Transcript:
Christopher Wendt:
I’m Mr. Christopher Wendt, I’m the international director of the Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima. Tonight I’m joined with His Excellency, Bishop Athanasius Schneider and also Dr. Michael Sirilla. Professor of Dogmatic Theology at Franciscan University of Steubenville. We’re all so excited that you’re here. Your Excellency, thank you for coming on. Tonight’s format is going to be a Q&A Session again, just like what we’ve done in the past.
If you recall, last time, we did a Catechism class with His Excellency but since then, hundreds of questions came in. In fact, just today, we received 30 new questions. So we will try to get as many questions as we can. We typically can cover about 20 questions in one session. Since there are so many questions, we’re going to have another Q&A session on April 13, 9pm on Eastern time.
I have an announcement that I am very excited about because it would be a special evening: on May 13, His Excellency has decided to start a worldwide consecration to Our Lady, according to St. Louis de Montfort. His Excellency will lead us in the consecration prayer that St. Louis de Montfort wrote. The preparation for this consecration will start on April 10 until May 13. You are all invited. If you want to be a part of it, email us at info@livefatima.io and say “please put me on the list” and we will put you on the list. We’ll send out everyday the daily prayers so that you’ll have what you need to do the consecration. You can also request this book from Tan Publishing, it has a vinyl cover and it is very handy to use. We will all be using this book and the emails will contain prayers from this book.
Another that is exciting is that we’re celebrating the 500th anniversary of the Catholic faith in the Philippines. March 31, 1521, the Spanish celebrated the first mass in the Philippines; and at the end of this evening, after we say the prayer for the concentration or the prayer that the Holy Father will make the consecration, I’m going to ask His Excellency to bless the Philippine nation as they celebrate 500 years of the Catholic faith.
And without further ado, I’m will turn this evening over to Dr. Michael Sirilla, who will be asking your questions.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Thank you, Christopher. I’d like to ask His Excellency if he would lead us in a prayer tonight.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
Pater Noster, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo et in terra.
Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Thank you, Your Excellency. Thank you, Christopher. It is such a blessing to be with you all again. Even more so now than ever, as things seem to intensify in the spiritual warfare. On a natural level, there are so many reasons to despair but on a supernatural level, in the light of the gospel, there’s no reason to despair. Thank you so much for being here tonight Your Excellency because it is really encouraging to have you.
So let’s get started. There are so many questions and I know we won’t get through all of them. The first one is from a priest, a friend of mine, who having the same question as I am from the heart, is asking regarding the letter from the Vatican Secretariat of State stating that individual celebrations of the mass are suppressed at the side altars of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Priests and faithful coming to the basilica or to mass there will only be able to take part in one of the four concelebrated masses each morning as well as the other concelebrated masses during the day at the main altars and significantly limiting the Traditional Latin Mass. Your Excellency, what does this say about the mass and how should priests and the faithful respond to this?
Bisho Athanasius Schneider
It is truly a very sad situation. I think it is not correct. Firstly, according to the true spirit of the law of the Church, the Canon Law, the Church always guarantees that every priest should have the freedom to celebrate the Holy Mass individually; it is the right of the priest that the Church endows to the priest. It is also a law of the Church that no one can be forced to concelebrate. Therefore, to outlaw Holy Mass on the side altars in the Basilica of St. Peter’s is a complete undermining of the Law of the Church. This sets a bad example from the Holy See that will be witnessed by the entire world, and this will pave the way for others to imitate it and end up going against the Law of the Church. This is a new kind of implicit persecution against the individual celebration of the Holy Mass by the priest. We have to ask with the utmost humility of the Holy See that this new norm will change according to the Law of the Church.
