New Details Show That The TLM Ban In St Peters Is Targeting Bishop Schneider

0:00Well, today is a, um, the 25th anniversary of the darkest day in American history within living memory for most people watching this. So at least say a prayer for the repose of the soul. Those were lost that day if you could please and maybe tend to think about how different the world was before that day and how it is now and what it is we lost. A lot of younger people don't understand at all. Like why people above a certain age tend to hold on to that day as much as we do. And it's because they grew up in what came after the world that was born that day. And it's hard to explain to people about how different the world is from now from that time. So maybe reflect on it a little bit and see if you can find a way to explain it to somebody in your life who may not understand who was below a certain age because you're

1:04going to see unfortunately a lot of really awful takes on social media today about all that and kind of like you did yesterday. So we braced for it. And we'll move on here to our main story, which was not long after my report yesterday on Bishop Schneider's pilgrimage being canceled by the Vatican essentially, really being banned from offering the traditional mass, the St. Peter's Basilica. And they were announced to be offering it in the Basilica of Mary Major, which is fine. That's a good place to have a mass, but it's not St. Peter's. More details were found by Advaad Econom and published. And it's pretty clear that they were targeting Schneider with this. They never say, ooh, it's because Bishop Schneider was doing X, Y and Z. But Bishop Schneider for the last, most of the last year has been the only bishop as far as I can tell going and confronting what's going on in the church. You're doing it in a very peaceful, charitable, more diplomatic way than I am, but he's a

2:10bishop. He has other dynamics going on and I appreciate his candor. He's the only one willing to tell the truth about seemingly what's going on. So we go here to Advaad Econom and the day they published this, Schneider spoke again. So we'll get to that too. Advaad Econom with the headline, Vatican letter leaves door open for some more and pontificum mass to return to St. Peter's. That's a weird way to describe the traditional mass, some more and pontificum mass, but I, you know, we all know what they mean by that. Published on the 10th of September. Further details have emerged about the decision not to hold this year, some more and pontificum pilgrimage mass in St. Peter's, Basilica, with a letter sent to organizers indicating that the restriction applies specifically to this year and leaving open the possibility of a future return to the Vatican Basilica. Advaad Econom previously reported that the traditional Latin mass would not form part of the pilgrimage at St. Peter's this year. This publication understands that a one-page letter dated 7th of August and sent to organizers

3:15through the Apostolic nuns' theater provides further detail on the decision and its scope. Advaad Econom understands that Archbishop Paulo Rudelli, substitute for general affairs of the Secretary of State, was involved in the communication and signed the letter not authorizing the Paragranascio ad Petri Sadem, formally the International Pilgrimage Populum, popular some more and pontificum mass at St. Peter's. The wording leaves open the possibility that the pilgrimage could return to St. Peter's Basilica in a future year. Rather than stating that the organizers would never be permitted to celebrate the Pilgrimage mass there, the letters specifically said they were not authorized this year to celebrate it at St. Peter's in Rome. The decision therefore applies to the 2026 pilgrimage and does not necessarily close the door to future celebrations. The letters pass through the Apostolic nuns' theater also recognizes the organizers as the interlocutors for the request. Importantly, the restriction applies to the Pilgrimage mass rather than bringing in two celebrations of the traditional Latin mass at St. Peter's Basilica itself.

4:16St. Peter's already has a daily traditional Latin mass each morning. It's in the catacombs and the basement, basically. While the solemn high mass is according to the older Roman right, can also be celebrated for some amenities when requested and when approved. So rather high demand, as you might expect, to offer mass in St. Peter's. So, it was specifically his Pilgrimage that was targeted. And in the initial report, Vatican officials made it clear that was the case. Anyway, they said after last years, they said the organizers and other people, I've hinted that I think that involves a lot of people with online personalities, treated the return of the traditional mass to St. Peter's as a triumphal event. Look, we have a new pope when they were gloating. That's where they used, by the way, gloating. Doing a victory dance, as it were. One that was extraordinarily premature by my estimation, given that I can't really tell

5:21the difference between Leo and Francis on the fundamentals. But here we are. It was this specific Pilgrimage, the one headed by Bishop Schneider. Call this the first warning, if you will. Because this comes hot on the heels of several statements in the last couple of months about things going on in Rome. Sendedality. The shocking statement from Bishop Schneider really to say that he basically doesn't think the new mass can stand. He didn't say it's not valid. He just says he doesn't see a path forward for it. That it's not sustainable for the church. And that it has very little theological ground to stand on, because it was made by committee. The kind of stuff of person with a microphone might say, but usually you won't get a Bishop saying it. But in this case, it looks like Schneider did. And then he, the same day, seemingly, that had about a connoordered what they reported.

