Bishop Schneider: We cannot dilute our faith to please non Catholics. This is a betrayal. Our faith is not charity toward those who are in error, because we must illuminate them and invite them to accept the full truth without diluting anything. Of course, we can explain it to them, but not by yielding the church doctrine and the church liturgy. This is even more difficult. How to explain to people how we, a creature, can be the Mother of God, who is eternal, who is immense, but the church in the Council of Ephesus dogmatized the title Theotokos, Greek, the genetrix in Latin, Mother of God, against Nestorius, the heretic who rejected this title with the same arguments as now. The note says that it is difficult to understand.
Adrian Milag: In the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Protection of technology prayer, Lord Jesus Christ, Sovereign King enthroned in heaven. In your love and mercy, I ask that you establish a perimeter of protection, which oppresses blood around our communication devices and all technology we use and own, our phones and cell phones, computers, tablets and other devices, the cameras or webcams, microphones, speakers, displays, any and all software, Wi Fi connection in the air, both my router and the router of the people we are communicating with, the optic cables involved in the transmission of data, and the light waves being used to transfer data. Cleanse them with your precious blood and drive from them any satanic influence.
I ask that you establish around them a sanctuary of your mercy, where Satan and any other evil spirit or human agency cannot interfere. I ask, Father, that you will block, bind, rebuke, and render impotent any assault of the evil one from them in any way. Father, so long as these instruments are utilized, we ask you to allow them to enjoy the protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Saint Carlo Acutis, Saint Michael, the Archangel, and all the holy angels. We ask this in your most holy name, the name before which every knee shall bow in heaven, on the eart,h and under the earth, that Jesus Christ is Lord. Amen. In the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
And welcome again, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, for this opportunity to have a very fruitful and wonderful discussion, Bishop.
Bishop Schneider: Thank you for your invitation.
Adrian Milag: You have so many things to do, but you still give time to us, and what a great honor, Bishop. And we really, truly appreciate your time.
Bishop Schneider: I very much love the Filipinos.
Adrian Milag: We also love you, Bishop. And I heard, Bishop, by the way, before we start, that you will fly here next year, right? Is it true?
Bishop Schneider: Yes.
Adrian Milag: Is there any specific date?
Bishop Schneider: Probably at the end of April, the beginning. Yes. It is not yet exactly established, but it is, with much probability, this date.
Adrian Milag: And I hope you can also have, I mean, one of your itineraries in Luzon.
Bishop Schneider: It can be. I have not yet exactly established. I will check. That will be great. It will happen, and we will pray for it. Where are you located?
Adrian Milag: I’m in Luzon right now. I’m staying in Bulacan, but it is just near Metro Manila, Bishop.
Bishop Schneider: Good.
Adrian Milag: So if you are able to visit, I will surely come where you are.
Bishop Schneider: Maybe we can be in contact, since I know you can ask me then later.
Adrian Milag: Yes, thank you, Bishop. I also heard that one of my friends asked me because you also have a devotion to Blessed Ivan Merz. Is it true?
Bishop Schneider: Of course, yes, yes.
Adrian Milag: Can you tell us more about him?
Bishop Schneider: Blessed Ivan Merz was a young, devoted, and courageous Catholic layman in Croatia and died in the 20s, 100 years ago. He was a scholar, a professor, and he dedicated his life to virginity to our Lord Jesus Christ as a layman in the world. He founded a youth organization for young men to defend the Catholic faith in public society and to live a committed Catholic spiritual life. He really led a very intense spiritual life in the world. He was teaching. He was a professor and a scholar. He wrote some scientific articles on history and on liturgy. He was even a linguist. He is a beautiful example for young men living in the world, similar to Saint Pier Giorgio Frassati, who was a young man living in the world in chastity, in deep friendship with Jesus, being in the world. So this is beautiful, to have these young men, even Carlo Acutis, even though he was more or less still a boy. But these young men who were not priests and not monks, not hidden in a monastery, but living in the world and living a life of purity, of chastity, of deep spiritual life, unity with Jesus Christ, daily Holy Communion. We need such examples in our day.
Adrian Milag: That’s amazing, Bishop. Maybe we can dive into our topic. What moved you to respond strongly to the recent DDF document discouraging the Marian titles coredemtrix and mediatrix, Bishop Schneider?
