Author Topic: Bishop Schneider - upbeat on SSPX reconciliation prospects (Read 9332 times)

Matto · « **Reply #15 on:** August 10, 2015, 05:08:39 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Despite the concerns that Bishop Schneider has for the so-called "ambiguities" of Vatican II, doesn't he follow its new religion of false ecuмenism, false unity, and religious liberty? And if so, why would we care what he thinks?

I think the reason we care about what he thinks, despite the fact that he follows the new religion, is because he is easily the most conservative of all the Novus Ordo Bishops (that I know about) so if there is one who actually has the Catholic Faith, it is him.

Adolphus · « **Reply #16 on:** August 10, 2015, 05:13:47 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: 2Vermont
Quote from: Matto
Quote from: Bishop Athanasius Schneider
I think the issue of Vatican II should not be taken as the “conditio sine qua non”, since it was an assembly with primarily pastoral aims and characteristics. A part of the conciliar statements reflects only its time and possesses a temporary value, as disciplinary and pastoral docuмents do. When we look in a two millennia old perspective of the Church, we can state, that there is on both sides (Holy See and the SSPX) an over-evaluation and over-estimation of a pastoral reality in the Church, which is Vatican II.

Wow, this statement seems very similar to when some traditionalists say that Vatican II was a pastoral council and didn't define anything infallibly so we don't have to follow it.

Is this how the SSPX sees it?

I have heard different opinions from different SSPX priests, so as far as I know some see it that way and others see it differently.

Exactly. It is a big mistake assuming all the SSPX priests think as their superiors. A number of them still resist the betrayal in different ways.

Nickolas · « **Reply #17 on:** August 10, 2015, 07:28:10 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: 2Vermont
Despite the concerns that Bishop Schneider has for the so-called "ambiguities" of Vatican II, doesn't he follow its new religion of false ecuмenism, false unity, and religious liberty? And if so, why would we care what he thinks?

I think the reason we care about what he thinks, despite the fact that he follows the new religion, is because he is easily the most conservative of all the Novus Ordo Bishops (that I know about) so if there is one who actually has the Catholic Faith, it is him.

Are memories erased with time as to Rome's tools to reign in and deceive? How to you create deception if you are Rome, I mean the beach balls on the altar Rome ? The dancing bishops Rome?

Pick yourself a so-called conservative bishop, in this care a very new bishop (I wonder if he was in the chorus line?) Let him be invited to the SSPX seminary of all places, as if this tells him anything, and let time pass for several months. Then release the bishop's smiling review that all is ok, "we all can trust" the SSPX. "Regularize them !".

The good bishop isn't talking to Rome in this interview, he is talking to the Traditional Catholics who have been led to believe that they must really pursue desperately "recognition" and that Rome really cares about them.

That's my take. With all the deceptions over the past three years, and the fallen Traditional groups into the no lap, what is different now? Have we forgotten about history (thankful to Truetrad.com) :

http://www.truetrad.com/index.php/the-dead

I am so sick of this. No wonder young people ditch the faith or become so modern and weak they are of no earthly good. With no deception coupled with SSPX trumpeting false hope and their own form of deception on the stupid faithful, we must continue to pray and warn of such deception.

Nickolas · « **Reply #18 on:** August 10, 2015, 09:14:30 PM »

The short version this time: "Who cares"?

Nickolas · « **Reply #19 on:** August 10, 2015, 09:58:36 PM »

Quote from: Nickolas

The short version this time: "Who cares"?

Correction: Who cares what this bishop says? Really.

A Sorry Man · « **Reply #20 on:** August 11, 2015, 04:18:15 AM »

Watch and Pray

What this Bishop says must be understood in terms of his position within the NO.

I do not hear this Bishop saying that the Second Vatican Council was a total perversion of the mind.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that the NO Mass is dangerous, a bastard rite, to be avoided.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that Indult attendance is tantamount to shaking hands with the Church's enemies.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that Rome has lost the faith and is in apostasy.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that the missionary role of the Church is being subverted by Her enemies.
I do not hear this Bishop saying anything remotely close to the truths that the great Archbishop once warned us about.

This Bishop's interview is a red herring - and it is very sad to see that many, many souls will fall for this manoeuvre. The number of those who will trumpet this as a positive development will let us know how many have fallen for the Modernists' latest stroke of deceit.

The SSPX continues to crumble from within the minds of it's clergy and laity.

God have mercy on us.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, pray for us.

Thank God for the Combat for the Faith.

God Bless

2Vermont · « **Reply #21 on:** August 11, 2015, 07:23:10 AM »

Quote from: A Sorry Man

Watch and Pray

What this Bishop says must be understood in terms of his position within the NO.

I do not hear this Bishop saying that the Second Vatican Council was a total perversion of the mind.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that the NO Mass is dangerous, a bastard rite, to be avoided.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that Indult attendance is tantamount to shaking hands with the Church's enemies.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that Rome has lost the faith and is in apostasy.
I do not hear this Bishop saying that the missionary role of the Church is being subverted by Her enemies.
I do not hear this Bishop saying anything remotely close to the truths that the great Archbishop once warned us about.