6:23They also published this from Schneider. Adline. Bishop Schneider on Sendedality, co-rhodemptrix, and what his mother's tears taught him about communion in the hand. His mom was not a fan of communion in the hand. Schneider has gone on the record before saying it should be banned. Again, another unpopular opinion. Schneider's not one who buys the well. You have one church father who said it's okay, so it's okay. Because if you actually read the church fathers, there were others who vehemently disagreed with their tooling in on that. We'll go here, again, not the whole thing, but the substantive part here. He's asked here by the Advaad-Khanam writer. International Marion's symposium will be held at the Augustinianum at the 7th of 8th of October. So here, Bishop Schneider is going to run headlong into a question about the thing that kind of broke a lot of people with Leo. That essentially made it so they weren't giving him a chance anymore. And that was the stripping of the titles of co-rhodemptrix and medi-atrix of all

7:27graces. People, titles that you, or titles that you will see popes using in various forms, or there may be not using those specific titles, but they're using the definitions of them before the title is kind of got solidified. You can go back a thousand years and find popes referring to our lady's role in salvation and the redemption of the human race. Code does not mean equal. Code means she participated. There's a big difference. And Schneider here is going to go run headlong into the subject. On that topic, your excellency after Mataire popular Fidelis. The Holy See has said, the title co-rhodemptrix is, quote, always inappropriate. Yet the saints, doctors, and ordinary papal medisderm used that title for centuries in a secondary and dependent sense. And they cannot have led the faithful astray. Dependent meaning depending on the grace of God. Can the faithful still invoke our lady as co-rhodemptrix and medi-atrix of all graces? Or has a doctrinal note of this kind now withdrawn those titles from the church's public language? What would a true development of Mary and doctrine look like as opposed to a quiet

8:30retirement of the titles for pastoral or ecumenical convenience? And remember, one of the reasons the Vatican banned those titles is because it'd be a stumbling block to Protestants. You know what else is the stumbling block to Protestants? The idea that saints in heaven can hear your prayers and carry them to God. Even though the letter to the Hebrews and the book of the Apocalypse or Revelation, fear Protestant, says pretty clearly they can. In those two books you get explicit language saying that the saints sit on thrones in heaven that the prayers of the faithful come up to them like steam, basically, and that they collect them in the bulls and carry them to the Lord. That's pretty clearly the intercession of the saints. But the Vatican banned that for the Virgin Mary, for ecumenical convenience, those titles. And the entire Catholic understanding of the communion of saints is a stumbling block to Protestants. Here's Bishop Schneider's response.

9:33The faithful can still use those titles because there are missiles approved by the popes, even with a mass formula, with the title of mediatrix of all graces. So here, Bishop Schneider is directly rejecting what the pope has said or with the pope authorized. Therefore, they would have to say, quote, this mass must be deleted from all missiles, which would be nonsense. All the words of the popes in the past with the title, mediatrix of all graces, would have to be deleted, canceled. It is not possible. Therefore, when the church used it in the missile and is still using it in the old missiles, they can use it. The church of today has no authority to cancel texts of the church which the church used for such a long period, and which the saints and even the church fathers used. Now, let's apply that to the liturgy, and Schneider does apply that to the liturgy. He says, we have Saint Ephraim and others, not directly the title of covered dumptricks or mediatrix of all graces, but the substance explaining it plainly and directly.

10:35The concept of these titles, what the titles were meant to encapsulate in just a simple phrase, had been taught by the church well before there was the titles themselves. Therefore, we are more sure in using the titles, covered dumptricks and mediatrix with the fathers of the church, with the doctors of the church, with the popes, with the formulas of masses in the missiles, then with the document of the D.D.F. We are in a better position than this document, Monterey, popular fidelis. I think in the future of this document will be canceled. This will be canceled, not the other. To which, as the interviewer says, previously, you proposed a pope Leo IV that we do not need another modu proprio, but a more solemn document like an apostolic constitution, so that a bishop may no more forbid the traditional Roman right than he may forbid the nobisordo. What in your judgment is still missing for the turdical peace?

