SSPX hits out at German Bishops accusing them of defamation
Position Statement of the German Superior of the SSPX, Father Franz Schmidberger
At the conclusion of the General Assembly of the German bishops addressed in detail the relationship to the SSPX. German Bishops' Statement here.
I would like this as a District Superior in Germany to state:
1. The SSPX does not reject the whole Council. Archbishop Lefebvre himself participated in the council, was in the preparatory commissions and approved most of the documents.
2. The German Bishops' Conference makes a condition out of the full adoption of the Council, including the contentious and ambiguous. That means nothing other than to stop the dialogue before it even began. We see that the German bishops do not want to discuss the controversial points of the Councils but wish to construct taboo zones.
3. The German bishops do not behave in a spirit of brotherhood. Instead of dialogue and talks in a peaceful, constructive way to act against the signal from Rome that the was given by the withdrawal of the Decree of Excommunication and reject every offer of dialogue from the SSPX.
4. The bishops are bound by the eighth commandment, which reads: "Thou shalt not give false testimony." We therefore urge the Episcopal Conference to take back the defamatory accusation of anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish sentiments within the SSPX. In the Williamson affair, the SSPX Superiors have reacted immediately. The German District has stated immediately after the publication of the unspeakable statements clearly and unambiguously condemned any kind of trivialisation of Nazi crimes and apologised to those who were injured by the statements. We would again point out that the father of Archbishop Lefebvre lost his life in Sonnenburg Concentration Camp.
5. The bishops are calling on the SSPX to recognise the authority of the pope, although the SSPX never put this authority in doubt. This shows that the bishops have never given serious thought to the positions of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X. substantially addressed, nor want to.
6. The SSPX on the contrary detects within the German Episcopate a subtle rejection of papal authority. The attitude towards papal decrees of the recent past in this context is relevant:
a. The desire of the Pope to translate correctly the falsely rendered words of consecration, was ignored by the German bishops previously ignored.
b. The motu proprio for the liberation of the old Mass is implemented by some bishops so restrictively that it almost remains ineffective.
c. The Good Friday prayers of the Pope were also erroneously described by some theologians in Germany as antisemitic.
d. The clear position of the Pope about the ecclesiastical understanding within Protestant communities was made in Germany overwhelmingly misunderstood.
e. Despite repeated calls, the German bishops do not withdraw the Königstein Declaration which makes the encyclical "Humanae Vitae" of Pope Paul VI ineffective.
f. Finally, the declaration "Dominus Jesus" was strongly criticised by German theologians because it only talked about the unique path to salvation offered by the Church.
7. Given these facts, we see that some bishops reject the path of clarity laid down by the Pope and reconciliation. They apparently want the complete elimination of all conservative attitudes within the church. This opposition to the Pope is currently (still) not disclosed, but has long been subliminally present in many utterances.
8. Faced with this situation, we thank the Holy Father for his paternal responsiveness. We will make every effort on our part, to formulate the positions of the SSPX - which is not their own, but those of the Magisterium of the Church - in an understandable, selfless and loving way that a fruitful discussion with by all Catholics of good will be possible. We are pleased that there is now a basis for theological discourse.
9. In our desire to express, in the service of love of the eternal and true Rome the SSPX wishes especially to reject the untenable accusations of illicit ordinations. These envisaged ordinations were never prohibited, as has been confirmed in personal conversations in Rome. Here the Bishops ensnare themselves in obvious opposition: they emphasise that there is not yet unity with the SSPX, while at the same time wanting to place a ban on ordinations. One can only refer to what Archbishop Zollitsch even in his statement stated: it is for the Holy See - and not the Bishops' conferences – to create and to identify the conditions for full unity.
At the conclusion of the General Assembly of the German bishops addressed in detail the relationship to the SSPX. German Bishops' Statement here.
I would like this as a District Superior in Germany to state:
1. The SSPX does not reject the whole Council. Archbishop Lefebvre himself participated in the council, was in the preparatory commissions and approved most of the documents.
2. The German Bishops' Conference makes a condition out of the full adoption of the Council, including the contentious and ambiguous. That means nothing other than to stop the dialogue before it even began. We see that the German bishops do not want to discuss the controversial points of the Councils but wish to construct taboo zones.
3. The German bishops do not behave in a spirit of brotherhood. Instead of dialogue and talks in a peaceful, constructive way to act against the signal from Rome that the was given by the withdrawal of the Decree of Excommunication and reject every offer of dialogue from the SSPX.
