Dr. Robert Moynihan: Hello. We are here today with Bishop Athanasius Schneider, 60 years old, from Astana in Kazakhstan. Bishop Schneider, we have a few questions to ask you about your trip in recent trip to the United States and then more generally about the situation of the Church and the world in late 2021 as we speak. It is October 24, and you have been traveling in the United States for three weeks. Can you tell us briefly about your trip? Where did you go? What have you seen? What struck you especially, and what caused you some concern?
Bishop Schneider: I had a generally positive impression. Very much this time, the reason why I came was that I was invited by the Catholic Identity Conference in Pittsburgh and then by the Call to Holiness Conference in Detroit. These were the main events. Then also the solemn pontifical Mass in honor of Blessed Emperor Karl on the 21st of October here in Virginia, in the Washington DC area. These were the three main events why I came here to the United States.
Then I also visited other places and gave some conferences and holy Masses. I visited the Sophia Press headquarters in New Hampshire. I had a really general positive impression this time. I would say I witnessed signs of a true springtime of the Church because I met so many young families. The Masses which I celebrated and the conferences were crowded, and the majority were young people, families, even children, the youth, students.
It was really a joy for a bishop to see young people. They are all longing to hear the truth, the simple Catholic faith, to participate in the liturgy, the Latin Mass, the traditional Latin Mass of all the ages of the saints. I also visited some Catholic colleges, and I witnessed the same vigor, joy, and longing for the truth of the Catholic faith and the liturgy.
I could say that these were all signs of hope in these difficult times. I believe that the United States is a country where the true tradition is now growing more and more among young people and young families.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Some people have a sense that at the present moment we are experiencing yet another version of this attempt to reshape and remake the human being. We might call it globalism, but it is a globalism based on tremendous computer power and tremendous memory in computer chips, which can record every purchase you have made in your life. They can decide whether you like a donut or an egg and build a profile of you over time. This could then be helpful in determining what you might be afraid of and what you might be attracted to.
In this way, the increasing information society, with these global, sprawling technological companies, the technocracy, seems to be merging the human person into some type of almost global mind. Does this seem to be something we should be concerned about?
Bishop Schneider: Of course. We are all witnessing this, that even in our daily life, we are under continuous control through our phones and now through the travels we are making. With the new forced and mandated vaccinations, which are also a clear sign of control, they can track us. These signs show that a person who is continuously controlled is not free and is substantially a slave, because when you are not free, you are controlled. Slaves are controlled.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: You mentioned tracking, but are you saying this is because you carry a card or a pass, or are you saying there is something in the vaccine itself? I do not know.
Bishop Schneider: I do not know this, but only that you are marked. You are already registered. Your number on your pass, the green pass, or another pass, contains all your data. When you are traveling, you already have to show this. Even when you go to a supermarket, you have to show the green pass. This is recorded, of course.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: You say this is a sign of not being free or of being a slave. But is it not merely a matter of being well-ordered and well-organized?
Bishop Schneider: No, it is apparently well organized. It has to be well organized in order to keep together a slave society. If it is not well organized, you cannot keep and control a mass slave society.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: But who then would be the controllers? There is a phrase in Latin, quis custodiet ipsos custodes, who guards the guardians themselves? How can we be sure that the mass of this new well-organized and orderly global society is benevolent, wise, kind, and generous, rather than malevolent, unkind, and actually exploiting humanity over which they have such total control?
Bishop Schneider: It would be completely naive to assume that those who establish such well-ordered control are benevolent. If you limit freedom, it is not benevolent. I very much like the motto of the state of New Hampshire, Live Free or Die. I was recently there.
When I start to control someone in such a way, it is in itself not benevolent, because I am controlling not children who cannot yet use reason and therefore must be guided to protect them, but adult persons who have their own will, free will, and their own intellect. In doing this, society is being converted, even if presented in a benevolent way, into a society of little children who supposedly do not know how to reason or behave, or into slaves.
