Bishop Athanasius Schneider: ‘We are in the fourth great crisis of the Church’

[pnewton]

The National Bishops conference created the Mass we attend now to be ecumenical and welcoming to Protestants.

Thanks be to God!

The Catholic Church is not an exclusive club that uses stagnation to maintain the status quo. The Catholic Church is a mission. I sometimes get the impression from cradle Catholics that they wish we cradle Catholics would have stayed in our own little churches and left them alone. Jesus said.

• “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are."*

If changing** discipline** is needed to unite Christianity, then let it be. St. John Paul preached a new evangelization. Straining gnats will not do nothing but divide us. Can we please start living our own conscience and allow others to do the same to extent that the Holy Catholic Church allows it. No Mass is holier. No Eucharist is holier. Let the bishops do their job and stop being critical of those faithful that follow their shepherd, whether you agree with the opinions of others or not.

If God needs to bring you up as a prophet and saint, he has all the power to do so, as he did Karol Wojtyla.

 

[pnewton]

Indeed there are. But they’re ignored. As is Vatican II except for its “spirit.”

FYI I have never ignored my bishop. Now it is up to the Holy Spirit if he guides the minds of the cardinals when the next conclave comes to bring a change, then I will not ignore that either.

But, do traditionalists ignore that which they disagree with, or do they just disagree and speak their opinions? I prefer to give all the benefit of the doubt and accept that we disagree rather than thing anyone is ignoring the proper ecclesial authority.

 

[drolla]

Karol Wojtyla did not support communion in the hand, did not support liberation theology and knew the importance of Tradition. So watch it, bub.

 

[Magdalena59]

catholicherald.co.uk/features/2014/06/06/bishop-athanasius-schneider-we-are-in-the-fourth-great-crisis-of-the-church/

**Bishop Athanasius Schneider: ‘We are in the fourth great crisis of the Church’
**

During a trip to England the Soviet-born bishop says the Church today is experiencing ‘tremendous confusion’

By SARAH ATKINSON

Liberals, collaborating with the “new paganism”, are driving the Catholic Church towards a split, according to Bishop Athanasius Schneider, the liturgical specialist who is carrying on a rearguard fight against “abuses” in the Church.

So serious are the problems, Bishop Schneider said in an interview last week, that this is the fourth great crisis in the history of the Church, comparable to the fourth-century Arian heresy in which a large part of the Church hierarchy was implicated.

If you have not heard of the Soviet-born bishop, you will. The sincere, scholarly clergyman is auxiliary bishop of the distant Archdiocese of St Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan. But this month he has received a rock star welcome from congregations across the country on his tour of England and he has embraced cyberspace to put over a trenchant, traditional defence of the Church. “Thanks be to God, the internet exists,” he said.

There are a lot of pages and comments here and I didn’t read through all of them so I don’t know if someone asked this already but, what are the other three great crisis’?

Thank you.

 

[drolla]

So we should accept our Bishops support for Gay Pride Parades and Pro-abortion Politicians? Our obedience is to the Magisterium of the Church, the Vicar of Christ and all those Bishops united with him. The priest, pastors and bishops who are doing what’s popular and relevant for today’s culture are nothing more than betrayers like Judas.

 

[drolla]

I’m not sure, but I think the fist crises was Arianism, 2nd - Islam, 3rd - Protestantism.

As far as making the Church more welcoming for Protestants - well, THAT"S THE PROBLEM.
So many think it’s about the Church being accommodating and welcoming to them, to tickle their ears with only positive, uplifting thoughts.
It’s really about dying to yourself and accepting the Church’s Truth for what it is, the Church isn’t going to change its doctrine, They need to surrender themselves and welcome the Truth without any reservations. That changes the nature of the person to begin to change their behaviors through prayer & grace. The Bishops hold the Teaching office of the Church, the are commanded to make saints, not be popular.

 

[ProVobis]

FYI I have never ignored my bishop. Now it is up to the Holy Spirit if he guides the minds of the cardinals when the next conclave comes to bring a change, then I will not ignore that either…

pn, the Protestants believe the Holy Spirit guides them too, but your point taken.

 

[ProVobis]

Consider also, that it was not an issue for the centuries* before* communion on the tongue, the early Church, or Jesus.

