Good Reading: "Resisting Abortion-tainted Vaccines and the Culture of Death" by Bishop Athanasius Schneider (in English)

 Anti-Christian world powers that promote the culture of death are seeking to impose on the world’s population an implicit—though remote and passive—collaboration with abortion. Such remote collaboration, in itself, is also an evil because of the extraordinary historical circumstances in which these same world powers are promoting the murder of unborn children and the exploitation of their remains.

When we use vaccines or medicines which utilize cell lines originating from aborted babies, we physically benefit from the “fruits” of one of the greatest evils of mankind—the cruel genocide of the unborn. For if an innocent child had not been cruelly murdered, we would not have these concrete vaccines or medicines. We should not be so naive to not see that these vaccines and medicines not only offer a health benefit but also promise to promote the culture of death.

Of course, some argue that even if people do not take these vaccines, the abortion industry will still continue. We may not reduce the number of abortions if we stop taking such vaccines or medicines, but this is not the issue. The problem lies in the moral weakening of our resistance to the crime of abortion, and to the crime of the trafficking, exploitation and commercialization of the body parts of murdered unborn children. The use of such vaccines and medicines morally – albeit indirectly—supports this horrible situation.

Observing the Catholic Church’s response, abortionists and those responsible for biomedical research will conclude that the hierarchy has acquiesced to this situation, which includes an entire chain of crimes against life and indeed can aptly be described as a “chain of death.” We have to wake up to the real dangers, consequences, and circumstances of the current situation.

 

Theories Justifying the Use of Abortion-tainted Vaccines

The documents of the Holy See (from 2005, 2008, and 2020) that deal with vaccines developed from cell lines originating from murdered unborn children are not infallible decisions of the Magisterium. The arguments put forth in the aforementioned documents regarding the moral licitness of the use of abortion-tainted vaccines are ultimately too abstract. We need to approach this problem in a more profound way, and not remain in a juridical positivism and formalism of abstract theories of cooperation with evil, benefiting from the evil deeds of others, double effect, or whatever one wishes to call such justifying theories.

We have to go deeper, down to the root, and consider the aspect of proportionality. This concrete chain of horrible crimes—murdering, harvesting tissue and body parts from murdered unborn children, and commercializing their remains through the manufacturing and testing of vaccines and medicines—is out of all proportion to other crimes, e.g. benefitting from slave labor, paying taxes, etc. Even the most apparently impressive historical examples, which are sometimes adduced to justify the moral licitness of the use of abortion-tainted vaccines, are incomparable to the issue before us.

Indeed, due to the gravity of abortion, and the current reality of an ever-expanding abortion and biomedical research industry involving the trafficking and exploitation of aborted baby body parts, the principle of material cooperation or other similar theories cannot be applied in this case. It is, therefore, highly anti-pastoral and counterproductive to allow the use of abortion-tainted vaccines in this historical hour. The souls of the murdered babies, from whose body parts people are now benefitting through these medicines and vaccines, are living and have a name before God.

 

When one uses an abortion-tainted vaccine, one is standing directly and very personally before the vaccine syringe. In paying taxes, one is not directly and personally confronting the process of a specific abortion. A government is not asking you concretely to give your money to “this” concrete act of abortion now. The government often uses our money against our will. Therefore, the use of an abortion-tainted vaccine is a much more personal confrontation and a much closer meeting with the monstrous crimes involved in its production, than paying taxes or benefitting from the evil acts of another person. Should the government tell a citizen directly and personally, “I am taking your money to pay for this concrete abortion,” one has to refuse, even if it means confiscation of one’s home and imprisonment.

In the first centuries, Christians paid taxes to a pagan government, knowing that it would use a portion of the tax revenue to finance idol worship. However, when the government asked Christians personally and individually to participate in the crime of idolatry, by burning just a small grain of incense before the statue of an idol, they refused even at the price of being martyred for bearing witnesses to God’s First Commandment.

 

The Grave and Unique Character of Abortion-tainted Vaccines

How can we, with maximum of determination, be and proclaim to be against abortion, when we accept abortion-tainted vaccines whose origin lies in the murder of a child? Both logic and common-sense demand that we not accept such vaccines or medicines. In difficult times of great confusion, God often uses the simple and the little ones who tell the truth while the majority swims with the tide. Unfortunately, many people in the Church, and even some Catholic pro-life organizations, are swimming with the tide on the specific question of abortion-tainted vaccines and medicines. It seems that many theologians, and even the Holy See and the vast majority of bishops, are also swimming with the tide, and there remains only a minority in the Church of our day which is saying, “Stop. This is not good. This is a danger!” As Christians, it is our duty to bear witness to the world by not accepting these vaccines and medicines.

