Heresy and other grave doctrinal errors are found in Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s catechism, which is titled “Credo: Compendium of the Catholic Faith”. The Latin word “Credo” means “I believe”.

“Credo” – the Heresy of Feeneyism

For a comparison between the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on salvation versus the heresy of Feenyism, see my previous article: Feeneyism is Heresy because Salvation Reaches Beyond Christianity. As I wrote in that article: Now please understand that heresy is defined NOT by the particular details in the ideas of the founder of the heresy. Rather, heresy is defined as whatever is fundamentally contrary to formal dogma. So if someone proposes a new version of Feeneyism, with different details, but the same fundamental errors in opposition to dogma, then the idea remains heresy.

So the errors of Bishop Athanasius Schneider on salvation, while somewhat different from the exact set of errors of Fr. Leonard Feeney, still retain its fundamental opposition to Catholic dogma on salvation. And so the Schneider version of Feeneyism remains the same heresy.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider states the dogmatic teaching: Outside the Church there is No Salvation. However, he narrows the definition of “the Church” and its membership much as Fr. Feeney did, making his interpretation of that ancient teaching false. The proper understanding of that saying is found in many places in magisterial teaching. But this quick summary by Pope Saint John Paul II in a general audience is helpful: All Salvation Comes through Christ. In summary, the membership of the Church, sufficient for salvation, includes not only baptized Catholic Christians, but non-Christians who have received an implicit baptism of desire. See this Short Syllabus of Catholic Teaching on Salvation.

Credo: “549. Can a man be saved who does not know God’s revelation, or the Church He founded? One who neglects to pray for insight or earnestly seek the true religion is ignorant by his own fault, and so cannot be saved. Likewise, one who refuses to enter the Church once he has discovered it is refusing the known invitation of God, and thus cannot be saved.” [Credo p 158]

The above claim excludes from salvation all those who know about the Church and even some of those who do not know, as they are claimed to be guilty of neglecting to pray for insight or neglecting to “see the true religion”. This position ignores Catholic teaching that an objectively grave sin, such as deciding not to become Christian, is only the type of sin that deserves eternal punishment if it is accompanied by full knowledge of the grave immorality of the act and full deliberation (full consent of the will to that sin). Such a sweeping condemnation (“and thus cannot be saved”) is a rejection of the power of God’s grace and the extent of God’s mercy, and is not compatible with Catholic teaching on salvation.

Concerning those who die with invincible ignorance, Credo [n. 550] limits this case to one who has “not deliberately rejected grace offered to him, including divine revelation, and has the proper added dispositions,” and then says only that “it is possible for God to join him to the Church in an extraordinary way.” As the text continues, we see that Credo presents a long list of conditions for an implicit baptism of desire as this “extraordinary way”. The Church has never narrowed the implicit baptism of desire with such a list of conditions.

“552. What preconditions would be necessary for a soul to be saved in this extraordinary way?
1. Belief that God exists and is a Rewarder of those who seek Him (see Heb 11:6);
2. Sincere effort to know and do God’s will as He makes it known;
3. True repentance for sin and hope for pardon.” [p. 158-159]

“553. What are the further preconditions for such a “baptism of desire”?
1. Perfect conversion;
2. Sincere belief in and love for Jesus Christ and the Blessed Trinity;
3. Firm intent to enter the Church. [p. 159]

Why is this position on a baptism of desire the heresy of Feeneyism? First of all, the conditions implicitly require the person to already be in the state of grace as an alleged prerequisite to enter the state of grace by a baptism of desire. Only those in the state of grace have the infused virtues of love, faith, and hope. No one can have sincere belief in and love for Jesus and the Trinity, and “hope for pardon” unless they already have those virtues of love and faith and hope — implying they already entered the state of grace by some form of baptism. Then the “firm intent to enter the Church” excludes the implicit version of a baptism of desire, since one only formally enters the Church by a baptism with water. The Church has always taught that baptism of desire can be implicit, meaning that the person does not have an intention to enter the Church.

Notice also that Schneider’s version of salvation only applies to persons who believe in Jesus and the Trinity, thereby excluding all non-Christians from salvation. And this was one of the main errors of Feeneyism as well. To the contrary, Pope Saint John Paul II taught, in the papal encyclical Mission of Redemption: “The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all.” [RM 10] And this teaching of John Paul II is entirely consistent with past magisterial teachings, as explained in my book: Forgiveness and Salvation for Everyone. Salvation is offered to all; however, some persons go to Hell because they reject the offer through the last moment of their lives.

In Credo 555, Schneider explains that an unbaptized Catholic martyr, like St. Felicity, goes to heaven by a baptism of blood. But in Credo 556, Schneider states that a baptized non-Catholic may be saved if they are martyred for Christ. Notice his implicit claim that the non-Catholic Christian can only be saved by a baptism of blood, if they are already baptized. He is implying that non-Catholic Christians, who are validly baptized, are still not saved, except in extraordinary cases like martyrdom for Christ. This claim is a denial of the dogmas of the Church on baptism and the state of grace (see Benedictus Deus). In Catholic teaching, Protestant baptism is valid and confers the state of grace AND everyone who dies in the state of grace is certainly saved. Schneider proposes that non-Catholic Christians — baptized and in the state of grace !!! — are still not saved except in extraordinary cases like martyrdom. This is the heresy of Feeneyism.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider continues explaining this heretical error in great detail, leaving no doubt that his position is a version of the heresy of Feeneyism.

Credo: “558. Who are not members of the Catholic Church? All the non-baptized, including Jews, Muslims, and pagans.”