I’m quite aware that how the Apostles ate the Body and drank the Blood is not doctrinal. Nor is the shape of the Body and Blood. And I’m sure they didn’t run a wafer factory and produce round tongue-sized pieces of hosts in the early church. But even though a cloth was used when receiving (they don’t tell you that part) AFAIK two church councils and several Popes condemned the practice for whatever reason. They’re also part of the 2000-yr old Church which the people in the 60’s would have liked to have suppressed just like their counterparts did 400 years earlier. And FWIW I don’t think it was the bishops who were behind the move for CITH; otherwise it would have been addressed at Vatican II or the liturgical committees which VII directed.

 

[ProVobis]

But, do traditionalists ignore that which they disagree with, or do they just disagree and speak their opinions? I prefer to give all the benefit of the doubt and accept that we disagree rather than thing anyone is ignoring the proper ecclesial authority.

It was more than the traditionalists who became shocked when CITH was first presented as an option from the pulpit. It was against what had been been taught as a serious sacrilege against the Church, against Christ, against the catechism, against their priests, against their nuns, against their parents, etc. How can one not expect such an adverse reaction from them? This was a 180 degree turn for them. Oh sure, many have all accepted it by now and you commend them, but does the end always justify the means taken?

 

[ProVobis]

Zero crumbles.

Can you defy gravity too?

 

[Tigg]

ProVobis:

:tiphat:

 

[Tigg]

If changing** discipline** is needed to unite Christianity, then let it be. St. John Paul preached a new evangelization. Straining gnats will not do nothing but divide us. Can we please start living our own conscience and allow others to do the same to extent that the Holy Catholic Church allows it. No Mass is holier. No Eucharist is holier. Let the bishops do their job and stop being critical of those faithful that follow their shepherd, whether you agree with the opinions of others or not.

It’s not just discipline that is being changed here and after following your insightful posts, I think you honestly know that. We would love for the bishops to teach the faith plainly and consistently, without controversy and contradiction. (What does it say when an Archbishop tells his peers that the Church has abdicated her teaching role?) If I listen to my bishop, odds are that I will be led down a different path from another. Sometimes the differences are not so minor. Sometimes it affects our very* identity* as Catholics. I have a friend who lives about 45 miles north in a different diocese. I have been to her parish and she to mine. Quite honestly, we have both said it’s almost like one is Catholic and the other is not. The very atmosphere is different, the emphasis is different and the true core ( the Eucharist) almost appears hidden. We worship God with all our senses in the Mass and when the focus shifts from Christ to man (anthropocentrism is the word Bsp Schneider uses ) it is actually palpable and I personally have experienced it. It violates our sense of the faith and that is what my friend and I have experienced. We call it “Protestant” because it is foreign to the spiritual ground we have previously stood upon.

 

[ProVobis]

…Sometimes the differences are not so minor. Sometimes it affects our very* identity* as Catholics. I have a friend who lives about 45 miles north in a different diocese. I have been to her parish and she to mine. Quite honestly, we have both said it’s almost like one is Catholic and the other is not. The very atmosphere is different, the emphasis is different and the true core ( the Eucharist) almost appears hidden.

But the Unus Cultus, Unus Cantus, Una Lingua (One culture, one chant, one language) Church was wrong, simply because it was pre-Vatican II and created all those insensitive and evil traditionalists.

BTW I got this term from an old pronunciation guide of the Latin Mass. I’d post the link but it’s a very slow-loading one; I couldn’t get past page seven and it hung up the computer.

 

[Tigg]

But the Unus Cultus, Unus Cantus, Una Lingua (One culture, one chant, one language) Church was wrong, simply because it was pre-Vatican II and created all those insensitive and evil traditionalists.

BTW I got this term from an old pronunciation guide of the Latin Mass. I’d post the link but it’s a very slow-loading one; I couldn’t get past page seven and it hung up the computer.