I am more inclined to think that, over time, they treat us as slaves, using beautiful expressions and images of protection.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: This is a dramatic vision that you are sketching. You grew up in the Soviet Union, and you are now traveling in the United States. The Soviet Union was a controlled society. Is this truly a controlled society? We consider ourselves free. One of our great phrases is, Give me liberty or give me death.
Bishop Schneider: Yes, I think that, of course, the communist society was a society of total control. But in those times, there were not yet the technical means of control that exist today, more than thirty years after its collapse. At that time, these technological means of control did not yet exist. Now we have them.
Therefore, it is evident, as we already stated, that in our daily life, in our travels, and so on, technology, our emails, and our cell phones are already controlled, and we know this. Now, with global vaccination, it is a further step. I do not enter into the technological details of the vaccination, but only into the fact that it is promoted with such intensity and insistence. This is already a sign of preoccupation and concern.
We therefore have to restate and to create a worldwide chain and movement of people, of all people of goodwill, to regain basic civil freedom, to not be treated as little children who do not know what they are doing, or as slaves, by a small and powerful elite group that dictates to all governments and all nations, telling them in detail how to behave. For example, during this COVID crisis, this was manifested. It was a very detailed and elaborate plan from a kind of central elite group giving the same orders, the same details, and the same terminology to all countries of the world.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: So you are saying that your evidence for what you believe is a globally coordinated effort is the fact that the same phrases were used in different countries and the same programs were unfolded.
Bishop Schneider: It is not my belief. I state facts. We are not stupid. We simply have to open our eyes and our minds. We can state that even the details, the signs, the symbols, the terminology, and the plans are coordinated. This cannot simply fall from heaven.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: You are a Catholic priest and bishop, and you are presenting yourself publicly. You mentioned that there needs to be a global community that coordinates a type of resistance to this. Are you truly saying that?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, of course. For the sake of re-establishing a truly worthy human life, to restore the dignity of human life, to respect freedom, true freedom, and to eliminate all signs of tyranny and dictatorship.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Tyranny and dictatorship. But do you think that you have any allies in this?
Bishop Schneider: I think that history has shown that there were always people in difficult times who began resistance. We know the resistance movements in Nazi Germany. We know the resistance movements in communist countries. Those who fought in these resistance movements were later honored as heroes when the dictatorial systems collapsed, even though they were persecuted at the time of their resistance.
Therefore, I think we have to unite, across all countries, people of goodwill at all levels of society, people who simply use their common sense.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: But I have to say, I must interject. We have at the head of the Catholic Church Pope Francis. He has asked people more or less to accept, agree with, and go along with this coordinated effort to create some type of global response to the virus through vaccination and then to accept restrictions, masks, and so on. How can you explain that the successor of Peter could be so different in his analysis of this situation from you, who is also a bishop in the same Church?
Bishop Schneider: I think it is not the task of a pope to help such a global and evident movement, which is clearly excessive in restricting the fundamental liberties of human society and of individuals, or to be the promoter of such purely worldly realities. This is not the task of the Church. This was not the task of Saint Peter, which Christ gave to him and to his successors.
When the temptation came that the first Pope and the first bishops, the Apostles, wanted to deal more with earthly realities, to serve tables, we read in the Acts of the Apostles that Peter said it is not fitting, it is not good, that we abandon our first task, which is prayer, the glorification of God, the liturgy, and the proclamation of the Gospel, the truth of the Word. This is what the Church must follow and what every Pope must follow.
Unfortunately, for two thousand years, there were cases when some Popes did not follow this and were immersed in worldly realities, forgetting the first task of prayer, the promotion of prayer, the preaching of the truth of the Gospel, and the salvation of souls, not first of bodies. We had, for example, in Renaissance times, Popes who were completely immersed in worldly things. Alexander Borgia, for example, or Julius the Second, who spent much of his time as Pope on horseback, fighting as a soldier, as a commander of an army. Others spent their time in diversion, entertaining themselves with music and other worldly matters.
