Michael J. Matt: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Michael Matt, and this is the Remnant Underground with a very, very special guest today. I’m very pleased to introduce to this audience His Excellency Bishop Athanasius Schneider, who is a dear friend. Welcome to Remnant TV’s Remnant Underground. How are you?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Thank you. This is God’s grace.
We are doing good
Michael J. Matt: Good. I’m glad to hear that. How are things in your country? There was something of a civil war not too long ago
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: In January, a week of a kind of small revolution, but it was a struggle for power between some political factions. But thanks be to God, the situation is now under control, and we are living in peace.
Michael J. Matt: That’s wonderful. COVID-19 restrictions are lightening up a little bit in Kazakhstan
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: They are now Almost all Covid restrictions have been dropped, so we are moving without masks in public places. It’s not prescribed anymore, and we returned almost to normality.
Michael J. Matt: I see. Well, we are all hoping and praying that it continues because, of course, you are a central feature in our Catholic Identity Conference, which will take place at the end of September. So hopefully, God willing, if the restrictions are lifted, maybe you’ll be able to join us once again for that conference.
Your Excellency, the reason I had you on the program today is because I wanted to talk about your new book, which, as far as I’m concerned, has not really gotten enough exposure, given controversies regarding the mass the traditional mass especially coming under some restrictions. The name of the book is The Catholic Mass: to Restore the Centrality of God in the Liturgy, and you are the main author. I understand our friend Aurelio Porphyry, I’m pronouncing his name correctly, is the co-author. First of all, how is the book doing? Is it available already? Is it on the market already? Can we buy it
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Since January, Sophia has published it, and I heard they have already sold a lot of copies very well this last month. I think it can do good for priests and for the faithful to understand more deeply what the Holy Mass is. Therefore, the title is The Catholic Mass. It had to be Catholic in every aspect in every sense. It was written before the journalist Christopher came out, but maybe it was providential. In this book, I tried to show the greatness of the liturgical tradition of the Church, specifically the Liturgy of the Holy Mass, which we inherited all over time from the apostles and the Fathers of the Church continuously without rupture. This treasure of prayers, gestures, and liturgy, the Church kept carefully all over time over the millennium, not only during decades but even over centuries. This is so important to understand more deeply the prayers, the rituals, the gestures, all aspects connected to the Holy Mass, which is the greatest act on Earth because it is a divine human act that Christ is himself fulfilling through his ministers.
Michael J. Matt: You say in your book that the Mass is the greatest and most important work of the Church. I’m curious because I know at the Catholic Identity Conference, we have priests from the area come to be with you to visit with you out in Pittsburgh. So my question about this book is, is this a book that could be given to anyone, whether a priest offers the traditional Latin Mass, or maybe he’s trying to make his Novus Ordo Mass more traditional? Would this be something that is very beneficial for just about any priest who is trying to do the best and most perfect act of worship through the Mass, whether you say the old or the new Mass
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: I think yes, because I was not treating explicitly, and only the order or the ritual of the traditional Mass itself. Of course, I mentioned and explained some aspects extensively, but I also presented in general the theological and doctrinal meaning of what the Holy Mass is, especially the sacrificial character and the spiritual aspects like prayer and adoration. Then we touched also aspects of sacred music, sacred art, and Holy Communion several aspects. So it’s not only the rite itself. It is broader and therefore helpful for all priests regardless of which form they celebrate. Of course, when you read the book, you will appreciate the traditional form of the Mass more because there I explained extensively the richness of this liturgical tradition. I also indicated some weak points and defects of the so-called Novus Ordo performed. Inevitably, I had to speak about these aspects of the current liturgical praxis because the aim of my book, as the subtitle says, is to restore the centrality of God in the liturgy. Our current crisis in the liturgy, the liturgical crisis, and even the ecclesiastical and pastoral crisis is the lack of the centrality of God. This lack of centrality of God manifests itself first in the liturgy because the liturgy is where we are living our Catholic faith weekly, at Sunday Mass, and so on. There, we see in the Novus Ordo this defect of the centrality of God in the shape of the liturgy and even in the details. Therefore, it is necessary that we return the Novus Ordo really filling it with the elements of the centrality of God and sacredness.
