Bishop Schneider: The stance of Father Altman, the alleged invalid election of Cardinal Bergoglio. If this were the case, there would be confusion, chaos, because one part of the Cardinals would accept the other.
Joseph McClane: Joining us right now is Bishop Athanasius Schneider. He is the auxiliary bishop in Kazakhstan. He is a very outspoken and courageous bishop, and we are grateful for his being on the program. Your Excellency, good morning to you, and thank you for being with us.
Bishop Schneider: Good morning.
Joseph McClane: Recently, you published a statement, a letter of sorts, pushing back on errors within the church. I would argue on both sides of the spectrum. We saw that Father Altman in America doubled down on his arguments that Pope Francis, Jorge Bergoglio, is not the Pope, but rather of the church. Can you tell us, from your article, from your statement, why that would be in error?
Bishop Schneider: Well, this contradicts the constant tradition of the church. There are two things we have to distinguish in the issue of the so-called invalidity of the pontificate of Pope Francis and the stance of Father Altman. One is the alleged invalid election of Cardinal Bergoglio, for two reasons, as they say. One party says it was because of the invalid abdication of Benedict. Consequently, the election of Cardinal Bergoglio was invalid. Another party says that some rules of the Conclave norms were not observed, or the so-called Sant Galen mafia had an influence on the election of Cardinal Bergoglio, and therefore, it was invalid.
Let us see the first item. Even if the election of Cardinal Bergoglio had been invalid, there have been, during 2000 years, really invalid elections of popes, not a few, but several. Nevertheless, in practice, the church always behaved in the following manner: from the moment when the majority of the College of Cardinals and the episcopate accepted the newly elected, even invalidly elected, candidate and started to name him in the Holy Mass in the Eucharist, for a considerable time, he was considered de facto as the valid Pope. There were cases with antipopes where it was not clear who was the true pope, but then the majority of the Cardinals followed this practical rule. We have to apply the same principle even if we do not know with certainty whether the accusations of invalid observation of the election of Cardinal Bergoglio are true. Therefore, we have to follow the more certain, constant practice of the Church in such cases of doubtful elections of a pope.
And this is very wise, because otherwise there would be confusion and chaos, since one part of the Cardinals would accept it and the other would not, and one part of the bishops would accept this accusation or not. The College of Cardinals is the electors, and if they all agree, this can even correct at the root some possible errors of procedure in the election. This is very wise. Otherwise, I repeat, there is no exit, no solution in practice.
The same, in some ways, applies to another reason for which some people today consider Pope Francis invalid, namely, because of heresy. The topic of a heretical pope has been discussed in church history by some theologians, especially after the Council of Trent. For example, St. Robert Bellarmine and other theologians held the opinion that a pope who pronounces heresy loses the papacy automatically. St. Robert Bellarmine said this was only an opinion, so he did not present it as the final or definitive teaching of the magisterium. The magisterium, meaning the teaching authority of the popes and Ecumenical Councils, never promoted or accepted the theological opinion of the automatic loss of the papacy by a heretical pope.
There is only one case, Pope Paul IV in the 16th century. He issued a document, a bull, declaring that a heretic cannot be a pope. But this document, the so-called Bull of Pope Paul IV, was not an ex cathedra pronouncement and stands alone in church history. One document from one pope does not have weight in view of 2000 years of other popes who did not promote this opinion. Therefore, we cannot say this is a constant teaching of the magisterium.
For example, there was Honorius I in the seventh century, who published official letters to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Sergius, which were at least doctrinally ambiguous concerning Christology. After his death, the Ecumenical Councils declared him a heretic pope, but the Holy See noted that he was not a heretic, only that he helped to spread heresy. Even so, the Ecumenical Councils did not declare that his pontificate was invalid from the moment of his statements. The following popes did not declare Honorius I’s pontificate invalid.
Another case occurred in the 14th century with John XXII, who spread material heresy by claiming that the saints in heaven do not have beatific vision but must wait until the Last Judgment. This is contrary to Scripture and the previous tradition of the church. He was criticized by theologians and by one cardinal, but no theologian at that time declared his pontificate invalid. Thanks be to God, John XXII repented before his death and retracted his doctrinal error.
