmitted Divine Revelation concerning the
Sacraments of Marriage and the Eucharist, are no longer exiled as it was with
the Nicene bishops during the Arian crisis. Contrary to the time of the Arian
crisis, today, as wrote Rudolf Graber, the bishop of Ratisbone, in 1973, exile
of the bishops is replaced by hush-up strategies and by slander campaigns (cf.
Athanasius und die Kirche unserer Zeit, Abensberg 1973, p. 23).
Another champion of the Catholic faith
during the Arian crisis was Saint Gregory Nazianzen. He wrote the following
striking characterization of the behavior of the majority of the shepherds of
the Church in those times. This voice of the great Doctor of the Church should
be a salutary warning for the bishops of all times: “Surely the pastors have
done foolishly; for, excepting a very few, who either on account of their
insignificance were passed over, or who by reason of their virtue resisted, and
who were to be left as a seed and root for the springing up again and revival
of Israel by the influences of the Spirit, all temporized, only differing from
each other in this, that some succumbed earlier, and others later; some were
foremost champions and leaders in the impiety, and others joined the second
rank of the battle, being overcome by fear, or by interest, or by flattery, or,
what was the most excusable, by their own ignorance” (Orat. 21, 24).
When Pope Liberius in 357 signed one of the
so called formulas of Sirmium, in which he deliberately discarded the
dogmatically defined expression “homo-ousios” and excommunicated Saint
Athanasius in order to have peace and harmony with the Arian and Semi-Arian
bishops of the East, faithful Catholics and some few bishops, especially Saint
Hilary of Poitiers, were deeply shocked. Saint Hilary transmitted the letter
that Pope Liberius wrote to the Oriental bishops, announcing the acceptance of
the formula of Sirmium and the excommunication of Saint Athanasius. In his deep
pain and dismay, Saint Hilary added to the letter in a kind of desperation the
phrase: “Anathema tibi a me dictum, praevaricator Liberi” (I say to you
anathema, prevaricator Liberius), cf. Denzinger-Schönmetzer, n. 141. Pope
Liberius wanted to have peace and harmony at any price, even at the expense of
the Divine truth. In his letter to the heterodox Latin bishops Ursace, Valence,
and Germinius announcing to them the above-mentioned decisions, he wrote that
he preferred peace and harmony to martyrdom (cf. cf. Denzinger-Schönmetzer, n.
142).
“In what a dramatic contrast stood the
behavior of Pope Liberius to the following conviction of Saint Hilary of
Poitiers: “We don’t make peace at the expense of the truth by making
concessions in order to acquire the reputation of tolerance. We make peace by
fighting legitimately according to the rules of the Holy Spirit. There is a
danger to ally surreptitiously with unbelief under the beautiful name of peace.”
(Hil. Ad Const., 2, 6, 2).
Blessed John Henry Newman commented on
these unusual sad facts with the following wise and equilibrated affirmation:
“While it is historically true, it is in no sense doctrinally false, that a
Pope, as a private doctor, and much more Bishops, when not teaching formally,
may err, as we find they did err in the fourth century. Pope Liberius might
sign a Eusebian formula at Sirmium, and the mass of Bishops at Ariminum or
elsewhere, and yet they might, in spite of this error, be infallible in their
ex cathedra decisions” (The Arians of the Fourth Century, London, 1876, p.
465).
The Four Cardinals with their prophetic
voice demanding doctrinal and pastoral clarity have a great merit before their
own conscience, before history, and before the innumerable simple faithful
Catholics of our days, who are driven to the ecclesiastical periphery, because
of their fidelity to Christ’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.
But above all, the Four Cardinals have a great merit in the eyes of Christ.
Because of their courageous voice, their names will shine brightly at the Last
Judgment. For they obeyed the voice of their conscience remembering the words
of Saint Paul: “We cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the
truth” (2 Cor 13: 8). Surely, at the Last Judgment the above-mentioned mostly
clerical critics of the Four Cardinals will not have an easy answer for their
violent attack on such a just, worthy, and meritorious act of these Four
Members of the Sacred College of Cardinals.
The following words inspired by the Holy
Spirit retain their prophetic value especially in view of the spreading
doctrinal and practical confusion regarding the Sacrament of Marriage in our
days: “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but
having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their
own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off
into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of
an evangelist, fulfill your ministry” (2 Tim. 4: 3-5).
May all, who in our days still take
seriously their baptismal vows and their priestly and episcopal promises,
receive the strength and the grace of God so that they may reiterate together
with Saint Hilary the words: “May I always be in exile, if only the truth
begins to be preached again!” (De Syn., 78). This strength and grace we wish
wholeheartedly to our Four Cardinals and as well as to those who criticize
them.