The other is the Traditional Form of the Holy Mass is made impossible to celebrate in the Basilica for the reason that in the Traditional Form, there is no concelebration. But, in some way or another, we still give our gratitude to our Lord that it is still tolerated in the Basilica of St. Peter; however, it is only permitted in the grottos, below in the catacombs. The Traditional Mass and the individual Mass are now becoming some kind of clandestine mass or “Mass of the catacombs” in Rome, or at least in the Basilica of St. Peter. We fully know and understand that the circumstances of the time of the clandestine church brought plenty of fruit. This situation of being persecuted and forced to go to the catacombs will undoubtedly yield abundant fruits for the Church, as it has done in the past and will do so again, I am confident. As a result, even in these trying times, we must maintain a supernatural spirit. God will use this for a greater spiritual benefit in ways we cannot fully understand, and God will ultimately bring abundant fruits for the Church even during this difficult situation.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Thank you. Yes, It’s so good to hear that encouraging note there because, as I’ve said, on the natural level, there are so many discouraging things but what you said was right, by faith, we know this. We know God’s goodness and we know that he will bring good out of this. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Here’s the next question, It’s about the Church’s teaching on the charismatic movement. The question is, “I know that it was started by the Protestants and that there are some Catholics that do get interested but I’m concerned for a friend of mine who is interested in it and as you care for your flock, what do you tell them? I found the charismatic movement to be like Medjugorje with lots of false teaching and practice yet some people indirectly and not through the charismatic movement, grow stronger in their faith. However, I have seen some people really go off the deep end and went far from the true faith of Christ, becoming like Protestants and rejecting the priesthood, downplaying the sacraments, etc. What do you think? And what does the church teach on this?”
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
There is no direct, concrete teaching about the charismatic movement. Even after the Second Vatican Council, the Pope and the Council accepted and encouraged the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, especially Pope John Paul II. However, we have to look at this phenomenon from a broader perspective. The Church is not only fifty years old; it is two thousand years old. We have to keep in mind that the Charismatic movement started more or less fifty or fifty-five years ago in the Catholic Church, and it was only for a short time. Therefore, the approval of Pope John Paul II is not an automatic criterion for its authenticity. I mean this with humility, of course, because the Popes can also make some prudential errors in approving different movements within the Church, which later reveal that there are some defects. Given its historical origins and influences from African-American protestant communities in the United States at the turn of the twentieth century, we must always approach this movement objectively.
It was a completely new kind of Christian denomination. Until then, Christianity had two wings: the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church. They contained our sacramental structure, an objective understanding of the priesthood and episcopacy, the sacraments, the veneration of saints, and concrete expressions of piety and devotion to the Church. The current Catholic and Orthodox churches share ecclesiastical and sacramental Christianity, and the other is Protestant, which came from Martin Luther and other protestant so-called reformers, who were not reformers but deformers of Christianity. So this wing of the Protestant world has a more subjective approach to Christianity in which it is not sacramental, without the priesthood, and without the veneration of Our Lady and the Saints. Now came the third wing: a movement, the charismatic movement, with roots in Protestantism, of course. It developed because it has the essential characteristic mark of subjectivity. So, the subjectivity of my personal experience and my personal feelings are becoming essentially central in this new form of a Christian denomination or even a kind of religion because there are also charismatic religions that are non-Christian. So, in other religions also, personal experience and feelings are becoming the sentimental aspects that form the center and criteria of the religion. This, of course, is very dangerous because we cannot make the element of feelings, which is of course a valid element and is also inculcated in Catholic tradition, the only sentimental aspect of our religion. Even though we, the Catholic and Orthodox religions, have these feelings and sentiments, they have their place; they are not the center, they are not so essential, and they play a secondary role. Here is the danger of the charismatic movement, may it be Catholic or Protestant: it has a vital focus and places central importance only on sentimental and emotional feelings. This then leads you to an external display of your personal feelings publicly, which goes against the teaching of our Lord when He says, “But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret.” “And your Father, who sees in secret, will repay you.” (Mt. 6:6), which makes the charismatic movement quite the contrary; they express their personal experience and feelings to the public. So in a way, it harms one’s pure intentions.