Michael J. Matt: That’s such an important point, Your Excellency, and that’s why I brought it up. I remember even Michael Davies, who was a lay champion of the traditional Latin Mass and traditional restoration. He used to make the point that we mustn’t cut off many tradition-minded priests who are still saying the Novus Ordo Mass because they are in a situation where it’s difficult for them not to. He used to talk about the direction in which the priests are going. So if a priest would much prefer to be saying the traditional Latin Mass but he’s not able to do that yet because of his bishop or his parish, if he’s reading a book like yours and trying to make his Novus Ordo Mass as traditional as possible, moving in the direction of the traditional Mass, perhaps eventually to begin offering the traditional Mass, this priest is an ally of ours. This is a tradition-minded priest who should not be cut off because he’s not yet saying exclusively the traditional Latin Mass. I think your book would be a wonderful tool to hand to many good priests who want to be more traditional, who want to know how to understand it, because seminary formation has not been good for them. I would guess this is the book to hand to that sincere tradition-minded priest, am I right?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Yes, you are correct. This was also my aim: to write for these sincere souls, seminarians or priests who desire to celebrate the sacred mystery of the Holy Mass in the most worthy and pious manner possible in their situation, where they are living, and to help them, maybe even celebrate the Novus Ordo in a manner that is more traditional. This is possible because it is a characteristic of the Novus Ordo that it leaves some freedom, some possibilities for the celebrant to shape the Mass, the celebration. So it could be celebrated towards the Lord, at Orient, and also in the Novus Ordo, only using, for example, the first Eucharistic Prayer, the old Roman Canon, even in Latin. This is not forbidden by law. Some intolerant bishops might forbid a priest to celebrate the Novus Ordo in this way or to use Latin in the Eucharistic Prayer, but that would be an abuse because the law itself, the rubrics, do not forbid it. On the contrary, the Second Vatican Council commanded that the Latin language must be retained in the Roman Rite. It is a must, not a possibility. Therefore, a priest who at least uses the Eucharistic Prayer in Latin, or maybe the preface, obeys the Second Vatican Council, and a bishop who prohibits it would be acting against the law of the Church, which still permits this. The rubrics of the Novus Ordo presuppose that the priest can celebrate facing the Lord. For example, when the priest says, “Pray brethren, that my and your sacrifice may be acceptable to God Almighty Father,” the rubric says he turns to the people to say this, then turns back to the altar to continue the Mass. Another rubric, when he says, “Behold the Lamb of God” before Holy Communion, the priest takes the host, turns to the people, says, “Behold the Lamb of God,” then turns to the altar and receives Holy Communion. So even the rubrics presuppose that at these moments the priest is turning to the Lord.
Maybe I can tell you an episode from my life. About 30 years ago, I was in Brazil giving a retreat to a charismatic group. I celebrated a Novus Ordo in a traditional way, using the Roman Canon, incense, and all the traditional forms. Afterward, the people asked me which rite it was. They had never assisted at such a venerable rite of the Holy Mass in their lives. I said it was simply the Novus Ordo. This shows that in so many churches today, people and bishops celebrate the Novus Ordo in very different ways, making it difficult to say there is only one shape of the Novus Ordo. But with the traditional Mass, there are precise prescriptions and rubrics, and there is really only one form worldwide. Before the council, there were human variations, maybe some abuses in some places, but in general, the rite itself was clear and uniform.