November 23, 2016
+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of
the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
Friday 3 June 2016
Bishop Athanasius Schneider issues public letter on Amoris Laetitia interpretation
Will anyone else join this Bishop and the few others who have had the courage to state the reality that we are faced with as faithful Catholics?
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2558-bishop-athanasius-schneider-replies-to-the-remnant-s-open-letter-on-amoris-laetitia
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2558-bishop-athanasius-schneider-replies-to-the-remnant-s-open-letter-on-amoris-laetitia
Dear Mr. Christopher A. Ferrara:
On May 9, 2016 you published on “The Remnant” website an open letter to me regarding the question of the Apostolic Exhortation “Amoris laetitia”.
As a bishop, I am grateful and at the same time encouraged to receive from a Catholic layman such a clear and beautiful manifestation of the “sensus fidei” regarding the Divine truth on marriage and the moral law.
I am agreeing with your observations as to those expressions in AL (“Amoris laetitia”), and especially in its VIII’s chapter, which are highly ambiguous and misleading. In using our reason and in respecting the proper sense of the words, one can hardly interpret some expressions in AL according to the holy immutable Tradition of the Church.
In AL, there are of course expressions which are obviously in conformity with the Tradition. But that is not what is at issue here. What is at stake are the natural and logical consequences of the ambiguous expressions of AL. Indeed, they contain a real spiritual danger, which will cause doctrinal confusion, a fast and easy spreading of heterodox doctrines concerning marriage and moral law, and also the adoption and consolidation of the praxis of admitting divorced and remarried to Holy Communion, a praxis which will trivialize and profane, as to say, at one blow three sacraments: the sacrament of Marriage, of Penance, and of the Most Holy Eucharist.
In these our dark times, in which Our Beloved Lord seems to sleep in the boat of His Holy Church, all Catholics, beginning from the bishops up to the simplest faithful, who still take seriously their baptismal vows, should with one voice (“una voce”) make a profession of fidelity, enunciating concretely and clearly all those Catholic truths, which are in some expressions of AL undermined or ambiguously disfigured. It would be a kind of a “Credo” of the people of God. AL is clearly a pastoral document (i.e., by its nature of temporal character) and has no claims to be definitive. We have to avoid to “make infallible” every word and gesture of a current Pope. This is contrary to the teaching of Jesus and of the whole Tradition of the Church. Such a totalitarian understanding and application of Papal infallibility is not Catholic, is ultimately worldly, like in a dictatorship; it is against the spirit of the Gospel and of the Fathers of the Church.
Beside the above mentioned possible common profession of fidelity, there should be made to my opinion, by competent scholars of dogmatic and moral theology also a solid analysis of all ambiguous and objectively erroneous expressions in AL. Such a scientific analysis should be made without anger and partiality (“sine ira et studio”) and out of filial deference to the Vicar of Christ.
I am convinced that in later times the Popes will be grateful that there had been concerning voices of some bishops, theologians and laypeople in times of a great confusion. Let us live for the sake of the truth and of the eternity, “pro veritate et aeternitate”!
+ Athanasius Schneider,
Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
Tuesday 26 April 2016
Official response and translation of Bishop Athanasius Schneider to Amoris Laetitia
Posted here courtesy of Rorate, Bishop Schneider has asked this be distributed far and wide.
Praise Jesus our Lord for this holy Catholic bishop!
May St. Michael protect him.
"Amoris laetitia": a need for clarification in order to avoid a general confusion
The paradox of the contradictory interpretations of "Amoris laetitia"
The recently published Apostolic Exhortation “Amoris laetitia” (AL), which contains a plethora of spiritual and pastoral riches with regard to life within marriage and the Christian family in our times, has unfortunately, within a very short time, led to very contradictory interpretations even among the episcopate.
There are bishops and priests who publicly and openly declare that AL represents a very clear opening-up to communion for the divorced and remarried, without requiring them to practice continence. In their opinion, it is this aspect of sacramental practice, which, according to them, is now to undergo a significant change that gives AL its truly revolutionary character. Interpreting AL with reference to irregular couples, a president of a Bishops’ Conference has stated, in a text published on the website of the same Bishops’ Conference: “This is a disposition of mercy, an openness of heart and of spirit that needs no law, awaits no guideline, nor bides on prompting. It can and should happen immediately”.
The rest of this important article can be read at the link below:
The rest of this important article can be read at the link below:
Sunday 24 April 2016
Bishop Schneider call on Pope Francis to clarify to avoid a general confusion - issues stunning rebuke of Amoris Laetitia!