Modesty has somewhat of a role to play because you not only have bodily shame but also spiritual shame. One cannot exhibit themselves completely to the public, neither bodily nor spiritually, especially their soul. Lack of modesty and discretion is also another characteristic of the charismatic movement. The Church never approved this. Historically, we now go back to the so-called first charismatic phenomenon in the history of the church, and the true charismatic event was the day of Pentecost. When the Holy Ghost came and filled Our Lady and the Apostles, they neither danced nor clapped, cried, or fell down on the floor to rest in the Holy Spirit, as they called it, which is sometimes happening today. Neither Our Lady nor the Apostles present their personal feelings in the Pentecostal event; only St. Peter presents the Gospel truth in an objective way because he was filled with the fire of the Holy Spirit. He spoke clear and rational words for everyone to understand him in his own language. This fire of the Holy Spirit gave them the courage to proclaim Christ, to accept the persecution and receive martyrdom, and to be prudent and wise. They were filled with the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit. We know one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prudence. We need to be prudent. You cannot display everything in public. We also have fear of God, not really to have real fear of God, but to give due reverence and respect to our God. Another gift is piety, as are all the other gifts. These gifts are the true charismatic event of Pentecost.
A phony charismatic event occurred in Asia and Phrygia in the second century. Montanism was the movement of the Montanists. There were Catholics present, including a priest named Monatanus. They claim they had a new Pentecost experience, that the Holy Spirit came again upon them, and they had the baptism of the Spirit. They claim they are experiencing the true church—the church of the Holy Spirit. Then they started to spread some radical practices and obey their so-called prophets in their communities. As a result, the Church condemned these charismatic movements, particularly the monatists. Since then, the Church has exercised extreme caution in these matters.
So there is a good book about the charismatic phenomenon, its history, and its phenomenology. It is titled “Enthusiasm: A Chapter in the History of Religion” by Ronald Knox. I would recommend this book; it is written with precision and prudence about all this phenomenon in diverse religions and the problematic aspects of it. Of course, the Catholic Charismatic Movement has its positive qualities and characteristics. We cannot simply deny this, especially when it comes to prayer zeal and self-dedication to God. I am aware that many Catholic charismatic movements have pious devotions to the Holy Eucharist and praying the rosary. This is good, but it is not a specific characteristic of the charismatic movement. This has long been a characteristic of the Catholic tradition. I believe we must assist our charismatic brothers and sisters in returning to the more balanced ways proven and tested by the entire Catholic tradition. They will bear more fruit in the church and in their personal lives.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Wonderful, thank you, Bishop. The book that bishop was referring to is by Monsignor Ronald Knox and it’s entitled “Enthusiasm”, it is a very good reference, thank you for those reflections.
The next question I have is as follows, “Is it okay for extraordinary ministers (lay people) to give Communion to the shut-ins and to people in nursing homes? The reason I ask is because the priests in my area will not do so and the lay people feel that it is their duty to give communion to people who so desperately want it. Also, I was a little disturbed to find out that one of the extraordinary ministers took one of the hosts at home for four hours because the recipient was unable to receive our Lord at the time of the visit. What does the church teach about extraordinary ministers?”
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
If that is not the teaching of the Church, it’s only a problem of discipline, not of doctrine. This discipline was unfortunately allowed after the Second Vatican Council. It was completely unnecessary, and it went against the entire Church’s tradition. Never in the two-thousand-year tradition of the Church, be it in the East or the West, could lay people distribute Holy Communion during the Holy Mass. We have to abolish this. We cannot continue this because whenever a priest is celebrating the Holy Mass, it is not a grave necessity for lay people to assist in distributing Holy Communion. Even if there is the possibility of prolonging the celebration, we cannot do this because we have to give time to the Lord. The Holy Mass is not a cafeteria service that we have to eat and finish immediately.
