Sunday, April 24, 2016

Archbishop Schneider

Bishop Schneider is not only against the Way.  He is also against the liturgy of the regular parish Mass.  Of course, Tim Rohr agrees with everything Bishop Schneider says.  After all, he attends the Traditional Latin Mass.  He has even called his followers to pressure their parish priests to make changes in the regular parish Masses.  Why?  Because he believes that only real reverence is found in the Traditional Latin Mass. 

Bishop Schneider has criticized the documents of Vatican II which are aligned with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  According to the weblink below: 
In Lumen Gentium 16, he criticizes the text: “the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God.”.............. 
These are the Muslims – they have no supernatural faith and therefore they have no supernatural act of worship. Even the Jews who rejected Jesus as God, as Trinity, they rejected Him they have no faith. Therefore their worship is also natural, not supernatural.” 
Schneider also criticizes the document Unitatis Redintegratio on ecumenism where it states that even non Catholics are a means of salvation.
Apparently, Bishop Schneider has already judged that only Catholics are saved while everyone else are not.  Yet, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338
Salvation comes from God alone, and it is not the place of the Church or any Bishop to judge non-Christians to Hell.  Which one among us would condemn a sick child to Hell simply because he/she was born into a Hindu family and have never heard the Gospel of Christ?  This Hindu child never even rejected Christ.  After all, a person cannot reject what he/she have never heard of in the first place.   

1 Corinthians 5:12-13  What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”


  1. There are many bishops who support the NCW. Wherever there are communities, you find supporting bishops who allow the NCW to adore our Lord and build communities in their parishes. So it is no surprise that there are bishops who don't support the NCW. There is nothing new in this. Bishop Schneider is one those bishops. He gave this interview in Hungary but this does not represent the view of the Hungarians. I personally know NCW communities in Hungary who have been walking for over 25-30 years!

    Bishop Schneider is dead wrong is his analysis of the monotheistic religions. Just like the body and blood both are present in the Holy Eucharist, the same way all three persons of the Holy Trinity are present in any one person of the same God: Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. Therefore you cannot claim that those who believe in the Father do not have faith. On the contrary, they do have faith in God the Father who is the first person of the Triunite Holy Trinity. "Shema Israel" the Lord is One!

    Bishop Schneider still believes NCW communities receive the Eucharist sitting and pass the chalice around hand by hand. This is all wrong! These things had been corrected in the NCW a long time ago. If there are other things that need correction, further correction will be made. You see, Junglewatch is dead wrong in blaming the NCW liturgy on the Archbishop. The NCW liturgy was set up, tested and occasionally corrected by the international team of catechists. Even bishop Schneiner understands that it is under their purview.

    Bishop Schneider is also wrong about Trent. There are different views about Trent in the NCW. Obedience in the Catholic Church does not mean you have to exclusively align your individual way of thinking. Obedience means you respect and follow instruction when it is coming from authoritative source. In particular, bishop Schneider is wrong about the Holy Spirit. We do not deny the role of the Holy Spirit that led to Vatican 2.

    Unlike Bishop Schneider, I do not see anything wrong in presenting the Catholic doctrine in a way that is acceptable to Protestant. It is the spirit of ecumenism that was promulgated by Vatican 2.

    As the Wikipedia says: Ecumenism and nondenominational or postdenominational movements are not necessarily the same thing. While some of these can be ecumenical in intent, normally nondenominationalism seeks no common organizing principle nor works toward the unity of Christians. Ecumenism is not religious syncretism, "lowest-common-denominator" theology, or an effort to bring about "One World Religion" that is something other than Christianity. Nor is it "false irenicism" or the "dumbing-down" of doctrine to the point of indifference.

    Of course, those who loathe the thorough work and major achievements of Vatican 2, won’t take this spirit of Christian unity with pleasure.

  2. Dear Diana,there is a problem with your post. You say that Bishop Schneider is judging non-Christians to hell, but I have read the entire interview, and I can't see anywhere where he does that. The section that you quote is concerned with the worship of Muslims and Jews, but not their eternal fate.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 12:17 pm,

      According to the article:

      "Schneider also criticizes the document Unitatis Redintegratio on ecumenism where it states that even non Catholics are a means of salvation."

    2. Yes, but again, this is hardly a judgment on who is destined for hell. He is referring rather to "non Catholics [as] a means of salvation", not whether non-Catholics go to hell.

      You need to read more carefully dear.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 2:13 pm,

      If a person does not have salvation, where do you think he goes? There is only one place a soul with no salvation goes to. That would be Hell. The Bishop disagrees with a document which stated that even nonCatholics are a means of salvation. Why does he disagree? Because he thinks that only Catholics are a means of salvation.