"The See of Peter, that is, the Sovereign Pontiff, is the guarantor of the unity of the Faith and of Apostolic and Sacramental discipline. Considering the confusion that has arisen among priests and bishops in the sacramental practice with regard to the divorced and remarried and in the interpretation of AL, one can consider as legitimate an appeal to our dear Pope Francis, the Vicar of Christ and "the sweet Christ on earth "(St. Catherine of Siena), to order the publication of an authentic interpretation of AL, which should necessarily contain an explicit declaration of the disciplinary principle of the infallible Magisterium regarding the admission to the sacraments of the divorced-remarried, as formulated in the n. 84 of Familiaris Consortio."
Reading his words, 6000, about 10% AL, is invigorating, it is Catholic unlike what has issue forth from the Pope, the most verbose, obtuse and destructive piece of bile ever issued from the Vatican.
Pope Francis must be held accountable by the bishops and lay faithful for his grievous error in this wretched document. These malefactors can never be part of any sacred hierarchy of the Church and that includes the Bishop of Rome himself if he fails to teach and sanctify and rather, allows this travesty to stand. They will get no respect from this writer while they actively engage in auto-demolition of the faith.
One can imagine his indigestion at breakfast this morning.
Bishops, speak up or be damned!
http://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/amoris-laetitia-chiarire-per-evitare-una-confusione-generale/
Overnight, the Editor of Veri Catholic has published an English translation which is available at:
https://vericatholici.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/bishop-athanasius-schneider-speaks-on-amoris-laetitia/
and has been archived on this blog here:
http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/p/bishop-athanasius-schneider-speaks-on.html
Overnight, the Editor of Veri Catholic has published an English translation which is available at:
https://vericatholici.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/bishop-athanasius-schneider-speaks-on-amoris-laetitia/
and has been archived on this blog here:
http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/p/bishop-athanasius-schneider-speaks-on.html
Thursday 4 February 2016
Bishop Schneider interviewed
There is a reason why Rorate Caeli Blog, is one of, if not the most widely read Catholic blog in the world along with Father Z. You can check the veracity of my statement at alexa.com. Once again, they have featured for our edification, the wise words of a holy prelate.
During the vexatious and unethical lawsuit launched upon me by Thomas Rosica, CSB, I received letter of prayer and consolation from Bishop Athanasius Schneider. He is one of the men which we must look to in these difficult times of crisis for the Church. His words below touch the very heart of the crisis and while charitable in his criticisms, he holds nothing back as to the seriousness of the situations facing the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ and each one of us.
Rorate Caeli has given blanket permission for a reprint of their interview with Bishop Schneider and we thank them for it.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/02/exclusive-bishop-athanasius-schneider.html
EXCLUSIVE: BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER INTERVIEW WITH RORATE CAELI
*NB: words in bold by Rorate for emphasis:
H.E. Schneider: A typical Catholic parish priest should know well the perennial sense of the Catholic faith, the perennial sense as well of the laws of the Catholic liturgy and, knowing this, he should have an interior sureness and firmness. He should always remember the Catholic principle of discernment: “Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus”, i.e. “What has been always, everywhere and from all” believed and practiced.
The categories “always, everywhere, all” are not to be understood in an arithmetical, but in a moral sense. A concrete criterion for discernment is this: “Does this change in a doctrinal affirmation, in a pastoral or in a liturgical practice constitute a rupture with the centuries-old, or even with the millennial past? And does this innovation really make the faith shine clearer and brighter? Does this liturgical innovation bring to us closer the sanctity of God, or manifest deeper and more beautiful the Divine mysteries? Does this disciplinary innovation really increase a greater zeal for the holiness of life?”
As concretely to the innovation of washing the feet of women during the Holy Mass of the Last Supper on Holy Thursday: This Holy Mass celebrates the commemoration of the institution of the sacraments of the Eucharist and the Priesthood. Therefore, the foot washing of women along with the men not only distracts from the main focus on Eucharist and on Priesthood, but generates confusion regarding the historical symbolism of the “twelve” and of the apostles being of male sex. The universal tradition of the Church never allowed the foot washing during the Holy Mass, but instead outside of Mass, in a special ceremony.
By the way: the public washing and usually also kissing of the feet of women on the part of a man, in our case, of a priest or a bishop, is considered by every person of common sense in all cultures as being improper and even indecent. Thanks be to God no priest or bishop is obliged to wash publicly the feet of women on Holy Thursday, for there is no binding norm for it, and the foot washing itself is only facultative.
THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS
During the vexatious and unethical lawsuit launched upon me by Thomas Rosica, CSB, I received letter of prayer and consolation from Bishop Athanasius Schneider. He is one of the men which we must look to in these difficult times of crisis for the Church. His words below touch the very heart of the crisis and while charitable in his criticisms, he holds nothing back as to the seriousness of the situations facing the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ and each one of us.
Rorate Caeli has given blanket permission for a reprint of their interview with Bishop Schneider and we thank them for it.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/02/exclusive-bishop-athanasius-schneider.html
EXCLUSIVE: BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER INTERVIEW WITH RORATE CAELI
SSPX; Women and foot washing; consecrating Russia; anti-pastoral bishops and much more
Last week, Rorate Caeli interviewed His Excellency Bishop Athanasius Schneider, one of the most visible prelates working on the restoration of the traditional Latin Mass and faith, on numerous topics.
In this wide-ranging interview, His Excellency thoughtfully expounded on issues critical to the Church in this great time of crisis. Read the entire interview so you don't miss His Excellency's thoughts on the current status of the SSPX,women's participation in the Mass and the washing of women's feet, whether Russia was ever truly consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Summorum Pontificum and anti-pastoral bishops and much, much more.
All may reprint/repost this interview -- but you must credit Rorate Caeli.
POST-SYNOD CHURCH & UNBELIEVERS IN THE HIERARCHY
Rorate Caeli: In the recent Synod, we will not know the legal impact it will have on the Church for some time, as it’s up to Pope Francis to move next. Regardless of the eventual outcome, for all intent and purposes, is there already a schism in the Church? And, if so, what does it mean practically speaking? How will it manifest itself for typical Catholics in the pews?
H.E. Schneider: Schism means according to the definition of the Code of Canon Law, can. 751: The refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with those members of the Church who are submitted to the Supreme Pontiff. One has to distinguish the defect in belief or heresy from schism. The defect in belief or heresy is indeed a greater sin than schism, as Saint Thomas Aquinas said: “Unbelief is a sin committed against God Himself, according as He is Himself the First Truth, on which faith is founded; whereas schism is opposed to ecclesiastical unity, which is a lesser good than God Himself. Wherefore the sin of unbelief is generically more grievous than the sin of schism” (II-II, q. 39, a. 2 c).
The very crisis of the Church in our days consists in the ever growing phenomenon that those who don’t fully believe and profess the integrity of the Catholic faith frequently occupy strategic positions in the life of the Church, such as professors of theology, educators in seminaries, religious superiors, parish priests and even bishops and cardinals. And these people with their defective faith profess themselves as being submitted to the Pope.
The height of confusion and absurdity manifests itself when such semi-heretical clerics accuse those who defend the purity and integrity of the Catholic faith as being against the Pope – as being according to their opinion in some way schismatics. For simple Catholics in the pews, such a situation of confusion is a real challenge of their faith, in the indestructibility of the Church. They have to keep strong the integrity of their faith according to the immutable Catholic truths, which were handed over by our fore-fathers, and which we find in in the Traditional catechisms and in the works of the Fathers and of the Doctors of the Church.
Rorate Caeli: Speaking of typical Catholics, what will the typical parish priest face now that he didn’t face before the Synod began? What pressures, such as the washing of women’s feet on Maundy Thursday after the example of Francis, will burden the parish priest even more than he is burdened today?
The very crisis of the Church in our days consists in the ever growing phenomenon that those who don’t fully believe and profess the integrity of the Catholic faith frequently occupy strategic positions in the life of the Church, such as professors of theology, educators in seminaries, religious superiors, parish priests and even bishops and cardinals. And these people with their defective faith profess themselves as being submitted to the Pope.
The height of confusion and absurdity manifests itself when such semi-heretical clerics accuse those who defend the purity and integrity of the Catholic faith as being against the Pope – as being according to their opinion in some way schismatics. For simple Catholics in the pews, such a situation of confusion is a real challenge of their faith, in the indestructibility of the Church. They have to keep strong the integrity of their faith according to the immutable Catholic truths, which were handed over by our fore-fathers, and which we find in in the Traditional catechisms and in the works of the Fathers and of the Doctors of the Church.
Rorate Caeli: Speaking of typical Catholics, what will the typical parish priest face now that he didn’t face before the Synod began? What pressures, such as the washing of women’s feet on Maundy Thursday after the example of Francis, will burden the parish priest even more than he is burdened today?
H.E. Schneider:
The categories “always, everywhere, all” are not to be understood in an arithmetical, but in a moral sense. A concrete criterion for discernment is this: “Does this change in a doctrinal affirmation, in a pastoral or in a liturgical practice constitute a rupture with the centuries-old, or even with the millennial past? And does this innovation really make the faith shine clearer and brighter? Does this liturgical innovation bring to us closer the sanctity of God, or manifest deeper and more beautiful the Divine mysteries? Does this disciplinary innovation really increase a greater zeal for the holiness of life?”