One might ask the proponents of the moral licitness of the use of abortion-tainted vaccines or medicines the following question, “If you travelled back in time and witnessed the gruesome murder of an unborn child, the dismemberment of his body, the harvesting of his tissue, and his cells then processed in the lab, even if there were hundreds of chemical processes involved with that particular vaccine or medicine, could you with a clear conscience receive such a vaccine or medicine into your body?” It is hard to imagine that they could, as they would have before their eyes the scene of a child being dismembered and are now physically benefitting from the use of his cells.

The distinction is often made between the direct presence of fetal cell lines originating from the murder of an unborn child in a vaccine and their use in testing, and certainly the latter is objectively less grave. But we still cannot accept the use of these cell lines even for testing, as it brings us closer to the crime of marketing the cells from murdered babies. In this case, too, there is an accumulation of horrible crimes. The first crime is to have killed a child. The second is to have used and processed these cell lines. To then use these cell lines for testing is yet another crime. We cannot collaborate in this accumulation of crimes and we cannot benefit in any way from their “by-products.”

 

The Obligation to Resist

Let us imagine the possibility of abortion being entirely forbidden worldwide. Were this the case, the medical and pharmaceutical industries would then have to seek out alternatives to develop a vaccine, and God will provide them if we observe His law, specifically the Fifth Commandment. However, God will punish us if we use the cell lines originating from murdered babies to manufacture and test vaccines and medicines! We have to open ourselves to a more supernatural perspective.

We have to resist the myth that there is no alternative—and by using these vaccines or medicines, we cooperate in further propagating this myth. Yet, there are alternatives! The anti-Christian world powers will surely not admit that alternatives exist, and will continue to push abortion-tainted vaccines. But we must resist.

Even if there is only a small minority of faithful, priests and bishops who do so, ultimately the truth will prevail. History will look back and say that even some good Catholics yielded, even high-ranking prelates responsible for the governance of the Holy See yielded to an expanding biomedical and pharmaceutical industry that used cell lines originating from the murder of unborn children to produce and test vaccines and medicines. History will say they allowed themselves to be blinded by abstract theories of remote material cooperation, benefitting from the evil acts of others, or other similar theories.

We must follow the truth. Even if we lose all our friends, we should follow our conscience, as did Saint Thomas More and Saint John Fisher. It is also a sign of the end times that even good people are confused about this important matter. Let us recall the words of Our Lord, who said that even the elect will be also seduced (cf. Mt. 24:24). A time will come when God will reveal to people in the Church, who now defend the morality of using abortion-tainted vaccines, some of the consequences of this choice. Their eyes will be opened, because the truth is so powerful. We have to live for the truth and for eternity.

To remain silent and to acquiesce to the already widespread use of aborted baby body parts for biomedical research, and to argue away this injustice with an abstract theory of “remote material cooperation,” or whatever one may call such a justifying theory, is a spiritual blindness and grave omission at a dramatic historical moment when Christians instead should stand up and proclaim to the whole world, “We will never acquiesce to this injustice, even if it is already so widespread in medicine! It is not allowed to treat unborn children, the lives of the weakest and most defenseless people in the whole world, in such a degrading way, so that the stronger, those already born, may receive a temporal health benefit from their use.”

Ivan Karamazov in Dostoyevsky’s famous novel “The Brothers Karamazov” asks the fatal question: “Tell me straight out, I call on you—answer me: imagine that you yourself are building the edifice of human destiny with the object of making people happy in the finale, of giving them peace and rest at last, but for that you must inevitably and unavoidably torture just one tiny creature, that same child who was beating her chest with her little fist, and raise your edifice on the foundation of her unrequited tears—would you agree to be the architect on such conditions?“

Memorable are the words with which Pope John Paul II forcefully condemned any experimentation on embryos, declaring:

    No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church. This evaluation of the morality of abortion is to be applied also to the recent forms of intervention on human embryos which, although carried out for purposes legitimate in themselves, inevitably involve the killing of those embryos. This is the case with experimentation on embryos, which is becoming increasingly widespread in the field of biomedical research and is legally permitted in some countries….[T]he use of human embryos or fetuses as an object of experimentation constitutes a crime against their dignity as human beings who have a right to the same respect owed to a child once born, just as to every person. This moral condemnation also regards procedures that exploit living human embryos and fetuses-sometimes specifically ‘produced’ for this purpose by in vitro fertilization-either to be used as ‘biological material’ or as providers of organs or tissue for transplants in the treatment of certain diseases. The killing of innocent human creatures, even if carried out to help others, constitutes an absolutely unacceptable act. (Encyclical Evangelium vitae, 62-63)

The blood of murdered unborn children cries to God from vaccines and medicines which utilize their remains in any manner whatsoever. We have to make reparation for the accumulated crimes involved in their production. We have to ask pardon not only from God, who searches the reins and hearts (cf. Rev. 2:23), but also from the souls of all murdered unborn children, who have a name before God. We must especially ask pardon from those children whose body parts are used in such a degrading way for the health benefit of the living. It is incomprehensible how churchmen, with the aid of abstract theories from moral theology, can tranquilize the conscience of the faithful, by allowing them to use such vaccines and medicines.