This Bishop's interview is a red herring - and it is very sad to see that many, many souls will fall for this manoeuvre. The number of those who will trumpet this as a positive development will let us know how many have fallen for the Modernists' latest stroke of deceit.

The SSPX continues to crumble from within the minds of it's clergy and laity.

God have mercy on us.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, pray for us.

Thank God for the Combat for the Faith.

God Bless

Exactly. Until this bishop converts, he works for the dark side.

covet truth · « **Reply #22 on:** August 11, 2015, 10:29:11 AM »

The SSPX brags that this Bishop has said they have "the mind of the Church". But Bishop Schneider has come from the Conciliar church which has a different mind altogether. He uses the Archbishop's words to allay fears by saying they will be accepted "as we are". Of course, they will accept us “as we are” now. The question one must ask is would they have accepted the Society as it once was - before the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration, before the expulsion of Bishop Williamson, before the re-branding when we laid down our sword, before the machinations of G.R.E.C.

It is not the same SSPX of the Archbishop anymore. What sense does it make to put oneself under the same liberalism that is responsible for the crisis in the Church. The same liberalism that the SSPX had always fought against in the past. What has Bishop Schneider done to resist Vatican II? He says the new mass. This isn't just about the Mass it is about the Faith, the entire dogma of the Faith.

One side has to have changed their direction in order for this to happen. What side has made the most concessions to the other side? Slowly, slowly, the SSPX creeps closer to the mind of the Conciliar church. Like Essau, they will have sold their inheritance for a mess of pottage.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #23 on:** August 11, 2015, 11:31:00 AM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: 2Vermont
Despite the concerns that Bishop Schneider has for the so-called "ambiguities" of Vatican II, doesn't he follow its new religion of false ecuмenism, false unity, and religious liberty? And if so, why would we care what he thinks?

I think the reason we care about what he thinks, despite the fact that he follows the new religion, is because he is easily the most conservative of all the Novus Ordo Bishops (that I know about) so if there is one who actually has the Catholic Faith, it is him.

And where were all the new "traditionalist" and "conservative" bishops and cardinals when we had the first indult by JPII? Were they "generous" then? They did not step in until Summorum Pontificuм when they understood well it was the vehicle to take the naive faithful back to the Novus Ordo. Bishop Schneider may be the most conservative bishop but he has taken the "1989 Profession of Faith" and "Oath of Fidelity" therefore can only be a Judas goat to take the SSPX and faithful back to Rome and is now giving moral support and credibility to a discredited +Fellay so the faithful follow the SSPX to the slaughter and encourage +F to take the final step.

Since knowing about GREC, I think it is very possible that they were channeling the faithful to the SSPX knowing it would only be a matter of time. Not to mention the SSPX persecuting independent chapels and even trying to secretly take them over.

Marlelar · « **Reply #24 on:** August 11, 2015, 03:07:10 PM »

Quote

I think the issue of Vatican II should not be taken as the “condicio sine qua non”, since it was an assembly with primarily pastoral aims and characteristics. A part of the conciliar statements reflects only its time and possesses a temporary value, as disciplinary and pastoral docuмents do.

link

If this is true then why did EVERYTHING change after V2???? How the faith was taught, lived, and understood completely changed; V2 ushered in a new religion that would be completely unrecognizable to our grandparents.

richard · « **Reply #25 on:** August 11, 2015, 03:21:55 PM »

The SSPX brags that this Bishop has said they have "the mind of the Church"

Perhaps he means the mind of the N.O. church.

covet truth · « **Reply #26 on:** August 11, 2015, 03:29:05 PM »

Quote from: Marlelar

Quote
I think the issue of Vatican II should not be taken as the “condicio sine qua non”, since it was an assembly with primarily pastoral aims and characteristics. A part of the conciliar statements reflects only its time and possesses a temporary value, as disciplinary and pastoral docuмents do.
link

If this is true then why did EVERYTHING change after V2???? How the faith was taught, lived, and understood completely changed; V2 ushered in a new religion that would be completely unrecognizable to our grandparents.

I agree. It completely ignores reality. How can anyone who has lived through these times possibly be fooled by this attempt to paint Vatican II as something of "temporary value". What "value", temporary or otherwise?

A Sorry Man · « **Reply #27 on:** August 11, 2015, 04:50:12 PM »

NO Bishop Schneider has been exposed here, thank God we can see it. But for those we encounter who will be taken in by his silky speak, I feel this is the smoking gun which incriminates this NO Bishop and the SSPX leadership:

"To my knowledge there are no weighty reasons in order to deny the clergy and faithful of the SSPX the official canonical recognition, meanwhile they should be accepted as they are"

'Deny' - deny the clergy and faithful what? The SSPX was created by God through Archbishop Levebvre to be a group that preserved the Catholic Faith while Rome was infested with Modernism, and the Society did this for many, many years. What on earth then can the Modernists possibly deny the SSPX?

'Official Canonical Recognition' - ah, so this is what can be denied.

But surely official canonical recognition by the Modernist enemies of the Church means nothing to the SSPX.......