As concretely to the innovation of washing the feet of women during the Holy Mass of the Last Supper on Holy Thursday: This Holy Mass celebrates the commemoration of the institution of the sacraments of the Eucharist and the Priesthood. Therefore, the foot washing of women along with the men not only distracts from the main focus on Eucharist and on Priesthood, but generates confusion regarding the historical symbolism of the “twelve” and of the apostles being of male sex. The universal tradition of the Church never allowed the foot washing during the Holy Mass, but instead outside of Mass, in a special ceremony.
By the way: the public washing and usually also kissing of the feet of women on the part of a man, in our case, of a priest or a bishop, is considered by every person of common sense in all cultures as being improper and even indecent. Thanks be to God no priest or bishop is obliged to wash publicly the feet of women on Holy Thursday, for there is no binding norm for it, and the foot washing itself is only facultative.
PRIESTLY FRATERNITY OF ST. PIUS X (SSPX)
Rorate Caeli: A non-typical situation in the church is the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). Why does Your Excellency think that so many Catholics are afraid of the SSPX or anxious about any association with it? From what Your Excellency has seen, what gifts do you think the SSPX can bring to the mainstream Church?
H.E. Schneider: When someone or something is unimportant and weak, nobody has fear of it. Those who have fear of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X ultimately have fear of the perennial Catholic truths and of its demands in the moral and the liturgical domain.
When the SSPX tries to believe, to worship and to live morally the way our fore-fathers and the best-known Saints did during a millennial period, then one has to consider the life and the work of these Catholic priests and faithful of the SSPX as a gift for the Church in our days – even as one of the several instruments which the Divine Providence uses to remedy the enormity of the current general crisis of the faith, of the morals and of the liturgy inside the Church.
In some sectors of the SSPX there are, however, as it is the case in every human society some eccentric personalities. They have a method and a mindset which lack justice and charity and consequently the true “sentire cum ecclesia,” and there is the danger of an ecclesial autocephaly and to be the last judicial instance in the Church. However, to my knowledge, the healthier part corresponds to the major part of the SSPX and I consider their General Superior, His Excellency Monsignor Bernard Fellay, as an exemplarily and true Catholic bishop. There is some hope for a canonical recognition of the SPPX.
When the SSPX tries to believe, to worship and to live morally the way our fore-fathers and the best-known Saints did during a millennial period, then one has to consider the life and the work of these Catholic priests and faithful of the SSPX as a gift for the Church in our days – even as one of the several instruments which the Divine Providence uses to remedy the enormity of the current general crisis of the faith, of the morals and of the liturgy inside the Church.
In some sectors of the SSPX there are, however, as it is the case in every human society some eccentric personalities. They have a method and a mindset which lack justice and charity and consequently the true “sentire cum ecclesia,” and there is the danger of an ecclesial autocephaly and to be the last judicial instance in the Church. However, to my knowledge, the healthier part corresponds to the major part of the SSPX and I consider their General Superior, His Excellency Monsignor Bernard Fellay, as an exemplarily and true Catholic bishop. There is some hope for a canonical recognition of the SPPX.
THE SYNOD AND PAPALOTRY
Rorate Caeli: Back on the Synod, while focusing on tradition, does Your Excellency believe that the changes in the Roman liturgy post-Vatican II contributed to the current crisis in the Church, the crisis of marriage, the family and societal morality in general??
H.E. Schneider: I wouldn’t affirm this in such a way. Indeed the very source of the current crisis in the Church, the crisis of marriage, of the family and of the morality in general is not the liturgical reform, but the defects in faith, the doctrinal relativism, from which flows the moral and liturgical relativism. For, if I believe in a defective manner, I will live a defective moral life and I will worship in a defective, indifferent manner. It is necessary first to restore the clearness and firmness of the doctrine of faith and of morals in all levels and, from there, start to improve the liturgy. The integrity and the beauty of the faith demands the integrity and the beauty of one’s moral life and this demands the integrity and the beauty of the public worship.
Rorate Caeli: Still on the Synod, it is clear to those with eyes to see that Pope Francis caused confusion instead of clarity in the Synod process, and encouraged a turn toward rupture by elevating the role of Cardinals Kaspar and Danneels, Archbishop Cupich, etc. What is the proper attitude a Catholic should have towards the pope in these troubled times? Are Catholics obliged to make their views known and “resist” as Cardinal Burke said in an interview last year with us, even when their views are critical of the pope?