4. The bishops are bound by the eighth commandment, which reads: "Thou shalt not give false testimony." We therefore urge the Episcopal Conference to take back the defamatory accusation of anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish sentiments within the SSPX. In the Williamson affair, the SSPX Superiors have reacted immediately. The German District has stated immediately after the publication of the unspeakable statements clearly and unambiguously condemned any kind of trivialisation of Nazi crimes and apologised to those who were injured by the statements. We would again point out that the father of Archbishop Lefebvre lost his life in Sonnenburg Concentration Camp.
5. The bishops are calling on the SSPX to recognise the authority of the pope, although the SSPX never put this authority in doubt. This shows that the bishops have never given serious thought to the positions of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X. substantially addressed, nor want to.
6. The SSPX on the contrary detects within the German Episcopate a subtle rejection of papal authority. The attitude towards papal decrees of the recent past in this context is relevant:
a. The desire of the Pope to translate correctly the falsely rendered words of consecration, was ignored by the German bishops previously ignored.
b. The motu proprio for the liberation of the old Mass is implemented by some bishops so restrictively that it almost remains ineffective.
c. The Good Friday prayers of the Pope were also erroneously described by some theologians in Germany as antisemitic.
d. The clear position of the Pope about the ecclesiastical understanding within Protestant communities was made in Germany overwhelmingly misunderstood.
e. Despite repeated calls, the German bishops do not withdraw the Königstein Declaration which makes the encyclical "Humanae Vitae" of Pope Paul VI ineffective.
f. Finally, the declaration "Dominus Jesus" was strongly criticised by German theologians because it only talked about the unique path to salvation offered by the Church.
7. Given these facts, we see that some bishops reject the path of clarity laid down by the Pope and reconciliation. They apparently want the complete elimination of all conservative attitudes within the church. This opposition to the Pope is currently (still) not disclosed, but has long been subliminally present in many utterances.
8. Faced with this situation, we thank the Holy Father for his paternal responsiveness. We will make every effort on our part, to formulate the positions of the SSPX - which is not their own, but those of the Magisterium of the Church - in an understandable, selfless and loving way that a fruitful discussion with by all Catholics of good will be possible. We are pleased that there is now a basis for theological discourse.
9. In our desire to express, in the service of love of the eternal and true Rome the SSPX wishes especially to reject the untenable accusations of illicit ordinations. These envisaged ordinations were never prohibited, as has been confirmed in personal conversations in Rome. Here the Bishops ensnare themselves in obvious opposition: they emphasise that there is not yet unity with the SSPX, while at the same time wanting to place a ban on ordinations. One can only refer to what Archbishop Zollitsch even in his statement stated: it is for the Holy See - and not the Bishops' conferences – to create and to identify the conditions for full unity.
.jpeg)
Comments
What a breath of fresh air, to have Catholic bishops who speak plainly, charitably, truthfully, and FAITHFULLY.
Please bring the SSPX into full canonical regularity SOON, Holy father.
You need these men.
I second Rick DeLano's appeal to the Holy Father. We need the SSPX bishops active in the Church now because these German ones are wolves in sheeps' clothing and a great danger to Catholic souls.
Next, Fr. Schmidberger of the SSPX disavows all "anti-Jewish sentiments." The Apostle Paul wrote, "For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost." (1 Thessalonians 2: 14-16).
If Fr. Schmidberger were to put into high German these words of St. Paul and then sign his name to them without reference to the Apostle Paul, these words would be considered by 99.99% of the judiciary and media of the West to be "anti-Jewish sentiments."
What sort of Traditional Catholicism is it that is cleansed of anti-rabbinic, anti-Talmudic "sentiment"? I have myself have read Fr. Schmidberger's criticism of Jews in a public speech. Perhaps he does not remember?
Furthermore, Fr. Schmidberger refers to an individual, a certain "Williamson." It's a common enough surname and there are plenty of Williamsons about, but only one that I know of who was consecrated a bishop by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Why does Fr. Schmidberger strip Bishop Williamson of his title in referring to him only as "Williamson"? Is this not openly contemptuous of a bishop of his own order?
Next we find Bishop Williamson's statements questioning the existence of execution gas chambers in Auschwitz decribed as "unspeakable." Why? What makes them unworthy of utterance? Fr. Schmidberger does not say. Bishop Williamson's doubts are said to be "trivializing" Nazi crimes.