The blood of the murdered unborn children cries to God from abortion-tainted vaccines and medicines! May the Lord have mercy on us! Kyrie, eleison!

"The Sins Against the Blessed Sacrament and the Need of a Crusade of Eucharistic Reparation" by Bishop Athanasius Schneider (in English)

There has never been in the history of the Church a time, where the sacrament of the Eucharist has been abused and outraged to such an alarming and grievous extent as in the past five decades, especially since the official introduction and Papal approval in 1969 of the practice of Communion in the hand. These abuses are aggravated, furthermore, by the widespread practice in many countries of faithful who, not having received the sacrament of Penance for many years, nevertheless regularly receive Holy Communion. The height of the abuses of the Holy Eucharist is seen in the admittance to Holy Communion of couples who are living in a public and objective state of adultery, violating thereby their indissoluble valid sacramental marriage bonds, as in the case of the so-called “divorced and remarried”, such admittance being in some regions officially legalized by specific norms, and, in the case of the Buenos Aires region in Argentina, norms even approved by the Pope. Additionally to these abuses comes the practice of an official admittance of Protestant spouses in mixed marriages to Holy Communion, e.g., in some dioceses in Germany.

To say that the Lord is not suffering because of the outrages committed against Him in the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist can lead to a minimizing of the great atrocities committed. Some people say: God is offended by the abuse of the Blessed Sacrament, but the Lord does not personally suffer. This is, however, theologically and spiritually too narrow a view. Although Christ is now in His glorious state and hence no more subject to suffering in a human way, He nevertheless is affected and touched in His Sacred Heart by the abuses and outrages against the Divine majesty and the immensity of His Love in the Blessed Sacrament. Our Lord has expressed to some Saints His complaints and His sorrow about the sacrileges and outrages with which men offend Him. One can understand this truth from the words of the Lord spoken to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, as Pope Pius XI reports in his Encyclical Miserentissimus Redemptor:

 

“When Christ manifested Himself to Margaret Mary, and declared to her the infinitude of His love, at the same

ti.me, in the manner of a mourner, He complained that so many and such great injuries were done to Him by

ungrateful men—and we would that these words in which He made this complaint were fixed in the minds of the

faithful, and were never blotted out by oblivion: “Behold this Heart”—He said—”which has loved men so much and

has loaded them with all benefits, and for this boundless love has had no return but neglect, and contumely,

and this often from those who were bound by a debt and duty of a more special love.” (n. 12)

 

Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité gave a profound theological explanation of the meaning of the “suffering” or “sadness” of God because of the offenses the sinners commit against Him:

 

This “‘suffering,’” this “‘sadness’” of the Heavenly Father, or of Jesus since His Ascension, are to be

understood analogically. They are not suffered passively as with us, but on the contrary freely willed and

chosen as the ultimate expression of Their mercy towards sinners called to conversion. They are only a

manifestation of God’s love for sinners, a love which is sovereignly free and gratuitous, and which is not

irrevocable.” (The Whole Truth About Fatima, vol. I, pp. 1311-1312)

 

This analogical spiritual meaning of the “sadness” or the “suffering” of Jesus in the Eucharistic mystery is confirmed by the words of the Angel in his apparition in 1916 to the children of Fatima and especially by the words and the example of the life of St. Francisco Marto. The children were invited by the Angel to make reparation for offenses against the Eucharistic Jesus and to console Him, as we can read in the Memoirs of Sister Lucia:

While we were there, the Angel appeared to us for the third time, holding a chalice in his hands, with a host above it from which some drops of blood were falling into the sacred vessel. Leaving the chalice and the host suspended in the air, the Angel prostrated himself on the ground and repeated this prayer three times: ‘“Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit…’ Then, rising, he once more took the chalice and the host in his hands. He gave the host to me, and to Jacinta and Francisco he gave the contents of the chalice to drink, saying as he did so: “Take and drink the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, horribly outraged by ungrateful men. Repair their crimes and console your God.” (Fatima in Lucia’s Own Words. Sister Lucia’s Memoirs, Fatima 2007, p. 172)

