That was fabulous bishop Schneider! We love you and need your spiritual teaching !
@bonniesammons2348Ай бұрын
Absolutely made my day. Thank you thank you for such clear teaching, so very needed. Bishop Schneider is a true shepherd. Even if he were the only one left his "voice" would help me keep the Faith no matter what.
@marie-noelledp3073Ай бұрын
Oh my God ! Bishop Schneider is amazing ! He is so caring for us... ❤❤
@samiamnot8906Ай бұрын
Don't use Our Lord's name in vain. I can't believe that here, in 13 days, nobody has corrected you. You need to be more careful.
@JulesAMI111Ай бұрын
What a wonderful and illuminating interview with our beloved Bishop Schneider. Thank you Timothy. God’s blessing to you both.
@EpoRose1Ай бұрын
God Bless Bishop Schneider! A true shepherd of the Church!
@JustUsCrazyBoyzАй бұрын
Bishop Schneider came here to my lay community here in The Philippines last month where we say the TLM. He had a very inspirational sermon where he told us to bare up with being marginalized for now and God will restore the Latin Mass especially if we prayed hard enough! Such a Holy Man!
@julianpaschinger5343Ай бұрын
Bishop Schneider , deo gratias🙏🏽
@rosariolm3619Ай бұрын
Greetings from a faithful following family from the Netherlands!!!!!!!
@doortjem5739Ай бұрын
Greetings from the Netherlands, too 😊
@lorraineklimek1677Ай бұрын
My admiration and respect for Archbishop Schneider is immense. Particularly, even when he is correcting others, he does so with charity. I remind myself of his example when I found myself feeling anger or outrage about current controversial events going on in the Church.
@1907jdeeАй бұрын
Excellent clarity from Bs Schneider. 🙏
@Paweł-u2hАй бұрын
Watching from Poland! 🇵🇱
@MichaelPeriaАй бұрын
Thank you for this interview. This clears lots of confusions that I had in mind.
@zaloboАй бұрын
PRAY, PRAY, PRAY FOR THE TRUE CATHOLIC TLM OF OUR LORD, JESUS CHRIST !!!!
@dianesimoes894313 күн бұрын
Thank you for correct info.
@kadi1100Ай бұрын
Watching from germany ❤️🔥🙏🏽🌹📿
@karlheven8328Ай бұрын
Er ist der beste deutsche Bischof (in Kasachstan aber er ist deutsch)😊❤
@kadi1100Ай бұрын
@@karlheven8328 er ist wahrhaftig ein Segen für die ganze Welt. Ich weiss nicht welche Staatsangehörigkeit er hat. Geboren ist er in Kirgisistan :) Und dann später mit seinen Eltern nach Deutschland gezogen
@karlheven8328Ай бұрын
@@kadi1100 Ja, seine ganze Familie ist deutschen Blutes.
@Josef_FritzАй бұрын
Thank you for this video .Great teachings,
@albertritchot5393Ай бұрын
How can Catholics will low levels of catechesis recover what appears to have not been taught in the last 50 years or so the Faith? Must we go back to pre-Vatican documents to get a more realistic and truthful teaching?
@Greg-ei6lvАй бұрын
Read the Catechism of the Council of Trent
@albertwaigwa865219 күн бұрын
I bought and I’m getting to know well The Catechism of The Council of Trent or better still Catechism of st Pious X what a difference of Clarity especially on the uncertain areas
@bbcarve53Ай бұрын
Hello Tim what is the name of the 12 volume catchesis series that the bishop mentioned
@TheGringoSaladoАй бұрын
“Even a blind man could see.”
@ClavesCoelorumАй бұрын
With all due respect to His Excellency, the argument that "Psalm 42 wasn't said at every Mass before 1965, and the Last Gospel wasn't always said at every Mass before 1965, therefore abolishing them entirely in 1965 is entirely unproblematic" does not follow. Firstly, it was only the 1960 Code of Rubrics that tinkered with the opening rites of Mass (i.e. abolishing them entirely if something such as a blessing preceded it) and decreed the omission of the Last Gospel when something followed Mass, e.g. Absolution at the catafalque). Some things were begun by the Pius XII Holy Week "reforms" in 1955 in a limited way, that is true. But they became applied generally only in 1960. Secondly, the fact that Psalm 42 was not said in Passiontide or at Requiems doesn't mean or justify that therefore it should NEVER be said. It was omitted (or, as some may say, never introduced) on those occasions for particular reasons, in CONTRAST to the ordinary rite of Mass where it would always be found. The omission of something as an exception to a rule does not mean that the rule is superfluous.
