Whoah there. You're putting words into the bishop's mouth and/or assuming things you shouldn't assume.
Here are some things to consider, as a more plausible alternate explanation:
1. +W isn't ordaining them because the seminary is a joke. [In other words, their formation is inadequate, which is what I said.] Fr. Pfeiffer wouldn't implement the measures necessary (listed by +Williamson) to make it into a real seminary. Fr. Pfeiffer wouldn't consent to being "under" +Williamson [See below] -- so you can't be surprised if +W won't ordain the seminarians.
2. As for the other sacraments, +Williamson has in the past gone out of his way to provide Confirmations a short drive from Boston, KY, so as not to suggest he approves of that sinkhole of scandal, or associate himself in any way with it! [Probably the easiest way to avoid the "lay exorcist," too!]
3. Bishop Williamson has been soundly attacked in countless ways by Fr. Pfeiffer & Co. They shouldn't even *want* his Confirmations or his Holy Oils. They have soundly rejected him as a bishop. Why should the bishop feel guilty by not "taking care of" such a group? They want nothing to do with him; +W is just giving them what they want! [See below again -- this is not the only case.]
No one has a "right" to the priesthood. And a bishop (sacrament dispenser OR classic bishop with jurisdiction) will answer to God for every man he ordains to the priesthood. It's the bishop's job to make sure the candidate is worthy: adequately trained both spiritually and mentally to be adequate for the task. +Williamson didn't find an adequate program of spiritual OR intellectual formation at the Boston "seminary".
.
I don't claim to be the expert in this; the whole situation is complex and unseemly, a blight on the Traditional movement.
.
I was making some observations based on what I've heard in the online sermons and conferences of Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko, as well as the +W videos. They have a lot of good teaching to offer but then pops up these sore points of contention and disagreement. I know Catholics who are repulsed from Trad groups for this very reason; so overall, it has the effect of driving the youth away to Indult or FSSP or even Novus Ordo, where they can at least imagine that they "feel good."
.
What's a bit alarming is to hear Fr. Pfeiffer say he has sent messages to +W at Broadstairs asking to meet him there, but +W responded that if Fr. P shows up, +W won't be available. Then he said he wants to sit down with +W and show him where he's wrong. Effectively, it pans out to Fr. P not wanting to be "under" +W because Fr. P wants to be "over" +W -- he wants to CORRECT the Bishop. As if he covets the episcopal rank. Then there would be two more bishops opposing each other, as if we don't already have enough of that. ("There will be bishops against bishops...") Can you imagine Fr. P getting so-called consecrated a bishop by Ambrose-Moran? Maybe that's in his long range plans... When A-M gets old and feeble, how would he do otherwise than help out the Priest who "saved" him?
.
As for Fr. Pfeiffer not wanting +W's oils or Confirmations, he has several times made clear that Roman Catholics should have nothing to do with Eastern rites -- with a vague reference to Eastern Orthodox, but he doesn't make that clear. With the hyperbole he is accustomed to, it certainly sounds like he has an abiding revulsion of everything Eastern. I have yet to hear him say anything positive about the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, for example. Then he turns around and tries to make excuses for the self-professed history of Ambrose-Moran, as if everyone should ignore all of Fr. P's denigration of the Eastern Rites. What I'm saying is, when he's critical of +W then expects +W to help him, it's not too different from him being critical of Eastern Rites then expecting Ambrose-Moran to help him. IOW it's not a matter of PRINCIPLE with Fr. P, so much a matter of his own consistent self-contradiction.
Topic: New priest in Boston, KY (Read 17336 times)