H.E. Schneider: For several past generations until our days there reigns in the life of the Church a kind of “pope-centrism” or a kind of “papolatria” which is undoubtedly excessive compared with the moderate and supernatural vision of the person of the Pope and his due veneration in the past times. Such an excessive attitude towards the person of the Pope generates in the practice an excessive and wrong theological meaning regarding the dogma of the Papal infallibility.
If the Pope would tell the entire church to do something, which would directly damage an unchangeable Divine truth or a Divine commandment, every Catholic would have the right to correct him in a due respectful form, moved out of reverence and love for the sacred office, and person of the Pope. The Church is not the private property of the Pope. The Pope can’t say “I am the Church,” as it did the French king Louis XIV, who said: “L’État c’est moi.” The Pope is only the Vicar, not the successor of Christ.
The concerns about the purity of the faith is ultimately a matter of all members of the Church, which is one, and a unique living body. In the ancient times before entrusting to someone the office of a priest and of a bishop, the faithful were asked if they can guarantee that the candidate had the right faith, and a high moral conduct. The old Pontificale Romanum says: “The captain of a ship and its passengers alike have reason to feel safe or else in danger on a voyage, therefore they ought to be of one mind in their common interests.” It was the Second Vatican Council, which very much encouraged the lay faithful to contribute to the authentic good of the Church, in strengthening the faith.
I think in a time in which a great part of the holders of the office of the Magisterium are negligent in their sacred duty, the Holy Spirit calls today, namely the faithful, to step into the breach and defend courageously with an authentic “sentire cum ecclesia” the Catholic faith.
If the Pope would tell the entire church to do something, which would directly damage an unchangeable Divine truth or a Divine commandment, every Catholic would have the right to correct him in a due respectful form, moved out of reverence and love for the sacred office, and person of the Pope. The Church is not the private property of the Pope. The Pope can’t say “I am the Church,” as it did the French king Louis XIV, who said: “L’État c’est moi.” The Pope is only the Vicar, not the successor of Christ.
The concerns about the purity of the faith is ultimately a matter of all members of the Church, which is one, and a unique living body. In the ancient times before entrusting to someone the office of a priest and of a bishop, the faithful were asked if they can guarantee that the candidate had the right faith, and a high moral conduct. The old Pontificale Romanum says: “The captain of a ship and its passengers alike have reason to feel safe or else in danger on a voyage, therefore they ought to be of one mind in their common interests.” It was the Second Vatican Council, which very much encouraged the lay faithful to contribute to the authentic good of the Church, in strengthening the faith.
I think in a time in which a great part of the holders of the office of the Magisterium are negligent in their sacred duty, the Holy Spirit calls today, namely the faithful, to step into the breach and defend courageously with an authentic “sentire cum ecclesia” the Catholic faith.
TRADITION AND ITS ENEMIES FROM WITHIN
Rorate Caeli: Is the pope the measure of tradition, or is he measured by tradition? And should faithful Catholics pray for a traditional pope to arrive soon?
H.E. Schneider: The Pope is surely not the measure of tradition, but on the contrary. We must always bear in mind the following dogmatic teaching of the First Vatican Council: The office of the successors of Peter does not consist in making known some new doctrine, but in guarding and faithfully expounding the deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles (cf. Constitutio dogmatica Pastor aeternus, cap. 4).
In fulfilling one of his most important tasks, the Pope has to strive so that “the whole flock of Christ might be kept away from the poisonous food of error” (First Vatican Council, ibd.). The following expression which was in use since the first centuries of the Church, is one of the most striking definitions of the Papal office, and has to be in some sense a second nature of every Pope: “Faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith” (First Vatican Council, ibd.).
We must always pray that God provides His Church with traditional-minded Popes. However, we have to believe in these words: “It is not for you to have knowledge of the time and the order of events which the Father has kept in his control” (Acts 1: 7).
In fulfilling one of his most important tasks, the Pope has to strive so that “the whole flock of Christ might be kept away from the poisonous food of error” (First Vatican Council, ibd.). The following expression which was in use since the first centuries of the Church, is one of the most striking definitions of the Papal office, and has to be in some sense a second nature of every Pope: “Faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith” (First Vatican Council, ibd.).
We must always pray that God provides His Church with traditional-minded Popes. However, we have to believe in these words: “It is not for you to have knowledge of the time and the order of events which the Father has kept in his control” (Acts 1: 7).
Rorate Caeli: We know there are many bishops and cardinals – possibly the majority – who want to change the Church's doctrinal language and long-standing discipline, under the excuses of "development of doctrine" and "pastoral compassion." What is wrong with their argument?
