Robert Moynihan: I’m Robert Moynihan, the editor of Inside the Vatican magazine. Once again, I am very pleased to have with me Bishop Athanasius Schneider from Astana, Kazakhstan. Welcome, Bishop Schneider.
Bishop Schneider: Thank you. God bless you.
Robert Moynihan: And you are in good health after traveling to the seminary in Karaganda.
Bishop Schneider: Yes. Thanks be to God. It’s not so far away.
Robert Moynihan: All right. We wanted to talk about your own formation, what caused you to become the man and the theologian that you are, and to take some of the positions that you take. Therefore, I wanted to go back a little through your life. But I really wanted to start with your spirituality. I thought about the phrase of your episcopal motto, Kyrie eleison. It’s Greek. I wondered if you could explain what it means, why you chose it, and how it is related to your deep spirituality.
Bishop Schneider: First, I would say I am not a great theologian. I am a simple bishop, as I consider myself. First, I am convinced, and this guides me, of the words of Holy Scripture from Saint Paul, what do you have that you did not receive. This is really my whole life. All that we have, which is good, is a gift of God’s grace. It is truly a gift, and we must appreciate it more and be aware that all we can do for God is really a gift.
Then, to your other question, my motto as a bishop is Kyrie eleison. I say to you how it came. I did not reflect on it so much. When the nuncio at that time, twenty years ago, called me and gave me the information of my appointment by Pope Benedict XVI in March 2006, he said to me that I also had to choose a motto, as every bishop does.
When I went out of the nunciature, it was suddenly in my mind and in my soul, the word Kyrie eleison. I do not know. Maybe my guardian angel inspired me, because I have had a very deep devotion to my guardian angel since my youth and throughout my life. It was very clear to me. I did not need to reflect more about it. It was already in my soul. Kyrie eleison.
Kyrie eleison is a short expression, but very deep and rich spiritually and theologically. It is a very short prayer that includes many truths, a kind of synthesis.
Robert Moynihan: Let us focus on the two words. What do the two words mean, Kyrie and eleison?
Bishop Schneider: Kyrie means the Lord, Kyrios in Greek. This is the expression we use most in our prayer, in the Psalms, in the liturgy, and also personally when we say, ” My Lord and my God. We cannot say more beautiful words of faith, trust, and love. Lord, my Lord and my all. He is the Lord, Kyrios. This is our Lord Jesus Christ, the incarnate God.
By this, we also express our faith in the Incarnation, in the divinity, in the full divinity and humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Kyrios. We proclaim Him as we say in the Gloria, tu solus Dominus, you alone are the Lord, the Kyrios. You alone. The exclusivity of Jesus Christ is also expressed. His exclusivity and uniqueness as our Savior, our only way to salvation. There is no other Lord as He.
It also expresses what we most need, the mercy of God. What would we be without the mercy of God? It would be incredible and unthinkable. We live by the mercy of God since the first grace in baptism. Then, when we become adults and receive the grace to experience a personal conversion to Christ, we realize how much the Lord forgave us and how much He showed us His forgiveness and His mercy.
Therefore, the second word, eleison, is Greek and means have mercy on us. Have mercy. This is the acclamation and the prayer from the depths of our hearts. Lord, have mercy on me, a poor sinner. The more we draw closer to the Lord and the more we approach eternity, the more we become aware that we have received so much mercy in our lives and are still receiving it.
As Saint Augustine said, we must thank the Lord even when, with His grace, we do not commit mortal sins or crimes. It is only by His grace. We must thank Him that He gave us the grace not to sin grievously. We must be grateful to Him and praise His mercy. We live by His mercy.
As Holy Scripture says in the Psalm, misericordias Domini in aeternum cantabo, the mercies of the Lord I will sing for all eternity. I think that, probably in the beatific vision, our gratitude will also be included, gratitude that we are saved by His mercy. Of course, there will be no negative feelings or repentance in heaven because we will already be in beatitude. Nevertheless, we will be grateful to the Lord for His mercy, because without His mercy, we could become great sinners. Without His mercy, we could even go to hell. We could be condemned. This is a real reality that we must acknowledge calmly but with confidence and humility.
We must thank the Lord. Saint Thérèse of the Child Jesus showed this in her life and in the process of her canonization. I think she mentioned that when she made a confession to her confessor, he said to her in the presence of God that after hearing the confession of her life, he declared that she had never committed a mortal sin in her life. She was such a pure soul. Nevertheless, she consecrated herself as a victim soul to the merciful love of God. She said the merciful love, not only the love of God, but the merciful love of God, as a victim.