@NoryJaneChristineАй бұрын
Communion on hand is Mark of the Beast together with Lay Minister and Blessing of Non-Communicants. It is the buying and selling in the Altar Rail or Communion Line. This is why Our Lady of Akita had a mark on her right hand while The Visionary had a mark on left hand which she said is due to communion on hand
@ciaran6171Ай бұрын
Gosh. Sounds like +Schneider isn't 100% on board the Vatican II Sunshine Bus. Can anyone let me have the number of the DDF?
@judithmcrae3704Ай бұрын
How can one pray for the intentions of the pope when he is promoting heresy?😊
@katiekuchar6014Ай бұрын
God’s will is for us to obey the bishop of whatever diocese we are in.
@samiamnot8906Ай бұрын
What if the bishop is a wolf?
@Dim-yz6wk7 күн бұрын
@@samiamnot8906 Exactly . Deus benedicat tibi ✝️🛐🛐🛐
@suegreene1Ай бұрын
It's not the same, I asisted many Novus Ordo Ad Orientum, the comunion given in the tongue, but it felt empty..And it was given by my friends of a Franciscan Community. those were the times I was far away of the Catholic Church, because I went through a dissagrable situation when I was 12 years old. When I rediscovered the Mass of the Ages, I understood what had happened and what I missed.
@simonwesteng3610Ай бұрын
Without any foreknowledge of `tradition` (and change of tradition), I have always intuitively received the Blessed Sacrament not by taking It with my fingers and then to my mouth but I have always offered up the palm of my hand for It to be placed therein from where I myself elevate It and receive It directly upon my tongue. As a lover of God, I see this meathod as the most loving way of initiating `Holy Communion`. In other words, just as the earliest tradition did, I have continued this particular practise, seeing this as the most natural, reverent and intimate manner of receiving My Eucharistic Lord.
@TeM203Ай бұрын
If we only realised who is He, hidden under the appearance of a fragile host, the Holy of Holies, Almighty God, we would never approach him standing and reaching out with our hand. Out of fear and loving reverence. Especially, as many eucharistic miracles shown, it is His wounded sacred heart we receive.
@dan_m7774Ай бұрын
He told us to reach out and take, then eat. It is unfortunate to obey Christ upsets people.
@TeM203Ай бұрын
@dan_m7774 you should do more research and reading before judging who is obedient to Christ and who is not. Read church fathers, lives of saints. Even old testament, ark of the covenant, who could touch it? Here is more than the ark. Nearly 2000 years of church history.... they were all years of disobedience to Christ you say? I do not want to debate but I pray that our Lord Jesus will lead us on a straight path and keep us in his heart. In the end it is only between us and God. Let's focus on this relationship with Him. God bless you.
@dan_m7774Ай бұрын
@@TeM203 The early church you received by hand. Christ was touched constantly in crowds. Remember the Apostles being dumfounded why Christ asked the crowd who touched him? Receiving on the tongue was a novelty introduced as a man made way of showing respect. The Ark was prohibited to touch, because God said not to touch. God did not say do not touch the bread. You are to obey the Church if they restrict how to receive you obey. If they allow various ways, then don't disobey by claiming otherwise. To do so is to disrespect God, thus making you unworthy to receive in any form.
@albertwaigwa865219 күн бұрын
@@dan_m7774 please Read The Catechism of St Pious X then also listen to Bishops other podcast about “ take” verb and it’s loosely translated form from Aramaic into English.
@Dim-yz6wk7 күн бұрын
@@TeM203 Deus benedicat tibi ✝️🛐🛐🛐
@kathleenfrancis1872Ай бұрын
The guy that hands out Jesus in The Most Blessed Sacrament almosts drops it. He's a great guy but not even an extraordinary minister.
@PukhelykopterАй бұрын
So: is the conclusion then, that catholics are receiving a damaging Eucharist in every Novus Ordo Mass?! is that Bishop Schneider's message?! Converts from protestantism/evangelicalism being fervent Catholics now - as converts are - receiving a damaging Eucharist all the time?!!! Appreciate an answer... Thx for the video.
@alexisarrizon6799Ай бұрын
Is it still live
@tomsdigestАй бұрын
Pius XII's condemnation of "liturgical archeologism," or Benedict XVI's "once sacred, always sacred" principle? Pick one, can't have both
@saetainlatinАй бұрын
Hopefully Bsp Schneider can address Michael Lofton's criticism of his latest book Credo, in which according to Lofton Bsp Schneide is redefining the word schism.
@austinkent8811Ай бұрын
What is there to address? Bishop Schneider gives a definition that is not the same as the actual definition from canon law and the traditional theological loci, this is simply a fact.
@femaleKCRoyalsFanАй бұрын
credo is an amazing catechism.