11:36So now it's the liturgy. He says, I have proposed to the Holy Father, so now we know what he spoke about when he met with him privately back in July. I have proposed to the Holy Father to issue a more solemn document, but in a sense of resolving the liturgical question from the foundations again, globally again, without the small wars between modu proprios and with these casualties. No. Rather, in a wider view of the entire 2,000 years of the church, to bear in mind, to have this tolerance, as the church always had for several different liturgies in the church. A real coexistence, a specific coexistence of both forms. And so this was my intention in proposing it to the Holy Father. Maybe he could consult cardinals privately, or bishops, or even convoke them at hawk. I would say it would be better to invoke the president of the Episcopal Conferences to take part, the bishops, and not only the College of Cardinals. Of course, the College of Cardinals separately, specifically only for this question, to establish

12:39a liturgical piece for both rights. After this, the Holy Father should reflect and then publish an Apostolic Constitution, which will give us a tax liturgical leonina, or a liturgical piece under Leo. Leo's liturgical piece. From there, they go on to a comical dialogue. And other things that are interesting, if you want to read them for yourself. I'll have links to them. And today's show notes, at the Return to Tradition at Substack, or the Anthony Stein substack, is linked in the description box below this video or audio podcast, depending where you're hearing me now. I would love to see Leo sign that. I don't think it's going to happen. And remember, the issues in the church are well beyond the liturgy. The liturgy is the expression in the form of worship of what we believe. Everything we profess to believe as Catholics goes through the liturgy. It meets in the liturgy. The modernists understand that. That's why they have said that the new mass and the traditional mass are not compatible

13:44with one another. That the traditional mass, the traditional Roman right of the mass that developed organically, starting at the Apostolic times, started taking shape in like the fifth century in a very overt way and developed organically all the way through then and then was codified as the normative mass for the Latin West with underpious the fifth and the Council of Trent, but existed and was a widespread mass in itself well before then all the way to 1962. The last missile that was published with it. They have said that that mass, 15 centuries at least, 19 centuries depending on how you count it, is not compatible with the church's theology today. That is a shocking statement, one that they keep repeating. And until that is addressed, I don't think you'll have true liturgical peace.

14:44I think the modernists know that as well. That's why Leo keeps traditionalist custodous. Now I will be happy, ish, if he rescinds traditionalist custodous, but they have said repeatedly that's not going to happen to his men have. Now, some have said, manly cardinal roacher, playing a dangerous game speaking for the Pope on this. But I would expect that cardinal roach knows what he's doing when he says those things. Raven race is the mass that helped defeat the Ottoman fleet at La Panto and they look down on it. Well, you see, it's not ecumenical. Especially in a reaching out to those who allegedly worship the same God as we do. I don't believe that for a second either. But I'm very curious. We have the rest of the thesis of the TLM takes place there in St. Peter's every day.

15:46We don't know if it's every day. It takes place in the catacombs and I reported on it when they moved it down there, you can literally fit fit eight people in that mass. They put it in the most cramped, inaccessible place possible. I'll still be able to tell you the straight face. It's available. Eight people. So technically, it's available, technically. But there's a reason that you will not see this and it goes back to that compatibility with the theology of the church, specifically the ecclesiology, which is sort of the theology of the church's identity. It's relationship to God, it's relationship to man, it's relationship to the world, right? What it's mission in the world is how it understands the great commission, all of those things. And part of that is relationship to secular authorities. We have a story today, one that is kind of a mess around and find out kind of story. You know, we'll try to keep it PG-ish here, right?

16:48You'll have no doubt seen in your time, people who have demanded that the church delete their baptismal records. Take me off your lists. I'm no longer a Catholic. I have left the faith. They'll tell you. And the church says we can't do that. Once you are baptized, it is a Catholic sacrament. You have the indelible mark of being a Catholic until, well, forever, even after you're gone, it will be on your soul as an indelible mark. Cannot be removed. And people say, well, please, take me off your lists, et cetera. And this is how you get, in some ways, a little devil's advocacy here because there are some things that are outgrowth to this, that are a legitimate problem. One of which is I still get mail from the Archdiocese of Portland, Oregon. I have not lived there for 10 years, almost. I still get their mail. Live an halfway across the country from them. I still get collection envelopes from a parish in Tulsa that I have not set foot in in eight

17:50years. I don't know why, because there's a very real, let's not, let's just keep people in the books thing, issue in the church. And that's how you also get these inflated numbers of, they're being one, you know, almost two billion Catholics in the world now they tell you because they never take anybody off the books in any possible way. Let's say you get those numbers. And lawmakers, atheistic lawmakers from the atheistic EU are going to do something about this. Adlined from life site, you'd rule on forcing Catholic church to erase baptismal records, erase them. Now, what are the chances that the Vatican will say no on this? And I know your gut reaction for most people watching this will be though, they're not, they're going to give them what they want. They have no spine. Even the modernists, the worst of them have defended the seal confession.