In her writings, there is a phrase that may astonish us. She wrote that at the end of her life, even if she had been the greatest sinner in the world and had committed the most horrible sins, but repented with very deep repentance and great trust in the mercy of the Lord, she would wish to die as the greatest repentant and forgiven sinner. This is hypothetical, but she wanted to have these feelings, to die as the greatest repentant forgiven sinner. Then it would be written as the story of a repentant sinner who died out of love and repentance for God and for the mercy of God.
Therefore, this expression, eleison, have mercy on us, is very rich for our life. We must always trust. Not only for ourselves, but we should be kindled with the desire to ask and implore the mercy of God for sinners and for the conversion of sinners.
Eleison is this word. Semantically, there is also the word eleos, which is connected with oil that heals our souls and wounds. The Lord is the Good Samaritan who heals and purifies with wine, cutting away our sins, and then with oil heals our wounds.
I also chose the Greek expression Kyrie eleison to express the unity of the Church, the Eastern Church, and the Latin Church. In the traditional Latin Mass, the prayer Kyrie eleison is not in Latin but in Greek. This prayer is a bridge between the two parts of the Church.
As Saint John Paul II and other popes said, the Church breathes with two lungs, the East and the West, the Eastern liturgy and the Western liturgy. This prayer, present in the Latin liturgy in the Greek language, is a beautiful expression of the unity of the Church.
It also impelled me because I was appointed in the East geographically. Kazakhstan is quite eastern. I live among the majority of Orthodox Christians in Kazakhstan. Among the Christians, the Orthodox Russians are the majority, although the country itself is majority Muslim.
I live with them in the East. Only afterward did I begin to reflect on my motto. As I said, it was an instantaneous illumination for me to take this prayer, this invocation.
Robert Moynihan: Well, you’ve touched on very beautiful things in this first part of our conversation. You’ve talked about your motto, Kyrie eleison. You mentioned that this was spontaneous in you, in thankfulness for the mercy of God in your whole life. You also talked about it being part of the Latin Mass, even though it is Greek. I always emphasize that people who say, I want to attend the Latin Mass, have to realize that at the very center of the Mass, there is this Greek phrase. They have to really say, I want to attend the Latin and Greek Mass. In fact, they actually should say the Latin, the Greek, and the Aramaic or the Hebrew, because we have Alleluia and Amen, which are words in the Aramaic language.
Bishop Schneider: And also Hosanna. Hosanna.
Robert Moynihan: Yes, Hosanna. So when we say the Latin Mass, we say it is the Mass that was consolidated in Latin, but had roots also in Greek and Aramaic.
Bishop Schneider: Maybe I can add that when we say the traditional Mass, it is the Mass of the holy languages, which were on the cross.
Robert Moynihan: Languages that were on the titulus above Jesus, where it said Jesus Christ, King of the Jews, Jesus of Nazareth. I am sorry, yes, Jesus Nazarenus Rex Judaeorum. Because they did not have J in Latin, they wrote I for Jesus, N for Nazarenus, R for Rex, and I again for Judaeorum, of the Jews. Then the priests came to Pilate and said, would you like to change that? Do not write that this is the King of the Jews, right? Jesus of Nazareth, who said he was King of the Jews. Pilate replied, What I have written, I have written, scriptsy, scriptsy. That remained written. It was in three languages: Latin, Greek, and Hebrew or Aramaic, the spoken language of Hebrew. That connects your motto with the center of the liturgy and the center of the crucifixion. The crucifixion is the mercy of God on all of our sins, all of our sins that lead to wars and oppression, which trouble our lives from birth to death. Today I am thinking and praying for everyone involved, all the soldiers, all the civilians, everyone in the Middle East.
You also mentioned very appropriately that this is the same phrase used in the Orthodox liturgy. You are trying to be a bridge. You were born in the Soviet Union. The Soviets oppressed Orthodoxy. The Catholic Church was always very small, not completely nonexistent, but small. Both Orthodoxy and Catholicism were crushed. By choosing this Greek phrase, which is in the Byzantine rite and still celebrated by the Orthodox and Eastern Catholics, you are also saying in your episcopal motto that you wish to participate in the healing of the wound between East and West.
Those are all beautiful things you spoke of. The last beautiful thing was that we are all striving and longing for holiness, and the mercy of God provides a channel for that. You spoke of Saint Thérèse of the Child Jesus, saying even if she committed many sins, she would repent and desire to repent to receive God’s grace and to be close to God. You touched on profound pastoral matters, spiritual matters, sanctity, ecclesiology, and liturgy.