Bishop Schneider: First, it is a kind of rupture, a rupture with a considerable time of teaching of the ordinary magisterium of popes, and then also the teaching of doctors of the church, of saints who clearly explained the doctrine of the God given mediation of Our Lady, even using the titles coredemtrix. Popes, John Paul II seven times, Pope Pius XI, Pope Benedict XVI, and the other popes, even not using the titles but really explaining the same content with maybe other words. And even the most recent Doctor of the church, John Henry Newman, also defended the title coredemtrix. Therefore, simply this fact, and now comes a document saying this title is always inappropriate. So it is saying to us, look at what all these popes used, and these saints and doctors of the church used; it was wrong. So it is the same as saying, de facto, we were misled for a long time. And this is impossible. The church cannot, for a long time, mislead us in doctrine. And even there was a holy Mass in the old missal approved by the Holy See with the explicit title Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum. And now saying this should not be used anymore is simply impossible.
Therefore, we have to stick to the ordinary magisterium, to those popes who repeatedly and for a considerable time used this title, to those doctors of the church who are many, and to saints like Saint Pius and even Maximilian Kolbe and others. This was my first motivation. And then also this note, even though using beautiful words and a large document, but looking closer, it is a kind of minimalism of Mariology, reducing Our Lady more to only an intercessor, like the saints, but not recognizing her specific, exceptional, unique role in the work of our redemption with Jesus Christ, her divine Son, and her role as Mediatrix, as the spiritual Mother, the spiritual motherhood of all the redeemed. This is not necessary by nature, but by God’s will, by God’s determination. It is not necessary, but God decided that it should be so that she would be as close as the new Eve, the new spiritual Mother of all the redeemed.
This aspect is very traditional. Since the second century, Saint Justin, Saint Irenaeus of Lyon, even Saint Irenaeus of Lyon, who was a kind of grandson of the apostles and of Saint John, in a spiritual sense, coined this very strong expression, Mary the Virgin Mary as the new Eve, by her obedience, by her acceptance of the redeeming plan of God. She became, thereby, explicitly, the cause of salvation for herself and for the entire human race. It is a strong word, the Latin causa salutis generis humani. Since then, the church has kept this doctrine. Now, suddenly, this doctrine was so much reduced, and therefore we have to stick to this development, or rather genuine development of this doctrine until Pope Benedict. Even Pope Benedict, in 2010, in one homily at the canonization of a saint who was very devoted to Our Lady in Brazil, said that Our Lady is the Mediatrix. She transmits or dispenses all the fruits of grace, all the fruits of grace, and this role is even necessary. He used the word necessary in the sense that God established it. It is very clear.
And then John Paul II, so many quotations. We have enough quotations from him also. Therefore, I say they could not have been misled, these popes and these doctors of the church and these saints. So when I have to choose between this note today of Cardinal Fernandez, even approved by Pope Francis, which is a kind of rupture, I will surely, for me it is more sure, stick to what Pope Benedict, John Paul II, and the popes before him said, and what the doctors of the church and the saints said.
Adrian Milag: And Bishop, how should Catholics properly understand Mary as coredemptrix without falling into the theological misunderstandings that the DDF fears?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, it is clear, it was always explained by the popes and by the saints that Mediatrix and coredemptrix are only a secondary and a subordinated role. He established that she would be associated with him as the Mother of the Redeemer, as the spiritual Mother of all humanity, not by necessity, I repeat, but simply by divine will, because it shows even more the divine wisdom and divine love when he associates creatures to his greatest work, which he did, the redemption. Paul also says we are coworkers of God. This is not meant at the same level as God. Therefore, coredemptrix does not mean the same level. Co means, by the Latin cum, with. In German, we say mit, with. And as we say, for example, the co-pilot in the plane. There is one pilot, who is directing, but there is another on his side, and he is called co co-pilot. So in co-redemption, there is one Redeemer who is operating all, and on his side is his mother, the Immaculate, the new Eve, as a co in co redemption.
And there are also other titles that are even more difficult to understand. Let us say the title Mother of God. This is even more difficult. How to explain to people how a creature can be the Mother of God, who is eternal, who is immense, but the church in the Council of Ephesus dogmatized the title Theotokos, Greek, the genetrix in Latin, Mother of God, against Nestorius, the heretic who rejected this title with the same arguments as now. The note says that it is difficult to understand, and the church did not accept this. The church said no; nevertheless, we say Theotokos with these same explanations. And the heretic Nestorius said, let us better use a clearer expression to avoid any misunderstandings and ambiguities. Said Nestorius, and he proposed, instead of Theotokos, Mother of God, to use the title Christotokos, the Mother of Christ. And the church said no, it is not sufficient, Mother of Christ. We have to say Mother of God, because Christ was always God and not only man, and because he was a divine person and not a human person.
