The church is facing the second Christmas celebrations under Corona conditions. Can a real Christmas spirit even arise amid the pandemic? One should not “let oneself be eaten up by frustration,” says Linz Bishop Manfred Scheuer, who has headed the diocese since 2015 (before that he was bishop in Innsbruck). In the interview, the deputy chairman of the Austrian Bishops’ Conference explains what he means. And he advocates social reconciliation, although his church has recently been massively attacked.

“Wiener Zeitung”: In September the pastoral office of the diocese of Linz was stormed by right-wing extremists in protest against the planned and supported erection of a memorial for people who died on the run. Is the memorial actually coming into being?

Manfred Scheuer: From a legal point of view, it was “only” a disruptive action by people who can be assigned to the identities, and so does not constitute an immediate criminal offense. I was told that they usually go to the limits of what is criminal, but not beyond it. The memorial as a joint project of the state of Upper Austria, the cities of Linz, Traun and Leonding, Linz AG, the burial and cemetery administration, the Catholic and Protestant churches and the Islamic religious community is located in the Linz / St. Martin erected. It is important for us to underline that it is about a culture of remembrance for a certain group. For example, we also have memorials for star children or for victims of National Socialism. This place is supposed to be about people who died while fleeing, to give one to the bereaved who otherwise have no place to mourn here in Austria.

How does the FPÖ stand in the country?

She condemned the disruptive action in the pastoral office and also the demos against the memorial. The libertarians But the big supporters have not spoken out more explicitly either.

What the FPÖ explicitly opposes is the Covid vaccination and, above all, the compulsory vaccination.

Basically, I would make a distinction between “I am against vaccination” and “I am against mandatory vaccination”. I also notice it at the party you mentioned, especially in Upper Austria, where the state party chairman himself was exposed to Covid. In this sense there are many differences between the state and federal parties.

How do you rate the coalition in Upper Austria between a Christian-social and a right wing party?

Basically, I would like to underline that the diction “Christian-social” rather leads to the First Republic, the party itself has not existed since 1934. I am also happy about the development in Austria that with the “Mariazeller Manifesto” the Catholic Church no longer feels that it is specifically assigned to any political party or that it is making election recommendations. In any case, I see cooperation on important issues at both federal and state level, which unfortunately shows itself to be fragile here and there, but I hope that it will also face the next challenges.

Did I hear a certain criticism of the ÖVP?

If you heard that out, I will leave this on your side for now.

The most recent lockdown lasted the longest in Upper Austria. Was that right?

Our development was difficult, especially in October and November, so the measures were appropriate and evidently effective. An assessment of right or wrong is not the job of a bishop, but the medical professional.

Should we even celebrate Christmas as usual? Doesn’t common sense demand to forego meetings in spite of the easing, so that the number of infections does not explode after the holidays?

The ways in which Christmas are celebrated are very different. At professional or private celebrations with a lot of alcohol, often dying late into the night, it has of course been shown that they are not so useful now. In the liturgical area, however, we still have strong distance rules and FFP2 mask requirements. I believe that it is important to celebrate life. The loneliness of old people in particular or the question of who children and young people can meet affects them a lot psychologically – the side effects mentioned, which are sometimes not considered. It is important that we celebrate together, but also clearly adhere to the rules and restrictions in order to protect each other, but also to give each other the freedom to celebrate.

You recently said that at Christmas we should “not fixate ourselves on frustration and be eaten up by resignation and disappointment”. How can this be done?

Of course, sometimes that’s easier said than done. I think the pandemic shows that, but life as a whole and politics also show that: We don’t have the solutions. We don’t do everything perfectly. There are many variables and sources of error. I cannot say today what the overall situation will be in two weeks’ time. It is important to see: My knowledge, my radius of action is very limited, you can also say: It is finite. On the positive side, this means: I am flexible, capable of learning, and hopefully also capable of correcting things. It’s not about being right or being right, but rather: How can we protect together? How can we overcome the pandemic in the interests of salvation? And how can we make reconciliation possible across some rifts? Celebrations in particular are important nourishment for the soul: to be able to be happy, to be able to move around, to be able to experience community. That also gives strength and support. For me personally, prayer is also a form of resilience.

As a theologian, how do you feel about vaccination requirements?

It is a question of the sciences that research and work in this context and of political decisions. The ethicists have to sound out and bring in different perceptions here: What does that do with mental health? How do we deal with fears? What is it doing to our society? What are the economic consequences? Of course, the question of vaccination and compulsory vaccination cannot be economic, but I cannot ignore the question of economic efficiency, because research has to be made economically feasible and the side-effects of an economic downturn are not necessarily beneficial for people’s health. In this respect, I trust the judgment of science that this is currently the appropriate way to protect society. We bishops have in our declaration “Protect. Heal. Reconciliate.” said that it is a question of proportionality, appropriateness, but also in the good sense of the chances of success, when it comes to compulsory vaccination. It is an ultima ratio because it is of course a restriction on freedom. One thing is clear: there should be no compulsory vaccination.

Do you understand people who refuse to be vaccinated IF at the same time people in poorer countries are waiting in vain for a Covid vaccination?

In this situation, I would first like to focus on those suffering from Covid and on those who have been dying with baldness for two years in this area very tense, sometimes overwhelmed, work hardest: the medical and nursing staff. I don’t start from my own well-being, but from perception and insertion into this situation, we die looking for a common approach. But I also believe that we can only really overcome the pandemic when the vaccination rate worldwide is correspondingly high. You can now see at Omikron that this virus IS spread worldwide within a few days, even if individual countries take very limited measures.

Shouldn’t we then rather pass on the vaccine that is being refused here to Africa, where the vaccination rate is sometimes less than 10 percent?

I have not yet made this calculation. I think it is important to do some persuasive work with us, to provide clarification, to seek dialogue. The difficulty I am currently seeing is: You cannot revise a path after a few steps and then go differently – that would only mess everything up and would be a form of health policy anarchy. Now the basic decision has been made to look for certainty about vaccination and the compulsory vaccination. That has to go hand in hand with a natural solidarity.

The pandemic, with all its consequences, did not necessarily help the church to solve its problem of young talent. Digital offers or not: Are we heading towards a final aging of the church?

We have gone through very positive and also very difficult phases in the last 22 months. Especially in times of lockdown and restrictions, there have been very creative forms of solidarity, mutual support and celebration, not only, but also via virtual channels. Personally, I have experienced the companies as so deeply as they actually weren’t before. Sometimes the outwardly easier way was even the more intense, because some of them even collected themselves better than before. Of course, the worship congregations have to find each other again first. Participation in radio and TV church services was immensely high, and there is also great interest. In the Diocese of Linz, for example, we are trying to become sustainable with the structural process at the parish level and the reform of offices. We don’t have simple strategies. Because belief cannot be forced any more than friendship. A community cannot be legally demanded either, not even through a moral postulate. So I don’t know how we’ll be in five years’ time. I am not going into the near future euphoric and see some developments as minimally stressful, others as promising. I am convinced that people in Upper Austria eat, young and old, who are filled with faith and the gospel, want to share life with one another, want to stand up for one another and also have a concern for the poor and the disadvantaged.

What’s your Christmas message?

Let us trust life because God lives it with us. This is a word from the Jesuit father Alfred Delp, who said this in the face of his execution on February 2, 1945. That means: We can celebrate even in very exposed situations. This fest does not depend on whether we are doing better or worse in other areas. The promise that is associated with this holds true even and especially in difficulties.