In any case, for me, this is also a sign that the current Pope must deeply reflect on whether he is truly observing the first mandate which Christ gave to Peter and to him, and must take seriously the words of Saint Peter which we mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: So you are making a critique of the choice of Pope Francis to make statements about medical and political decisions which he is endorsing, and you are saying he is going beyond his real mission and, in this way, neglecting the mission to evangelize and to preach the Gospel. Yet some people wonder if you are an enemy of Pope Francis, but you told me earlier that you are, in fact, his best friend.
Bishop Schneider: First, I would say that the word critique today is understood in different ways. If this is a critique, then it is a very benevolent critique, a fraternal correction. It is a sign of fraternal charity. Moral theology says that when you correct your neighbor benevolently, this is a sign of love for your neighbor. I am his brother in the episcopate, and I desire only what is best for him.
If I were to remain silent, I think my conscience would accuse me of committing a sin of omission. You could say something to your brother, to your elder brother, to the Pope, to Peter, something important for his salvation, for his soul, for his mission, and for the benefit of the entire Church, and you did not say it because you were afraid or politically correct. I think a bishop should not behave in such a way.
When you make a truly benevolent correction, only for the good of the person and for his task, you must accompany this with prayer. This I do. I have never prayed for anyone as much as I have prayed for Pope Francis, and I have celebrated Holy Masses for him. Therefore, in this way. I would say to him, Holy Father, I am truly your best friend.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: You told me yesterday that you were with Pope Francis in a meeting with other bishops from the former Soviet Union. You spoke at that meeting about the Abu Dhabi document, which speaks of different religions as willed by God. You spoke eloquently about it, about how it was a delicate moment, how Pope Francis answered you, and how you answered Pope Francis. I thought it would be quite interesting if you could recreate what happened at that meeting.
Bishop Schneider: Yes. It was the ad limina visit of the bishops of the Central Asia region, one month after the Abu Dhabi document. It was at the beginning of March 2019. There was a very dangerous phrase in the Abu Dhabi document, which the Pope signed, a phrase that it is impossible for a Christian to maintain in such a formulation. It was formulated in a highly ambiguous way, at least ambiguous, but in fact erroneous.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: So you are saying that one phrase in that document is something you find erroneous, and you brought this up.
Bishop Schneider: Yes. This is where it is stated that God wills the diversity of the sexes, the diversity of nations, peoples, languages, and cultures. In His wise will, He wills this diversity. These were enumerated together, and then also religions, in the plural, religions.
You cannot put on the same level the diversity of the human sexes, man and woman, the reality of marriage created by God in His positive will, and the diversity of nations, and then at the same level state that God wills the diversity of religions.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: So what happened at the meeting?
Bishop Schneider: I will conclude with this phrase. The diversity of religions includes wrong religions, idolatry, and false adoration. God can never will these in the same way that He wills the diversity of human sexes, man and woman. But in the document, it is written in one phrase, in one breath, which is wrong. We cannot place them at the same level. It should have been formulated differently.
At the beginning of the meeting, I asked the Holy Father about this. He was very kind and fraternal. He himself started to speak about the Abu Dhabi document and then said we were free to express our opinion. I said to him, “Most Holy Father, I am very concerned about this phrase,” and I quoted it. I asked him to retract it because it relativizes the uniqueness of our Lord Jesus Christ as the only way, the only religion built by God, and I asked him to proclaim this to the world. I said that if he would do this, the people of our day could hear clearly through the mouth of Francis, the successor of Peter.
The Pope thanked me kindly for my contribution and answered that the diversity of religions should be understood as the permissive will of God. In theology, the permissive will of God means that God tolerates a situation but does not will it positively or directly. Several negative realities in human life and history are tolerated by God, such as our sins, because He does not want to force our freedom.
I then asked again, “Holy Father, but the diversity of the human sexes, man and woman, is not the permissive will of God.” Since the phrase in the document enumerated everything in one breath, it could be misunderstood. The Holy Father said, “Yes, this phrase could be misunderstood,” and repeated that one can say to the people that it is the permissive will of God. I asked him kindly again to do this.