And in the same way, we can use the coredemptrix title, explaining and doing a beautiful catechesis. Pope Benedict the Sixteenth, once, I think it was in Fatima, spoke about the holy children of Fatima, who by their suffering united their sufferings with Jesus Christ in a sense of reparation. And then he spoke in general about the sick people, the sick people who are suffering and who, with deep faith, unite their sufferings with the sacrifice of Christ for the salvation of souls. And then Pope Benedict said that these souls who are uniting their sufferings with the cross of Christ, with his sacrifice, he said they are co-redeemers of the world, co-redeemers. So, when even holy souls or heroic souls can be called co-redeemers with Christ for the salvation of souls, even more his Immaculate Mother, the new Eve, can be called co-redeemer with Christ.
Adrian Milag: And Bishop, why do you think the intention behind this document?
Bishop Schneider: One of the intentions is for ecumenical reasons.
Adrian Milag: For the Protestants?
Bishop Schneider: To be more acceptable to Protestants, but this is not a valid reason to diminish the constant teaching about Our Lady’s mission and participation in the redemption of humankind and in the distribution of graces, as the church taught. This is not a valid argument to reduce our doctrine to please those Protestants who do not have the entire faith about Our Lady’s mission and her role. And even if we please the Protestants, they will ask for more and for more, until we become completely Protestant. Only then will they be happy, unless they accept the entire Catholic faith. We cannot dilute our faith to please non Catholics. This is a betrayal of our faith. It is not charity toward those who are in error, because we must illuminate them and invite them to accept the full truth without diluting anything. Of course, we can explain to them, but not by yielding the church doctrine and the church liturgy.
Adrian Milag: Thank you for that clarity, Bishop. And Saint Maximilian Kolbe boldly taught about Mary’s unique participation in redemption. So do you think that the DDF’s position is in tension with Kolbe’s Mariology, Bishop?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, Saint Maximilian Kolbe, he was such a clear teacher, even on the coredemptrix, on the Mediatrix explicitly, and he was canonized, and other saints also.
Adrian Milag: What pastoral dangers arise when ancient Marian titles are minimized or softened after centuries of consistent usage?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, it is not pastoral because it is doing a rupture, and this is not Catholic. Catholicism is always growing organically without ruptures, like a tree, like a plant, and all ruptures are never Catholic. This is a rupture and should not be done. And this is not infallible, and it is not definitive. We have to distinguish different levels of texts of the church. We should not be in error in not distinguishing the different levels. This would not be Catholic to attribute any text, any text from Rome, to be infallible. This is a parody of the Catholic faith. It is against the Catholic faith, because infallibility is only rare and with very specific, limited conditions. And outside these conditions, church documents can contain errors. They should not, but they can theoretically, and they did during the history of the church. There were cases, we cannot deny it. Therefore, God only gave the guarantee of infallibility in very specific, clearly defined occasions. It is a guarantee for us.
I repeat, it is desirable that the Pope and the bishops always present us sure doctrine, even if they do not speak infallibly and do not want to speak infallibly. But nevertheless, it occurs, and it happens in our day, especially in the last pontificate of Pope Francis. There were documents and words that were evidently in error against divine revelation. To say that all religions are willed by God is against the first commandment, it is against divine revelation, for example, and so on. Therefore, we must stick to the teaching of all times, which is sure. And the current problems, or lack of clarity or ambiguity, are only temporary. It will pass. And it is not infallible. Then we say, with all respect to these documents, we are not obliged by conscience to accept them, because they are not infallible.
And if we have reasons, we are not Protestants that we say we are judging. No, we are not judging. We simply stick to the traditional faith, which is clear, and we stick to the teachings of the church that have been continuous and immutable until this document, for example. Then we will stick to this. We will stick to the voice of the church, not to my voice, not to my judgment. No, because it is evident. When something is evidently a rupture, we do not have to start squaring the circle and doing mental acrobatics. This is not honest.
Chesterton, the famous Chesterton, said a phrase which I love. He said we Catholics, when we enter the church, we take off our hats, not our heads. It means that we have to use our reason. We do not switch off our reason. We have to use our reason. When it is evident that there is a rupture with the preceding teaching, then it is evident. Then I use my reason with faith and consult the voice of the popes of all times, of the saints, of the doctors, and pray that God may again intervene, so that Rome will again issue clear documents without any ambiguity, in evident, I say evident, continuity with the preceding magisterium of all times, without causing us to do, how do you say, mental acrobatics to justify it.
