Bishop Schneider Says Traditional Catholics Are Not “Extremest”, But Rather The Hope For The Future

Traditional Catholic Priest ^ | August 29, 2014 | Fr. Peter Carota

[ebb tide]

Traditional Catholic Priest

by Fr. Peter Carota

Search

Main menu

Skip to primary content

• Home
• Sample Page

Post navigation

← Previous Next →

Bishop Schneider Says Traditional Catholics Are Not “Extremest”, But Rather The Hope For The Future

Posted on August 29, 2014 by fc

Bishop Schneider had an interview published in the June 6th 2014 CatholicHerald.co.uk, “We Are In The Fourth Great Crisis Of The Church“.  If you have the time please read the whole great article.  Here I have attempted to only highlight the main points in the article.

In his interview he said we are in the fourth great crisis of the Church.  This is spearheaded by the liberals in the Church who are collaborating with, what he calls, the “new paganism” and this is actually driving the Catholic Church towards a split.  In this collaboration, we see something like what happened with the fourth-century Arian heresy in which “a large part of the Church hierarchy was implicated”.

The root and cause of this crisis he says is “the “banal” and casual treatment of the Blessed Sacrament by clergy, including some of those in positions of authority, and the laity, who are going along with secular society.  

“The Eucharist is at the heart of the Church,” he said. “When the heart is weak, the whole body is weak.”  He strongly believes that receiving Holy Communion in hand contributes gradually to the loss of the belief in the Real Presence and in transubstantiation.  

“It seems that the majority of the clergy and the bishops are content with this modern use of Communion in hand… For me this is incredible. How is this possible, when Jesus is present in the little Hosts?  There is the grievous fact of the loss of the Eucharistic fragments. And the fragments of the consecrated Host are crushed by feet. This is horrible! Our God, in our churches, is trampled by feet!  It is time that the bishops (should) raise their voices for the Eucharistic Jesus who has no voice to defend himself.  Here is an attack on the Most Holy, an attack on the Eucharistic faith.”

He acknowledges that we have been in this crisis for the last 50 years, (Since Vatican II), with great confusion over doctrine and liturgy.  An example of this “confusion” is clear in the preparation of the Extraordinary Synod coming up this October in Rome:

“I think this issue of the reception of Holy Communion by the remarried will blow up and show the real crisis in the Church. The real crisis of the Church is anthropocentrism and the forgetting of Christo-centrism….  This is the deepest evil: 1) man, or the clergy, putting themselves in the centre when they are celebrating liturgy, (in some churches God, in the tabernacle, is put in a corner, while the priest takes centre stage), and 2) when clergy change the revealed truth of God, for instance, concerning the Sixth Commandment and human sexuality.”  (In this he is referring to homosexuals and divorced people living together or in a second marriage.)

He is very critical of trying to change Catholic pastoral practices, (like giving communion to people living in sin and then calling it mercy).  “This is a kind of sophism.  It is comparable to a doctor who gives a diabetic patient sugar, although he knows it will kill him.”

He says: “Unfortunately there were … members of the clergy and even bishops who put grains of incense in front of the statue of the emperor or of a pagan idol or who delivered the books of the Holy Scripture to be burned. Such collaborationist Christians and clerics were called in those times thurificati or traitors.  We also have those who collaborate, or are traitors of the Faith today”. St Lawrence’s Martyrdom

As a consequence of liberal clergy and laity, he see a split coming eventually.  “I can presume that such a separation will affect each level of Catholics: lay people and even not excluding the high clergy.”

He hopes that this split will eventually lead to a renewal of the Church in a traditional way.   The present “anthropocentric” [man-centred] clerical system will collapse. “This liberal clerical edifice will crash down because they have no roots and no fruits.”   There are hardly any vocations in any of the ordinary dioceses or religious orders.

Bishop Schneider warns that “traditional Catholics may, for a time, be persecuted or discriminated against, even at the behest of those who have “power in the exterior structures of the Church”.  All of us traditional Catholics are already badly persecuted by the people in power in the Church.  Each one of us can tell our own story.

In the end, he says “The Supreme Magisterium” will restate clear doctrinal statement, and no longer will go along with neo-pagan world and ideas.  The lack of clarity in the documents of Vatican II has led to this confusion.