When I was a boy, we used to pronounce Kyrie eleison in the old Mass. I was a little boy, and then they changed. We still say, Lord, have mercy. Same words, but we do not pronounce them in Greek. In the old Mass, it was nine times: Kyrie eleison, Kyrie eleison, Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison, Christe eleison, then repeated three more times. Today it is six times: Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy. It is a dialogue. The old form was more Trinitarian in a sense, repeated three times. The Novus Ordo uses these words in translation and is more of a dialogue between the priest and the people.
I really appreciate you touching on such sensitive and important things, like the fate of our souls and prayer to God, woven into your episcopal motto. Then there is the fact that you are from the Soviet Union, born in the USSR. This has affected your whole life. I was reading your biography. Your parents were Black Sea Germans, ethnic German settlers who lived along the northern coast of the Black Sea in the Russian Empire. At the end of World War II, they were evacuated to Berlin, then deported to a labor camp in Krasno, in the Ural Mountains. Your family was involved with the underground church in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin. Your mother’s name was Maria. She was one of several women to shelter the Blessed Oleg Zaritsky, a Ukrainian priest later imprisoned in a labor camp. In 1963, just about the time you were born, he was martyred by the Soviet regime for his ministry.
After protecting him, before he was taken away, your family was relocated to Kyrgyzstan, the Kyrgyz Soviet Socialist Republic, the next republic south of Kazakhstan, where you are now. They were released from the camps, and from there, your family went from Central Asia to Estonia, also a Soviet Socialist Republic. As a boy, you and your three brothers and sisters would attend clandestine Masses with your parents, sometimes traveling sixty miles from your home in Valga, taking the first train in the morning under the cover of darkness and returning on the last train at night.
Do you have memories of that, sometime in the late sixties and into the seventies? What was it like to live in the Soviet Union, to be a Catholic, and to face communism?
Bishop Schneider: Well, I also had the experience first in Kyrgyzstan. We had no churches, almost no priests. The priests came very rarely and in secrecy. My parents helped the underground Church in Kyrgyzstan, even organizing secret prayer meetings. I also remember the rare secret Masses at night in Kyrgyzstan, celebrated by a priest. I was a child of seven or eight years old. I remember well these Masses and prayers.
On Christmas night, because Christmas was a day of work and school in an atheist country, there was no holiday. We had to pray, sing, and sanctify the Christmas night. There were many Germans in our small town. My parents organized these meetings in our house all night. This is my unforgettable experience, the most beautiful of Christmas nights. Everything was packed, and we prayed and sang Christmas songs, all in German, without a priest. There was no priest, yet we were happy to do this.
By divine providence, across the road from our house lived one of the chief policemen of the city. It was strictly forbidden to organize any prayer meetings. But he was a good person, a friend personally. Sometimes he came to us. His name was Anatoly. He has already passed away. My father said to him, Anatoly, Tonight we are Christians and Catholic Germans. We must pray all night and sing and sanctify it. He said, It is forbidden. You cannot do this. Then he listened, and finally he said, I will take care that no police will come to you tonight. Please pray and sing. He protected us, and we could do this.
Regarding Estonia, one of the most beautiful memories was the Sunday journey to Holy Mass, taking the first train in the morning at five or six o’clock, and returning at midnight. This trip was planned to be protected from possible police control. There were four children and two parents, six people in total, and divine providence protected us. These travels to Holy Mass always remain in my memory.
Robert Moynihan: I would say the entire podcast is distinguished by the memories you give us of the time of persecution, when your parents even had to speak to the policeman across the street. There was a certain gentleness on his part. You were an underground Christian and grew up for many years in that environment. You were strengthened to be not of this world or of a worldly government, but to be part of the Kingdom of God and the liturgy. This characterizes you. This was your childhood, and you remain that type of person, someone who listens and is devoted to prayer, to faith, to the liturgy, and to being part of God’s kingdom and not worldly.
Curtis White asks, and actually makes a gift to us, which is much appreciated: Thank you, Curtis. Dr. Moynihan, thank you for your podcast. We have more than 100 people living with us right now. Bishop Schneider, watching you in Kazakhstan, and me, Dr. Moynihan. A question for His Excellency: Does Bishop Schneider foresee a time in which the Church will go back underground, as it were, back into the catacombs?
Bishop Schneider: Well, I think yes, because in some way we experienced it during the COVID lockdowns. All over the world, there were real catacomb Masses because in some countries it was strictly forbidden by the government to celebrate Mass.
Robert Moynihan: Was this surprising to you? Were you very aware that this was remarkable?
