PAGE COLLECTIONS -- CHECK THEM OUT!

Friday, March 22, 2024

Bishop Schneider: Fiducia Supplicans "is an insult to reason....an abuse."

The first subject discussed in the video below is Fiducia Supplicans, the magisterial document on blessing homosexual and other "couples" in mortally sinful "unions." According to Bishop Schneider, we must protest respectfully and ask the pope to retract the document. 


The interview is amazing. I recommend it. Bishop Schneider is one of the most important and courageous voices in the Church today. He warns us that, "The enemies are not sleeping. The good ones they are sleeping and the enemies are awake and very busy to promote their agenda."

We must do our "strategy of the Holy Spirit" to elect the next pope. And so, Bishop Schneider urges a "crusade" of prayer. You can join the crusade here by making your pledge. Let's get serious about the Blessed Mother's messages. Here's the obligation a crusader embraces:

At Fatima, Our Lady encouraged us to pray the Holy Rosary and gave us the practice of the Five First Saturdays as an effective spiritual means to obtain special divine favors.

In the face of the tremendous crisis now afflicting the Catholic Church, the Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima is launching a worldwide spiritual crusade consisting in the daily prayer of the Holy Rosary and the practice of the Five First Saturdays to implore, through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, God’s help and intervention, particularly for the Holy See in Rome.

This spiritual crusade will begin on the first Saturday of January 2024 (January 6) and conclude on the first Saturday of December 2024 (December 7).

Let us all do our part to defend the faith and free Holy Mother Church from the occupation by our modern Judases. 

25 comments:

  1. Do you really have to ask? So much to work with here! (BTW, I am not the anonymous "lol" poster above).

    "the magisterial document on blessing homosexual and other "couples" in mortally sinful "unions." MAGISTERIAL document....from "definitely pope" Bergoglio, because legit popes have a long history of teaching heresy to the entire Church.

    "According to Bishop Schneider, we must protest respectfully and ask the pope to retract the document." I'm sure that'll work...yep, lol.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Astana auxiliary is a favorite of Bergoglio and possibly controlled opposition. Bergoglio’s continued toleration of Schneider is suspicious, considering the consistency and seriousness of his criticism of his boss.

      Delete
    2. How would you know whether Bishop Schneider is a "favorite of Bergoglio?" Perhaps the Holy Spirit has something to do with the fact that he hasn't been attacked by the Vatican. Not to mention that removing him as an auxiliary would do nothing to stop his apostolate and would just create one more martyred bishop and magnify attention. I've met Bishop Schneider twice and he impressed me with the same spirit as Mother Teresa -- humble and holy. My maiden name is Schneider and his people (he told me) are from the same area as my German ancestors. My nephew also bears a remarkable resemblance. Perhaps we are related. I would consider that an incredible privilege.

      Delete
  2. Is "whether it works or not" the measure of success? Crucifixion of Jesus by the magisterial leaders of His days seems to say no.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Apples and oranges....I don't see the parallel between Christ's efficacious redemptive sacrifice
      and Bishop Schneider's half measures which are doomed to fail, but you do you.
      And yes, "whether something works or not" is the measure of success - did the crucifixion of Christ destroy Christianity? No, it was a failure.

      Delete
    2. Actually, the parallel is between the evil religious leaders of Christ's time and the evil religious leaders of our own. They had authority and failed as you say. Pope Francis has the authority; and he will fail as well.

      Delete
  3. Re: FS

    Three points from the document.

    1. Blessing does not mean approval.
    2. Marriage is between a man and a woman.
    3. The blessing may not be given in conjunction with a false wedding ceremony.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

    ReplyDelete
  4. You can't bless a "couple" and a "union" without blessing what their "coupleness" and "union" mean which is what many clerics are pointing out. And the pope's recently published memoir illustrates that's exactly what he meant to do.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ms K:
    Re: "You can't bless a "couple" and a "union"

    FS does not allow the blessing of the "union".

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mr Frisbee:

    There is nothing in FS contrary to Tradition.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

    ReplyDelete
  7. Re: FS and union - Para 5

    "5. ... "the Church does not have the power to impart blessings on unions of persons of the same sex."

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

    ReplyDelete
  8. And yet that's exactly what they're doing by calling them "couples" and "unions." The document is hypocritical and typical of the way Francis does things as Bishop Schneider points out. In his recent memoir the pope said, “It is right that these people who experience the gift of love should have the same legal protections as everyone else.” The "gift of love" he's talking about is sodomy. Phil Lawler has a great article at Catholic Culture on this. He writes:

    "Dozens of bishops, hundreds of priests, and thousands of lay Catholics have agreed that Fiducia is at odds with the perennial tradition of the Church—a radical break from what has been believed 'always and everywhere, and by everyone' in the Catholic world. A serious theologian, facing such a charge, would want to demonstrate that the critics were mistaken, that his thoughts actually were in conformity with the Catholic tradition. Instead Pope Francis makes light of the protests, saying that 'if some brother bishops decide not to follow this path, it does not mean that this is the antechamber of a schism.'"

    I don't agree with you on this, Richard, as you know. Neither do a vast number of clerics and laity who are experts in theology and Church teaching. The Coptic Orthodox Church obviously disagrees with you since they have broken off ecumenical relations due to the FS.

    I recommend Lawler's article for those who want a serious opinion well expressed. https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/pope-francis-doctor-law/

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ms K
    re: "Neither do a vast number of clerics and laity who are experts in theology and Church teaching."

    I am a dumb-dumb. But the plain text of the Englishmen translation of FS clearly reads:

    The FS document specifically states that the Church cannot bless the "unions of persons of the same sex".