In April, he spoke in the general audience about the diversity of religions and said that theologians explain this with the permissive will of God. He spoke publicly, but in my opinion, it should have been explained more precisely, and it would have been good to mention the Abu Dhabi document directly. At least he did this, and I am grateful, but I still feel it was not sufficient and could have been clarified more clearly.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Thank you for that description of your meeting with the Pope and your request for a very specific clarification.
Bishop Schneider: I want to add that after this, the Holy Father was so kind that he sent me a personal card. He wrote to me in Italian, Caro fratello, and asked me to pray for him. He attached to his letter a photocopy of his speech to the general audience on April third. In this photocopy, the words permissive will of God were underlined in his own hand.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Underlined in his own hand.
Bishop Schneider: Yes. He sent me personally this photocopy of the speech, together with a kind card.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: For the past few years, many bishops and many lay people have said that Pope Francis has not been clear enough, that he has allowed a certain confusion, that he says one thing and then another, and somehow allows this to continue without clarification. Is this a general concern you have about how he has conducted himself?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, of course. This is evident. Unfortunately, Pope Francis repeatedly makes affirmations, whether orally or in written texts, that are not clear and that people cannot understand. In some way, this undermines the clarity of the permanent and unchanging divine truth.
The Apostles always preached in a clear manner. Saint Paul said that he did not speak in an unclear way. He compared unclear preaching to someone who does not know where to run or to someone who fights without knowing how to fight. This expression appears in one of his letters.
All the Popes and all the Fathers of the Church have always taught that it is the task of the Magisterium to propose, expound, and explain the Word of God in the clearest possible way so that no doubt or ambiguity remains for the faithful. The Pope and the bishops are shepherds who must give good pasture and nourishment to the sheep and guide them to clear waters, not to poisoned waters or unclear waters. A shepherd seeks good grass, not ambiguous grass, for the sheep.
Teaching must be clear. It is a medicine. Clear teaching depends on eternal salvation, and unclear teaching can mislead people. This is why clarity is so important for the Pope and the bishops. Their first task is to teach, but to teach clearly. This is the greatest act of charity, to transmit eternal truth, which is beautiful, which gives life, and which gives eternal life to the people.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Well, you have spoken about the need for clarity in teaching, and you called this an act of charity for the people who are hungry for clarity in a society that is relativistic, whether due to political correctness, and where people think the teaching of the Catholic Church is changing or can change. But why do so few bishops seem to join with you in expressing these concerns about relativism or the marginalization of Christ, therefore accepting this type of ecumenism without clear guidelines, or even about the suppression of the old Latin Mass? Why are you seemingly alone, or almost alone, among the thousands of Catholic bishops in pointing out the necessity for more clarity as an act of charity?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, this is a difficult question, but of course, there are bishops who think the same and wish for clarity.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Can you give examples?
Bishop Schneider: Well, we know bishops and cardinals, let us say the four cardinals who are the Dubia Cardinals.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: That was Cardinal Meisner, who has died.
Bishop Schneider: And Cardinal Kasper died, and now Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Brandmüller, and Cardinal Sarah have several times expressed himself clearly and well. There are others who also wish the same, but for several reasons they do not speak out publicly, for personal reasons or for political or church political reasons. I don’t know, every bishop has to give account in the divine tribunal for what he did with his episcopate, so I cannot judge my brothers. Unfortunately, there are few; in difficult times, there were not many in the majority, it is a sign that in history, in times of crisis, there has always a minority. At the same time, what gives me hope and joy is that there is an ever increasing number of simple faithful, really simple faithful of all ages, fathers of families, mothers of families, young people, students, young priests, who speak clearly and explain the faith of old times in a clear manner, teaching it to their children and propagating the faith also in the internet sphere. There are many occasions and publications left by laypeople, and this gives me joy and hope that God is also using the simple ones in the church in difficult times to maintain and transmit the purity and clarity of the faith.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Well, you have joy and hope. Many people, nevertheless, are quite concerned about the global situation, about looming restrictions, and totalitarianism. In Italy, dock workers in Trieste have been striking against the requirement to receive the vaccination. Many people feel these times are so confused and so dangerous that they speak about the end of the world. And you said in Christus Vincit, in his inaugural encyclical, a supreme Saint Pius X, who was Pope in the first years of the 1900s, remarked that the Gathering Storm of error at the beginning of the 20th century, relativism, and modernism was so serious that he would not be surprised to hear that the Antichrist was already on this earth. Where do you think we are more than 100 years later? Do you believe the Antichrist is here?