Our Orthodox brothers and sisters could set us an example. Even the deacon is forbidden in the Orthodox Church, specifically the Byzantine Orthodox Churches, from touching the Body of Christ and distributing Holy Communion; only the priest and bishop are permitted to do so.
Even if there are a thousand people, they will wait. They will show patience because this is the greatest gift of the Church, the Body of Christ. We must make time, especially when receiving it, and not treat it as if we’re eating at a fast-food restaurant. We spare the time because we need to be in the moment of the distribution of Holy Communion, for it is the most sacred and holy moment. Before the Second Vatican Council, the deacons could distribute Holy Communion because they were the extraordinary ministers, since sacramental ordination had been bestowed upon them. We must draw a clear line between the practice of extraordinary so-called lay ministers during Holy Mass and their practice outside of Holy Mass. These have very important differences.
So, outside Mass, there was a tradition in the Church during the time of persecutions, even in the first centuries, and in my personal experience, in the Soviet clandestine church, lay people could give Holy Communion but only outside the Holy Mass, to bring Holy Communion to the prisoners and to the dying, and even my own mother gave Holy Communion to her mother, my grandmother, when she was ill, because there were no priests. These were the realities in those cases: with the permission of a priest or a bishop, lay people could give Holy Communion to those in need of it, but of course, they have to do this with the greatest possible reverence. For example, they have to have in their house a small room where there can be a tabernacle that is reserved only for this purpose. I can’t speak for such circumstances, but if such a situation existed, as it did in my case with the persecution, my great aunt had a room with a hidden tabernacle for the Blessed Sacrament. They were present in the room and offered adoration because it was during a time of persecution. So, in this case, it could be done, and the greatest possible reverence was shown towards the Body of Christ.
The other aspect is that when lay people bring the Body of Christ to the sick or the imprisoned, they have to help them make an act of contrition because we need to receive our Blessed Lord with a purified heart. Especially when they have serious sins, they should not receive Holy Communion and instead ask for a priest to come and hear confession. In this case, these extraordinary ministers have to seek out a priest, even from far away, to invite him, bring him, and drive him. Please plan a trip, bring a priest, and have him confess this day to this prisoner and give him Holy Communion. So it has to be organized and have an inventive, clear motive to really ensure that these people receive the Holy Confession to purify their souls. It is even more important in some ways. The first sacrament is confession, followed by Holy Communion, which purifies your soul. So, at the very least, you can have spiritual communion. So these have to be distinguished from these aspects.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Wonderful. Thank you. The next question, the person asks, “What is the Church’s teaching on submission within marriage? It is a given that the husband should not dominate his wife but it seems as though the magisterium after Vatican II is embarrassed by what the Sacred Scripture says by speaking about a mutual submission with no authoritative head. What are we to believe about the role between husband and wife in marriag as Catholics?” Just to be clear, that is how the questionner worded the question and I will make a disclaimer that I do not have anything to do with the wordings of the question, but it is still a fair question.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
They have to follow the Holy Scriptures; the Church cannot be above the Holy Scriptures. St. Paul says that the true relationship in marriage should analogously be the same as that between Christ and his Church, the bride. The sacrament of marriage is a symbol of Christ and the Church’s union. This is the content of the sacrament; from it flows practical behavior. As Christ is the head, we cannot deny that the husband is not the head of the family, and it is not an issue of dominance because, just as Christ is not dominating us, he is loving us, and he gives us life. It is the husband’s responsibility to love his wife and even to give his life for his wife and children. This is of course a very demanding but very important task; it has to be, and it is always the head of the family who is in charge.
When we want to live in the just eyes of marriage, especially according to the Word of God, the wife has to submit to her husband. It is not a matter of who is less important but of order, just as in the order of creation. God created Adam first, then Eve. Adam is representing Christ, and Eve is representing Mary, the new Eve. The heart of this relationship between the husband and wife is in the submission of love and respect; you cannot separate love and respect.
Therefore, the wife is the heart and the husband is the head; this is the order of the marriage that God established. Archbishop Fulton Sheen wrote a short book about marriage. He said you need three to get married: the husband, the wife, and Christ. If you have Christ in your marriage, the wife is also in some way submitted to the husband according to the teachings of the Gospel.
I mean this in the supernatural sense; according to the author of creation, being obedient or submissive to your husband is an expression of respect and love.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Thank you. The next few questions are about the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The questioner says, “In order to fulfill my Sunday obligation, is it licit for me to attend a sedevacantist church like Pius V? In my area, there are no reverent mass that I can go to. There is no society of Pius X either and I am worried for my salvation.”
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
No, it is not permitted to attend because this is a true schismatic community and they are denying the truths that the Church has concretely established. So, the sedevacantists are true schismatic communities comparable to the Orthodox Church. There is a difference between them: the Orthodox deny the primacy of the Pope, while the sedevacantist does not deny the dogma of the primacy of the Pope; they deny that there is a head of the Church. Some believed it for 70 years, even going back 200 years. The sedevacantist believes Francis is not the Pope. It is a subjectivism concept, and it contradicts religion, common sense, and the faithful trust in God that God has always bestowed upon us, even in the worst situations in which the Church has been led by a Pope. There was always a Pope, even when there were considerable periods of vacancy in the chair of Peter, but not for a considerable period of time.
In this case, the sedevacantist denies, in practice, the reality of the primacy of the Pope, which is an essential part of our Catholic faith. They are in some ways similar to the Orthodox communities at this point, which both deny the practical, concrete aspect of the dogma of the papacy. Therefore, we cannot go to the sedevacantist Mass in this case because we truly believe in the fullness of the revealed truth of the primacy of the Pope. It is opposed to the church’s visibility and is moving closer to Orthodox teachings. According to them, the head of the church is invisible; it is only in Christ. This is truly against the fundamental structure that God gave the Church: the visibility of the head of the Church—the Pope, the bishops, and the priests.
There is a difference for the Society of Saint Pius X in believing in the fullness of the primacy of the Pope because the society accepts the Pope and names and prays for him in the Mass. Their problem is that they do not obey his orders, but this is another canonical aspect of external disobedience, which they have good reason to believe given the church’s enormous, extraordinary crisis. Unfortunately, the Pope helped and promoted harmful things in the church, especially in the liturgy, which justifies their disobedience to the Pope. I think it is important that the Society of Saint Pius X believed in the primacy of the See of St. Peter.
It is truly necessary to obey the primacy of the Pope, for it is within the fullness of the Catholic Church, especially when the Pope speaks about doctrine, which is the doctrine of Christ. In the case of the Society of Pius X, obedience is limited to canonical submission. This is the difference between the Society of Pius X and the sedevacantist communities.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Thank you for that Your Excellency. Now, I would like to personally ask a follow up question, I’m sure you have heard of this. This always comes up over the years in my studies. Using the 1983 Code of Canon Law as reference, there are claims that in the danger of death, a Catholic may receive a Viaticum from an Eastern Orthodox priest or priests in Schism since the Eucharist is still valid. I’m not sure if that is correct but if it is, would a Catholic faithful be able to receive viaticum from a schismatic priest such as priests from Pius V.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
In the canon law, there is a canon that says that even an excommunicated priest can give the sacraments, the absolution, and of course the Holy Communion to a dying person in danger of death. An excommunicated priest can still give the absolution.
This is the most important, I repeat: the absolution – the sacrament of penance. You can receive Holy Communion spiritually, but for me, the most important thing is the absolution from your sins, and a schismatic priest or excommunicated priest according to the canon law can still do this because in this case, the most important law is the salvation of the soul. Maybe he can also give Holy Communion.