“559. Who else does not belong to the unity of the Catholic Church? All the baptized whose crimes and sins have impeded the efficacy of their baptismal character, separating them from the spiritual goods of the Church. These include heretics, schismatics, excommunicates, and apostates.” [p. 160]

First, this claim that the baptized, who are in the state of grace, can nevertheless have the effectiveness of their baptismal character impeded, resulting in a loss of salvation, is both heresy and incompetent theology. The baptismal character is an indelible mark on the soul. The effectiveness of baptism is found in habitual grace, the three infused virtues (and the other virtues), and the indwelling of the Trinity. A baptized person does not lose any of these things, except by actual mortal sin, and these things return with repentance and forgiveness. Basic teachings of the Church on Christianity and salvation are ignored and implicitly contradicted by Schneider’s heretical catechism. That his text is called “Credo”, meaning “I believe”, is ironically accurate, since the book contains the beliefs of an individual heretical and schismatic Bishop, and not what We Believe as faithful Catholics. Schneider is saying that this book is what he himself believes.

Notice again that Credo excludes “all the non-baptized” from membership on the Catholic Church, and therefore from salvation under Schneider’s narrow understanding of “Outside the Church there is no salvation.” He also excludes heretics and schismatics from salvation. Ironically, under his own position on salvation, Bishop Athanasius Schneider would not be saved. However, under the actual teachings of the Church, heretics and schismatics might lack the full culpability of actual mortal sin for their heresy or schism, and so might still be in the state of grace and able to be saved (if they die in that state). But Schneider ignores the difference between an objectively grave sin and the full culpability of actual mortal sin.

The claim that “excommunicates” are excluded from membership in the Church and therefore, under the error of Feeneyism (which does not accept implicit membership in the Church), would exclude them from salvation. But the Church does not teach that excommunicates lose the state of grace and salvation. IF a particular person is excommunicated AND happens also to be guilty to the extent of actual mortal sin for their offense, then they would only be saved if they repent and return to the state of grace.

I should also point out that membership in the Church admits of different types and degrees. A person excommunicated for the sin of abortion, for example, is still a member of the Church, as proven by the ability and right of that person to go to Confession (typically with their pastor), repentant, and receive absolution from sin as well as removal of certain types of excommunication (non-public; latae sententiae). Only members of the Church can receive the Sacraments. A heretic and schismatic who repents can go to Confession, so they are still in some sense a member.

As for apostates, those who leave Christianity entirely, they could still be saved if they have invincible ignorance for this grave sin, and remain in or return to the state of grace before death.

To make his views on salvation even worse, Bishop Athanasius Schneider includes “Modernists” among those heretics who cannot be saved (unless they repent and return to the Church). This term is often used for liberal Catholics, and in no way implies actual mortal sin and the loss of the state of grace. So Schneider is trampling on the dogmatic teaching of the Church that any form of baptism gives the person the state of grace, with love faith and hope, and that all who die in a state of grace are saved.

Later in Credo, Schneider states that “Christ founded only one true Church: the Catholic Church.” [n. 597, p. 168]. Fine, of course that is true. But then he again narrows salvation in a way that is contrary to the teaching of the “only one true Church”, by saying: “only in and through the true Church are men sanctified and finally saved.” [n. 599]. This narrowing of salvation to only formal members of the Catholic Church — with very few exceptions even for other Christians, such as a baptized non-Catholic Christian martyr — is heresy. It differs from the heresy of Feeneyism only in slight ways that do not repair the heretical contradiction of Catholic dogma by Feeneyism.

It is true to say that only “in and through” the true Church are people saved, ONLY IF one admits that the Church includes everyone in the state of grace, such as non-Catholic Christians and non-Christians who have received an implicit baptism of desire. When the definition of the true Church is narrowed to believing and practicing Catholics only, then it is heresy.

Similarly, Mormons baptize with water and they use the very same Trinitarian formula as in the Catholic Church; yet their baptism is invalid because by the words “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” they mean three of many other gods, and not the one God who is three Persons. So it is also with the expression “Outside the Church No Salvation”. If by “Church” you do not mean the broad definition of the Church taught by the Roman Catholic Magisterium, but instead you mean a much narrower definition, then you make the ancient expression “Outside the Church No Salvation” into a falsehood by your own misinterpretation. And that is the error of Feeneyism and the error of Credo.

More proof of this heretical narrowing of the definition of Church and of the requirements for salvation is found in this quote from Credo:

“609. Is it proper to affirm that the Spirit of Christ uses separated Christian communities as ‘means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church’?[44] No.” [p. 171].

That inner quote is from the Second Vatican Council, Decree On Ecumenism, n. 3. In this and many other points of doctrine, Credo explicitly rejects the teachings of Vatican II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This occurs openly and fully deliberately, so much so that the teaching of the one true Church, the Roman Catholic Church, is quoted and then immediately rejected. These repeatedly open rejections of magisterial teachings, accepted by successive Popes and by the body of Bishops dispersed in the world, show that Bishop Athanasius Schneider is not in communion with the body of Bishops, does not accept Vatican II, and is refusing submission to the teaching of multiple Popes on important doctrines of faith.

“611. Is it dangerous to affirm: ‘That which unites Catholics to separated Christian communities is greater than that which separates them’? Yes….” [p. 172].

That claim by Schneider is a rejection of the teaching of Pope Saint John 23, which was quoted in agreement and expounded upon by Pope Saint John Paul II in “Ut Unum Sint”. Bishop Athanasius Schneider rejects the teaching of the Second Vatican Council on ecumenism, a teaching that has been taught by the successive Popes and by the body of Bishops continuously since Vatican II. Credo does NOT teach the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church led by the successors of Peter; but instead the book teaches the personal beliefs and multiple serious heresies and other errors of Bishop Schneider.

Ronald L Conte Jr