Hadn’t heard of this but I like! I’ve copied the term for further reading. I will say on another note I’m especially wary of the new Ecumenism which states “The restoration of unity among all Christians is one of the principal concerns of the Second Vatican Council.” Now that is a very noble goal, but something is going terribly wrong in that department, too. I completely agree on the call to a “gentle, mutual respect and trust in one another.” But c’mon…the movement is essentially meant to bring all into one fold (no problem there) but how is this to happen when the very tenets of belief are so contrary to one another. Does this V2 decree really mean that we are to invite Buddhists and Muslims into our churches to “dialogue?” Because that is what is happening and it sounds a lot like compromising the faith to me. Think about it. Uncatechized Catholics, who do not even know what their faith says and who are not being corrected by the shepherds, listening to what is essentially antithetical to that very faith!

 

[pnewton]

Karol Wojtyla did not support communion in the hand, did not support liberation theology

I did not say he did.

. So watch it, bub.

If you get too hot over this, perhaps you should not try and convert faithful Catholics to be more-like-you faithful Catholics.

 

[Memaw]

His Holiness Pope Francis does not want the faithful receiving Communion in their hand nor does he want them standing to receive Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. According to Vatican liturgist, Monsignor Guido Marini, the pope is trying to set the stage for the whole church as to the proper norm for receiving Communion for which reason communicants at his papal Masses are now asked to kneel and receive on the tongue.

The Holy Father’s reasoning is simple: “We Christians kneel before the Blessed Sacrament because, therein, we know and believe to be the presence of the One True God.” (May 22, 2008)

According to the pope the entire Church should kneel in adoration before God in the Eucharist. “Kneeling in adoration before the Eucharist is the most valid and radical remedy against the idolatries of yesterday and today” (May 22, 2008)

The pope’s action is in accord with the Church’s 2000 year tradition and is being done in order to foster a renewed love and respect for the Eucharist which presently is being mocked and treated with contempt. The various trends and innovations of our time (guitar liturgy, altar girls, lay ministers, Communion in the hand) have worked together to destroy our regard for the Eucharist, thus advancing the spiritual death of the church. After all, the Eucharist is the very life and heartbeat of the Mystical Body around which the entire Church must revolve.

Recently, Cardinal Antonio Canizares Llovera, prefect for the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, encouraged Catholics to consider receiving holy Communion on the tongue as a “sign of adoration that needs to be recovered.” When we do so, he said, we “know that we are before God himself and that he came to us and that we are undeserving.” To receive the Eucharist on our tongue, he said, is to signify our humility before the Lord and to recognize that it is God himself who feeds us.

For this reason, some Catholics choose to receive the Eucharist not in their hands, but directly on their tongues. Receiving the sacred host on our tongue ensures that we do not treat Christ’s presence as an ordinary piece of bread.

Reception of holy Communion on the tongue has been a tradition of the Church for more than 15 centuries. It began, largely, as an effort to affirm that the Eucharist was not a symbol or a ritual, but the living presence of Jesus Christ. In recent years I have observed that a growing number of young Catholics, particularly seminarians, choose now to receive holy Communion on the tongue.

I always receive Communion on the tongue but because of my age and crickityness, I cannot kneel without the help of a Communion Rail, so I stand. God Bless, Memaw

 

[pnewton]

So we should accept our Bishops support for Gay Pride Parades and Pro-abortion Politicians? Our obedience is to the Magisterium of the Church, the Vicar of Christ and all those Bishops united with him.

These are each their own topic and I prefer not do address gossip and undocumented accusations. But, no, we do not have to vote like bishops tell us. They have authority over the liturgy, not politics. I do not know how one “accepts” or not these issues.

 

[pnewton]

Can you defy gravity too?

The fragility of any item is not a universal law. Mass without gravity is an inherent impossibility. Bread that does not leave crumbs in a specific situaion is neither an impossibility or a universal law of physics.

 

[pnewton]

But the Unus Cultus, Unus Cantus, Una Lingua (One culture, one chant, one language) Church was wrong,

This term has me confused. I thought there different rites in different languages long before Vatican II. Also, as Latin was not the original language of the Church, inculturation had to extend to the first century. Even some of our holidays were adapted to the culture of the people.

 

[pnewton]

(What does it say when an Archbishop tells his peers that the Church has abdicated her teaching role?).

Did he? It’s not in the article, at least worded like that or in any other way I could find. Most of what the AB said was in the future tense, especially the dire things. Maybe he will be shown to be right. I would hope that none are hoping for disaster.