18:52Now maybe they do it for different reasons than we would like, but they still defend it. And I would hope that this will be a case where they'll do the same here. Well they will tell them no, we're not going to just erase baptismal records. No matter what you tell us, go ahead and persecute us. Remember, most, the most the modernists, most of them are true believers. They truly believe they are an emission from God to fix the mistakes that were made to his church. They are Protestant in a way that is not like other Protestants in as much as they hold to a theory that many Protestants have, which is the sort of Babylonian captivity or Babylonian exile thesis. There are some Protestants out there who fully believe that the Catholic church was founded by Jesus Christ on the rock of Peter. What they don't believe is that the church was true to its mission for very long at all. They believe Constantine corrupted it or they were pagan accretions added to the religion

19:57over the course of time. And they will virtually all of them will say by the 5th century at the latest of the Catholic church defected. That's what many of them believe. Modernists believe a variation in that too. They refer to like the Council of Trent as an exercise in rigidity and clericalism. They'll say that for most of the church's history, that it became a clericalist, a tyrannical organization. And that's why we got to go back to ancient times. Ignoring all the mandates of popes against such things. Pious to 12th taught against archeologist and these other sort of errors of claiming we must just go back to ancient Catholic practices. They taught against them called them errors, serious errors. But that's why they do it because they believe that at some point the church defected and that they have been on a God-given mission to fix the church. Many of them are true believers. Many of them are. Others will use that argument though. They just convenient for their purposes.

20:59Details from the article. The European Union's top court may force the diocese of Ghent to erase baptismal records at the request of individuals under EU data protection law. The court of justice of the European Union is considering a case involving the diocese of Ghent in Belgium. And a dispute over whether a person who requested de-baptism has a right under the general data protection regulation to have all personal information removed from the church's baptismal register. Baptismal register is the fundamental basis for establishing the juridical status of the person in the internal legal order of the church. The commissioner of the Bishops' Conference is the European Union stated, requiring the Catholic Church to erase the data contained in it thereby intervening directly in its organization will constitute a series infringement upon church autonomy and institutional freedom of religion. So that's not how it works. You can't just de-baptize somebody. That's not how it works.

21:59Once you're baptized, you have the mark forever. Forever. Like we're talking eternity forever. We're talking a million years from now you enjoying whatever your eternal reward is. We'll still have that mark of baptism forever. Take the baptism of your children very seriously. Take your own baptism. If you are discerning coming into the church, take your baptism deadly seriously. It is not something to be trifled with. And it's certainly not something for an institution that looks like it's failing anyway to start digging into what the EU is trying to do. They need to stop with this. But of course they're not going to. But at least the EU's bishops are trying to stop it. That's nice of them. For once, the same people who play fast and loose with church teaching on all sorts of political issues, the same bishops who are all basically echoing the nonsense coming out of the German bishops these days, the German bishop, taught him an excommunicating people

23:03who vote for AFD, the German bishops who advocate for all sorts of manner of social programs that are actually evil on their face, the social policy of the EU and of Germany. No, but at least on this one, the bishops of the EU look like they're united in telling the EU to go take a hike. Whether that will stand as anybody's guess, and I'm curious if you think they will hold the line on this. Keeping in mind that modernist bishops too have been pretty good about defending the church against the attempt to break the seal of confession. This isn't just a, well, these bishops do a lot of bad things, so they're going to waffle here. They've been good on one topic. They might be good on another. That touches also on core Catholic theology that these people have never ever challenged, which is that baptism leaves a mark on you forever. Very curious, what you think about this.

24:04Let me know in the comments because this isn't going to be the only time they try this. Even if they're successful here, meaning they make the ruling, they're not going to get to, I doubt they're going to get the bishops to go along with it, but they will try. If they pass that law, you're going to see this attempt to elsewhere. You go look again to the seal confession issue. How many states in the United States have passed at the hands of always, always at the hands of Democrat lawmakers to try to break the seal of confession? How many times has that been done? It's also been tried in Australia, parts of Europe. How often do they do this? Because once a lawmaker tries this in one place, they start trying it elsewhere and everywhere. Now, the seal of confession, how it comes with an automatic expunication of a priest were to violate the seal of it. They get excommunicated and laecized instantly or they can go to jail in the places with those

25:04laws. So that might be what separates this one, this story from the seal confession in that there are very real material consequences of violating the seal. But I'm curious what you think about this. So let me know in the comments and hit like and subscribe if you haven't. It does help sharing this on social media helps to pray for everybody we spoke about in this today. Again, not trying to rally you up against them. These church figures do a masterful job of doing that themselves and they certainly don't need my help in doing that. So please pray for them. It's Friday also maybe do some fasting or some other form of penance or abstinence for them. I'm Anthony Stein, Ave Maria.