Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Fr. Schmidberger on the death of Msgr Williamson  (Read 57492 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Fr. Schmidberger on the death of Msgr Williamson
« Reply #60 on: February 04, 2025, 04:23:25 AM »
"We" warned him, as of Schmidberger had any authority, other than imagined, over His Excellency Bishop Williamson, [...]
That's how someone with even a modicuм of humility, of respect for his episcopal office and for his status as THE hand-picked successor of the Archbishop to carry on his legacy (until the other 3 were thrown in as add-ons) would have phrased it [...]
Fr. Schmidberger certainly sees it differently. I will try to outline his point of view: the auxiliary bishops are only assistants of the SSPX and the Superior General. The actual center of the SSPX is the Superior General and in this office Fr. Schmidberger was the successor and "spiritual son" of the archbishop. Even if he no longer holds this office de facto, he certainly still sees himself "morally" as the successor of the archbishop. And that is why it is easy for him to equate his own point of view with that of the SSPX.

Re: Fr. Schmidberger on the death of Msgr Williamson
« Reply #61 on: February 04, 2025, 04:37:30 AM »
Why are we giving so much screen time to Schidberger?
Nobody is forced to read this thread. Everyone decides for themselves which posts they read and comment on and which they ignore.

Fr. Schmidberger is, after all, not an unimportant person in the history of the SSPX. His short comment is not only of historical interest (as a contemporary docuмent), but it also reflects the current "spirit" of the SSPX: their fraternal attitude towards deserving (former) members; their joy at the growth of the tradition, even outside their own group;... ;-)


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr. Schmidberger on the death of Msgr Williamson
« Reply #62 on: February 04, 2025, 06:37:01 AM »
-- errors and confusion caused in KE comments
-- episcopal consecrations that lack any objective necessity (Schmidberger = measure of objectivity) and any sensus ecclesiae

So, for the last part here, once again we have Schmidberger indicating that he is the measure of objectivity and sensus ecclesiae, as well as being capable of sitting in judgment that the KE Comments are filled with error and caused confusion ... and his entire attack had an arrogant, pedantic, and condescending tone as if he were projecting himself as an adult talking down to an infantile, immature Bishop Williamson.  No, it's the neo-SSPX who are filled with error and are causing confusion, and His Excellency Bishop Williamson made judgments regarding the state of necessity that were predicated undoubtedly on his world view that a great chastisement approaches and he wanted to spread some bishops out around the world in a situation that he viewed as inevitable (and with which I whole-heartedly agree) ... namely, when we get into a Plandemic 2.0 and other controls on movement that will make Plandemic 1.0 look like a walk in the park, and, if you recall, even during the first one there were people who couldn't get to the Sacraments due to the lockdowns, including people dying in hospitals without the absolution and Last Rites.  Of course, for those like Schmidberger who claim that "politics" has nothing to do with the spread of faith and the SSPX who gave no indications that they were aware of what was taking place during the first Plandemic, believing most of the propaganda and thinking the authorities to be acting in good faith, they don't see this.  It's also the reason I believe that Bishop Stupki would ordain (and offer to ordain) married men, because he, having grown up behind the Iron Curtain, could more readily sense the thing that are about to happen.  Just as they don't "see" what's going on in the world, so too they appear to have adopted some attitude that the Crisis in the Church is not some kind of apocalyptic or "End Times" aberration, but within the realm of normal for the Church, and seem to be operating with some bizarre institutional / official normalcy bias that infects their entire view of the world, the Church, and the Crisis ... on which Bishop Williamson and most Traditional Catholics with even a little faith left do not share, recognizing the highly abnormal situation that we're in and therefore an OBJECTIVE necessity to carry on as His Excellency Bishop Williamson did.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Fr. Schmidberger on the death of Msgr Williamson
« Reply #63 on: February 04, 2025, 08:52:57 AM »
Here's another big problem with the new-sspx's management under +Fellay...they have become authoritarian...especially in regards to +W. 

The sspx was formed as a group of priests, a collective, that would work together.  There are no vows.  It is not a formal religious order.  There's no stock or legal rights.  Add in the 4 bishops and you have 2 different religious hierarchies (priest vs bishop) and it's a hodge-podge of a group of people, trying to bring order in the midst of a crisis.  Not easy.

The sspx leadership has 3 main functions.
a.  Financial Mgmt - Collect donations and pay the bills (so that the lights stay on and the water stays running).  Buy/build new chapels.  Buy stuff for churches.
b.  Organization Mgmt - Add new priests to the rotation/move priests where needed.  Organize the sacraments and chapels.  Organize system for travel, expenses, etc.
c.  Member Mgmt - Settle disputes among priests.  Help priests who are burned out or sick.  Seminary mgmt.  Etc.

In my opinion, the sspx does great at the above 3.  Where they overstepped their bounds and where they have gone overboard, is in telling priests/bishops how to act, what they can/can't talk about, etc.  The new-sspx (under +Fellay) went cultish and control-freak.  

(And let's not forget, that Bishops have a DUTY to preach and teach, much more so than priests.  Bishops such as +W should be preaching on DIFFERENT topics than priests.  They have different vocations, duties, and obligations.  A bishop in a diocese is "the man".  The only person he answers to is the pope (and only on rare occasions).  Otherwise, his calling is to lead, make decisions and be independent.  The whole idea of +Fellay telling another bishop what to do is backwards.  The idea that a PRIEST could tell a bishop what to do is insidious and anti-catholic.)

They went from +ABL's 'servant-leadership' to +Fellay's 'dictatorship' of controlling every aspect of the sspx.  They homogenized chapels, the laity and the priests.  They tried to homogenize +W and he said 'no thanks'.  So they kicked him out.

They went from +ABL's simple goal of "let's save souls" to the +Fellay's dream of "let's build a community".  The goals couldn't be more different, both in focus and scope.

To use a business analogy,

+ABL built a Mom-n-Pop store where everyone felt comfortable and who offered affordable prices to help the town.

+Fellay has built a "brand", a global, homogenized, corporation, where everyone must "stay in line" or else.

There are pros-cons to both approaches.  I think most people though, prefer the former over the latter.

Re: Fr. Schmidberger on the death of Msgr Williamson
« Reply #64 on: February 04, 2025, 10:47:44 AM »
Is it possible to get some screengrabs or some incontrovertible proof of this newsletter from Schmidberger? 

I'm not doubting it, but we can't expect anyone else to believe it just because it's written on a forum.