I think it is plausible for a schismatic priest to administer Viaticum in assisting a dying person but it is not simply for a sick person or someone in a persecuted situation. I will not say this because the church never allowed heretical or schismatic priests in the first centuries. In the first centuries, during the persecution of the church, they were not allowed to give sacraments unless these people were really on the verge of death.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Thank you, that’s a very important distinction. The next question is again on the mass. The person asks, “There are no Latin mass nearby and the mass celebrated in the regular parish is very irreverent, sad, and disturbing. Since there is currently a relaxation of the precept that we attend Mass every Sunday (I’m assume that its related to the COVID situation and that is an issue in itself), often lately, we have been staying at home on Sunday mornings. As a father, I lead the family in the mass prayers from the traditional Latin Mass. In it, we actually pray as a family, we chant the ancient Latin, read and reflect on the readings, use holy water, light candles and make a heartfelt spiritual communion. It sounds wonderful but is it? Are we doing the right thing by avoiding mass at the local parish? To what extent should family seek mass when there is no obligation? What situation is best for our children? What do you think your parents would do?”
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
It depends on the extent of the irreverences in that parish, I don’t know the concrete situation. If the irreverences, heresies, or ambiguities in doctrine are dangerous, which the priest is preaching then it’s better not to go there. In this case, in the example that you gave, it is justified to just be at home just like what we did during the Soviet period when we had no place.
The father of the family has to organize at least once a month a real trip to another place to assist a real worthy Sunday Mass. Maybe he can seek a place somewhere nearby or another church in his region where at least a Novus Order mass or a Latin mass is celebrated in a worthy manner.
So he has to seek this possibility and make the sacrifice of traveling. We traveled 70 miles for Sunday Mass. 70 miles in one direction and another in coming back. For me, it was one of the most beautiful experiences in my life: the trips to Sunday Mass. And then all your life you will be fascinated by its importance. In this case, I would suggest that the father should do this, even if he cannot do this every Sunday but at least once a month or twice depending on the distance.
Dr. Michael Sirilla
That’s great. The next question…
Christopher Wendt:
Please ask question no. 14, I think they will agree.
Dr. Michael Sirilla
Thank you, Christopher. “What is the principle which makes the vaccine that uses stem cells from aborted babies immoral? For example, is it the disrespect of the body or scandal cooperation with evil? Secondly, if the aborted baby’s body was properly buried with the exception of the minimum number of cells for the development of the vaccines, would it make the vaccines licit?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
The basic evil here is that it is associated with the murder and assassination of an innocent unborn child. The deepest root of evil is that in some way, you are connected personally along these series of crimes which are all connected. There is no moment wherein you can separate this and say, ‘No, I am not touched by this evil,’ you are touched – you have its mark in your body. Even if it’s only 0001%, it does not matter, it’s still there, it’s simply common sense. You do not need to be an Aristotle or a St. Thomas Aquinas, it is just common sense.
It is common sense, if it were not for the assassination of an innocent child, you may not have your medication or vaccine. These are all connected crimes because otherwise, you will not be able to get your vaccine or your drug. This is the crime: the assassination and you will be part of this chain even in the most remote way. There is a connection and in this case, it is you as an individual, you are now personally before this vaccine tube.
So you are now confronted with this product of the assassination – the ultimate product, even if it had only been tested, it is still connected. Why should it have been tested in the first place? Please take other means that have no connection. It would have been better for it not to be tested than this. But since it still has a connection, no matter how small, you are still a part of it. Now you are confronted with this evil and horrible massacre.
This child sacrifice is more than just any child sacrifice because it is a child sacrifice in a sophisticated and cunning way. I repeat, in a sophisticated and cunning way. The world is administrating this to us Catholics, “please take this, it’s beneficial for your health.” But this is based on the tears of innocent children. They are already weeping in the womb of their mother. They do.