Reporting about the third Apparition on July 13, 1917, Sister Lucia stressed how Francisco perceived the mystery of God and the necessity to console Him because of the offenses of the sinners:

What made the most powerful impression on him [Francisco] and what wholly absorbed him, was God, the Most Holy Trinity, perceived in that light which penetrated our inmost souls. Afterwards, he said: “We were on fire in that light which is God, and yet we were not burnt! What is God?… We could never put it into words. Yes, that is something indeed which we could never express! But what a pity it is that He is so sad! If only I could console Him!” (Sister Lucia’s Memoirs, p. 147)

Sister Lucia wrote how Francisco perceived the necessity to console God, whom he understood to be “sad” because of the sins of men:

I asked him one day: “Francisco, which do you like better—to console Our Lord, or to convert sinners, so that no more souls will go to hell?” “I would rather console Our Lord. Didn’t you notice how sad Our Lady was that last month, when she said that people must not offend Our Lord any more, for He is already much offended? I would like to console Our Lord, and after that convert sinners so that they won’t offend Him any more.” (Sister Lucia’s Memoirs, p. 156)

In his prayers and in the offering of his sufferings St. Francisco Marto gave priority to the intention of “consoling the Hidden Jesus,” i.e. the Eucharistic Lord. Sister Lucia reported these words of Francisco, which he said to her: “When you come out of school, go and stay for a little while near the Hidden Jesus, and afterwards come home by yourself.” When Lucia asked Francisco about his sufferings, he answered: “I’m suffering to console Our Lord. First I make it to console Our Lord and Our Lady, and then, afterwards, for sinners and for the Holy Father. … More than anything else I want to console Him.” (Sister Lucia’s Memoirs, p. 157; 163)

Jesus Christ continues in a mysterious way his Passion in Gethsemane throughout the ages in the mystery of His Church and also in the Eucharistic mystery, the mystery of His immense Love. Known is the expression of Blaise Pascal: “Jesus will be in agony even to the end of the world. We must not sleep during that time.” (Pensées, n. 553) Cardinal Karol Wojtyła left us a profound reflection on the mystery of Christ’s sufferings in Gethsemane, which in a certain sense continue in the life of the Church. Cardinal Wojtyła spoke also about the duty of the Church to console Christ:

And now the Church seeks to recover that hour in Gethsemane—the hour lost by Peter, James and John—so as to compensate for the Master’s lack of companionship which increased his soul’s suffering. The desire to recover that hour has become a real need for many hearts, especially for those who live as fully as they can the mystery of the divine heart. The Lord Jesus allows us to meet him in that hour [and] he invites us to share the prayer of his heart. Faced with all the trials that man and the Church have to undergo, there is a constant need to return to Gethsemane and undertake that sharing in the prayer of Christ our Lord.” (Sign of Contradiction, chapter 17, “The prayer in Gethsemane”)

Jesus Christ in the Eucharistic mystery is not indifferent and insensitive towards the behavior which men show in His regard in this Sacrament of Love. Christ is present in this Sacrament also with His soul, which is hypostatically united with His Divine Person. The Roman theologian Antonio Piolanti presented a sound theological explanation in this regard. Even if the body of Christ in the Eucharist cannot see nor sensibly feel what happens or what is said in the place of his sacramental presence, Christ in the Eucharist “hears all and sees with superior knowledge.” Piolanti then quotes Cardinal Franzelin:

The blessed humanity of Christ sees all things in themselves by virtue of the abundant infused knowledge due to the Redeemer of mankind, to the Judge of the living and the dead, to the Firstborn of every creature, to the Center of all celestial and earthly history. All these treasures of the beatific vision and of the infused knowledge are certainly in the soul of Christ, also in so far as it is present in the Eucharist. In addition to these reasons, by another special title, precisely as the soul of Christ is formally in the Eucharist, for the same purpose of the institution of the mystery, it sees all men’s hearts, all thoughts and affections, all virtues and all sins, all the needs of the whole Church and of the individual members, the labors, the anxieties, the persecutions, the triumphs—in a word, all the internal and external life of the Church, His Bride, nourished with His flesh and with His Precious Blood. So by a threefold title (if we can say so) Christ in the sacramental state sees and in a certain divine way perceives all the thoughts and affections, the worship, the homages and also the insults and sins of all men in general, of all his faithful specifically and his priests in particular; He perceives homages and sins that directly refer to this ineffable mystery of love. (De Eucharistia, pp. 199-200, cited in Il Mistero Eucaristico, Firenze 1953, pp. 225-226)

One of the greatest apostles of the Eucharist of modern times, St. Peter Julian Eymard, left us the following profound reflections on the affections of the sacrificial love of Christ in the Eucharist:

