Interviewer: At various times in human history, people have tried to refashion humanity. The Roman emperors demanded that they be worshiped, and the Christians refused to bow or to offer incense to Caesar, and they were persecuted for that. They were killed. The Soviet Union wanted to create a new man, the Homo sovieticus, the Soviet man who would no longer be part of a class society but would be part of a brotherhood of working men and women. But this society collapsed, just as the Roman Empire collapsed, and we saw it in our own lifetimes. You grew up in the Soviet Union. Can you tell us anything about this attempt to create a new type of man and why it failed?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: First, it failed because it was not based on the simple order of creation, which God created. God is the inventor. He is, in some way, the artist, the architect of the universe and of human life and being. He gave an order. When you do not observe the functions or the laws of a being or even of an instrument, it will collapse over time and not work.
The same happened when the communists built a completely materialistic society that denied the immortality of the soul and eternity, holding only a temporal, materialistic view. This is against the nature of the human being. Such a system cannot function for long. It functioned for maybe seventy years, and then it collapsed. They even proclaimed the eternal Soviet Union, vechni sovietski sayus, the eternal communism, even though they did not believe in eternity. Other dictatorships, such as Hitler’s, also proclaimed eternity. Hitler spoke of the thousand-year Reich, and it collapsed after twelve years. The same will occur whenever people establish a society like the Homo sovieticus against the plan of God.
Interviewer: Some people have a sense that we are now experiencing another version of this attempt to reshape and remake the human being. We call it perhaps globalism, but it is a globalism based on tremendous computer power and the immense memory of computer chips, which can record every purchase you make in your life. They can decide if you like a donut or an egg, and they can create a profile of you over time that can be used to determine what you might fear or be attracted to. In this way, the increasing information society, with these global technological companies, the technocracy, seems to be merging the human person into a kind of global mind. Should we be concerned about this?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Of course. We are all witnessing this in our daily lives. We are under continuous control through our phones, our travels, and now with new mandated vaccinations, which are also a clear sign of control. They can track us. These are signs that a person who is continuously controlled is not free and is, in substance, a slave. When you are not free, you are controlled. Slaves are controlled.
Interviewer: You mentioned tracking. Are you saying that because you carried a card or pass, or are you suggesting there is something in the vaccine itself?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: I don’t know this, but I know that you are marked. Your number, your pass, your green pass, or other identification holds all your data. When you travel, you must show it. Even when you go to a supermarket, you must show the green pass, and this is recorded.
Interviewer: You say this is a sign of not being free or of being a slave. But isn’t it merely a matter of being well-ordered and well-organized?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: No. It is apparently well-organized. It must be well-organized to maintain a slave society. If it is not organized, you cannot control a mass of slaves.
Interviewer: But who then would be the controllers? There is a Latin phrase, quis custodiet ipsos custodes, who guards the guardians themselves? How can we be sure that the masters of this new, well-ordered, global society are benevolent, wise, kind, and generous, rather than malevolent, unkind, and exploitative toward the humanity they control?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: It would be completely naive to assume that those who create such total control are benevolent. If you limit freedom, it is not benevolent. Much like the motto of the state of New Hampshire, “Live free or die,” this is the reality. When you begin to control someone in such a way, it is not benevolent. You are not controlling children, who lack reason and must be protected. You are controlling adults who have intellect and free will. You are converting society into a kind of community of little children who do not know how to reason or behave, or, more accurately, into slaves. I am more inclined to believe that they treat us as slaves, using beautiful expressions and images of protection.