When asked if, as a bishop, it is difficult to speak out against what is happening in the Church, he said; “It is quite insignificant to be popular or unpopular. For every member of the clergy, their first interest should be to be popular in the eyes of God and not in the eyes of today or of the powerful. Jesus said a warning: ‘Woe to you when people speak well of you.’”  

He went on: “Popularity is false… Great saints of the Church, such as Thomas More and John Fisher, rejected popularity… those today who are worried about the popularity of the mass media and public opinion… will be remembered as cowards and not as heroes of the Faith.”

Many “Catholics” who go along with the pagan world, are considered “good” Catholics, while “those who are faithful to the Catholic faith or those who are promoting the glory of Christ in the liturgy, are labelled extremists”.

He also brought up the issue of the poor, which for the liberals seems to trump over morals or sacred liturgy.    We see this when so many Catholics voted for a president who is for murdering of the unborn babies.  They justified this because he is “supposedly” for the poor.  Bishop Schneider contradicts this idea: “This is erroneous. The first commandment which Christ gave us was to adore God alone. Liturgy is not a meeting of friends. It is our first task to adore and glorify God in the liturgy and also in our manner of life. From a true adoration and love of God grows love for the poor and our neighbour. It is a consequence.”

He ends by saying that the traditional Catholics “have kept the purity of their faith and they represent the true power of the Church in the eyes of God and not those who are in administration.”

He ends on a positive note: “I am not worried about the future. The Church is Christ’s Church and He is the real head of the Church, the Pope is only the vicar of Christ. The soul of the Church is the Holy Spirit and He is powerful.”  

So all of you traditional Catholic bishops, priests, religious and people reading this, you are the ones that Bishop Schneider has said will keep the Catholic faith pure and continuing.  After most of the other bishops, religious, priests, and other “Catholics” continuously put you down, know that God is listening and at least there is one bishop who acknowledges the precious value you have for God’s Catholic Church.  Thank you for your heroic virtues of standing strong while everything seems to be collapsing around us and no one in the Church seems to care.  God and Mary do.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by fc. Bookmark the permalink.

[Campion]

It then becomes the business of EVERY non-Catholic since they are the objects of that kind of treatment of Catholics with that mindset.

Please document for us all of the cases of non-Catholics burned at the stake, with the official approval of the Catholic Church hierarchy, anywhere in the world, since the year 1845.

[BlackElk]

Brian Kopp DPM:

You're not an SSPXer and you fully grasp the subject of this discussion.

[BlackElk]

See #28.

[metmom]

That is a tacit admission that the Catholic church engaged in it before 1845.

And in that time, the Catholic church has met its match in power and it has been prohibited from acting in such a way.

Nevertheless, my point wasn’t that it had been done in recent history or not, but that that mindset is still alive and well within Catholicism.

That point which Catholics seem to be evading instead of condemning.

And you’re not the only one on this thread who we’ve seen not condemn the mindset of burning heretics at the stake.

[Brian Kopp DPM]

Good point. But very few of our anti-Catholic separated brethren grasp it, and they should refrain from commenting on an issue about which they know nothing.

The bishop who is the subject of this thread is very well known in conservative and (non-schismatic) traditional Catholic circles. He has written on liturgical issues especially to include receiving the Holy Eucharist kneeling and on the tongue, and has been the subject of numerous conservative and (non-schismatic) traditional Catholic articles and blog posts.

[defconw]

Bump for later.

[defconw]

I went and read the whole article. I do not disagree with the Bishop.

I do believe that taking the Eucharist in hand is a practice that should be done away with. I receive on the tongue whenever I can. Kneeling would be preferred. I think this in the hand thing came because modern man is always in a hurry and it is faster to receive in the hand. But why do we have to be in such a hurry all the time?

I do pray that the Church will not cave to the liberals on who can receive. Time will tell.

[Elsie]

Those old errors will cease to exist after the chastisements that are headed our way.

Oh?

The old chastisements didn't seem to do much for them.

[Elsie]

Stand when they stand and knell the same.

That get's a bit tiring.

---

Doesn’t take long, no heavy reading or tests to take.

I've been - I've noticed.

[Elsie]

If I thought you should be burned at the stake, I would say so and I have not.

I kinda suspected that...

(Dean of Discipline Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club: Roast 'em Danno!)

[Elsie]

Don't you mean IN the year 1845; not SINCE?