We must also remember that a pope cannot proclaim heresy ex cathedra, because a dogma of faith teaches that the pope is unable to err in defining or confirming a doctrine ex cathedra in its definitive form. Outside of ex cathedra pronouncements, however, a pope can commit errors and even heresies, as happened in a few cases in the past.
Joseph McClane: So Bishop Schneider, what should we do as lay people in these dark and confusing times?
Bishop Schneider: First, of course, we have to pray, to implore heaven for divine intervention, that God may send us strong popes who truly fulfill the duty of Peter and defend the Catholic faith. This is the essence of the papal office. For 2000 years, the Holy See has been the martyred magistra, a mother and teacher of all churches and all the faithful. It will be so again because the papacy is a divine institution, not merely a human one. God permits, temporarily, that this office is obscured, darkened by the negative influences of our time. But we must remember it is only for a relatively short period. The Holy See will again be strong, clear, and shine. This is true. We have to renew our trust and faith.
We should also pray for the current pope, that God may illuminate him so he recognizes and fulfills his duty as successor of Peter and imitates his predecessors.
Second, we must know the Catholic faith from the catechisms, especially the traditional catechisms. We have this teaching, and we must adhere to the teachings of all the popes, the Fathers of the Church, and the doctors of the Church. Study and read this so that you are not confused, even by a pope or a synod. The constant teaching of the Church over 2000 years, supported by over 260 popes and the doctors of the Church, is stronger than the temporary confusion we are witnessing now, even in Rome and worldwide. This confusion will pass, and the Church and the faith will remain.
Third, we must reverently admonish those in error, including the pope and bishops, not with anger, because we are not a political party, but with clarity, respect, and courage. We should admonish the pope and bishops to return to the clear, unambiguous teaching of the Catholic faith and to be courageous defenders of the faith without fearing the world. We do this in different ways, through statements, conferences, and other actions. Lay people must promote clarity and help those in authority who are weak or faltering in their task. The laity must remind them of the constant teaching of the Church.
Joseph McClane: And it reminds me of, and I would like your comment on this, Matthew chapter 12, when our Lord says to His disciples that the householder, the chief steward in charge of the house, when the master is away, gets drunk and beats the other stewards of the house. It seems to me that there are many today who either want to pretend the chief steward isn’t abusive, or they want to leave the house and set up their own house. What would you say to that, and what was our Lord’s intention in all this, Bishop Schneider?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, the intention was that the Lord did not say we must leave the house when there are some abusive holders of authority. We are one family. Of course, we can temporarily separate ourselves from the consequences of the abuses, in the sense that we do not obey abusive commands that would damage the faith or the holiness of the liturgy, and so on. But we cannot declare them invalid. We have to pray for them nevertheless. This has been the approach throughout history. The saints also behaved in this way.
What you mentioned is a distorted vision of the papacy. The pope is not God. He is not divine. He remains human, and he is not infallible in every word and action continuously. This misunderstanding is a parody of the Catholic dogma, and it gives credence to Martin Luther and the Protestant sects who accuse us of exaggerating the papacy. We have to correct this. The pope can commit errors. The Holy See can make mistakes in temporal or disciplinary affairs, and even in some doctrinal statements that are not definitive, which are not meant to be imposed as definitive teaching on the entire Church.
Our measure is the constant tradition of the Church, the constant teaching which we know. This is found in the catechisms, in the encyclicals of past popes, with very clear statements on topics of our day, regarding the relativism of doctrine, the uniqueness of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church, morality, and so on. We have this teaching, and we must be faithful to it.
Joseph McClane: Amen, Your Excellency. We are grateful for your time today. Thank you so much for speaking out on these issues. Would you give us your blessing, please?
Bishop Schneider: Yes.
Dominus vobiscum, et cum, spiritu tuo. Et benedictio dei omnipotentis, Patris et Filii et spiritus Santi descendant, super vos et maneat semper
Praise be to Jesus Christ!
Joseph McClane: Now and forever. Did you like that video? It’s okay, you can admit it. It’s perfectly fine. Hey, we covered the big stories of our day, from inside the Church to outside the Church to all points in between, and we do it from a Catholic perspective. It’s called A Catholic Take, a radio program Monday through Friday. We live stream it right here on this channel, so make sure to subscribe, like, and share. We would be very grateful. And don’t forget, you’re going to want to watch this video right here, because you don’t want to miss anything.