FALSE TRADITIONALIST: MONS. SCHNEIDER STILL ATTORNEY FOR REGULARIZATION OF THE SSPX
As you can see, Bishop Schneider is an ecumenist, and his ecumenism is not limited to the SSPX ...
A letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith addressed
to the Superior of the Fraternity Saint Pius X has recently been made
public, in which it seems that on the part of Rome it was reversed back
to the point where it broke With Benedict XVI.
The apparent success of the current negotiations was based on the fact
that the problematic issues related to Vatican II were apparently
considered by Rome to be subject to further discussion, whereas now they
are once again demanded as a priori a firm assent to the whole Vatican
II and to some parts of the post-conciliar magisterium that still gives
rise to some doubts. Could you give us some light on this situation and your opinion?
MONS. SCHNEIDER: To me personally this letter made me very sad, because I was one of the visitors of the Holy See sent two years ago to the SSPX. There were four bishops. I was one of them. I submitted a report and proposed some solution, and now almost everything we did has been totally useless. I think it is very antipastoral. That
during three years the Holy See tried to promote visitations, not to
follow a maximalist way, but a pastoral way of pastoral integration of
these realities of the Church, the SSPX to give them an opportunity to
participate fully in the structure of the Church.
I think it is a very antipastoral gesture, and contrary to all the rhetoric of mercy that is done, unfortunately. And
if, on the other hand, the whole Council is implicitly infallible,
which is contrary to all Tradition ... The Council is not infallible,
according to its own statements, and Popes John XXIII and Paul VI said
on many occasions that the CVII had only one Pastoral end Paul VI said many times that the Council did not proclaim new doctrines contrary to the previous one. So, if nothing has changed, why that attitude? I do not see any legitimate reason to demand that.
For
example, there is much talk of ecumenism now, with much generosity, and
the least is required in the conversations with the Orthodox, with the
Lutherans ... The minimum is demanded. But within the Church, it begins to demand the maximum. On the contrary, the SSPX believes in its perpetual dogmas. All dogmas. Everybody. While
the Orthodox Church denies the dogma of infallibility, the primacy of
the Pope, for example, and the Holy See very cautious, it does not
require much, only the indispensable.
For example, I know the orthodox well because I live there in the midst of them, I know their mentality. With regard to the conversion of Russia, not only for me, there are others who have also seen it. A clandestine saint who died in the persecution in Kazakhstan is of the same opinion. He said that the conversion of Russia means in the end that the Russian Orthodox Church joins the Pope, to Rome. That is your conversion. I believe it, and I hope so. If
the Russian Orthodox Church accepts the primacy of the Pope, it will be
a miracle, if it accepts the dogma of the Pope's infallibility, the
dogma of the Immaculate Conception (which he does not accept today) and
says to the Holy See: Your dogmas, but the Second Vatican Council is
strange for us: that it is pastoral, that language is not always clear, all that of religious freedom, ecumenism, etc. We are not very convinced, and some statements of the Magisterium are not true. All the rest we accept.
Imagine,
if the Orthodox Church were to turn, it would soon see that the Holy
See immediately gave them the ecclesiastical communion, without
demanding what they still do not agree with. This is safe. Surely
you could ask: "Would you do with the Orthodox the same as they are
doing with the FSSSPX?" No. That's why I think it very doubtful, but
Divine Providence always acts, and although I think the time has not yet
come, Will arrive when God wills.
_______________________
Bishop Schneider concelebrating the new Mass