The church never spoke ambiguously in earlier times, never. The church spoke clearly, so that we would not have to guess or make adventurous interpretations. Therefore, the church has the task, I repeat, to speak clearly, to avoid any ambiguity. This is the task of the successor of Peter, of all the popes, of the magisterium. So we continue to pray that the Holy See will again recover this power of clarity and teach the entire world.
Adrian Milag: And Bishop, so just to clarify, is it still okay to use the title of Mary as coredemptrix, because it is just a note?
Bishop Schneider: Of course. When Pope John Paul the Second, who is a canonized saint, used it seven times, and other popes, and John Henry Newman, the recent doctor, when they used the same, then they would have to accuse Pope John Paul the Second, this note would have to accuse John Henry Newman, Maximilian Kolbe, and so on. Therefore, we can surely use the title, because we are sure these were used by many popes, by the saints and doctors of the church. We cannot go into error using these titles, even though this note says they should not be used. But this is, I repeat, a rupture, and this is a kind of abuse of power of this dicastery. I repeat, you cannot do ruptures with the preceding doctrine. It is not possible. It is not Catholic.
Adrian Milag: Thank you, Bishop, and you mentioned there is a growing Marian minimalism in Rome. So what long-term effects could this have on doctrine and devotion?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, it is minimizing this specific, unique role of Our Lady, which God gave her, not that I have to strip this from Our Lady. I repeat, the heretic in the fifth century, who was Patriarch of Constantinople, stripped Our Lady of the title Theotokos, and with what authority he had. I repeat the same arguments as in this note, because it is ambiguous, because it needs so many explanations, and so on. We are sure of the traditional use of these titles.
Adrian Milag: And Bishop, what principles should guide Catholics in remaining faithful to Marian teachings while also being obedient to legitimate ecclesial authority?
Bishop Schneider: We are obedient to the authorities of the popes who used these titles. This is also obedience, and we cannot, this would be a wrong obedience, obey a rupture. It is not a correct obedience, since it is not demanded from us in virtue of infallibility. We can stick to the previous because it is more…
Adrian Milag: Sure, bringing that clarity, Bishop. And Your Excellency, do you believe that the proclamation of Mary as coredemptrix, the Mediatrix of all graces, is still possible?
Bishop Schneider: Well, this doctrine, the church was always very careful and cautious. Even the Immaculate Conception was an example. Already Fathers of the Church expressed it. And then, during the Middle Ages, Saint Bonaventure and even Saint Thomas Aquinas were against it, but Bonaventure, the Franciscan school, promoted it. And so it gained ever more conviction in the church, the truth of the Immaculate Conception.
And even then, the church started to grant Masses, and so on. And you see, it lasted many, many centuries until the nineteenth century, that the church said, Now it is mature. We can proclaim it, because it is a divine truth. We have the conviction after so many centuries, even millennia, to be sure this is really revealed by God. And then Pope Pius the Ninth asked all the bishops of the world before he proclaimed the dogma, their meaning if it is really the faith of the pastors of the church. And they said yes, almost all, the overwhelming majority of the episcopate said yes, we believe this is a truth of God. And then he asked, What is the belief of your people, of the faithful, not only of the bishops. Pope Pius the Ninth also wanted to know what the people, the Catholics all over the world, believed regarding the Immaculate Conception. And the bishops answered that almost all their faithful also believed in it.
And after being sure that this is the sensus fidei, the sense of the faith of the entire church, there was no more doubt, and he proclaimed this as dogma. And the same was repeated in 1950 regarding the dogma of the Assumption into heaven. The same procedure. You see, even though the Fathers of the Church and John Damascene, Fathers of the Church in antiquity, explicitly spoke about the corporal Assumption of Our Lady into heaven, it was proclaimed only in the twentieth century. You see how cautious the church is.
And therefore, I think regarding the co-redemption and the mediation of all graces, the church should also be cautious and take time, take centuries. And therefore, this note should not have been issued. This note, on the contrary, should have explained better the meaning and said, okay, let us give freedom to debate, to discuss. The church has time. Let us continue in freedom without forcing our thinking. Let the conviction of the entire church mature, as the church did in past times.
And now this note, it is a kind of artificial force, a kind of violation of our thinking. It says, shut up your mouth, switch off your reason, and take it and do not use it anymore. The church never did that. It is immature. We have to take time and mature. I hope that Pope Francis, or the next Pope, will again give the freedom for discussion, for reflection, for the theologians, for the people, regarding coredemptrix and mediatrix, enough time to continue the debate for centuries, and let the Holy Spirit guide us, and let us apply the synodal method of listening to one another, and not simply cut any discussion as this document did. It is against the synodal method, by the way.
