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;... ;-)

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.

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.

I could ask him next Sunday, but I don't really doubt it's him. I am a bit surprised, because I thought he was a more conservative priest, as he is a monarchist and everything. But I guess that was in 2008, when his Wikipedia page was written.

The German clergy hopes that Francis "in an eccentric moment" will give them new bishops and that's somehow supposed to help the situation (???). I've also personally argued with Fr. Pfluger, who shares the viewpoint, which Fr. Schmidberger presented in 2016: https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2016/04/the-moment-has-come-to-normalize.html

Fr. Pfluger (who I supposes shares this thinking with Fr. Schmidberger, if the letter is from him), sees the "necessity" of consecrating bishops tied to the fact that "well there are still 2 bishops alive, so there's no necessity to consecrate bishops, maybe Francis will have a change of heart now". My attempt to explain to him that it would be a trap by Rome to get them under their authority fell on deaf ears. Post 2012 they completely lost the plot on what their actual mission is and where their jurisdiction comes from. So now they think his 2015 excommunications are valid, because there was more than one bishop left. The "lifting" of the "excommunications" was a clever trick to get them back under modernist authority, even without a formal signature. Most of the German laity are not independent thinkers, sadly. They go and fall with whatever their priest says. Few educate themselves about VII, even fewer suspect that there's anything wrong.

My assessment is that he was brainwashed to believe in the h0Ɩ0cαųst, as most German boomers of his generation are (without internet and public schools, there's little they could do). Or, he "fears the Jews" in the Bundestag to shut down German chapels. Nowadays this is much less risky, since German Zoomers are redpilled on the Jews because of TikTok, plus there are a lot more ex-Muslim converts who "know", but in 2010 it would have been a hard line to hold in BRD-Germany. I do, to some extent, understand that the German SSPX can't go all-out on the Jews, because they'd simply be banned. But it's uncharitable to put it into an eulogy 15 years later.

He does however, still celebrate very reverent Masses, I didn't have the impressions that he rushes Mass. I'd be careful with judgements, but then again I haven't been part of the SSPX for very long, I can't tell how things developed over the years. I can only say that the German priests are pretty bad on moral theology compared to the US ones.

I think it's fair to criticize +Williamsons apparitionism, promotion of false visionaries like Maria Valtora, promotion of dubious Eucharistic miracles, etc. (I hope these errors will die out now), but he was dead-on when it came to the historical role of the Jews trying to sabotage the Church, the core errors of Vatican II and standing up to +Fellay going back to Rome. See Fr. Hewko on how you can criticize a bishop while also remaining respectful.

It's very ironic, I was on my way to Stuttgart last Sunday, but I couldn't make it due to some circuмstances. Maybe it's a sign that I shouldn't go there anymore. I am personally "on my way out" of the SSPX if I can get a better job and relocate near a Resistance chapel, the only reason I still support the neo-SSPX to some limited extent is because they have valid sacraments (I don't want to be donatist and I'm still obliged to go as long as the sacrament is not doubtful and the priest is not teaching errors in the sermon) and they still do serve a purpose when converting non-Catholics (it's hard to go "only Resistance Mass" mode when there is only one Resistance priest my country). Hopefully I can be out of that situation soon.

His E-Mail is indexed at https://hunter.io/email-finder - I don't want to post it here in order to not provoke bots to mail him. If you input "fsspx.de" into the domain + his name, you can find his E-Mail.

I personally think the bishop was already kind of senile in his later years. After 40 years of fighting modernists, that's understandable, but nevertheless bad for the faithful.

      I don't agree with this " senile" term. It was remarkable that, to the very end, you could watch his sermon videos, for Sundays esp...he would hold on to this very small missal, all tattered and ancient, yet his mind was admirably smart, and explained mysteries as much as is humanly possible.  So, yes, sometimes he would forget a detail here and there, but his love of Catholic culture invariably trumped any memory lapse. Actually, the last three sermons, they were perfect. The Epiphany if I recall was special. But yes, he wouldn't talk for an hour. "His Excellency" is what it says:  Bishop Williamson was E X C E L L EN T !
     He was very hospitable to me in Winona. He actually composed a little 4 line poem for me. Let's just finish by saying he was dignified, had integrity as Fr Chazal just spoke.... Once in a while he would use the French expression: " Noblesse oblige" which roughly translates to: When you hold a higher public office, walk the walk and talk the talk.
 Pray for he repose of his soul,... RIP +

Father Schmidberger also has an uncanny resemblance to Cardinal Rampolla

more liuke Reinhardt Heydrich

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.

I hope you're as proof-hungry about other topics claimed by the modern world as you are about this.

But seriously? Fr. Schmidberger's words and actions are SO HORRIBLE you can't believe they're true? You would sooner believe that someone in the Resistance went out of his way to compose several paragraphs of likely-sounding German from scratch, which exactly match Fr. Schmidberger's position, just to damage Fr. Schmidberger's reputation by implying he uttered such scandalous words?

Can we agree that these words are scandalous then? And if we find out they are truly Fr. Schmidberger, can we all agree that the SSPX has fallen and we need to set up alternative Mass center options all over the world?

If there are people who believe that this letter is a "fαℓѕє fℓαg" or a "conspiracy" (ever heard of Occam's Razor, guys?), I guess we're making progress! At least we can all agree those words are un-Catholic and quite scandalous.