"And I beheld, and heard the voice of one eagle flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice: Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth.... [Apocalypse (Revelation) 8:13]
We take time out today and everyday going forward to reflect upon the heroic efforts of Father Gruner in carrying on the message of Fatima to the world. On April 29: it was announced that Father Nicholas Gruner had passed away. He died suddenly of a heart attack while working at his Fatima Center office. O
God, Thou didst raise Thy servant, Father Nicholas Gruner, to the
sacred priesthood of Jesus Christ, according to the Order of
Melchisedech, giving him the sublime power to offer the Eternal
Sacrifice, to bring the Body and Blood of Thy Son Jesus Christ
down upon the altar, and to absolve the sins of men in Thine own holy
Name. We beseech Thee to reward his faithfulness and to forget his
faults, admitting him speedily into Thy holy presence, there to enjoy
forever the recompense of his labors. This we ask through Jesus Christ
Thy Son our Lord. Amen.
Today we are living in a time in which we are living in a
time in which we are beginning to witness the revival of Islam.
This is something that Hiliare belloc the great
English Historian of the 20th Century had prophetically states
in his work "the great Heresies". In this book written in the late
1930's he states that "Millions
of modern people of the white civilization—that is, the civilization of Europe and America—have forgotten all about Islam.
They have never come in contact with it. They take for granted that it is
decaying, and that, anyway, it is just a foreign religion which will not concern
them. It is, as a fact, the most formidable and persistent enemy which our
civilization has had, and may at any moment become as large a menace in the
future as it has been in the past. The suggestion that Islam may re-arise sounds
fantastic but this is only because men are always powerfully affected by the
immediate past: one might say that they are blinded by it. "
A brief History
of Islam
The fact that most of the Mohammedans are mainly located in
the far east is because the people known as today's “Arabs”, from whom
Islamic religion spread, were descendents of
Ishmael, the son of Abraham who was born of the slave woman agar to whom
God said he would multiply her seed. This is why the Ishmael is recognized as a
prophet in the Islamic Religion (he is placed after Abraham but before Isaac ).
These sons of Agar dwelt on the Arabian peninsula and were
roughly divided between a nomadic and a more or less urban oasis culture.
The Tribal-society aspect of pre-Islamic Arabia explains
many of the things that can be found in Islam today. For example, it was
perfectly in line with Arab morality to mount raids on other tribes in order to
obtain wealth, wives, and slaves, and so the tribes were constantly at war with
one another. These desert tribes lived by the code "an eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth". Vengeance was extracted whenever anything was done to hurt
any member of the tribe. Forcing people into slavery or kidnapping women, hold
them in a harem, and raping them at will was considered just and proper.
The harsh Arab climate produced a harsh tribal society in
which violence was the norm. And violence is still an attribute of Islamic
societies.
The Arab population was Polytheistic in orientation. The
male and female spirits existed in trees; stones, rivers and mountains, and
so they were they worshiped a various number of different “gods”. Sacred
magic stones were believed to protect the tribes. The Quraysh tribe had
adopted a black stone as their tribal magic stone and had set it up at the Kabah.
This magical black was kissed when people came on their pilgrimage to worship at
the Kabah. It was no doubt an asteroid/meteorite that had fallen out of the
sky and thus was viewed as being divine in some way.
The Quraysh tribe, (Muhammad's tribe) which was one of
the more larger and more important tribes saw to it that there was an idol for
every religion at the pagan temple called the Kabah (a another version of the
Roman Parthenon – the temple dedicated to all the Gods. The word Kabah is
Arabic for "cube" and refers to the square stone temple in Mecca where the idols
were worshipped. The Ka’bah was a cube shaped construction which was about 50
feet high with side 40 feet wide enclosing an empty, windowless room with
marble walls. This temple contained a virtual smorgasbord of deities with
something for everyone. At least 360 gods were represented at the Kabah and a
new one could be added if some stranger came into town and wanted to worship his
own “god” in addition to the ones that were already represented. - This Kabah
will later play a major role in Islam because it is by means of this Kabah that
Mohammed will claim to prove the apostolic character of his religion by simply
saying that Abraham and Ishmeal had built the Kabah even though there is no
historical proof that Abraham or Ishmeal were ever in Mecca.
The Beginning of Islam
The founder of Islam is Muhammad (AD 570 - 632).