By instituting His Sacrament, Jesus perpetuated the sacrifices of His Passion. … He was acquainted with all the new Judases; He counted them among His own, among His well-beloved children. But nothing of all this could stop Him; He wanted His love to go further than the ingratitude and malice of man; He wanted to outlive man’s sacrilegious malice. He knew beforehand the lukewarmness of His followers: He knew mine; He knew what little fruit we would derive from Holy Communion. But He wanted to love just the same, to love more than He was loved, more than man could make return for. Is there anything else? But is it nothing to have adopted this state of death when He has the fullness of life, a glorified and supernatural life? Is it nothing to be treated and considered as one dead? In this state of death Jesus is without beauty, motion or defense; He is wrapped in the Sacred Species as in a shroud and laid in the tabernacle as in a tomb. He is there, however; He sees everything and hears everything. He submits to everything as though He were dead. His love casts a veil over His power, His glory, His hands, His feet, His beautiful face and His sacred lips; it has hidden everything. It has left Him only His Heart to love us and His state of victim to intercede in our behalf. (The Real Presence, 29. The Most Blessed Sacrament is not Loved!, III)

St. Peter Julian Eymard wrote the following moving and almost mystical profession of the Eucharistic love of Christ, with an ardent appeal for Eucharistic reparation:

The Heart which endured the sufferings with so much love is here in the Blessed Sacrament; it is not dead, but living and active; not insensible, but still more affectionate. Jesus can no longer suffer, it is true; but alas! man can still be guilty towards Him of monstrous ingratitude. We see Christians despise Jesus in the Most Blessed Sacrament and show contempt for the Heart which has so loved them and which consumes itself with love for them. To spurn Him freely they take advantage of the veil that hides Him. They insult Him with their irreverences, their sinful thoughts, and their criminal glances in His presence. To express their disdain for Him they avail themselves of His patience, of the kindness that suffers everything in silence as it did with the impious soldiery of Caiphas, Herod, and Pilate. They blaspheme sacrilegiously against the God of the Eucharist. They know that His love renders Him speechless. They crucify Him even in their guilty souls. They receive Him. They dare take this living Heart and bind it to a foul corpse. They dare deliver it to the devil who is their lord! No! Never even in the days of His Passion has Jesus received so many humiliations as in His Sacrament! Earth for Him is a Calvary of ignominy. In His agony He sought a consoler; on the Cross He asked for someone to sympathize with His afflictions. Today, more than ever, we must make amends, a reparation of honor, to the adorable Heart of Jesus. Let us lavish our adorations and our love on the Eucharist. To the Heart of Jesus living in the Most Blessed Sacrament be honor, praise, adoration, and kingly power for ever and ever! (The Real Presence, 43. The Sacred Heart of Jesus, III)

In his last encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, Pope John Paul II left us luminous exhortations with which he stressed the extraordinary sanctity of the Eucharistic mystery and the duty of the faithful to treat this sacrament with utmost reverence and ardent love. Of all his exhortations, this statement stands out: “There can be no danger of excess in our care for this mystery, for ‘in this sacrament is recapitulated the whole mystery of our salvation’ (Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, III, q. 83, a. 4c).” (n. 61)

It would be a pastorally urgent and spiritually fruitful measure for the Church to establish in all dioceses of the world an annual “Day of Reparation for the crimes against the Most Holy Eucharist.” Such a day could be the octave day of the Feast of Corpus Christi. The Holy Spirit will give special graces of renewal to the Church in our days when, and only when, the Eucharistic Body of Christ will be adored with all Divine honors, will be loved, will be carefully treated and defended as really the Holiest of Holies. Saint Thomas Aquinas says in the hymn Sacris sollemniis: “O Lord, visit us to the extent that we venerate you in this sacrament” (sic nos Tu visita, sicut Te colimus). And we can say without doubt: O Lord, you will visit your Church in our days to the extent that the modern practice of Communion in the hand will recede and to the extent that we offer to you acts of reparation and love.

In the current so-called “COVID-19 Pandemic Emergency,” horrible abuses of the Most Blessed Sacrament have increased still more. Many dioceses around the world mandated Communion in the hand, and in those places the clergy, in an often humiliating manner, deny the faithful the possibility to receive the Lord kneeling and on the tongue, thus demonstrating a deplorable clericalism and exhibiting the behavior of rigid neo-Pelagians. Furthermore, in some places the adorable Eucharistic Body of Christ is distributed by the clergy and received by the faithful with household or disposable gloves. The treating of the Blessed Sacrament with gloves suitable for treating garbage is an unspeakable Eucharistic abuse.