H.E. Schneider: Expressions like "development of doctrine" and "pastoral compassion" are in fact usually a pretext to change the teaching of Christ, and against its perennial sense and integrity, as the Apostles had transmitted it to the whole Church, and it was faithfully preserved through the Fathers of the Church, the dogmatic teachings of the Ecumenical Councils and of the Popes.
Ultimately, those clerics want another Church, and even another religion: A naturalistic religion, which is adapted to the spirit of the time. Such clerics are really wolves in sheep’s clothing, often flirting with the world. Not courageous shepherds – but rather cowardly rabbits.
Ultimately, those clerics want another Church, and even another religion: A naturalistic religion, which is adapted to the spirit of the time. Such clerics are really wolves in sheep’s clothing, often flirting with the world. Not courageous shepherds – but rather cowardly rabbits.
ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE CHURCH
Rorate Caeli: We hear a lot about the role of women in the Church today – the so-called “feminine genius.” Women obviously have played a critical role in the Church since the beginning, starting with the Blessed Virgin Mary. But liturgically, Christ made His position crystal clear, as have pre-Conciliar popes. Does Your Excellency believe that female involvement in the liturgy, whether it’s women taking part in the Novus Ordo Mass or girl altar boys, has played a positive or negative role in the Church the last four decades?
H.E. Schneider: There is no doubt about the fact that the female involvement in the liturgical services at the altar (reading the lecture, serving at the altar, distributing Holy Communion) represents a radical rupture with the entire and universal tradition of the Church. Therefore, such a practice is against the Apostolic tradition.
Such a practice gave to the liturgy of the Holy Mass a clear Protestant shape and a characteristic of an informal prayer meeting or of a catechetical event. This practice is surely contrary to the intentions of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council and there is not in the least an indication for it in the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy.
Such a practice gave to the liturgy of the Holy Mass a clear Protestant shape and a characteristic of an informal prayer meeting or of a catechetical event. This practice is surely contrary to the intentions of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council and there is not in the least an indication for it in the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy.
THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS
Rorate Caeli: Your Excellency is well known for celebrating the traditional Latin Mass in many places around the world. What does Your Excellency find to be the deepest lessons learned from saying the Latin Mass, as a priest and as a bishop, that other priests and bishops may hope to gain by saying the traditional Mass themselves?
H.E. Schneider: The deepest lessons I learned from celebrating the traditional form of the Mass is this: I am only a poor instrument of a supernatural and utmost sacred action, whose principal celebrant is Christ, the Eternal High Priest. I feel that during the celebration of the Mass I lost in some sense my individual freedom, for the words and the gesture are prescribed even in their smallest details, and I am not able to dispose of them. I feel most deeply in my heart that I am only a servant and a minister who yet with free will, with faith and love, fulfill not my will, but the will of Another.
The traditional and more than millennial-old rite of the Holy Mass, which not even the Council of Trent changed, because the Ordo Missae before and after that Council was almost identical, proclaims and powerfully evangelizes the Incarnation and the Epiphany of the ineffably saintly and immense God, who in the liturgy as “God with us,” as “Emmanuel,” becomes so little and so close to us. The traditional rite of the Mass is a highly artfully and, at the same time, a powerful proclamation of the Gospel, realizing the work of our salvation.
The traditional and more than millennial-old rite of the Holy Mass, which not even the Council of Trent changed, because the Ordo Missae before and after that Council was almost identical, proclaims and powerfully evangelizes the Incarnation and the Epiphany of the ineffably saintly and immense God, who in the liturgy as “God with us,” as “Emmanuel,” becomes so little and so close to us. The traditional rite of the Mass is a highly artfully and, at the same time, a powerful proclamation of the Gospel, realizing the work of our salvation.
Rorate Caeli: If Pope Benedict is correct in saying that the Roman Rite currently (if strangely) exists in two forms rather than one, why has it not yet happened that all seminarians are required to study and learn the traditional Latin Mass, as part of their seminary training? How can a parish priest of the Roman Church not know both forms of the one rite of his Church? And how can so many Catholics still be denied the traditional Mass and sacraments if it is an equal form?
H.E. Schneider: According to the intention of Pope Benedict XVI, and the clear norms of the Instruction “Universae Ecclesiae,” all Catholic seminarians have to know the traditional form of the Mass and be able to celebrate it. The same document says that this form of Mass is a treasure for the entire Church – thus it is for all of the faithful.
Pope John Paul II made an urgent appeal to all bishops to accommodate generously the wish of the faithful regarding the celebration of the traditional form of the Mass. When clerics and bishops obstruct or restrict the celebration of the traditional Mass, they don’t obey what the Holy Spirit says to the Church, and they are acting in a very anti-pastoral way. They behave as the possessors of the treasure of the liturgy, which does not belong to them, for they are only administrators.