[Elsie]

Good point. But very few of our anti-Catholic separated brethren grasp it, and they should refrain from commenting on an issue about which they know nothing.

Ha ha

Your catholic brethren should be required to do the same!

[piusv]

“If that makes me a fool: guilty, guilty, guilty!”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqOBBhRpnxE

[BlatherNaut]

The misguided charity of Vatican officials towards SSPX knows no bounds

Au contraire. The liberals in the hierarchy can't arbitrarily excommunicate SSPX priests (although it is clear some would like to) because they are not schismatic, so they have done the next best thing by contriving to make the status of these priests so ambiguous that many Catholics fear any type of association with them.

Meanwhile, purveyors of Masses such as the one I was forced to attend while on travel (rock band set up directly in front of the altar, men in grubby shorts and t-shirts blaring hideously ear-splitting racket that was a cross between a mariachi band and the Grateful Dead while deafened parishioners cringed in their pews) receive unquestioned support from the same liberal hierarchy which holds all traditional Catholics (including the SSPX) in clear contempt.

[BlackElk]

If Catholics lack the common sense to avoid involvement with priests who hsve been involved with the likes of Williamson and are involved with the likes of Fellay, de Mallerais and Gallerata, then I guess they may be found in the pews at the Masses of the barely tolerated SSPX priests who are not, in any case, in good standing. Yes, the Ecclesia Dei Commission observed that the Masses of such priests will satisfy one's Mass obligations. Break out the party hats and noisemakers!

Would a conscientious parent expose children of tender years to the institutionalized resentments and rebellion of the SSPXers? What was that portion of the Act of Contrition about avoiding the near occasion of sin? Maybe if the SSPX priests accepted being gagged and muzzled and prevented from preaching, it might be different.

What will happen as the current SSPX bishops die off? Will the "emergency" continue to justify the consecration of replacements without jurisdiction to satisfy Marcel's theft of the ecclesiastical goods of consecration without obedience and without papal permission? Are we in for another "Old Catholic" ongoing schism that seems to be its own excuse?

Saint John Paul II seemed to have no problem, along with Cardinal Gantin (neither one any kind of liberal) declaring the illicitly consecrated Econe bishops of SSPX to have committed an act of schism and to excommunicate the lot of them. Unfortunately, the excommunications were lifted by Benedict XVI and for his efforts at "reconciliation," Benedict was spat upon by Fellay and company in their never-ending contempt for actual Church authority. Benedict would simply not submit to Fellay's "authority." Talk about putting the cart before the horse!

Do the SSPX priests obey Fellay or the Vatican? In obeying Fellay, are they not ratifying the schismatic act of Lefebvre, de Castro Meyer, Williamson, de Mallerais Fellay and Gallerata? Establish mandatory loyalty oaths for all priests and watch the bad and rotted fruit fall from the tree. And not just SSPX either. Turn then to those in the pews. Rinse and repeat as necessary.

Give any SSPXer a doctrinal exam and a few pointed questions about the authority of Saint John Paul II as Supreme Pontiff and it will be readily apparent that excommunication is not arbitrary. Those who exercise their "catholic" faith by expressing their naked contempt for papal authority are not "traditional" except in the worst "tradition" of notorious heretics since time immemorial who, if they continue to CLAIM to be Catholic, deserve a lot harsher treatment than excommunication.

[BlackElk]

Well, that’s eleven wasted seconds I am not likely to get back.

[BlackElk]

I get the point since about #28. That was nearly 100 posts ago. Bishop Schneider is not a household name in my household, nor anyone else in the Kyrzykhstan hierarchy. I have enough trying to keep American bishops accurately classified. Mea culpa, etc.

[BlackElk]

Make that Kazakhstan! If I can’t spell it, why am I expected to know about its auxiliary bishop? My wife is the former editor of Latin Mass magazine. I just asked her and she has never heard of Bishop Schneider either. The children have vacated the nest and the pussy cats express no opinion. We may be exceptionally ignorant of the man but that’s my story and I am sticking to it!

[piusv]

LOL

[piusv]

I’m sincerely surprised by the fact that a Traditionalist like yourself (you are a Trad, correct?) had never heard of Bishop Schneider until this moment. Any Catholic who questions Vatican II (and it seems that you do) tends to know this particular bishop has strong reservations about it as well. They also tend to respond to him in a positive manner.