In view of the horrible maltreatments of Our Eucharistic Lord—He being continuously trampled under foot because of Communion in the hand, during which almost always little fragments of the host fall on the floor; He being treated in a minimalistic manner, deprived of sacredness, like a cookie, or treated like garbage by the use of household gloves—no true Catholic bishop, priest or lay faithful can remain indifferent and simply stand by and watch.

There must be initiated a world-wide crusade of reparation to and consolation of the Eucharistic Lord. As a concrete measure to offer to the Eucharistic Lord urgently needed acts of reparation and consolation, each Catholic could promise to offer monthly at least one full hour of Eucharistic adoration, either before the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle or before the Blessed Sacrament exposed in the monstrance. The Holy Scripture says: “Where sin abounded, grace did more abound” (Rm. 5:20) and we can add analogously: “Where Eucharistic abuses abounded, acts of reparation will more abound.”

The day when, in all the churches of the Catholic world, the faithful will receive the Eucharistic Lord, veiled under the species of the little sacred host, with true faith and a pure heart, in the biblical gesture of adoration (proskynesis), that is, kneeling, and in the attitude of a child, opening the mouth and allowing oneself to be fed by Christ Himself in the spirit of humility, then undoubtedly will the authentic spiritual springtime of the Church come closer. The Church will grow in the purity of the Catholic Faith, in the missionary zeal of salvation of souls, and in the holiness of the clergy and the faithful. In deed, the Lord will visit His Church with His graces to the extent that we venerate Him in His ineffable sacrament of love (sic nos Tu visita, sicut Te colimus).

God grant that through the Eucharistic crusade of reparation, there may increase the number of adorers, lovers, defenders, and consolers of the Eucharistic Lord. May the two little Eucharistic apostles of our time, St. Francisco Marto and the soon-to-be-Blessed Carlo Acutis (beatification on October 10, 2020), and all of the Eucharistic saints, be the protectors of this Eucharistic crusade. For, as St. Peter Julian Eymard reminds us, the irrevocable truth is this: “An age prospers or dwindles in proportion to its devotion to the Eucharist. This is the measure of its spiritual life, faith, charity, and virtue.”

 July 22, 2020  

+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana

Open Letter by Bishop Athanasius Schneider (in Englsih)

Originally published here.

 

“We cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth” (2 Cor. 13: 8)

A Prophetic Voice of Four Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church

Out of “deep pastoral concern,” four Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, His Eminence Joachim Meisner, Archbishop emeritus of Cologne (Germany), His Eminence Carlo Caffarra, Archbishop emeritus of  Bologna (Italy), His Eminence Raymond Leo Burke, Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, and His Eminence Walter Brandmüller, President emeritus of the Pontifical Commission of Historical Sciences, have published on November 14, 2016, the text of five questions, called dubia (Latin for “doubts”), which previously on September 19, 2016, they sent to the Holy Father and to Cardinal Gerhard Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, along with an accompanying letter. The Cardinals ask Pope Francis to clear up “grave disorientation and great confusion” concerning the interpretation and practical application, particularly of chapter VIII, of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia and its passages relating to admission of remarried divorcees to the sacraments and the Church’s moral teaching.

            In their statement entitled “Seeking Clarity: A Plea to Untie the Knots in Amoris Laetitia,” the Cardinals say that to “many — bishops, priests, faithful — these paragraphs allude to or even explicitly teach a change in the discipline of the Church with respect to the divorced who are living in a new union.” Speaking so, the Cardinals have merely stated real facts in the life of the Church. These facts are demonstrated by pastoral orientations on behalf of several dioceses and by public statements of some bishops and cardinals, who affirm that in some cases divorced and remarried Catholics can be admitted to Holy Communion even though they continue to use the rights reserved by Divine law to validly married spouses.

            In publishing a plea for clarity in a matter that touches the truth and the sanctity simultaneously of the three sacraments of Marriage, Penance, and the Eucharist, the Four Cardinals only did their basic duty as bishops and cardinals, which consists in actively contributing so that the revelation transmitted through the Apostles might be guarded sacredly and might be faithfully interpreted. It was especially the Second Vatican Council that reminded all the members of the college of bishops as legitimate successors of the Apostles of their obligation, according to which “by Christ's institution and command they have to be solicitous for the whole Church, and that this solicitude, though it is not exercised by an act of jurisdiction, contributes greatly to the advantage of the universal Church. For it is the duty of all bishops to promote and to safeguard the unity of faith and the discipline common to the whole Church” (Lumen gentium, 23; cf. also Christus Dominus, 5-6).

            In making a public appeal to the Pope, bishops and cardinals should be moved by genuine collegial affection for the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ on earth, following the teaching of Vatican Council II (cf. Lumen gentium, 22); in so doing they render "service to the primatial ministry" of the Pope (cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops, 13).