Bishop Schneider: It was not surprising. It reminded me of my childhood during the time of the Soviet Union. This was a kind of exercise for the entire world. Unfortunately, we had to experience, during the COVID lockdowns, the kind of systematic control that governments can impose at any moment. We must be aware of this and ready. Even under other pretexts, there could be restrictions in the future. We Christians, Catholics, must be ready for catacomb Masses and to confess our faith.
During this time, we really needed courageous priests. Thanks be to God, there were courageous priests during the COVID lockdowns. But I wish there had been more. There were not many bishops who were courageous. My desire is that the Lord give His Church the graces of courage and the spirit of martyrdom. The globalist agenda is currently anti-Christian, clear in its ideology of destruction of God’s creation as men and women, of marriage and family, and asking us to adore the new idol of gender ideology, perverting God’s creation as He created us. We will not adore this idol. We will not give even a grain of incense to these new ideologies.
Therefore, I think we must pray. The Pope and the bishops must speak more about martyrdom and the virtue of fortitude, which is one of the main graces of holy Confirmation. They must encourage Catholics and priests to be fearless confessors of Christ and to develop the spirituality of martyrdom.
Robert Moynihan: Okay, so many strands here, and we could discuss many subjects immediately arising from the way the Vatican handled COVID to the way various governments handled it, more or less the same around the world. I had a brief conversation in March 2020 with Archbishop Viganò by telephone. I said, they are locking the churches and not celebrating Mass. He said, I do not know. That was five years ago, and we have gone through a lot since. He said, I am not sure if this is a sign, but it seems astonishing that the Church will not be celebrating Mass throughout Italy on this Sunday for the first time since the time of the Roman emperors in the first century. All the churches agreed not to hold public celebrations to avoid infection. He said it reminds him of the passage in Scripture that there will be an abomination of desolation, an apocalyptic term, that the sacrifice would cease before the end. Does this resonate with you in any way?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, this is an apocalyptic sign. But we are Christians. We must not be scared or fearful. We have Christ. He is the winner and always with us. We must develop self-confidence as Christians, knowing we are with Christ, the winner.
For example, during the horrible communist persecution in Spain, during the Civil War, seminarians and priests were killed. There was a case where an entire seminary of young seminarians was led to execution. They were shouting with confidence and joy, Long live Christ the King. Viva Christ. They shouted with joy, confidence, and a sense of victory even as they were brought to execution, just as the first Christians did in the Colosseum and amphitheaters. They went proclaiming Christ.
Robert Moynihan: Yes, I want to ask about the Soviet Union. Throughout our lives, we have been in the shadow of the Reds. Americans were always afraid they would come. Something changed in 1989–1990. On Christmas Day 1991, Gorbachev dissolved the Soviet Union. We are now thirty-five years from that. Half of my lifetime was under the Soviet Union, and the other half has been this time when we thought the disappearance of the Soviet Union would bring freedom and joy, religious freedom throughout the world. But something has gone wrong. This also includes the West, as if a type of Marxism took power in Russia and a kind of new Marxism or wokeism took power in the West.
The thing I also want to say is that the Russians always seem to me, to some extent, to have suffered under communism. They, too, were persecuted. Orthodox priests were arrested, many were killed, and some were put in gulags. I always distinguished between Russia and the Soviet Union, or the Russian leadership and the Soviet leadership. I do not know if you agree, but I always felt sorry for the Russians because they were put under a type of dictatorship, and they lost the Orthodox Church, which was infiltrated by the KGB. Now they have had twenty-five to thirty-five years, and they, too, somehow, we should pray for them, that they can return to their faith, but they have suffered greatly. I do not know if you would comment on that.
Bishop Schneider: Of course, we must distinguish communism from the Russian people, and sometimes this is not done. This is an injustice. I grew up with Russian people, even in my family, some who pertain to the Russian. The Russian people are really good people. They are deeply religious and love Our Lady. They were abused. I think world powers, the Freemasonry, orchestrated the October Revolution. It is proven by documents. Kerensky, the first so-called civil president, was the chief of the Grand Orient of Freemasonry in Russia.
Robert Moynihan: Grand Orient, yes, the Grand Orient.
Bishop Schneider: Yes, he was the first so-called President in the February Revolution. He was the chief of Russian Freemasonry.
Robert Moynihan: So you are speaking of February 1917, yes? Before Lenin came to power in the October Revolution, a kind of liberal Masonic group overthrew the czar. You are saying Kerensky was a Freemason and the head of the Grand Orient Lodge.