Bishop Schneider: Well, we are seeing that the phenomena which Pope Pius X described 100 years ago have increased even more, the relativism, the fight against God, against his laws, and so the signs of the end times are clearer now in our time. Nevertheless, it is not up to us to know the time. As Jesus Christ told the apostles in the Acts of the Apostles, it is not for you to know the times. We have to be always vigilant and ready for the coming of the Lord. Even though we can observe signs of a kind of pre-annunciation of some clear signs of the end times, we do not know how long this can last. We do not know if God will grant humanity and the church a time of true spiritual flourishing and renewal. I believe that God can, and maybe will, grant humanity and the church a time of real spiritual renewal. As Our Lady in Fatima said, at the end, maybe at the end times, her Immaculate Heart will triumph. It could be that this time of new renewal, a true springtime of the church, and a peaceful life for civil society and human dignity will be granted by God, because Our Lady in Fatima said that the pope should consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: I was just going to ask you.
Bishop Schneider: Yes, and then she added that Russia will convert, but after the consecration. So we have to follow her words. The sequence is the consecration of Russia, then the conversion of Russia, and then God will grant humanity a time of peace. I think we can believe that God will still grant humanity a time of peace.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Well, two issues emerge there. First is the consecration, and second is Russia. People believe that there was an attempt to consecrate Russia many times, even by Pius XII, then again, particularly the great moment in 1984 by John Paul II. But then, even in Affidamento, again in the year 2000, I was present that day for the entrustment, not the consecration. But then people say none of these precisely named Russia. So there’s a great debate in Catholic circles: did John Paul carry out the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart when he said, “I consecrate the whole world,” or has the consecration still not been made? And you think it should be made?
Bishop Schneider: Well, we have to simply read the text of his consecration from 1984, and there he does not mention Russia explicitly. So at least we can say he did the consecration in an imperfect form, evidently imperfect. It would be perfect if he had named Russia. Cardinal Cordes, four years ago, was in Kazakhstan as a papal legate for the Marian Congress in the Basilica in the Cathedral of Our Lady of Fatima in Karaganda. I was present, and during the homily, the cardinal stated the following, which I now quote: he said that sometime after the consecration of 1984, he was invited by Pope John Paul II to have dinner in the papal apartment. During this dinner, Cardinal Cordes asked the Holy Father, “Holy Father, why did you not mention Russia explicitly in the formal consecration?” The pope answered, “This was my intention, but those responsible for diplomacy in the Vatican said not to do this because of some dangerous tensions with the powers in the Soviet Union, because of political reasons.” So this was the Pope’s answer. Even so, Sister Lucia reportedly said that Heaven accepted this. Of course, it was a beautiful prayer. Why should Heaven not accept a beautiful prayer? But it does not…
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Mean you think Sister Lucia can be regarded as a valid witness to such questions? She was quite old, but already, yes.
Bishop Schneider: But I repeat, even if she said it, it does not mean that Sister Lucia thought this was the perfect form. She simply stated that Heaven accepted it. I think that an explicit mention of Russia should still be done, and then Heaven will accept this with more joy.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: I have two questions. One, there’s an old belief that the Pope will consecrate Russia, but he will do it late. He will delay and do it late. He will be old. It will be almost beyond hope. Finally, he will do it. Could Pope Francis do it? Could Pope Emeritus Benedict do it in this more perfect way that you are referring to, and would you encourage one or both of them to do it?