            The entire Church in our days has to reflect upon the fact that the Holy Spirit has not in vain inspired Saint Paul to write in the Letter to the Galatians about the incident of his public correction of Peter. One has to trust that Pope Francis will accept this public appeal of the Four Cardinals in the spirit of the Apostle Peter, when St Paul offered him a fraternal correction for the good of the whole Church. May the words of that great Doctor of the Church, St Thomas Aquinas, illuminate and comfort us all: "When there is a danger for the faith, subjects are required to reprove their prelates, even publicly. Since Paul, who was subject to Peter, out of the danger of scandal, publicly reproved him. And Augustine comments: "Peter himself gave an example to superiors by not disdaining to be corrected by his subjects when it occurred to them that he had departed from the right path" (Summa theol., II-II, 33, 4c).

            Pope Francis often calls for an outspoken and fearless dialogue between all members of the Church in matters concerning the spiritual good of souls. In the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, the Pope speaks of a need for “open discussion of a number of doctrinal, moral, spiritual, and pastoral questions. The thinking of pastors and theologians, if faithful to the Church, honest, realistic and creative, will help us to achieve greater clarity” (n. 2). Furthermore, relationships at all levels within the Church must be free from a climate of fear and intimidation, as Pope Francis has requested in his various pronouncements.

            In light of these pronouncements of Pope Francis and the principle of dialogue and acceptance of legitimate plurality of opinions, which was fostered by the documents of the Second Vatican Council, the unusually violent and intolerant reactions on behalf of some bishops and cardinals against the calm and circumspect plea of the Four Cardinals cause great astonishment. Among such intolerant reactions one could read affirmations such as, for instance: the four Cardinals are witless, naive, schismatic, heretical, and even comparable to the Arian heretics.

            Such apodictic merciless judgments reveal not only intolerance, refusal of dialogue, and irrational rage, but demonstrate also a surrender to the impossibility of speaking the truth, a surrender to relativism in doctrine and practice, in faith and life. The above-mentioned clerical reaction against the prophetic voice of the Four Cardinals parades ultimately powerlessness before the eyes of the truth. Such a violent reaction has only one aim: to silence the voice of the truth, which is disturbing and annoying the apparently peaceful nebulous ambiguity of these clerical critics.

            The negative reactions to the public statement of the Four Cardinals resemble the general doctrinal confusion of the Arian crisis in the fourth century. It is helpful to all to quote in the situation of the doctrinal confusion in our days some affirmations of Saint Hilary of Poitiers, the “Athanasius of the West”.

            “You [the bishops of Gaul] who still remain with me faithful in Christ did not give way when threatened with the onset of heresy, and now by meeting that onset you have broken all its violence. Yes, brethren, you have conquered, to the abundant joy of those who share your faith: and your unimpaired constancy gained the double glory of keeping a pure conscience and giving an authoritative example” (Hil. De Syn., 3).

            “Your [the bishops of Gaul] invincible faith keeps the honourable distinction of conscious worth and, content with repudiating crafty, vague, or hesitating action, safely abides in Christ, preserving the profession of its liberty. For since we all suffered deep and grievous pain at the actions of the wicked against God, within our boundaries alone is communion in Christ to be found from the time that the Church began to be harried by disturbances such as the expatriation of bishops, the deposition of priests, the intimidation of the people, the threatening of the faith, and the determination of the meaning of Christ’s doctrine by human will and power. Your resolute faith does not pretend to be ignorant of these facts or profess that it can tolerate them, perceiving that by the act of hypocritical assent it would bring itself before the bar of conscience” (Hil. De Syn., 4).

            “I have spoken what I myself believed, conscious that I owed it as my soldier’s service to the Church to send to you in accordance with the teaching of the Gospel by these letters the voice of the office which I hold in Christ. It is yours to discuss, to provide and to act, that the inviolable fidelity in which you stand you may still keep with conscientious hearts, and that you may continue to hold what you hold now” (Hil. De Syn., 92).

            The following words of Saint Basil the Great, addressed to the Latin Bishops, can be in some aspects applied to the situation of those who in our days ask for doctrinal clarity, including our Four Cardinals: “The one charge which is now sure to secure severe punishment is the careful keeping of the traditions of the Fathers. We are not being attacked for the sake of riches, or glory, or any temporal advantages. We stand in the arena to fight for our common heritage, for the treasure of the sound faith, derived from our Fathers. Grieve with us, all you who love the brethren, at the shutting of the mouths of our men of true religion, and at the opening of the bold and blasphemous lips of all that utter unrighteousness against God. The pillars and foundation of the truth are scattered abroad. We, whose insignificance has allowed of our being overlooked, are deprived of our right of free speech” (Ep. 243, 2.4).