Bishop Schneider: It is true. It is documented. It is not my words. It is a fact. He was, and he prepared the way for Lenin. It is evident that the Kerensky government offered no resistance during the October Revolution. He could have left Russia or the Soviet Union. He went to California.
Robert Moynihan: I did not know that Kerensky left Russia and went to California.
Bishop Schneider: He left Russia with the protection of Lenin because he helped Lenin to carry out the revolution.
Robert Moynihan: All right, so now you are my professor, and this was…
Bishop Schneider: It is a historical fact. He was accompanied by his family and went to the United States in his so-called exile.
Robert Moynihan: And you were saying…
Bishop Schneider: In December, when he died in the 1970s in the United States, the Russian Orthodox Church in the United States refused him a church funeral service, explaining that because he was a member of Freemasonry, he did not receive an ecclesiastical funeral.
Robert Moynihan: Okay, and you mentioned that all of this was, you call it, some type of political scene or show. Are you telling me that politics sometimes can be fake?
Bishop Schneider: Of course. We are not little children. We must open our eyes and see what it was. The first so-called People’s Commissars, the default commissioners in the first government of the Soviet Union, from 1918 to 1920, were not Russian at all. They were Russian Jewish people, not Orthodox, not believers, not part of the Orthodox Church, but part of the Jewish Russian population. Orthodox Russians were only a minority. This is a historical fact. We must open our eyes and examine history. Even Stalin was not Russian. He was Georgian.
Robert Moynihan: All right, so I had heard of this, but the general idea is that the First World War was a terrible war, probably never should have occurred. It grew bigger and bigger until it became worldwide. People were gathering. The United States finally entered in 1917. In America, we initially said we would not be involved in a European war, but we did get involved. After that, Christianity, in some way, took a serious decline. It had already declined during the French Revolution and through the modernism, technology, and inventions of the 1800s. But after the First World War, 1914–1918, the Soviet Union became not only post-Christian, but anti-Christian. They were not permitted, and your family experienced this, not permitted to celebrate the liturgy. They were arrested. They could not baptize their children publicly. They had to do it secretly, but if they were caught, they would be arrested.
In other countries, other isms emerged that were no longer Christian. Fascism arose in Italy, Nazism in Germany. Each of these movements distanced European people from their Christian traditions all over the Western world. In a certain way, liberalism itself was deeply influenced by humanism and Freemasonry, so it too was not rooted in the Christian faith. Christ was set aside more than a hundred years ago, after the First World War. It is amazing that we still have the Church, but we are under tremendous pressure. We are concerned about the splitting of the Church, the loss of faith, the loss of traditions, becoming worldly, setting Christ aside, and becoming, as they say, an NGO, a non-governmental organization that does social work.
One of our readers asks this as well. Bishop Schneider asks, FLIR dude, flyer dude, I think, Bishop Schneider. Thank you for your question. Are there any circumstances where the SSPX, when they consecrate bishops, such as their intention on July 1 to consecrate new bishops for the Society of St. Pius X, would cause either the FSSP, the Fraternity of St. Peter, which is inside the Catholic Church, founded by Cardinal Ratzinger as a kind of alternative to the SSPX, or the ICKSP, the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, to also feel it necessary to consecrate bishops? Will that ever happen? I do not know if you can comment or are familiar with this, but what do you think?
Bishop Schneider: Well, we have to distinguish this. The Fraternity of St. Peter and the Institute of Christ the King have no need for their own bishop because, for their ordinations, they always have bishops available from all over the world. There is no lack, so they can do it, and they do. They may invite regular bishops who are approved, or even me. I have already conducted several ordinations for Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Müller, and others. So they have no necessity to consecrate their own bishops because they are a kind of religious community.
The Society of St. Pius X is a different situation. They are not yet fully regularized by Rome, so they cannot request a bishop, me, or another to perform ordinations without risk. If I were to perform an ordination for the Society of St. Pius X, I would be punished by the Vatican because it would be ordaining a priest without proper dimissorial letters. Dimissorial letters for ordination can only be issued by a superior approved by Rome or by an institute approved by the Holy See. Therefore, the Society of St. Pius X, as long as they are not regularized, needs its own bishops to survive, to ordain priests and perform other episcopal duties or ceremonies. That is the basic difference.