Michael J. Matt: I just think we can’t stress that enough, Your Excellency. The Second Vatican Council itself, despite its problems, did not call for the abandonment of ad orientum. It did not call for the abandonment of Latin or Gregorian chant. These things we still have access to. I would encourage, and I want to ask you, what is the best method to encourage priests to understand this? Those of us who grew up in the Latin Mass, as I did, and my seven children grew up in the Latin Mass, even though they are not fluent in Latin, they can comprehend what is happening at the altar. A seven-year-old can handle it easily. There is no confusion. They know exactly what is going on. I think William F. Buckley said he was in favor of reserving a special sacred language for the worship of Almighty God. It seems that if we could convey that message, which I think is what your book does, to our priests, we could show that we are not so ignorant that we cannot understand the mysteries and grandeur of the Latin Mass. Even a child can learn to appreciate and love it. Then you have this sacred liturgy set aside for the proper worship of Almighty God. Would your book help a priest understand that it is not always just putting everything in the vernacular that will make it clear? The Latin Mass united Christendom for thousands of years despite the language differences.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Yes, I dedicated several pages in my book to this aspect of liturgical language. I show from tradition and even other religions that there is a need in every religion for sacredness, even in language. In the Old Testament, the Hebrews, the Israelites, had a sacred language, Hebrew. They did not use the language of the street, Aramaic. They used an elevated language, Hebrew, and created special explanations called the Targum in Aramaic of the Sacred Scripture because the Sacred Scripture was written in the elevated Hebrew language. This principle of sacred language is in Holy Scripture itself. God gave this. Our Lord, Jesus Christ, and the apostles observed and transmitted it. People must understand that the Holy Mass is not simply a class or a lesson or a religious talk. It is primarily adoration. As I explain in a chapter of my book, the Mass is adoration. This is fundamental. We were created to adore God. In heaven, we will see God in the beatific vision. Therefore, it is so important to stress this even here on Earth in the way we celebrate. The celebration must have an expression, a space of sacrality. This is the sacred language, in our case, Latin in the Roman Rite, which expresses the veil covering the ineffable mystery which is God.
It is a regret that the Novus Ordo brought practices contrary to the indications of the Second Vatican Council, leading to the complete abandonment of Latin and sacredness. This was an attack on the fundamental characteristic of the worship of the Mass, which is mystery, the mystery veiled. The Church has preserved this since the beginning, and it is preserved in all Oriental rites, except in the reformed Roman Rite, which was more influenced by Protestant ideas, emphasizing teaching over solemn worship. In the traditional rites of the Oriental Churches, there was no reform. There is no Novus Ordo. In the Byzantine, Armenian, Coptic, and Syriac rites, mystery is preserved. There is the veil, the iconostasis. Curtains are drawn at the most holy moment, the consecration and Transubstantiation. We do not have curtains or doors on our altar, but Latin should remain. I propose that in the future the Novus Ordo, at least from the preface and throughout the Eucharistic Prayer, should be in Latin, even in a lower voice, to give this atmosphere of mystery and adoration.
Michael J. Matt: It is possible you can correct me if I am wrong, but our Lord Himself may not have been speaking as a rabbi at the Last Supper on Holy Thursday. He probably was not speaking in a vernacular tongue, correct? In other words, the apostles, simple fishermen, may not have understood the language He spoke because it was a ritual for the feast, for the Passover. They were facing, Da Vinci got it right, they would have been facing liturgical west at that point, as in the Old Testament. There are nuances today that many people do not understand. Is this correct? He would have been using an elevated language at the Last Supper. Is this true?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Yes. Saint Thomas Aquinas says in his hymn on the Eucharist that the Lord strictly observed all prescriptions in celebrating the Last Supper. All the prescriptions of the law, prayers, benedictions, and Psalms were always prayed in the sacred Hebrew of Scripture. Therefore, during the Last Supper, our Lord used the forms of Psalms and benedictions. He did not use the language of the street, which was Aramaic.
The position of the table was also prescribed. They did not sit facing one another but all on one side, according to Hebrew tradition. The most important place, in the right corner, was reserved for our Lord. Next came John at His breast, then Peter, and so on. The apostles were arranged in a half circle, but all facing the same direction. According to first-century rabbinical tradition, during the Passover meal, everyone looked in the same direction, awaiting the Messiah. This shows that the apostles celebrated the Holy Mass, the Eucharist, looking east. The people and the first Christians all looked in the same direction. Restoring this orientation is a command. It is required by the law of prayer itself and by the understanding of the sacrificial character of the Holy Mass.
Michael J. Matt: You mentioned the iconostasis, and I think it is important for people to understand. If you go to an Eastern Ukrainian Catholic Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, you will see it. There is literally a wall. Before the consecration, the priest goes behind that wall, opens the door, performs the ceremony, and closes the doors, literally separating the people from the sacred, from the Holy of Holies. We have lost track of that in the Latin Rite. The communion rail has been removed, and full access to the sanctuary has been given. The point of liturgy is to worship Almighty God first and foremost. If you look at what has happened to our church, the sanctuary has been radically changed from anything that ever happened in sacred worship. My question is this: since they have done that, it does not seem to have worked. We have lost so many Catholics. There has not been a revival of faith in the Eucharist. In fact, it has gone the other direction since we lost the sense of mystery, of the Holy of Holies. On any level, Your Excellency, do you think stripping away sacrality from the altar and worship space has succeeded?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: We see that this was an attack on one of the central characteristics of divine worship itself, which is mystery. God is an ineffable mystery, and we can only approach Him with humility and silence, as all the prophets demonstrated and as the apostles did. In the Apocalypse of St. John, the angels prostrate themselves before the Lamb in the sanctuary, and the 24 elders are with Him. This scene should be a mirror, a reflection of how we must celebrate the ineffable mystery of the Holy Mass on earth.