My dictionary defines "trivialization" as reducing important events to minor, petty details. Is this what Bishop Williamson did when he said there were no execution gas chambers in Auschwitz? I don't think so. He didn't minimize the alleged homicidal gas chambers, he doubted their very existence in Auschwitz-Birkenau. Why would Fr. Schmidberger use this word, "trivialization" when it doesn't even apply to the case at hand? Could it be that he has picked up on a bossy buzz word that has been promulgated by the press and the Zionists, and parroted it in order to give his statement a tenor of modern relevance and a sense of solidarity with the various groups who have made this "trivialization" canard a part of their libel campaign against Bishop Williamson, and the SSPX itself?
In his last sentence, Fr. Schmidberger makes reference to the death of Archbishop Lefebvre's father in a Nazi concentration camp. What is that supposed to signify? Bishop Williamson did not deny the existence of Nazi concentration camps. Unfortunately, many noble Catholics died in them. I mention this datum in my book Judaism Discovered, and I have even included photographs of some of the victims. Many Catholics died in Nagasaki as well, in a criminal atomic bombing ordered by the President of the United States. Does this mean that because of Catholic deaths in Nagasaki, that Catholics are to forever support every unjust aspersion on the American people? If not, then in the case of Catholics and the Nazi concentration camps, because some died there it is not thereby ipso facto incumbent on all Catholics to forever support every unjust aspersion on the German people.
Fr. Schmidberger's timid and disingenous remarks will manage to charm not a single rabbi or Zionist leader. The forces of the latter-day Pharisees have already gathered documentation from old SSPX publications, speeches and books that prove that both the Archbishop and his subordinates have in the past spoken freely about Judaism's evil, unlike the newly reconstructed Fr. Schmidberger who writes in ways that are calculated to flatter the enemies of Christ and His Church and ingratiate the SSPX with those forces. This Archbishop Lefebvre did not do, even when under great pressure.
The SSPX under Fr. Schmidberger and some (though not all) of the leadership of the SSPX continue to cooperate with the rabbinic Shoah theology, i.e. the heresy which replaces Christ with Auschwitz as the central ontological axis of the West. From this cooperation has arisen movies and books of widespread influence and popularity which deny the Resurrection of Jesus Christ and even His existence. These blasphemies occur without any of the systematic opposition with which doubts about Auschwitz gassing-deaths are confronted, resulting in these blasphemies becoming institutionalized, thereby persuading millions of souls that Jesus never existed and that even if He did, He faked His own resurrection.
The website of a traditional Catholic newspaper has described Fr. Schmidberger's statement as "excellent." Many other conservative Catholics undoubtedly agree that for expedience' sake the statement is a step forward in the integration of the SSPX into the Vatican's official church.
Everyone who trades the Kingship of Jesus Christ for the supposedly clever tactic of mollifying the Zionist and rabbinic opposition, is accursed, and will answer for it on the Day of Judgment.
If Jesus Christ is truly King, then our society, our culture and our world cannot allow the sufferings of Judaic persons -- both real and imagined -- in a slave labor camp in Poland, to surpass in centrality, focus and public awareness, the murder of God on Golgotha.
--Michael Hoffman
I've read your long comment. It's been painful, but I've read it.
First, I cannot help to ask myself if you are even Catholic at all. You talk about dogmas, you talk about Mons. Williamson but despite your accurate biblical quote, I fail to see your faith between your lines. You could perfectly be a member of the British National Party if you didn't have a blog the rest of us could read. It is irrelevant however.
Sir, it the idea of a Catholic Bishop is Mons. Williamson, then I humbly suggest you to join an Eastern Orthodox Church, if any. You sir, fail to see whatever good there is within the Catholic Church, blinding yourself in your theories about Shoah.
Sure, it is not a dogma. Much more like all-time-wield Vatican II by the secular progressive in and out of the Church. Nonetheless, one should consider up-to-date evidence before making statements. If Bishop Williamson has encouraged serious inquiries about this matter, I'm glad, but now, as ordered by his superior, he must remain in silence, and we must pray for him.
You consider Fr. Schmidberger's speech to be petty. It's OK. I'm not going to force you to see the intelligence of grabbing the problem by a side and turning it upside-down against the Germans Bishops. It's fine. But what I'm not ready to do is to recognize as "catholic" someone that denies the holocaust just because he's got nothing else to do, because of plain old anti-semitism.
Christianity is the perfect synthesis of Jew, Greek and Roman civilizations. And you knowing a bit about History, and I think you do, it's a shame you end up in such debates.
You'll be in my prayers.
Mr. Vinuesa, would you be so kind as to explicate the "up-to-date" evidence regarding the so-called holocaust of six million Jews gassed. Thank you.
Thank you.