Robert Moynihan: Okay, you’ve touched again on several strands here, and I am sorry we can’t proceed on each area for four or five hours because you’ve touched on things that have to do with ordaining priests and keeping these groups alive and living in the church. At the same time, you’ve touched on the role of Rome. Rome has to send out domiciliary letters that permit
Bishop Schneider: Rome, not Rome. Domicorial letters must give the superior of these priests, but this superior who issues the domicorial letter must be the superior of a community approved by Rome, so deep
Robert Moynihan: And then you or any other bishop in the church can consecrate priests for them. Yes, but I guess I do want to ask two things, and we only have about 10 minutes to go. Two things, one, you met with Pope Leo on the 18th of December, so that’s two months and 13 or 14 days ago, two months and two weeks ago. You talked to him about being generous for the old liturgy in particular because the idea of consecrating bishops didn’t come until February 2. After February 2, when you heard that the SSPX wanted to consecrate bishops on July 1, and then when Rome said we don’t want you to do it, you then wrote another open letter to the Pope saying I hope you act in a pastoral way and reach out and be a pontiff that is a bridge maker between this group which is so profoundly Catholic in many ways but somehow is getting closer to irregular and getting closer to being excommunicated. And you want this somehow to be handled by the pope in a generous way. Is that, still, as you thought all this through, what’s your opinion now on how the pope should handle this?
Bishop Schneider: Of course, we must learn from history. I repeat, so many cases we had in history. I mentioned the Russian Orthodox Old Believers, old rituals, they could be closer to the church if, at that time, the Church authorities had had a more pastoral attitude, generosity, even if there are some things that should still be settled or discussed. It could take time, so this is my appeal. I also appeal to the Holy Father to consider the faithful, so many thousands of simple Catholics, families, children who are assisted by the Society of Pius X. For two generations they grew up, how can we simply leave them outside, how can we simply break them and say tomorrow you must change? It is impossible psychologically. We must, even in a context of decades, the Vatican speaks about tolerance, about a synodal approach, inclusiveness of all, but it is a contradiction when they are so harsh, so uncompromising with the Society of Pius X when they first come here. We will discuss, and only later, depending on the discussion, there will be the issue of the consecration of bishops. It is completely not realistic. It is not pastoral. It is really even lacking any sense of pastoral, even as a synodal approach, as they say. I think that behind it, of course, is the issue of the Second Vatican Council’s pastoral statements, which are not definitive but pastoral, and which changed in some way the doctrine, the official doctrine regarding the diversity of religions. This is touched by the document on religious freedom, which really introduced relativism, since 60 years in practice, in teaching all over the world in the church, a kind of relativism of the plurality of religions. To do dialogue must mean dialogue. It’s basically a denial of the gospel command to evangelize all and always until the end of time, not to go and dialogue. Jesus said go and teach and baptize all the people, the Buddhists, the Muslims, first the Jews, and so on. The church has done this for 2000 years. We had martyrs who went to the pagans or even to the Muslims and to the Buddhists and to the Hindus to bring them Christ, the greatest happiness. And for this, they were killed. These were the martyrs of evangelization. The apostles were killed because they were teaching. The apostles did not practice interreligious dialogue because at that time there were several sects, not only the official Roman pagan religion, but there were other cults and so on. The apostles did not introduce the method of interreligious dialogue. Even if Paul did it one moment in Athens in the Areopagus, he proclaimed Christ. He did not silence Christ. He proclaimed his resurrection. He proclaimed the Christian rule. And then they said go away, we will listen to you another time. But Paul did proclaim Christ very clearly, so he was expelled from the Areopagus.
I think this is very important. The Society of Pius X raises this question. We must be aware that we cannot continue with this method of religious freedom, plurality of religions, and interreligious dialogue as we did. Another question is the wrong ecumenical issues that other Christian religions or non-Catholic confessions are also instruments that the Holy Spirit is using. This is wrong. The Holy Spirit can use singular non-Catholic Christians, and they can even be holy souls. We cannot deny it, but not the system itself. This contradicts the Holy Spirit, the heresies, and the separations. Under the problem of the Novus Ordo, we cannot simply say we must interpret it in the hermeneutic of continuity, even the fraternity of St Peter. Why don’t they celebrate the Novus Ordo? They will never celebrate it. I know. But if the Novus Ordo could be, as Rome says, interpreted in the continuity of the hermeneutic of continuity, that is basically okay. Then my question is why the fraternity of St Peter is celebrating de facto and only exclusively the traditional rite? I think not only because of nostalgia and aesthetics and taste of tradition, but because of doctrinal issues, and they cannot explain it. This is the fraternity of St Peter and the other institutes which Rome approves for the old rite publicly; they will be punished by local bishops or by the Holy See. We must simply say this is the situation.