  3. Do you know what "a means of salvation" refers to? This phrase is not a statement about whether one is saved, but whether a particular religion is a "means of salvation". Catholics believe that the Catholic Church is the only supernatural religion - that is, the Catholic Church is the only means of salvation. Now, that does not mean that people who practice other religions are destined for hell, but only that if they are saved, it is by virtue of Jesus Christ and his Church.

    Again, I urge you to read more carefully.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 6:12 pm,

      Then why was he criticizing and disagreeing with the document of Vatican II, which stated that even non Catholics are a means of salvation"?

    2. Did you actually read what the Bishop said about this himself?

      “This [Unitatis Redintegratio] could also be interpreted in a wrong manner, in a way of the Anglican Branch theory that there are several branches of Christianity who are all means of salvation. Therefore we also have to clarify this expression. We have to say perhaps, nevertheless, God can use other Christians, but individually because the are baptized…Remember what St. Augustine said, what the non-Catholics have, they took from the Church. He even said they have stolen it from our house. What we have, this is Catholic, not theirs. Therefore, we have to explain this. Otherwise, it could be understood wrongly.”

      The article you refer to also says this:

      "Bishop Schneider is one of the few bishops who has brought up problems with Vatican II documents. We need to bring this up, because he is a very highly respected bishop."

      I look forward to the day that Bishop Schneider is elected to the see of Peter.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 10:39 pm,

      Did you read the entire document that Bishop Schneider disagreed with? It also stated that it is only the Catholic Church that is the "all embracing means of salvation"". So, what is there to clarify?

    4. Bishop Schneider is the auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan and titular bishop of Celerina. He may be well respected in fundamentalist circles on the territory of the former Soviet Union and among the traditionalists. But beyond them, especially in the modern Western European countries and in America, he is basically unknown.

      Bishop Schneider is a kneel-and-tongue maniac who would like to force all Catholics by authoritative power to take the Eucharist exclusively his way, kneeling and on the tongue. This is not reflecting the healthy diversity of the Catholic Church that has developed after Vatican 2.

      Moderate Catholics do not appreciate bishop Schneider's
      ramblings against women and the Pope. He says in this interview: "This manner of the celebration towards people, using women as lectors for example is more similar to Protestant worship." In his view women should not be lectors or get any role in the liturgy at all.

      He says of Pope Francis: "There is confusion because he is putting on the same plateau the natural level according to which all people are creatures of God and the supernatural level according to which only those who believe in Christ and receive baptism are children of God. Only those are children of God who believe in Christ, who are not born of the flesh or the blood, which is the natural level, but who are born from God through faith in Christ and baptism. This is declared by God Himself in the Gospel of John. The above mentioned statement of the pope contradicts in some way the word of God itself."

      Bishop Schneider attacks the Pope here because Francis called the believers children of God. He is distorting even the Gospels to find an argument against him. What kind of attitude is this? Pope Francis is right about the faith of people that makes them specially related to God who is One. If you go against the Pope, then you don't belong to the flock he shepherds.

      Bishop Schneider is a flagship for Catholic fundamentalists and traditionalists who would like turn back the church into the pre-Vatican 2 times. They want to stop and suspend all progress that has been achieved. Their ideal Catholic Church is the that of the Middle Ages! His direct attack against Pope Francis is a very disturbing sign of irreverence, the same kind of arrogant irreverence towards church authority and church leaders that we also see at Junglewatch.

      No wonder radicals at the jungle dig up "well respected" people like bishop Schneider from Kazakhstan in their desperate attempt to justify their wicked ways of trying to destroy decency and Catholic fellowship on Guam.

    5. "a kneel-and-tongue maniac "


      Bishop Schneider is not a "radical", nor is he unknown or without respect "in the west or in Europe". In 2010 Bishop Schneider addressed a conference in Rome to cardinals and bishops about the wrong interpretations of Vatican II documents -and he was not vilified for it.

      The bishop's central argument is that the ambiguities of Vatican II need to be clarified. Do you have a problem with that Zoltan?

      Given that Tradition is a necessary aspect of the Catholic Church's magisterium, it is rather sad, and definitely troubling when "tradition" is denigrated, mocked and avoided.