The fact that the SSPX have put NO Bishop Schneider's quote on their website for all to see is absolute proof that the SSPX is no longer the Society once led by Archbishop Levebvre.

The fact that masses of Priests and Laity are not up in arms regarding this poison of 'recognition' being paraded on the SSPX website speaks volumes in itself.

For those who have not been able to face the truth, now is the time to admit to it:

THE SSPX IS NO LONGER FIGHTING AGAINST THE MODERNISTS. THE SOCIETY ACTUALLY DESIRES THE RECOGNITION OF THE MODERNISTS.

Thank God, for those who wish to be Catholic, we have the Combat for the Faith.

God have mercy on us

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, Pray for Us

God Bless

Nickolas · « **Reply #28 on:** August 11, 2015, 04:54:01 PM »

Bishop Schneider's glowing report card on his visit to the SSPX seminaries was not unexpected. Bishop Fellay gushed about the Bishop Schneider's visits and his reaction to the "show and tell" opportunity.

http://sspx.org/en/fellay_interview_tradition_schneider_sarah_Francis

The whole Bishop "report card" is sad and at the same time horrifying because the SSPX leadership seeks "good reviews" and seems to crave acceptance. That is position of weakness. Acceptance from who? From those who have bastardized the Mass? From those who have destroyed the vestige of the Church? From those who have sat quietly witnessing the destruction while being encouraged to bring us back in, like a herd of sheep? That is really what is it to me.

Going back to Bishop Fellay's interview given after Bishop Schneider's whirlwind tour, this is what he said in part:

The Society's weaknesses? The risk of separation is serious. Look at the caricature of Tradition that calls itself the "Resistance", for example: it is a non-Catholic spirit that is almost sectarian. We wish to have nothing to do with it; it is a movement that is withdrawn into itself, with people who think that they are the only good and just men on earth: that is not Catholic. It is an objective, but relative danger. Most of the Society is healthy and will not fall into these illusions. This encourages us to rely upon supernatural means. God will show us what He wants of us; He will speak through circuмstances.

The strong points? The living fidelity that bears fruit and shows the world today that the Catholic life, even with all its requirements, is possible. But—another weak point—we are men of our times, and it would be a dream to pretend that we are immunized against the influence of the modern world. To be more precise, we must avoid the caricature of wishing for a Church without wrinkles or stains here below: that is not what the good Lord promised us on this earth. That is not what the "Holy Church" means; it means that she is capable of sanctifying using the means given by Our Lord: the sacraments, the Faith, discipline, religious life, the life of prayer.

I realize the interview has been discussed before, but perhaps it is time to revisit it.

The premise of the "risk of separation" is foreign to me. Separation from what? I speak for myself, but Bishop Fellay, why would I feel separated from the no church, from what is seen as the liberalization of the Church, from beach and balls and dancing bishops? Really, separated from what?

This kind of argument is just falling for deception at it truest sense. If that is not enough, we are then entertained with yet another opportunity to whack the Resistance as an example of non-Catholic spirit. That is proof to me that the Societies so called weakness of being outside the Church is a fαℓѕє fℓαg argument, one of deception.

Bishop Fellay reassures us that "God will show us what He wants of us; He will speak through circuмstances" Oh yes, God reassures us through circuмstances such as Bishop Schneider's report card of his visit. Yes, the salve, the stamp of approval, the all important sign that the SSPX is really good and has the heart of the Church. The SSPX is meant to feel that "yes, that is right. We were right all along. Rome really likes us. Such a good thing to hear and from Rome no less! Let's get a deal, quick, get it and be one again!! I can once again feel "connected" as I am supposed to feel. "

I hate deception because it has always been the prime tool of the devil. If I am being deceived, God help me. If I see truth, God help me to be strong evermore to resist the deceit of darkness.

A Sorry Man · « **Reply #29 on:** August 11, 2015, 05:43:58 PM »

Nickolas

You have said it correctly:

"Acceptance from who?"

Again, you have said it correctly:

[i]"...we are then entertained with yet another opportunity to whack the Resistance as an example of non-Catholic spirit[/i]."

This is key to Bishop Fellays' mind and the direction he is steering the SSPX clergy and laity toward. In 3 simple terms:

1 - NO Modernist Bishops are accepted, welcomed, and even quoted by Bishop Fellay

2 - NO Modernist recognition is desired and sought after by Bishop Fellay

3 - Resistance clergy and laity are bad-mouthed and demonized by Bishop Fellay. Yes, bad mouthed and demonised - we need only listen to Bishop Fellay speak:

"Look at the caricature of Tradition that calls itself the "Resistance", for example: it is a non-Catholic spirit that is almost sectarian. We wish to have nothing to do with it; it is a movement that is withdrawn into itself, with people who think that they are the only good and just men on earth: that is not Catholic."

So, according to Bishop Fellay, the clergy and laity who want nothing to do with the Modernists are:

Caricatures

Almost sectarian

Of a non-Catholic spirit

To be absolutely avoided

Withdrawn

Conceited

Full of pride

Not Catholic

How I wish Bishop Fellay would say he would have nothing to do with the Modernists.

God Bless