Muhammad's father died before he was born, and his mother died while he
was still
young. He was sent to live with his rich grandparents, who later sent
him to
live with a wealthy uncle, who in turn passed him on to a poor uncle who
raised
him as well as he could.
The Quarish tribe, to which Mohammed belonged, had
established itself in the south of Hijas (Hedjaz), near Mecca, which
was, the principal religious and commercial center of Arabia at the time of
Mohammed. They had become the masters and the acknowledged guardians of the
sacred Kaaba, within the town of Mecca — then visited in annual pilgrimage by
the heathen Arabs with their offerings and tributes — and had thereby gained
such preeminence that it was comparatively easy for Mohammed to inaugurate his
religious reform and his political campaign, which ended with the conquest of
all Arabia and the fusion of the numerous Arab tribes into one nation, with one
religion, one code, and one sanctuary.
According to the biographers and early Muslim
traditions, Mohammed’s mother died when he was a little boy and so he was raised
by his uncle Abu Talib who brought him up a pagan and introduced him in the
trade business but As a whole very little is known about his early life
mainly because he was simply a normal Arab boy who enjoyed talking with those
who traveled in the caravans. He loved to explore the desert and particularly
the caves. According to the early Muslim traditions, the young pagan
Muhammad experienced different visions in some of the caves he went to.
He got married at the age of 25 to a wealthy women named
Cadijah who’s cammel trade he looked after, she was some 15 years older him, but
it was through this marriage that he became much more acquainted with
Christianity since his wife’s uncle (Zayd) was a Nestorian Christian who
upbraided him for worshiping idols and instructed him in the faith. In fact
Father Nicholas of Cusa, a well known Catholic Theologian and Philosopher of the
15th Century, quotes another Arab, in his work “ A scrutiny of the
Koran” who states that Mohammed Himself had been influence by Sergius a
Nestorian monk, which seems probable since most of the surrounding region and
towns next to were Mohammed had lived had more or less accepted Christianity in
one form or other.
Nevertheless at the age of 40 Muhammad (610) Mohammed began
to experience have visions again. This time he claimed that Allah had called
him to be a prophet (nabi) and an apostle (Rasul).
Muhammad at first shared his call only with the family
and friends in secret. Indeed, his first converts were some members of his
own family. But soon his message became public, and he became subject to
ridicule and hostility by the population at large and even by members of his own
family.
Satanic Verses
In order to appease his pagan family members and the
members of the Quraysh tribe, he decided that the best thing he could do was to
admit that it was perfectly proper to pray to and worship the three daughters
of Allah: Al-Lat, Al-ussa and Manat! This led to the famous "satanic verses"
in which Muhammad in a moment of weakness and supposedly under the inspiration
of Satan succumbed to the temptation to appease the pagan mobs in Mecca (Sura
53:19).
Muhammad eventually fled to medina, in AD 622. This
event is called hejira by the Muslims and marks the beginning of the Muslim era
and calendar. In other words the year 622, is the year 1 in the Islamic
Calendar.
While at Medina, Muhammad planned and organized the
spread of his new religion. The only powerful method he could use was that
of violence in the name of Allah - the jihad. This jihad was so
successful, despite so many oppositions, that at Muhammad's death in AD 632 half
of the Arabic world had become Muslim, and by AD 750 the Muslims had conquered
the Persian and large parts of the Byzantine empire.
From reading the Koran one would not suppose that an
enormous number of Arabs were Christians. Though the people of the Hijas were
predominately pagan, many of the surrounding tribes had accepted Christianity.
There were some members of the Quraysh tribe that had accepted Christianity but
they were generally few. However all along the Mediterranean Christianity was
already fully established. In fact it is reported that that when Muhammad
entered Mecca in triumph in the year 630, paintings of Jesus and the virgin
Mary, among others, were still visible on the inner walls of the Ka'ba.
Coming Islamic Invasion of Europe
The meaning of Islam
The very word is an Arabic word, which originally referred
to an attribute of manliness and described someone who was heroic and brave in
battle. However most expounders of the word will generally affirm that it means
“submission” as the Moslems today understand it to mean. Most Moslem apologist
will even go as far as saying the originality of this name is a sign of the
divine origin of Islam and a clear indication that all must because Moslems
since it is obvious to any believer that we must be in “submission to God”.