    6. Please bear with me, reader; my comment does relate to the above.

      How many Tim Rohrs are there? In the lovable person, one, but conceptually, at least three:
      1. The traditionalist Tim Rohr (occupying a legitimate space on the Catholic spectrum ranging from traditionalist through mid-range to liberal as in, for instance, attending a Tridentine Mass as a pre-Vatican II traditionalist).
      2. The critical Tim Rohr (legitimate as in the pointing out of failures to follow established policies, liturgical instructions or laws; pointing out lapses in prudence or good judgment, hypocrisy, or heretical teachings; for instance, the failure of the NCW to follow the GIRM in the reception of communion by not immediately consuming the Host upon reception).
      Of course, there is room here for point and counterpoint. A criticism may be lodged, but it may or may not stick depending on whether the one criticized has a legitimate or weighty enough counter-argument. This is why we have judges, referees, debate-adjudicators in civil society; or in the Church, the point/counter-point within councils, advisors to the pope, schools of theology, and devil’s-advocates (in the case of proposing someone for beatification or sainthood).
      3. The abusive Tim Rohr (illegitimate; for instance, calling a bishop an ‘asshole’ and others ‘idiots,’ which is raw disrespect, not only demeaning the person so called, but also demeaning Tim Rohr himself, and does not cohere with or serve well the legitimate things he does or says).

      By the way, one could say the same about Mr. Zoltan, that there are three of him. He is 1. non-traditional on the spectrum of Catholicity, belonging to the NCW inasmuch as it has received Rome’s approval; 2. critical (inasmuch as he presents evidence or arguments to persuade others of his point of view or against the point of view of another) 3. abusive (calling a clergy a ‘maniac.’)

      What do we make of the above three Rohrs and three Zoltans? Paul reminds us that we see through a glass darkly. Indeed we do, and God help us pilgrims keep our footing on this dark and muddy path.

    7. Dear Anonymous, bishop Schneider's hardly veiled personal attack against Pope Francis is a disturbing sign of arrogant irreverence. Traditionalists disguise themselves as defenders of faith but, in fact, they only try to stick to the faith of the Middle Age. They look at the work of the Holy Spirit as manifests itself in our time with contempt and suspicion.

      Bishop Schneider's proposed "syllabus" for Vatican 2 would like to block the further ongoing work of the Holy Spirit that rebuilds the Catholic Church on enhanced foundations after Vatican 2. In particular, bishop Schneider opposes the ideas of Catholic communities, ecumenism and inter-faith dialogue.

    8. Dear Timothy, if you feel that calling bishop Schneider a kneel-and-tongue maniac is offensive then let me apologize. I did not mean to be offensive. So let's just say bishop Schneider is a strong kneel-and-tongue advocate. Does it sound better? Well, it is still true that people whose thinking revolves around one single issue and talk about this one single issue all the time are often called maniacs.

      As Wikipedia notes: English liturgical scholar and commentator Alcuin Reid wrote in a review of Dominus est in The Catholic Herald: "Bishop Athanasius Schneider, a patristic scholar, appointed a bishop by Pope Benedict in 2006, has raised his voice in prophetic call for the western Church to recall the importance, if not the necessity, of returning to the previous discipline of the reception of Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue."

      Even more disturbing is the bishop's attack on Amoris Laetitia, the latest pastoral letter from Pope Francis. This attack is a hardly veiled personal attack against the Pope. Let me quote:

      Bishop Schneider compares the current growing confusion over divorced and remarried in the Church to the Arian heresy which brought almost the whole Church into error. He adds, “there exists a real danger that this confusion expands on a vast scale” without the needed clarity from the Pope.

      Criticizing Pope Francis' proposal to treat divorced and re-married Catholics with respect, bishop Schneider claims: "In admitting, even in only exceptional cases, the ‘divorced and remarried’ to Holy Communion without asking them to cease to practice the acts contrary to the Sixth Commandment of God, by declaring presumptuously, moreover, that their acts are not grave sin, one chooses the easy road, one avoids the scandal of the Cross. Such a pastoral practice for the ‘divorced and remarried’ is an ephemeral and deceitful pastoral practice."

      It is extremely funny that Junglewatch is not brave enough to comment on Amoris Laetitia. Rather, they hide behind a traditionalist bishop who is linking the impact of the Pope's pastoral letter to the Arian heresy.

    9. Dear Zoltan,
      Thank you for your response. Actually, it is not me who you have hurt. It is the archbishop, and you yourself whom you have hurt. Name-calling never adds positively to an argument--it degrades a person and, to some extent, whatever truth you intend to convey. Thanks again.

  4. Kudos for Joshua Aglubat! Rohr went absolutely speechless. Lol!

    Joshua AglubatApril 27, 2016 at 10:42 AM

    What the hell is the problem with you people? You call yourself "concerned catholics" yet you are the ones who are causing division. I will tell you right now that GOD and his church has saved my family and I THROUGH the NCW. The NCW is NOT the only way to salvation, but it has helped me tremendously. It is one of the many ways God has to reach out to people. I want to speak about my sister who lived a life of precariousness. She was involved in sex, alcohol and she constantly expressed that she didn't know the meaning of her life. she attempted to commit suicide. My parents were very distressed over this and a couple years later we got an invitation to JOY. as a family we tried everything. from bible studies with our families but we weren't getting much fulfillment.The Lord used The NCW to help my sister find her vocation.She is now a Carmelite nun in Morrisstown, New Jersey! and guess what her preparation was? she went to mass everyday at Our Lady of Peace and Safe Journey at 6 pm. Now I am not saying that the way is the only way but can you people just stop and see that some graces are coming from it? The archbishop is trying his best to lead the church. im sure that he wakes up at 5 am every morning praying for every one of us.You cause the man to suffer like a dog. do you ever think about that? How can all of you say that the NCW is bad? my parents were on the verge of divorce and experienced problems in their marriage. when I was younger before the way, I never saw my parents ask forgiveness from each other. Now, every Sunday morning we gather as a family in prayer and I see my father ask my mother for forgiveness. Now in the Eucharist, many of you do not see how the children are. here are some examples of what they pray for. They pray to be better children. they ask God for humility. They ask God to help their parents marriage. they ask god to help them to stop sinning and to stop being selfish.they ask god to give them the gift to love others! these kids are as young as 5 years old and they pray for this in the assembly. How can you say that this is a bad thing ? that these kids are being brainwashed?!! Once in a while we go 2 by 2 to random homes and speak about how god has saved us. It is NOT the NCW that brings salvation. It is God USING the NCW as one way to help his church lead us to him. There are many people who are not in the NCW that are MUCH MORE converted than I am. God has used this way to help save my family and to help save myself. Maybe for other Catholics, God uses a different way. I don't know everything about all this financial situation, but the Lord has revealed himself to my family and I through this way. One way to see if this is from God is to look at the fruit that it bares. sure,all of us are great sinners. but the lord loves every single one of us. The lord never forces us and he leaves us free. The way has helped me grow closer to god. I have many sins, but God through the way has shown his love towards me and constantly calls me to come back to the church. Now, someone tell me is it really that bad that it has helped my parents marriage? that it helps the children pray for themselves and their families? I totally disagree that it is a bad thing, because I have seen the fruits of it.

    1. Dear Joshua,

      This is a great public personal witness. I thank you for it. It is an example of the sort of thing also done in the Cursillo Movement and in parish programs of renewal, such as CHRP (Christ renews His parish). It is not something one hears much about in traditionalist Catholic settings. Your public witness about your personal experience of being touched and turned by God, full of deep meaning for you and your family, has succeeded in reminding me just how big God's tent is.


  5. Bishop Schneider allegedly influenced Pope Benedict XVI, with his book *It is the Lord,* to distribute Communion to those kneeling and on the tongue during Mass in the latter years of his pontificate. When Cardinal Sarah was given the position in charge of the Sacraments and Divine Worship, he asked Pope Francis what would he like him to do re the liturgy,and Pope Francis said to follow what Pope Benedict had initiated. A couple of days ago, I saw on EWTN, thousands of young people attending a papal Mass at St. Peters Square. The priests distributed Communion on the tongue, even when people came up with hands open to receive. Some priests (either disobedient to the Popes instructions, or perhaps not addressed in a language they understood, did give Communion in the hand.) But the majority of priests were giving on the tongue.

    Would it not be your desire to worship God in a Biblical and Heavenly position - on ones knees, and to receive on the tongue so as to protect particles of the Host (Jesus) from falling to the ground and being trampled on, or transferred onto clothing, pews, books, hair, etc. This is what Bishop Schneider is concerned about, and rightfully so. Our Lord is being trampled on and abused because of peoples indifference to the problem. I am also familiar with priests distributing the Precious Blood from person to person who remain standing in their place (such as with the NCW), and because of the movement of the priest walking, the level of the Precious Blood moves in the Chalice and sometimes spills over the edge onto the floor or someones shoes. Is it not better to prevent Jesus from being abused in this way. One who loves Jesus cannot be indifferent to these happenings. Bishop Schneider, in his love for our Lord, is just asking us to prevent the abuse we inflict on Jesus.

    The other serious reason for Communion on the tongue is to prevent satanists from stealing consecrated hosts for their black masses. Receiving the Eucharist on the tongue, and consuming the Host immediately in front of the priest makes it harder for satanists to get their hands on Him.
    If you value Jesus in the Eucharist, you have to see that Bishop Schneider is correct in promoting the Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling.

    Bishop Schneider is not a kneel-and-tongue maniac; Bishop Schneider is more than a kneel-and-tongue advocate; Bishop Schneider is a defender and protector of the Body and Blood of Christ. For us not to agree, makes us indifferent to the abuse of our Lord. I would not scoff at this. I would promote it just like Saint John Paul II did, just like Pope Benedict XVI did, and just like Pope Francis does. If you believe in transubstantiation, you would do everything possible to see that Jesus is treated respectfully by everyone who presents themselves for Communion.
    To do everything possible, to prevent loss of Jesus, is very Catholic.