Adrian Milag: Wow, that is powerful, Bishop. And there is a question here, Bishop, from me. Are we committing sin if we struggle to accept the DDF note, Fiducia Supplicans, or other modern documents that seem to diverge from traditional teachings?
Bishop Schneider: We do not commit sin, of course not. Which sin, when we stick to the constant, long-time use of these doctrines and titles? We cannot sin. This document is an abuse of power and a rupture. We cannot obey a rupture. Better to obey the voices of popes, of saints, who were sure.
Adrian Milag: Another question from me. How can Catholics remain obedient to church leaders when there is so much confusion?
Bishop Schneider: Today, obedience to the church is not only to the current church authorities, but also to all authorities of two thousand years regarding the faith. The liturgy is also holy, which was celebrated by all the saints, and the church authority cannot forbid us, because it is not in their power to abolish such a tradition which was so sanctified. This would be abuse, because the church authority is beneath tradition, not above tradition. This is the Second Vatican Council. And we are not a human organization, a party. As one party says, now we have a new party program, we have a new party boss, and he says, what our previous bosses decided, we abolish, and now we present you a new program. This is not the Catholic Church. This is party progress.
So the bishops today and the Pope cannot behave themselves to say, now we state this, what you believed, what your fathers, your mothers, your grandfathers believed and prayed, you cannot use anymore. It is abuse. It is not possible. It is not in their power. And therefore we must say, with all respect and love, we cannot accept it because it contradicts the sure and constant use and tradition of the popes and saints and of our ancestors. We have to stick to them.
Adrian Milag: If my priest refuses to teach about sin or denies Mary as the new Eve, am I right to avoid seeking spiritual direction from him while still receiving the sacraments?
Bishop Schneider: Of course, you receive the sacraments. They are valid. But you may not receive his spiritual direction. It would be very imprudent. He will lead you into error. But of course, you can participate in Mass and receive the sacraments.
Adrian Milag: My brother abandoned Christianity for Marxism after seminary. Did God harden his heart, or how should we understand this spiritually?
Bishop Schneider: This person, we do not know exactly what was happening in his heart. Only God knows. And we have to pray for him, that he may again regain the Catholic faith and return to Christ, who is the only solution.
Adrian Milag: Can you share more about Saint Carlo Acutis, his Eucharistic reverence, and his concern about ambiguity in certain Vatican Two documents?
Bishop Schneider: Once, I spoke with his mother some years ago, and she said to me that he was very keen and cautious when he was in religion classes in school. He was fifteen years old, or fourteen, and the teacher priest was reading a text from the Second Vatican Council. Carlo found it not so clear, and then he made an investigation, and he went to the library and was reading the Latin text. He was very careful to examine if this was really so, if the Italian translation presented by the priest was correct. And he studied Latin, so that he could also read Latin. And after reading it, nevertheless, some perplexity remained in him in some expressions. I do not remember which exactly, the mother told me. But this shows Saint Carlo Acutis was a very pure soul and very honest in seeking the truth.
His great love for the Eucharist was manifested in his making adoration. He visited our Lord in the tabernacle. He received frequent Holy Communion. And he helped one of the servants in the house, who was not a Christian. He helped him to become a Christian and to receive Holy Communion. He was a kind of apostle. And then his great apostolate with the Eucharistic miracles also shows his burning heart for love and reverence for our Lord.
Adrian Milag: Thank you for sharing that story. Good to hear that, I did not know the story, Your Excellency.
Bishop Schneider: It is our private communication of his mother to me personally. Many years ago, I met his parents in Assisi.
Adrian Milag: Do you believe that the Vatican has been infiltrated by forces opposed to the faith, or how should Catholics understand this concern?
Bishop Schneider: Well, I do not know to what extent, but that there is an infiltration is evident. You cannot deny it because of some actions that were done. There are some agendas that are closer to the United Nations agenda, to the political elites of a new world, a kind of new world, ecumenical or ecological religion, and unfortunately, some members of the Vatican administration and staff are promoting it. And the LGBT agenda also. Unfortunately, it is such an evident sign that we can assume that there is some infiltration, because the enemies do not sleep, as St Peter Canisius, a great Jesuit saint, the second apostle of Germany, who was really, thanks to him, a great part of Germany was preserved from Protestantism. St Peter Canisius, doctor of the Church in the sixteenth century, once made this expression: Peter is sleeping while Judas is awake. And in some way, in our day also, it seems that the popes are not so keen, not so attentive to these infiltrations. So in some way, they are partly sleeping regarding this infiltration, but Judas is not sleeping; he is awakened. And the reality of the Church is like our Lord said in the Gospel, the parable, the tares together growing with the wheat.