The communion rails, called cancelli in Rome, have been present since the first century. From the fourth century onward, Christian churches used these cancelli, what we today call the communion rail, to signify that something very holy lies beyond: the altar, the presence of Christ, and the space for the ministerial priesthood. Beyond the rail is the nave, the gathering place of the faithful. The term “nave” is feminine, symbolizing the Church as the Bride of Christ, while Christ behind the altar represents the Bridegroom. Together, Bride and Bridegroom celebrate, but each in their proper place.
For this reason, only men, representing Christ the Bridegroom, were permitted in the sanctuary during the celebration of the sacred mysteries. Women did not enter behind the cancelli because they did not have access to the ministerial priesthood. This was strictly observed as a symbol of Christ and the Church. After the Second Vatican Council, these distinctions were abolished, not by any command of the Council, which said nothing about removing the communion rail, but as a matter of fashion. Removing the rails expressed, on a symbolic level, a reduction of the distinction between the ministerial priesthood and the common priesthood of the faithful.
Visibly, with no distinction, the sanctuary becomes one common space, which, symbolically, promotes a Protestant understanding of the priesthood. In Protestantism, Luther abolished the difference between the ministerial priesthood and the laity. Many modern churches without communion rails continue this symbolic Protestantization.
Michael J. Matt: Your Excellency, you mentioned the Protestant influence. Ostensibly, the radical changes, replacing the high altar with the table altar, abandoning ad orientem, were meant to make the Mass more palatable to Protestants, to encourage a sense of brotherhood. But in reality, we have many Protestant friends who work politically or socially with us, trying to understand Catholicism. Even from their perspective, the more “Protestantized” the Mass became, the less it helped them understand what Catholic worship is.
For example, if they saw the sacred liturgy behind an iconostasis, they would understand the vast difference between veneration of Our Lady and the worship due to God at the Mass. Yet today, the new Mass, stripped of mystery, does not communicate this. Catholics have lost a sense of identity, and some drift toward Protestantism. Do you think there is a connection?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Of course. It is very sad, but over the last 50–60 years, there has been a clear Protestantization of the understanding of the Holy Eucharist and the Mass. The manner of celebration, even in the modern church, reflects this Protestant tendency: simple prayers for a meal, architecture designed for visibility rather than sacred mystery. This changes the fundamental meaning of the Mass as sacrifice, turning it into a mere communal meal and blurring the distinction between ministerial priesthood and laity.
It is regrettable, but we must reaffirm the truth. We have an obligation to explain the richness of the Holy Eucharist to our Protestant brothers and sisters. The Mass is the sacramental sacrifice of Golgotha, a divine-human act that pours out grace each time it is celebrated. By showing the traditional Mass, celebrated ad orientem and emphasizing the mystery, Protestants can better understand and be drawn toward the fullness of Catholic truth.
Michael J. Matt: I don’t want to stir too much controversy, but I know our audience would be disappointed if we didn’t hear your thoughts on what’s happening right now regarding the Traditional Latin Mass. I want to set this up by recalling a moment when I attended your Mass in France, outdoors, at the Chartres pilgrimage. I didn’t know you well at the time, but you were offering the Traditional Latin Mass. I was kneeling in a field with 10,000 Europeans. Most of them spoke languages I didn’t understand, German, French, etc., but when the Mass began, we were united: Unam Sanctam Catholicam. We understood exactly what was happening. There was no language barrier at all. This is a tradition that has endured for over a thousand years.