@samiamnot8906Ай бұрын
@@austinkent8811 No he doesn't, I just checked it. Pages 78/79, same definition as canon law.
@austinkent8811Ай бұрын
@@samiamnot8906 yes he does: Schneider: “Who are schismatics? Those who received baptism, yet have been separated from the unity of the Catholic Church by refusing to recognize the Supreme Pontiff or have canonical communion with him and the other members of the Church (e.g., the Orthodox).” Canon law: “schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” Schneider redefines from “refusal of submission” to “refusal of recognition”, which makes sense given he holds water for groups that are schismatic according to the Church and this redefinition would make those groups no longer schismatic.
@Cato_the_ChristianАй бұрын
@@austinkent8811 “Q. Who are schismatics? A. Schismatics are those Christians who, while not explicitly denying any dogma, yet voluntarily separate themselves from the Church of Jesus Christ, that is, from their lawful pastors.” -Catechism of St Pius X. A lay catechism can have a definition that is not identical to canon law and still be true and efficacious for the one being taught.
@tomsdigestАй бұрын
Ruh roh, don't tell Kwasniewski that "saying the Secret and the Embolism out loud are not substantive changes!"
@tomsdigestАй бұрын
"When those holy hierarchs, preachers of Christ, and defenders * of the Gospel teachings and Orthodox traditions had received in themselves * the divine radiance of the Holy Spirit, * they proclaimed the supernatural * pronouncement openly * to be their conviction inspired by God, * namely the Creed, which is concise * yet defines the true faith sufficiently. * Clearly these enlightened and blessed men, receiving from on high * the revelation, declared to all * the decision taught by God." (Byzantine hymn for the Sunday of the Fourth Ecumenical Council) Just one of many examples that's a very far cry from Bishop Schneider's frankly Modernistic reductionism of conciliar spiritual authority, which somehow posits the Holy Spirit as a great unknown with just a few disparate manifestations in Church history. In any other era, "2,000 bishops gathered in ecumenical council said X" would've very much been taken as "the Holy Spirit has expressed X," without some sort of "Well, did it meet some very rare conditions of negatively-protected dogma defined at such-and-such a level only distinguished in the 19th century"
@austinkent8811Ай бұрын
Why does a random auxiliary bishop’s opinion matter? The Church says communion in the hand is allowed, case closed. To claim the Church has erred on this matter is no different than the Protestants who claim the Church erred by moving to exclusively communion on the tongue.
@doortjem5739Ай бұрын
You need to learn when and why they allowed communion in the hand. Case is not closed. If you belive that Christ is king and that He is a real in The Communion then you would never ever want to touch Him with your unworthy hands..God bless you.
@marccrotty8447Ай бұрын
Austin. Consider attending the Canonized Latin Mass and moving away from the "made by committee in 4 years" Novus Ordo rite.
@PadraigTomasАй бұрын
"...out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands, for touching this sacrament. Hence, it is not lawful for anyone else to touch it except from necessity, for instance, if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency." So said Saint Thomas Aquinas, *Summa Theologica*, Part III, Q.82, Art. 3. His opinion carries more weight than any of us.
@austinkent8811Ай бұрын
@@doortjem5739 I wouldn’t want to touch him with my even more unworthy mouth either, thankfully he offers himself to us in spite of our unworthiness. I don’t remember saint James giving an in depth treatise on the evil of our hands either.
@austinkent8811Ай бұрын
@@PadraigTomas his opinion carries less weight than the official disciplines of the Roman pontiff, who has changed the discipline in force in St Thomas time. Also kind of awkward considering Eastern priests don’t have consecrated hands and never have, and Roman priests didn’t have consecrated hands until well into the Middle Ages, that ceremony isn’t even native to the Roman Rite, it’s a Gallican accretion:
@johngregory5424Ай бұрын
Problem; The Bishop cannot communicate with God. Jesus is God`Son. Ask God for his Son`s birthdate. ; :
@dan_m7774Ай бұрын
Absolutely you are to touch God. More exactly you are to Eat while doing it .
@paulmurray3671Ай бұрын
I want Communion in the hand! I am fed up with people wh0 want t0 FORCE EVERY0NE to receive the Host n the tongue 0NLY!
@TeM203Ай бұрын
Want? A bit entitled, aren't we? The Lord is your Shepherd, you shall not want.
@dan_m7774Ай бұрын
@@TeM203irony from those who only want the TLM and on the tongue
@dan_m7774Ай бұрын
@@gracieobunny9916 nonsense
@dan_m7774Ай бұрын
@@gracieobunny9916 The irony of sticking your tongue out at God 😃
@michellemcdermott202617 күн бұрын
When did the Church become a democracy? I want sounds very prideful. Maybe what you want is not what you need.