Divisions in Islam:
Despite the military success of the Muslims, Islam has
divided into various sects of which the two largest are the Sunni and the
Shiah. The Term “Sunni” is derived from the word “Sunnah” which
means “Tradition”. The Shias have their own Sunnah, not identical to that of the
Sunnis. The Sunni uphold the legitimacy of the succession of the first three
caliphs, (Abu Bakr, Omar, and Uthman, while the Shiah defend the Divine right of
Ali as against the successions of these caliphs whom they call "usurpers", and
whose names, tombs, and memorials they insult and detest). The Sunni make up
the larger about 85 % while the Shiah make up about 10%.The major difference is
that Sunni is more like a Church founded on the consensus of the community,
while the Shite hold to an authoritarian form of Government were the imams have
the right of say which can not be contradicted by the community since they
are seen as having a sort of impeccability/infallibility.
That is a brief
historical overview, however Before I get into the Islamic notion of revelation
I want to mention something about the other sources of Islamic authority and
the Islamic beliefs so that you can understand what place the Koran holds in
Islam and what it teaches the Moslems.
The theology of the Koran
No Catholic Saint would kiss the Koran
The theology of the Koran is quite simple and thats what
makes it most suitable for your any Godless pagan to embrace. – The Joe 6 pack
religion.
It is a monotheistic - A strict belief in one God, who
they call "Allah". "Allah" has 99 names. For the Moslem Our Lord
Jesus Christ is merely a prophet, one of the many prophets with
Mohammed being the last and the greatest of the Prophets and so the Moslems do
not pray to or worship Mohammed, -not in the strict sense any way. They
pray to Allah - They believe that with Mohammed the canon or revelation
from God was finally closed. Their will be no more - Its true that some
Moslems deny this point but a general rule those are the tenants of the great
body of Moslems.
For the Moslems Islam supersedes Christianity and Judaism
in the way Christianity Superseded Judaism so according to them it is incumbent
on all Christians to be come Muslims and So we Should all convert and become
Muslims.
Similarities and Differences:
Moslems do believe in heaven and Hell, good and bad angels.
They believe in the Devil - the Shaitan -or iblis- who was
condemned to hell because he refused to worship Adam - this same idea is
found in the Talmud. They do Believe in Adam and Eve, but they deny
Original sin since for them the sin of Adam did not loose anything for the
rest of men but only for Adam alone.
The pagan element that Mohammedans have maintained about
angels is a believe in the spirits they call jinn, these spirits
are said to have originated in fire and function as mediators between angels
and humans. They claim that there are good and bad Jinn and that Mohammed
had converted some of them to Islam.
While the Muslims do believe in Heaven and Hell, their
notion of Hell is similar to ours, but their notion of heaven is clearly pagan
although not totally since, they claim that Heaven has 7 levels. The
seventh Level is the highest - somewhat equivalent to our heaven. There you are
in the presence of Allah.
However the average Moslem is more familiar with the
other levels of heaven which are presented in a materialistic and sensual way
since these places a mans sexual desires are fulfilled to the limited - a place
which St. Alphonsus says is only fit for beasts!
In fact if you really want to understand why some
Mohammedan
would strap some bombs on himself and gladly let them explode at the cost of his
life, it is precisely because he is promised heaven in return for killing the
infidel. And so he goes to his death looking forward to an eternity of bliss
in a land were there will be milk and honey and all wine and you can drink along
with the most beautiful girls called "Houris" to fulfill their every
desire!
Although the Koran does lay down most of what I have said
so far about the Islamic beliefs, yet all most all the other things Moslems
believe are derived from three other sources besides the Koran:
Other Sources:
I. The Hadith, a record of words and deeds of Muhammad
by his relatives and friends;
II. The Sunnah, or acts of Muhammad;
III. The Ijma, consensus of the Muslim community or of
its leading scholars.
The reason that
Mohammedans have other authorities other than the Koran is that from the very
beginning it was clearly understood that the Qur’án could not give all the rules
for all the situations encountered by a Muslims in daily life.
Even during
Muhammad’s lifetime a supplement to his message proved to be necessary; his
deeds and words were written down so as to be an example for future moslems on
how to conduct their lives. These stories about Mohammed were passed down
orally until the 9th century before they were systematically
collected and written down into what is know as the Hadith. The Hadith
Together with the Sira, constitute the Sunnah - that is the traditions of
the Prophet.
While no absolute canon of the Hadîth has ever been
established, nevertheless certain compilers are recognized as more trustworthy
- those compiled by al-Bukhari (d. 256 A.H., 870 A.D.), are
regarded as most sahih - most true . The Hadith itself from a historical point
of view as far as its reliability is a collection of hearsay statements which is
not really worth the paper it's written on, it is not only doubtful but like the
Koran it is also latent with contradictions (Islam by Alfred Guilaume, pg. 106)
but even then while I might undermine the Hadith because of the fact it is
historically unreliable for reasons I don't have the time to get into but
what you have to at least understand as that in practice it almost plays a far
greater roll than the Koran does for the average Muslim since without the Hadith,
the Koran the Koran doesn't stand as a Pillar of direction for Moslems on how to
function in their daily life as Muslims and being Arabs unless a law is set down
they will kill one another over even the smallest things.
The Second Vatican Council teaches convergence and coexistence which is Masonic not Catholic
The beliefs that are laid down for the Moslem to believe
are 6 major beliefs:
The Beliefs of Islam
The 6 Major beliefs of Islam, according to the Quran and
Muslim tradition:
I. Belief in Allah
II. Belief in the prophets
III. Belief in the day of Judgment (therefore belief in
heaven and hell);
IV. Belief in the revealed books;
V. Belief in the angels;
VI. Belief in fate
or providence – Calvanistic idea of Predestination.
Every Muslim must believe and profess these beliefs. If any
Muslim renounces Islam or becomes an apostate, he will be liable to the greatest
punishment, death and hell. Another Islamic belief is that is that it is
absolute necessity for all male Children to be circumcised, while some Islamic
sects prescribe it also for women. Divorce and Polygamy are allowed, Pork along
with alcohol are forbidden as "harram" – evil.
The
obligations of Islam
Muslims also hold to the teaching of “faith and good works”
and totally reject the protestant notion “justification by faith alone”. Upon
every Muslim there are incumbent various obligations which they are bound to
observe. They are the following:
I. Belief in the oneness of Allah and his prophet
Muhammad;
II. Offering of daily prayers;
III. Almsgiving; - They do believe in good works and
reject the idea of "faith alone"
IV. Observing the fast of Ramadan (30 days); -
Ramadam follows a luna Calendar. During the month of Ramadam Muslims can not eat
or drink during day time hours - not even their own saliva!
V. Performing hajj to the Kabah in Mecca once in a
lifetime, if possible.
The Islamic notion of Revelation:
The Islamic bible equivalent is the Koran. The word
Koran comes from the Arabic to recite or read since it was originally given
to Mohammed as a recitation which he inturn recited to others who wrote it down.
This revelation was intended to recieted by all who accepted its message, that
is why most devoute moslems now great portions of the Koran from memory. The
Koran is roughly equivalent in length to the New Testament and divided into 114
sections, known as suras. The book's are organizing principle according
to size.
While the Koran hold a similar prominence in Islam as the
bible does in Christianity, yet strangely enough their notion of revelation
is totally different. As you know, the Catholic teaching on revelation of
the Sacred Text of the Bible is that various human authors wrote the various
books or letter that they wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost while
nevertheless maintaining their liberty and their various styles, temperaments
and different degree's of human knowledge. For the Moslems on the other hand
the Quran was suppose to be send down from heaven directly by God by the
intermediary of one Man, the Prophet Mohammed who while he disclaimed having
any power to perform miracles, claimed that the divine revelations enshrined in
the Quran were themselves miraculous sign's of his apostle ship. In the
Koran Mohammed expressly states regarding the Koran that "God Himself and His
holy Spirit composed this most true book.”- Surah 16:101,
For the Moslem because the Quran is supposed to have come
down "unfettered" by human intervention, is thus the truest and clearest
statement of Allah's word, and therefore supersedes all previous revelations,
even annulling those revelations, as they have supposedly been corrupted by the
limitations of their human authors.
The Quran itself though is seen as merely a transcript
of an uncreated and eternal tablet or book that had preexisted in heaven in
which is written all that has happened and that will happen. It is suppose to
have been reveled to Mohammed by the intermediary of the spirit of God.
The physical Qur’án, that they have in written text for
them , is only the visible copy of that eternal and uncreated Quran. The
Uncreated and eternal Quran is called the Mother of the Book.The role of Mohammed was to speak the truths
of this Uncreated Koran, so that it could take on earthly form,
and thus carry Allah's eternal message to the world. And so not seen as a
book in the ordinary sense, nor is it comparable to the Bible, either the Old or
New Testaments. It is for the moslems an expression of Divine Will. If you want
to compare it with anything in Christianity, you must compare it with Christ
Himself. Christ was an expression of the Divine among men, the revelation of the
Divine Will. That is what the Quran is for the Moslems. If you want a comparison
for the role of Muhammad, the better one in that particular respect would be
Blessed Virgin Mary. Muhammad was the vehicle of the Divine, as she was the
vehicle of the word of God... (Charris Waddy, The Muslim Mind [New
York: Longman, 1976], p.14)
For this reason as funny as it might sound, Islam has
had and continues to have its own Arians, etc who debating and persecuting each
other over the nature of the Quran as being created or uncreated. Some say it's
created while others deny it! After years of blood shed on the issue it is
commonly held that the Koran is uncreated.
Nevertheless what is interesting about the Mohammedan
claim of an uncreated Quran - even though we find it erroneous - the idea of a
heavenly tablet was not a new idea invented by Mohammed the concept is as old as
religion itself. This idea was familiar to the ancient heathens (of
Mesopotamia), not to mention the fact that Talmudic Judaism, in its traditional
literature has crowned the Torah as pre-existent.
In Christianity pre-existence is ascribed to the word of
God, the logos but of course it has a different significance since the Moslems
don't worship the Koran as God !
Nevertheless during Mohammed’s lifetime the verses that he
recited and claimed to be revealed to him were written on palm-leaves, stones,
the shoulder -blades of animals, and any other material that came to hand.
because Mohammed could have his revelations at any time and so they often made
use of what was handy.
This says it all....
While historically there were a number of different version
of the Koran which contradicted each other, the Moslems wisely deceived to
destroy them and decide on only maintaining one version because the Moslems
feared that scriptural exegesis would pursue the course with them like it had
taken among Jews and Christians who at that the time accused one another of
corrupting and falsifying the text, it would have meant the end for this newly
founded religion. The edition which they put out is till this day the
authoritative text. Even though there are various versions of this text Only
the original Arabic version of the Koran is God’s inspired word since English
versions cannot give you the true meaning of the Koran .
The earliest copy of the Koran can be dated at around 790 AD
which is about 160 years after the death of Mohammed but there are some earlier
fragments which date about 100 years after the death of Mohammed. But its only
logical that the bones, stones, palm leaves, tree bark, etc.., which contained
some of the material on which the Koran was suppose to have been written that
these materials perished. Since these materials by their very nature corrupt. In
fact that is what even happened to the divinely inspired of Gospels and
Epistles the New Testament. The earliest copy of the Koran can be dated at
around 790 AD which is about 160 years after the death of Mohammed but there
are some earlier fragments which date about 100 years after the death of
Mohammed. Yet while its true that most Islamic Scholars will dishonestly affirm
that they still have the original version, yet it not only could they not
produce such a text but humanly speaking its not possible since those materials
by nature decay.
Prophets
Moslems no not
only have a different notion of Revelation but also of prophet hood. But this
teaching of Islam was clearly only a latter development since if you read the
Koran the notion of prophet hood resembles the Christian understand. They
firstly make a distention between one who is a Nabi -that is one who deliver
simple admonitions and warnings, and One who is specially chosen to proclaim
a special revelation , the rasûl – An Apostle.
Moslems claim that
not only are all the prophets/Apostles – Rasul of Allah, are inspired by God to
reveal his will to the world, but that these rasul/ prophets especially Mohammed
(the
seal/culmination of the prophets) were all without sin and infallible.
Conclusion
It's undeniably important to understand what Moslems do and
don't believe since Islam today is a reality that we have to deal with. The
Moslems today dwell not in some distant land across the sea but in the same
countries in which we also live and so its important to have at least some
understanding of one of the world's largest religions especially one which most
westerners are more than likely to join since it appeals to the senses and isn't
to difficult to follow and that would suit the lifestyle of most materialist
godless people today.
On this note, I would like to leave you with the thoughts of Belloc on
Islam who in response to the vital question "May not Islam arise again?" He
responds, "In a sense the question is already answered because Islam has
never departed. It still commands the fixed loyalty and unquestioning adhesion
of all the millions between the Atlantic and further a field throughout
scattered communities of further Asia. But I ask the question in the sense "Will
not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an
armed Mohammedan world which will shake off the domination of Europeans still
nominally Christian and reappear again as the prime enemy of our civilization?"
The future always comes as a surprise but political wisdom consists in
attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for
my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the
return of Islam.”
It seems we are beginning to see that revival!
JOIN The New Crusade @ TradCatKnight... Don’t forget to signup to my other social media outlets: google.com/+EricGajewski
The Revolution – the universal Revolution that unfolded with Humanism
and Renaissance and today is reaching its last steps after taking over
the leadership of the Church – has one weak point: its fundamental
illegitimacy. (1) Its illegitimacy is the weakness of this Goliath. A
David could defeat him if he knew how to aim the stone to hit between
his eyes.
Let me offer another metaphor to explain the Revolution’s embarrassment.
The Counter-Revolution has the strength of truth and legitimacy on its side
A usurper took over a kingdom by killing the legitimate king and his
family. Only a child managed to flee the country and escape. Although
his coup d’état was successful, the criminal lives in constant
affliction because he knows that boy is the legitimate heir and he is a
villain. If the boy returns to his land, the usurper will be defeated if
the boy knows how to unite his natural allies to depose the bandit.
If this boy in fact returns, what would be the best way to prevent him
from rallying his allies? It would be for the usurper to encourage many
counterfeit heirs to claim “rights” similar to those of the boy, so that
his potential allies would not know whom to support. Since the usurper
would control the actions of the fake heirs, the claim of the genuine
heir would be diluted and could become futile.
The Counter-Revolution does not need to have equal power to defeat the
Revolution. The CR has the strength of truth and legitimacy on its side.
So, a much smaller number of counter-revolutionaries can defeat the
Revolution insofar as they are aware of their strength and know where to
aim David’s stone.
If this is so, nothing is more important for the Revolution than to keep
the real counter-revolutionaries out of the picture. If it not possible
to destroy them by silencing their actions, splitting their ranks,
infiltrating their cells, suborning their members, slandering their
leaders, lying about their goals, then the best thing to do is to create
pseudo-counter-revolutionaries to confuse their followers and make
their fight as ineffective as possible.
The ensemble of these fake enemies of the Revolution is what we call the
false right. It is the best ally of the Revolution when the true and
legitimate Counter-Revolution is present. The more numerous the false
right factions, the better it is for the Revolution.
This revolutionary strategy is quite frequently employed in the
revolutionary process. Sometimes it is very difficult for the public to
discern the false right. The ones who, for obvious reasons, immediately
discern a new false right when it enters the scenario are the true
counter-revolutionaries. At the Final Judgment, where all these tactics
will be exposed, Catholics will be surprised to learn how often they
were fooled by false rights.
From theory to practice
At the 2014 October Synod a very radical report was launched midway
through when the Synod mentors realized they would not reach the
unanimity they needed to impose their progressivist agenda. That report
was meant to establish the goal that Pope Francis, Card. Kasper and
others want to reach.
In parallel, it also created a strong reaction in Catholic public
opinion, which is a good thing. It provided the pretext, however, for
the sprouting of a group of “conservative” ecclesiastics who are
increasingly assuming the role of heroes against Progressivism. They
provide good examples of the false-right. Let me analyze one of them
today.
Schneider restores traditional customs in order to make Vatican II and a hybrid Mass more palatable for conservatives
Among these new heroes is Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Bishop of Astana,
Kazakhstan. During the previous pontificate he had been one of the
“lions” favoring the
hybrid Mass, that is, a traditionalist-looking Novus Ordo
Mass following the plans of Benedict XVI. He also wrote two books
advocating that Communion in the hand should be abolished in the NO,
which are summarized here.
Schneider loves to appear in solemn Bishop's apparel. It is not rare to see him wearing the capa magna,
the Bishop's purple mantle with a long train. After the Synod,
Schneider made strong critiques of some progressivists at the Synod.
With these precedents, Bishop Schneider has been applauded by
conservatives and traditionalists, along with other Prelates who also
stood up against the excesses at the Synod. In less than one year he
already has free transit in many (Pseudo)traditionalist-conservative circles, be
they clerical – (Neo) SSPX, the Good Shepherd Institute – or lay – the Latin
Mass Society, TFP, the New Liturgical Movement and a variety of blogs in
the genre of Rorate Coeli, Fr. Z’s, Secretum Meum, Fraters in Unum.
To show who Schneider really is, I am transcribing very revealing documents that I found in major part on the blog
Call Me Jorge.
I double checked the sources and they appear to be authentic documents
insofar as we can rely on secondary sources on the Internet.
Schneider on Vatican II
During a symposium held in Paris in January of 2014, Bishop Schneider
made an appeal for the reform as set out by Benedict XVI. He stated his
position on the Council:
Bishop Schneider at the TFP seat in Brazil responds to questions of Fraters in Unum and defends Vatican II
“It is Vatican II Council that gave us a wider understanding of the
Mystery of the Church according to the teaching of the Church Fathers
[…]. Thus, the Church is seen as ‘a people made one with the unity of
the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit’ (Lumen gentium 4).” (2)
Defending the last fad of Benedict XVI on Vatican II, which was the hermeneutic of continuity (here, here,
here & here), Schneider said this at the Bishops' meeting on December 17, 2010 in Rome:
“Taking account of the experience of several decades since then, of
doctrinally and pastorally confused interpretations that are contrary to
the more than two millennia continuity of doctrine and prayer of the
faith, the need and urgency rise for a specific and authoritative
intervention by the pontifical Magisterium for an authentic
interpretation of the conciliar texts with completions and doctrinal
clarifications: a type of Syllabus errorum circa interpretationem Concilii Vaticani II.
“There is need for a new Syllabus, this time directed not so much
against errors coming from outside the Church, but against errors spread
inside the Church on the part of those who maintain a thesis of
discontinuity and rupture with its doctrinal, liturgical and pastoral
application. Such a Syllabus would consist of two parts: a part marking
errors and a positive part with propositions of doctrinal clarification,
completion and precision.” (3)
Questioned about his position on Vatican II by the Fratres in Unum blog in Brazil, he said:
“We should keep good sense and the sentire cum Ecclesia. It [the
Council] is a text of our mother, the Church. … With Vatican II the
Church did not stop being our mother, even if there are points to
correct and perfect. For this reason, I say that there are also many
good things in the texts of the Council. Why should we not value this?
This has been forgotten in the debates.
The Neo-SSPX is the latest to join the circle of the "false friends of Tradition..."
“For example: there is a norm in Sacrosanctum Concilium on
liturgy that says: ‘No one in the Church – neither a priest, bishop,
cardinal nor even pope – has the right to change by himself something in
the liturgical celebration. He cannot change, take off or add
anything.’ This is a very strong norm, which does not exist even in the
Council of Trent.
“If we quote this norm without referring to the source, if we were to
make a test among the majority of progressivist clergy, they would say
that it is a norm of the Council of Trent; they would say that such a
rigid norm cannot come from the Vatican II. This is only a small
example. I know of a book in Germany called The Silenced Council in which the author listed expressions of Vatican II that are actually traditional ones.” (4)
On ecumenism & inter-religious dialogue
On ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue, the French newspaper La Croix reported these words by Schneider:
“Anything that can bring about a mutual knowledge and respect between religions is a good thing.” (5)
“Ecumenism is necessary in order to be in contact with our
separated brethren and in order to love them. From the depth of the
challenge offered to us by the new paganism, we may and we must
collaborate with non-Catholics who seriously wish to defend the revealed
Divine Truth and the Natural Law that God created.” (6)
On Pope Francis, he made this general assessment less than one year ago, on May 30, 2014:
“Let us be grateful to God that Pope Francis has not spoken in the
manner that was expected by the media. Up to now, he expresses in all
his official homilies the beautiful Catholic doctrine.” (7)
These are some samples of the compromises of the “great hero” who is
charming so many conservatives and even traditionalists. In my opinion
he is clearly a false-right who has been put onstage by the
progressivist Vatican to be sure that it controls both the left and the
right reactions at the upcoming October Synod.