You cannot take cells from a dead body no – it has to be a living body. This is horrible. Second crime: to extract cells not from a corpse or a dead body but from a living one. The second horrible crime is the extraction of cells. And it would be cynicism to say ‘Oh, well we had killed the baby and extracted the cells but we gave them an honorable funeral,’ it would be a great cynicism to do this.
Another important aspect is that by accepting these we are silencing our fiery protest against the usage of body parts of these unborn assassinated children for medical research. There are big industries in fetal technology today. When you accept the vaccine even if it’s only for testing, it is already horrible, and you are already silencing your protest. You have to make a flaming fiery protest against this. When you are silent on this, you are contradicting yourself and if the entire church accepts this, we are silencing our protest. If we accept abortion-tainted medicines and vaccines even if it is only for testing, we are ultimately collaborating with the great immense culture of death. We are committing a grave sin of omission in this historical moment of protesting uncompromisingly against any abusive use of body parts of assassinated unborn children and all these horrible fetal technology and commercialization.
We have to be clear as Christians and there is no analogy or any other comparative method that could help, it is not applicable. No. It is so unique, this aspect of the assassination and concatenation. It is so unique that you cannot use some historical examples or other interesting examples to justify this. No. It is too unique.
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Thank you, Bishop, for your outspoken statements about out this together with your fellow Bishop, Bishop Strickland in Texas, you have empowered many of the faithful to speak out about this. Many scholars have (or at least some of us) have spoken out along the same lines. Most of us do not tolerate this. It is not even about the question of cooperation of evil but more on the question of benefiting from these ill-gotten gain which isseverely condemned in scripture, especially in the book of Proverbs. In Proverbs 11 it says, “Do not benefit from ill gotten gains but in righteousness and repentance, you will find life.” The life that we are looking for is the Spiritual and supernatural life, not just temporal and physical life. We should not compromise with this.
I’m sorry for adding my own thoughts here but I absolutely agree that this is extremely important. I think that the Vatican guidelines are misconstrued, It undermine our witness. Thank you, thank you for your witness, Your Excellency. We’re so grateful. Chris, do we still have time for one more question?
Christopher Wendt:
No, we have to respect His Excellency’s time.
Dr. Michael Sirilla
Okay, so we’re going to continue next time on April.
Christopher Wendt:
Your Excellency, I’m gonna put on the screen the prayer that the Holy Father will consecrate Russia, can you lead us in that prayer? And then, can you give a special blessing upon the Filipino listeners tonight and on their nation that is celebrating 500 years of the Catholic faith.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
In the name of the Father and the Son, the Holy Spirit. Amen.
O Immaculate Heart of Mary, you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother.
Look upon the distress in which the Church and the whole of humanity are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church.
In Fatima, you warned against these errors, as you spoke about the errors of Russia. You are the Mediatrix of all graces.
Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope: that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart so that Russia will be converted, a period of peace will be granted to the world, and your Immaculate Heart will triumph, through an authentic renewal of the Church in the splendor of the purity of the Catholic Faith, of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life.
O Queen of the Holy Rosary and our sweet Mother, turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer. Amen.
We entrust to Our lady, the Philippine country, the Philippine church, the Catholic Church, and everyne, that they will remain faithful to their Catholic faith and their love for the Holy Eucharist and to Our Lady. I will extend these blessings especially to our Catholic brothers and sisters from the Philippines and thank them for their example that they have given to the world, especially their fidelity to the Catholic faith.
Dominus vobiscum!
Christopher Wendt and Dr. Michael Sirilla:
Et cum Spiritu tuo.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
Et benedictio Dei Omnipotentis, Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti, descendat super vos et maneat semper. Amen.
Christopher Wendt:
Amen. Thank you, Your Excellency, for coming on tonight. I really appreciate it, I’m so inspired by your witness. We’re looking forward for more answers next time on April the 13th.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
I wish you all a blessed Sunday of the Leatare, the joy in the Lord. All of you and your families
Dr. Michael Sirilla:
And to you as well, Your Excellency, thank you so much.