Now, the problem with the consecration of bishops, which now came out for the entire church, the Society of Pius X is doing good work to awaken all to honest, real awareness. There are doctrinal problems with some expressions of the council and with the Novus Ordo, which cannot simply be interpreted with twisting arguments or squaring the circle. It is not possible. We must be honest. I concede it takes time also for the Holy See and others in the church. Let us take time. Invite the Society of Pius X. Give them at least a first small normalization, regularization with the Mandatum apostolicum for the consecrations. Then we can, together, as they are not exterior, but already participating in normality, discuss seriously without twisting arguments, honestly, these problematic expressions and where it led now. We see 60 years, and then propose some corrections, some improvements. This process takes time, maybe years. It would be helpful for the entire church to enter this process of debate. This will also be a synodal process of debate about problems with some ambiguous expressions of the council and of the Novus Ordo. The Society of Pius X will do and make a contribution.
Robert Moynihan: Okay, yeah, you’re saying that the Society is not excommunicated, it’s irregular. If they are excommunicated after July 1, it’s still possible to be in dialogue with them, but it’s easier now. You’re calling for podcasts, round tables, and discussions where they would say here are the problems that we find in the Novus Ordo, where there are departures, which is the same thing that Ottaviani and Bacci said in a letter to Paul VI back in 1968. There is a desire in the church to understand this, and I think even the Orthodox would like to see that we strengthen and purify our liturgy because we’ve recognized that we allowed somehow for departures in this Novus Ordo to become irreverent and not dignified. Joseph Ratzinger made some attempts, first by permitting the old liturgy in 2007, and also with his Dominus Iesus back in the year 2000. He was highly criticized, but he said Jesus is the center of everything. Jesus is the Logos that provides the goal, the end, the life. I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. He said he’s the center that gave an answer to the problem of ecumenism. He was saying even though we can be in dialogue with Hindus or Muslims, we say Jesus Christ is the Lord. Somehow, though, the tendency to be in dialogue and to set Jesus aside has grown in the church. You’re really calling for both on the liturgical side and on the ecumenical and religious freedom side for a study, discussion, and analysis, a clarification and reworking of anything that’s incorrect or has been interpreted wrongly back into the 2000-year tradition of the church, orthodox teaching, and that this will also be of rejoicing, certainly to the Orthodox, with whom we share all the sacraments. We’re in schism from the Orthodox, but not in theological separation, except for a couple of points. You’re really calling for a kind of process of discussion, and you think it’s pastoral and Catholic. It’s not against anything. Therefore, you are a man of dialogue, reaching out to keep this group in connection with the Roman Catholic Church fully accepted. You think it could be done if they have more time. You want something special done with this particular problem of the consecrations on July 1.
Bishop Schneider: Yes, this would be the most prudent, pastorally correct, and convenient gesture, and the most, in some way, I repeat, synodal gesture of Pope Leo XIII, to grant them really the Mandatum apostolicum to legally do the consecrations. I repeat, they will be doing a greater work, not only for their own communities, but they could also exchange more and make good contributions to the entire church. Yes, why should we fear it? I have the suspicion that there are some high-ranking clergy, maybe also in the Vatican, who simply fear the presence of the Society of Pius X. They would not allow any discussions to raise some questions about the ambiguity of some expressions in the Council and the Novus Ordo. They are dogmatizing the council and the Novus Ordo, which is not correct theologically because it is not infallible, but they do it because of their ideology. They want another church. These high-ranking clergy want a secularized, protestantized, ever more liturgical church. They want a global relativistic religion. They want to transform the church into a naturalistic organization with maybe some religious cosmetics and decorations, but basically another institution to serve the elites of this world. To be honest, we are one family. We should not be dishonest. We should be able to speak openly without fearing punishment when there is a family. The father of the family says yes, please feel free to speak even against me, but you will not be punished by me. This is family spirit. I appeal to the Holy Father, most Holy Father, please show this family spirit, take them in through the official permission of the consecrations, take them into the family you are, don’t fear, and show that you are paternal, synodal.
Robert Moynihan: And so maybe we could bring some priest or theologian from the Society of Saint Pius X, their third person, on our next podcast. Perhaps we could discuss two or three points, try to work through what they are going to contribute or are concerned about. We would gain clarity. A minute ago, we put on the screen that we’ll be together for a retreat. We have a couple of dozen people joining us right here, on this island off the coast of Croatia. There is nothing else on the island except a Franciscan monastery from 1390 and two Franciscans living there. We’re trying to support that monastery, but also to create on this island a type of place for prayer, for healing, and for dialogue. Maybe we could invite a couple of people there from June 15 to 21. Around those days, July 1 will be coming up. Maybe we could still help at the last moment to bring some people there to discuss what the Episcopal consecrations on July 1 may mean. My feeling is that the enemies of the church, the opponents of Christ, are very happy to see us divided and in schism, any little division that separates us, because ultimately it weakens us. They want to see the church weak. This is my motivation, to try to keep the one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church united, and also to reach out to the Orthodox, the Orthodox whom you know so well in Russia.