This is the mystery of the Church here on Earth at any level, including also the level of the Vatican in the Holy See administration. We cannot exclude it. And this is the reality here on Earth, and we have to pray that the popes will be more vigilant to recognize the infiltration of so many Judas, and with the help of Our Lady, she is invoked by the Church as the destroyer of all heresies, and Saint Michael the Archangel and so many saints, to govern the Church and to lead it as our Lord commanded to Peter and to all the popes.
Adrian Milag: And from John Esto, Your Excellency, you strongly promote the traditional Latin Mass, but there seem to be no listed TLMs in Kazakhstan. Could you clarify the situation?
Bishop Schneider: Well, our current bishops are not so considering it. We have very few people who demand it, because the majority of our liturgies, thanks be to God, are very worthy. We have in all of Kazakhstan, communion in the hand is prohibited. Formally, it is prohibited by the decree of the Bishops’ Conference. The only ordinary form to receive Holy Communion is kneeling on the tongue, in all churches, in all chapels, with the paten. There is no other possibility, except, of course, for sick people. And we have no altar girls at all, in all Kazakhstan, it is banned, no women, no altar girls. We have no Eucharistic ministers at all. And so it is a good situation in some way, and the people are pious and devoted, and therefore they do not know the Latin Mass, and some do not even feel the necessity, because these circumstances are good even in the Novus Ordo.
The majority of the older bishops say, Okay, we continue. So I celebrate in my private episcopal chapel, when I am not committed to public Masses, the traditional Latin Mass, and once, when teaching in the seminary, I also celebrate for the seminarians, with the consent of the other bishops, sometimes also the traditional Latin Mass. So this is momentarily the situation. But I think if there were a greater movement, it would be possible also, but since now, we do not have these considerable groups.
Adrian Milag: Thank you for that, Bishop. And what is the difference between true ecumenism and false ecumenism?
Bishop Schneider: True ecumenism is that we desire and do all that we can so that non Catholics may come back to the mother Church and embrace all the truth of the Catholic Church, which God revealed, and be fully integrated in the life of the Church, which is only one Church, the Catholic Church. And therefore we must desire it, pray for them, help them, and explain to them the Catholic faith, not diminishing the Catholic faith, but explaining the beauty without any compromises. This is true ecumenism.
The false ecumenism is to make compromises with truth to please the non Catholics. This is not a service for them. We betray the Catholic faith, and we commit sin against the love for our neighbor, because love for your neighbor is also that you bring him to the fullness of truth. This is charity. This is the work of mercy, to instruct the ignorant, the erring person.
Adrian Milag: And Bishop, why should they read your Credo? Why should every Catholic read this?
Bishop Schneider: It is not an obligation for Catholics to read my book at all. It is offered as a possibility. There are other probably good books also, the Baltimore Catechism, the ancient one is very good, the Pius the Tenth Catechism, and there is the Spirago Catechism of ancient times. You can read those. It is only a possibility among others.
Adrian Milag: The teachings that you share here, Bishop, really bring clarity based on the tradition. So it really helps people, especially those who are confused right now with things that are happening. And thank you, Bishop, for everything that you do. And Bishop, thank you so much. That is all the questions that I gathered from all the viewers. And Your Excellency, it is always a great honor to have this conversation with a pious, holy man like you. Thank you, Bishop. And before we say goodbye, we ask you to offer a prayer for the viewers and for the entire Filipino Catholic community.
Bishop Schneider: I entrust you to Our Lady, the coredemtrix, the mediatrix of all graces, our spiritual mother, the mother of God, the mother of the Redeemer, and to bless all the Philippines, to protect them, always in the Catholic faith, and all of you.
Ave Maria, Grazia plena, Dominus tecum, Benedicta tu in mulieribus, et benedictus fructus ventris tui, Jesus. Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae. Amen.
Dominus vobiscum. Et cum spiritu tuo. Benedicat vos omnipotens Deus, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Amen.
Adrian Milag: Wow. Thank you, Bishop, and rest assured also of our prayers for you, and hope to see you next year. If it is God’s will, it will happen, Bishop. God bless you always.
Bishop Schneider: God bless your work.