Bishop Schneider: Well, Benedict cannot do it. He is no longer Pope. It’s clear. We have to be very clear. Who can do it is the current pope, Francis, the only current pope, or one of his successors. We do not know. It depends on God’s providence. I wish very much, of course, all right, and we pray for them. I believe that the time will come when God will inspire and illuminate the successor of Peter to do this.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Then the second concern I would have is not about who would make the consecration, but who would receive it. In a sense, obviously God, the Virgin Mary, but the Russians. The Russians are the object of this. You live in Kazakhstan. That was part of the Soviet Union. Now it is a separate country, but it was a province of the Soviet Union. You speak Russian. You have Russian friends. You know the Russian mind to some degree, and the Russian soul. Can you help us understand this mind and soul better? Is it possible that Russia, which was atheist for 70 years, can experience a conversion, a religious revival? Is it happening now, and can they receive with gratitude a gesture from the Pope and the Catholic bishops that would consecrate them? Or would that somehow be politically, diplomatically, or culturally unacceptable to them?
Bishop Schneider: I think that today the political situation is different than in communist times. So today, I think that even the government of Russia, in my opinion, would consider such a gesture positive. In some way, Russia is valorized when you mention it explicitly, only Russia, for example. It is obvious to a politician that it is somehow profitable, profitable for the reputation of the country, simply a pragmatic thought. Therefore, I cannot imagine that the Russian government would be against it; rather, they would see it positively.
I think the Orthodox Church should also be happy, because the Russian Orthodox Church is one of the most Marian Christian churches in the world. They have every day a special veneration of an icon of Our Lady. I profoundly admire the Russian Orthodox Church. Therefore, if the first bishop in the world, the successor of Peter, prays, even though they are not canonically in full communion with the Holy See, they recognize that the Pope is the successor of Peter and that he is the first apostolic see in the Christian world—then when he entrusts or consecrates Russia and the Russian Church to the care of Our Lady, the Mother of God, or her Immaculate Heart, I think they should be happy. This is a prayer. Even when we are not canonically united, we can ask one another, “Please pray for me.” I have many Orthodox friends who say, “Pray for me,” and I say, “Pray for you.” This we can do.
When the Pope, the first bishop in the world in the apostolic succession, prays, this is a prayer. The consecration is a prayer, offered officially and solemnly for Russia to Our Lady. It is intrinsically a positive act and should be considered without prejudice, an act of fraternal charity towards their Church. I think they should consider it this way. I hope that these aspects can be explained to them before the consecration takes place in the future, both to the government and to the Patriarchate, and even if representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church are not invited to be present at this solemn act of consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Well, then, even these words you have spoken could in some way prepare for a better understanding of the meaning of the gesture. There might be one impediment: the Greek Catholic Churches. Could they be opposed to a consecration of Russia?
Bishop Schneider: No, they would never be opposed. I know this for sure. Why should they be opposed to that? This is the request of Our Lady of Fatima. They are Catholics.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: I have one last question, and I thank you so much for your time, but I want to go to the most spiritual and deep level of your faith. Can you tell us what Jesus means to you? What is your relationship with Jesus Christ? What is important about Jesus, and why is he so important to you and to the world?
Bishop Schneider: Jesus, I take the words of Saint Thomas the Apostle, my Lord and my God. There cannot be more beautiful words than these, my Lord and my God. And the other phrase of Saint Paul, Omnia in omnibus Christus, which means translated, Christ shall be all in all. Christ shall be all for me, in every aspect. My God and all is Jesus Christ. He is the incarnate God. Jesus is my God and my Lord, my Savior, my all.
This is the foundation of all my life, my faith, my work, and my sufferings. This is my desire: to see Him in heaven, the whole Trinity, and the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, my Savior, whom I now see with my faith, primarily in the Holy Eucharist. For me, Jesus Christ here on this earth, for my spiritual life, is primarily the Eucharistic Christ. Because here I find my God, my Lord, my Savior, incarnated concretely in the Holy Eucharist.