    FS specifically states that only men and women can marry.

    FS specifically states that a blessing is not approval.

    These statements are perfectly orthodox IAW Tradition.

    All the smart, educated experts have fail to point out exactly where in FS there is a deviation from orthodoxy.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

    ReplyDelete
  10. One more point, Richard,

    Chapter 6. talks about "any other union" which creates confusion, a typical strategy of Francis:

    6. It should be emphasized that in the Rite of the Sacrament of Marriage, this concerns not just any blessing but a gesture reserved to the ordained minister. In this case, the blessing given by the ordained minister is tied directly to the specific union of a man and a woman, who establish an exclusive and indissoluble covenant by their consent. This fact allows us to highlight the risk of confusing a blessing given to any other UNION with the Rite that is proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.

    That is exactly what the document does. It confuses and implies approval by allowing a blessing of "any other union." Whether it's an official rite of the Church or not, blessing a homosexual couple while they're holding hands, for example, implies approval of their "gift of love" as Francis put it. That "gift of love" includes behavior that is so disgusting I cannot be explicit about it. FS is a horrible document that was totally unnecessary and just creates more confusion. Our poisoned cup runneth over!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. It's a very clever document, I agree, with all the window dressing of orthodoxy, but when you bless "couples" you bless what that "coupleness" implies. As I've said before, words mean something. And just like Amoris Laetitial, this document is deceptive with an obvious agenda of moving the ball down the field to the LGBTQ goal for a touchdown.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The interview with Bishop Schneider was interesting but I had to take a step back when he mentioned Bishop Lefebre. Wasn't Bishop Lefebre excommunicated by St. Pope John Paul II?

    As far as the Latin mass, I consider it an anachronism. Nor do I think Vatican Council II was a bad thing. So many good things have come out of Vatican Council II, such as being able to hear the Mass in English. It was only recently that the translation of the Nicene Creed has been properly translated and up to snuff. And of course, the Our Father prayer could still be improved in the translation into English, but that's another discussion for another day. I don't have a problem in believing Jesus said that prayer in Greek 2,000 years ago. Some think he said that prayer in Hebrew. Maybe it was in Aramaic, for all I know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Reininger
      Re: "So many good things have come out of Vatican Council II, such as being able to hear the Mass in English."

      In North America it was not a good thing "to hear the Mass in English" if you came from a family which spoke a variation or patois of French, Italian, German, Czech, or another language. Mass in English was often unintelligible to non-English speakers. Mass in Latin was ineligible to frequent Mass goers.

      BTW VII mandated that the Latin Rite Mass be said in Latin.

      Vatican II on Latin: "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites" (SC, n. 36).

      WII also mandated Gregorian Chant at Mass and gave pride of place to the organ.

      The Mass in English was forced upon non-English speakers in order to make us into what Archbishop Ireland and Cardinal Gibbons called "good Americans" not good Catholics.

      As a result now only a relative handful of Catholics now bother to attend Mass no matter what language it is spoken in.

      God bless

      Richard W Comerford

      Delete
  13. Pope Benedict lifted the excommunication against the four ordained bishops in 2009. Francis gave the SSPX authority to hear confessions and witness marriages. The SSPX is in in irregular situation, but their Masses and all their sacraments are valid. Those who say the SSPX are "in schism" are incorrect.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dear Mike Reininger,

    You have been lied to. You've been tricked and deceived into believing you are "able to hear the Mass in English." The cold hard truth is this: the Novus Ordo mass you hear is NOT the mass of ages past translated into your preferred language. What you hear is lacking 70% of the content of the Traditional Latin mass. The Freemason who wrote it cleverly left in what just barely makes it valid IF OFFERED WITH THE GOOD INTENTION of the priest. What remains is nearly indistinguishable from Protestant services.

    Stop fooling yourself by thinking " good came out of Vatican II." NOTHING could be farther from the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dear Mike Reininger,

    Another comment on your post out of respect for your uninformed opinion,
    you say, "I had to take a step back when he mentioned Bishop Lefebvre. "

    Ask yourself why you rush to judgment of Lefebvre without, I dare say, any knowledge of his history with the Church before the second Vatican Council, during the council, or after the council. What actually do you know of this bishop other than " he was excommunicated." Sadly, the Vatican can be cruel when it wants to be and in the case of Lefebvre it has ended up looking really stupid because everything Lefebvre ever did was out of devotion to Mother Church and everything he ever accused the council of doing has proven BEYOND ANY DOUBT to have been true from day one and becomes only more obvious as time goes by.

    If you want to "take a step back" from someone, maybe just maybe it should be from the pontiff who was hostile toward Lefebvre and from the current usurper on the seat of Peter whose actions ands words are destroying the Church and leading souls to hell.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Good article here on the novelties of Fiducia Supplicans (all of which are grounded in the rich tradition of....Francis) and why it should be revoked:
    https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2024/03/fiducia-supplicans-should-be-revoked

    ReplyDelete
  17. This all began when we gave up the meaning of the word marriage, not to include one man and one woman. We were asleep and didn’t push back on society. Now, it’s devolved to where the meaning of words are dominated by evil people and we are distressed because we have to use phrases like LGBT-whatever and the promotion of abortion as a woman’s right to choose, and if children are able to exit the birth canal safely, are up for grabs to those who want to changed their sexual identities. Bless demonized “couples?” Hell, no and a legitimate pope should know the difference!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Further: the Jesus actor, who co-led Jesuit retreat with Father James Martin, will be CUA commencement speaker.

    ReplyDelete