Bishop Schneider: Yes, I appeal to the Holy Father. This separation, which could occur after the consecrations, if not done with the permission of the Pope, is completely unnecessary. Holy Father, you can so easily avoid an unnecessary separation. Please avoid it. The Orthodox also observe us. They say, even when you are not able, the Holy See can integrate a traditional community, and the Orthodox are even more traditional in some ways, so we do not have trust in our communal endeavors and dialogues. What trust will we have when we come back to you, and then you say, you cannot keep these traditional teachings? Then they are also fearful. I will give one example. An Apostolic Nuncio told me once he was, I think, in the time of John Paul II, in the nunciature in Cairo, Egypt. There was preparation for the visit of John Paul II to Egypt. He had to go to the Coptic Pope, Pope Shenouda at that time, who was also receiving the Pope. You know what the Coptic Pope said? He said, Please tell the Pope he shall not speak about religious freedom and the plurality of religions that we are aiming for, as the Second Vatican Council intended. Maybe he did not know the document on religious freedom well. This is interesting. The Coptic Pope was concerned that the Pope should not speak too much on this issue, not to relativize the uniqueness of Christ among Muslims. The nuncio, who was at that time a collaborator, transmitted this to the Holy See. The Holy See said, Okay, the Pope will be careful. The patriarch was calmed and then accepted the visit of the Pope. This is one example. The Orthodox are observing now how Rome treats traditional liturgy, which is for them untouchable, and how they treat more traditional views on doctrine, which were always valid before the council regarding religious freedom and ecumenism. The church taught this for centuries, and therefore, it must be allowed to continue to teach it. The Second Vatican Council did not intend to propose definitive teaching on these issues, which I mentioned: religious freedom, ecumenism, and so on. These are not definitive. They are open to improvement and correction.
Robert Moynihan: Well, you’ve said many important things again that we can discuss, but I take one thing as fundamental. The most ecumenical gesture that the Pope could make with his desire for better relations and closer relation with our brother Orthodox, from whom we’ve been separated for nearly 1000 years, would be demonstrated by his treatment of the Society of Saint Pius X. The Orthodox liturgy is very old, very traditional, and if the Roman Catholic Church cannot have a welcoming space for the old liturgy, how can the Orthodox feel comfortable returning?
Bishop Schneider: Very good, I agree. Not only liturgy, because the issue with the Society of Pius X is also doctrine, not only liturgy. I repeat, the Orthodox Church, if reconciled, will keep, I think the Holy See will allow them to keep some of their own traditional theologies which are not contrary to the Catholic faith. The Holy See will be more tolerant. I repeat, those views of Orthodox theology which are not contrary to the Catholic faith could be allowed to contribute. I know Orthodox bishops and theologians personally who could not accept, for example, the text of Dignitatis Humanae. They say they would rather agree with the traditional teaching of the popes before the council regarding religious liberty as tolerance, not as consensus. This is only one example. These aspects must also be considered, not only the liturgy, but also some expressions of the council. The Holy See must first give them integration through permission of the consecrations of bishops, a small step, and then create a convenient, psychological, pedagogical, and ecumenical atmosphere to discuss those issues that still must be discussed for the entire church. This will be an example for the Orthodox churches of how serious the Holy See is in approaching traditional communities within their own family.
Robert Moynihan: Yeah, seeing this, there might be some connection with the prophecy of Fatima that the Russian Church will convert, and the Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph, and the world will enjoy a time of peace. I would like, if we could, to leave now, and I appreciate everyone who has joined us. Consider coming in a couple of days in June to join us personally on a beautiful island in Croatia. We’ll try to work out a way for anybody to do that, if there is any difficulty scheduling or even financially. We’d like to gather people to create a movement of Catholics who have the type of spirit that Bishop Schneider is representing, the Spirit of Truth, while also talking and trying to keep together all those who seek the truth. Could you give us your blessing, Bishop Schneider?
Bishop Schneider: Dominus vobiscum.
Robert Moynihan: Et cum, spiritu tuo.
Bishop Schneider: Et benedictio dei omnipotentis, Patris et Filii et spiritus Santi descendant, super vos et maneat semper
Robert Moynihan: Amen. Thank you, Your Excellency. Welcome, thank you very much.