Given Traditionis Custodes, there’s a certain irony here. Pope Francis, who is more of a global-minded pontiff, is presiding over a Church where the Traditional Latin Mass already had a global presence, uniting the entire Catholic world. It demonstrates that you don’t need localized or “nationalist” liturgies to achieve universality; this Mass already accomplishes that. So why doesn’t he see it? Why has the Holy Father suddenly decided to crack down on what is arguably one of the most vibrant and growing movements in the Church today? Why, in the midst of a pandemic, attempt to restrict or cancel it?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: I don’t know; he will have to answer to God. God will ask him these questions, and we must pray that he is ready to stand before God’s judgment. I cannot fully explain his motivations, though we can theorize. Perhaps it is ideological. Over the last decades, there has been a tendency I would call “naturalism”, a drive to strip the Church of sacredness and the supernatural character of its life. The Traditional Latin Mass expresses mystery, sacredness, and the supernatural, which runs counter to this ideology.
Pope Francis may also believe that the Mass is “old-fashioned” or that “the world has changed” and people will not understand it. But that presupposition is flawed. Every human being retains a natural religious feeling. Nature was damaged by sin, as Luther noted, but not destroyed. The desire for sacredness remains in every person. By silencing elevated expressions of worship and prohibiting traditional elements, including the Traditional Latin Mass, this desire is suppressed.
When sacredness is removed, what emerges instead are purely naturalistic or secular forms of “honor” and beauty. For example, one may meticulously arrange receptions, meals, or ceremonies for the Pope, cardinals, or bishops, beautiful, careful, and aesthetic, but these honors are directed toward human beings, not God, who is a Mystery.
Many bishops and theologians oppose the Traditional Latin Mass because it reminds them of a truth they reject: that God is holy, supernatural, and worthy of worship. To those living primarily in a naturalistic understanding of religion, this Mass is disturbing, so they seek to abolish it.
But they will not succeed. God is still working in the Church. These leaders may think they are in control, but the true Master of the Church is God. Their attempts to destroy the Traditional Mass are in vain. Despite restrictions, the Mass continues to grow, sometimes quietly, sometimes modestly, but it grows. God will intervene, restore the fullness of truth, and the tradition will triumph in Rome. This revival, prepared through humility and even persecution over decades, will come, and the victory will be fully realized for the glory of God.
Michael J. Matt: That’s wonderful, Your Excellency. And of course, that is the supernatural hope we all hold. On the natural level, though, it seems that many bishops are not eager to enforce Traditionis Custodes. Right now, it feels like it’s becoming somewhat of a dead letter. What would you say to bishops and priests who are wondering what to do? Would you suggest they find a way to continue celebrating the Latin Mass no matter what?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Yes, I would encourage them: please continue. The fruits of the traditional Mass are evident; there are so many young people, children, families, joyful, not sad, people who truly know their faith, live their faith, and praise God. As a bishop, at least, you should rejoice that such places still exist in our world today. Even in modest measure, you must promote this within your pastoral prudence. Traditionis Custodes still leaves some space for bishops to act, to tolerate, or to interpret benevolently. In doing so, these bishops will be promoting a truly pastoral approach, which is at the heart of Vatican II and the Church’s pastoral mission over the years.
Michael J. Matt: Right, Your Excellency. Thank you so much. I could talk with you all day, but I know you are very busy. I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart as an American Catholic for the stand you’ve taken over the years in defense of God, tradition, and the sacred liturgy. I first became acquainted with your work when you took a strong stand in favor of Communion on the tongue, which influenced many people. Thank you for continuing the leadership you provide. We will pray for you, and I hope you will pray for us here in America. How can people order your book? What’s the best approach?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Yes, they can go to Amazon and search for “Bishop Athanasius Schneider, The Catholic Mass, SophiaPress.” All the details are there. They can also contact the SophiaPress publishing house directly, and they will find the book.
Michael J. Matt: Very good. I would also encourage our audience to attend the Catholic Identity Conference on September 30, where we’ll have the opportunity to meet His Excellency, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, in person. It’s always a great honor. Thank you again, Your Excellency. God bless you, and I hope we will speak again soon.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: And I want to thank you, Mr. Matt, for all that you are doing for the faith and for good Catholics in the United States, even those who may be suffering in some way. God will reward your sufferings and your fidelity. I encourage everyone: continue to live the traditional faith of our fathers and the saints, even in these difficult times, with conviction and joy.
Michael J. Matt: Thank you, Your Excellency. God bless you.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Praise be our Lord Jesus Christ.