Therefore, the Eucharistic Christ is the center of my life, of my spiritual life, of my faith. Every time I come to church to see the Holy Host during Holy Mass or during adoration, it is a continuous invitation to believe. I do not see Him in His glory, but I believe He is here truly, substantially, really. This is a continuous exercise of my faith and of my love.
My motto is also from Saint Peter Julian Eymard, a great Eucharistic saint, who said, Adveniat regnum tuum eucharisticum, may Your Eucharistic reign come. Our lives will be restored, sustained, and maintained most vigorously through the Eucharist, through a Eucharistic life. The entire Church can be renewed and revitalized only through the renewal of liturgical and Eucharistic life.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Your Excellency, I appreciate very much everything you have said. Thank you, and thank you for your best wishes, for your travels now as you are preparing to go back to Kazakhstan, and for all your future labors.
Bishop Schneider: Thank you, dear Mr. Moynihan, for your work, which you are doing. You are making a contribution in these times to the Catholic faith, to strengthen the Catholic faith as a layman, and this we can do together. This is also my joy and my gratitude to you. Thank you.
Sufferings, united with the sufferings of Christ, are blessed. God Himself, in Jesus Christ, suffered and accepted sacrifice so that we can unite our distress with the sufferings of Christ. In this way, our sufferings are blessed by God and bear fruit for all eternity. So it is a positive way to see even a time of darkness and crisis. Another aspect is that God sometimes permits, though He does not directly will, difficult times and crises so that we can, by accepting suffering with faith and humility, atone and make reparation for our sins. Globally, we see that every cross, every distress, every crisis must be seen positively in these three aspects.
God is the Lord, and He has always, in the history of humankind and in our personal lives, given us help. He intervened so that the difficult times ended. We hope that this difficult time of the so-called COVID crisis will also come to an end. Difficult times are also a time to exercise our virtues, our true humanity, and especially faith and hope. In the current COVID crisis, those in power are continuously instilling fear and panic, and this is not good, even psychologically. Those in responsibility should do the opposite. They should not continuously brainwash people with fear and panic. Of course, they can give admonitions and health measures for safety, but not excessively.
The major narrative we are observing now in the COVID crisis is a culture of fear, which can lead to depression. We have to help people overcome this. God always gives us hope. Even when we sin, He calls us to repent and embraces us as the prodigal son, restoring our dignity. God is a God of hope and forgiveness, but we have to be humble and return to God to ask pardon. Then we will lose all unhealthy fear, though we will maintain the true, supernatural fear of God because we love Him and ask for His paternal protection.
The agenda of the COVID crisis, I think, cannot work for long because it is so frightening. It intimidates people excessively, taking away fundamental civil liberties, such as the right to privacy regarding your own body, for example, through forced vaccinations. This is excessive, and human reason and the basic desire of humankind for true freedom and dignity will eventually overcome it. This gives us hope that humanity, with God’s help, will also overcome this crisis and the agenda of the so-called COVID agenda.
My message is first to those who have been sick in these times: do not lose hope. Pray to God for His help and ask others for prayers. Ask God to intervene so that this virus may disappear or become weaker, and that humanity may regain the natural immunity God gave our bodies. My message is that we can really hope that this crisis will, after some time, be less dangerous, and humanity will be able to overcome this virus, as it has overcome many other diseases in the past. But we must ask for the help of God, not only human efforts. With the help of God, and with the sincere work of scholars, scientists, and medical professionals, we can hope to overcome this in a way that respects the dignity and basic rights of human beings and of our human society.
Dr. Robert Moynihan: Are you ready to get back together with people and talk about our faith, and share great meals, wine, and music together? Think about joining us on an Inside the Vatican pilgrimage. Go to insidethevaticanpilgrimages.com and see all our latest pilgrimages. Look for the new pilgrimages in the United States of America, where you do not have to go through all the hassle of traveling overseas these days. If you do want to go overseas, we still have European pilgrimages as well. Come join us on pilgrimage.