In denying the celebration of the traditional Mass or in obstructing and discriminating against it, they behave like an unfaithful and capricious administrator who – contrary to the instructions of the house-father – keeps the pantry under lock or like a wicked stepmother who gives the children a meager fare. Perhaps such clerics have fear of the great power of the truth irradiating from the celebration of the traditional Mass. One can compare the traditional Mass with a lion: Let him free, and he will defend himself.
Pope John Paul II made an urgent appeal to all bishops to accommodate generously the wish of the faithful regarding the celebration of the traditional form of the Mass. When clerics and bishops obstruct or restrict the celebration of the traditional Mass, they don’t obey what the Holy Spirit says to the Church, and they are acting in a very anti-pastoral way. They behave as the possessors of the treasure of the liturgy, which does not belong to them, for they are only administrators.
In denying the celebration of the traditional Mass or in obstructing and discriminating against it, they behave like an unfaithful and capricious administrator who – contrary to the instructions of the house-father – keeps the pantry under lock or like a wicked stepmother who gives the children a meager fare. Perhaps such clerics have fear of the great power of the truth irradiating from the celebration of the traditional Mass. One can compare the traditional Mass with a lion: Let him free, and he will defend himself.
RUSSIA NOT YET EXPLICITLY CONSECRATED
Rorate Caeli: There are many Russian Orthodox where Your Excellency lives. Has Alexander of Astana or anyone else in the Moscow Patriarchate asked Your Excellency about the recent Synod or about what is happening to the Church under Francis? Do they even care at this point?
H.E. Schneider: Those Orthodox Prelates, with whom I have contact, generally are not well informed about the internal current disputes in the Catholic Church, or at least they had never spoken with me about such issues. Even though they don’t recognize the jurisdictional primacy of the Pope, they nevertheless look on the Pope as the first hierarchical office in the Church, from a point of view of the order of protocol.
Rorate Caeli: We are just a year away from the 100th anniversary of Fatima. Russia was arguably not consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and certainly not converted. The Church, while ever spotless, is in complete disarray – maybe worse than during the Arian Heresy. Will things get even worse before they get better and how should truly faithful Catholics prepare for what is coming?
H.E. Schneider: We have to believe firmly: The Church is not ours, nor the Pope’s. The Church is Christ’s and He alone holds and leads her indefectibly even through the darkest periods of crisis, as our current situation indeed is.
This is a demonstration of the Divine character of the Church. The Church is essentially a mystery, a supernatural mystery, and we cannot approach her as we approach a political party or a pure human society. At the same time, the Church is human and on her human level she is nowadays enduring a sorrowful passion, participating in the Passion of Christ.
One can think that the Church in our days is being flagellated as our Lord, is being denuded as was Our Lord, on the tenth Cross station. The Church, our mother, is being bound in cords not only by the enemies of Christ but also by some of their collaborators in the rank of the clergy, even sometimes of the high clergy.
All good children of Mother Church as courageous soldiers we have to try to free this mother – with the spiritual weapons of defending and proclaiming the truth, promoting the traditional liturgy, Eucharistic adoration, the crusade of the Holy Rosary, the battle against the sin in one’s private life and striving for holiness.
We have to pray that the Pope may soon consecrate explicitly Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, then She will win, as the Church prayed since the old times: “Rejoice O Virgin Mary, for thou alone have destroyed all heresies in the whole world” (Gaude, Maria Virgo, cunctas haereses sola interemisti in universo mundo).
This is a demonstration of the Divine character of the Church. The Church is essentially a mystery, a supernatural mystery, and we cannot approach her as we approach a political party or a pure human society. At the same time, the Church is human and on her human level she is nowadays enduring a sorrowful passion, participating in the Passion of Christ.
One can think that the Church in our days is being flagellated as our Lord, is being denuded as was Our Lord, on the tenth Cross station. The Church, our mother, is being bound in cords not only by the enemies of Christ but also by some of their collaborators in the rank of the clergy, even sometimes of the high clergy.
All good children of Mother Church as courageous soldiers we have to try to free this mother – with the spiritual weapons of defending and proclaiming the truth, promoting the traditional liturgy, Eucharistic adoration, the crusade of the Holy Rosary, the battle against the sin in one’s private life and striving for holiness.
We have to pray that the Pope may soon consecrate explicitly Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, then She will win, as the Church prayed since the old times: “Rejoice O Virgin Mary, for thou alone have destroyed all heresies in the whole world” (Gaude, Maria Virgo, cunctas haereses sola interemisti in universo mundo).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)