            Today those bishops and cardinals, who ask for clarity and who try to fulfill their duty in guarding sacredly and faithfully interpreting the transmitted Divine Revelation concerning the Sacraments of Marriage and the Eucharist, are no longer exiled as it was with the Nicene bishops during the Arian crisis. Contrary to the time of the Arian crisis, today, as wrote Rudolf Graber, the bishop of Ratisbone, in 1973, exile of the bishops is replaced by hush-up strategies and by slander campaigns (cf. Athanasius und die Kirche unserer Zeit, Abensberg 1973, p. 23).

            Another champion of the Catholic faith during the Arian crisis was Saint Gregory Nazianzen. He wrote the following striking characterization of the behavior of the majority of the shepherds of the Church in those times. This voice of the great Doctor of the Church should be a salutary warning for the bishops of all times: "Surely the pastors have done foolishly; for, excepting a very few, who either on account of their insignificance were passed over, or who by reason of their virtue resisted, and who were to be left as a seed and root for the springing up again and revival of Israel by the influences of the Spirit, all temporized, only differing from each other in this, that some succumbed earlier, and others later; some were foremost champions and leaders in the impiety, and others joined the second rank of the battle, being overcome by fear, or by interest, or by flattery, or, what was the most excusable, by their own ignorance" (Orat. 21, 24).

            When Pope Liberius in 357 signed one of the so called formulas of Sirmium, in which he deliberately discarded the dogmatically defined expression “homo-ousios” and excommunicated Saint Athanasius in order to have peace and harmony with the Arian and Semi-Arian bishops of the East, faithful Catholics and some few bishops, especially Saint Hilary of Poitiers, were deeply shocked. Saint Hilary transmitted the letter that Pope Liberius wrote to the Oriental bishops, announcing the acceptance of the formula of Sirmium and the excommunication of Saint Athanasius. In his deep pain and dismay, Saint Hilary added to the letter in a kind of desperation the phrase: “Anathema tibi a me dictum, praevaricator Liberi” (I say to you anathema, prevaricator Liberius), cf. Denzinger-Schönmetzer, n. 141. Pope Liberius wanted to have peace and harmony at any price, even at the expense of the Divine truth. In his letter to the heterodox Latin bishops Ursace, Valence, and Germinius announcing to them the above-mentioned decisions, he wrote that he preferred peace and harmony to martyrdom (cf. cf. Denzinger-Schönmetzer, n. 142).

            “In what a dramatic contrast stood the behavior of Pope Liberius to the following conviction of Saint Hilary of Poitiers: “We don’t make peace at the expense of the truth by making concessions in order to acquire the reputation of tolerance. We make peace by fighting legitimately according to the rules of the Holy Spirit. There is a danger to ally surreptitiously with unbelief under the beautiful name of peace.” (Hil. Ad Const., 2, 6, 2).

            Blessed John Henry Newman commented on these unusual sad facts with the following wise and equilibrated affirmation: “While it is historically true, it is in no sense doctrinally false, that a Pope, as a private doctor, and much more Bishops, when not teaching formally, may err, as we find they did err in the fourth century. Pope Liberius might sign a Eusebian formula at Sirmium, and the mass of Bishops at Ariminum or elsewhere, and yet they might, in spite of this error, be infallible in their ex cathedra decisions” (The Arians of the Fourth Century, London, 1876, p. 465).

            The Four Cardinals with their prophetic voice demanding doctrinal and pastoral clarity have a great merit before their own conscience, before history, and before the innumerable simple faithful Catholics of our days, who are driven to the ecclesiastical periphery, because of their fidelity to Christ’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage. But above all, the Four Cardinals have a great merit in the eyes of Christ. Because of their courageous voice, their names will shine brightly at the Last Judgment. For they obeyed the voice of their conscience remembering the words of Saint Paul: “We cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth” (2 Cor 13: 8). Surely, at the Last Judgment the above-mentioned mostly clerical critics of the Four Cardinals will not have an easy answer for their violent attack on such a just, worthy, and meritorious act of these Four Members of the Sacred College of Cardinals.

            The following words inspired by the Holy Spirit retain their prophetic value especially in view of the spreading doctrinal and practical confusion regarding the Sacrament of Marriage in our days: “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry” (2 Tim. 4: 3-5).

            May all, who in our days still take seriously their baptismal vows and their priestly and episcopal promises, receive the strength and the grace of God so that they may reiterate together with Saint Hilary the words: “May I always be in exile, if only the truth begins to be preached again!” (De Syn., 78). This strength and grace we wish wholeheartedly to our Four Cardinals and as well as to those who criticize them.

+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana