….As the veil of secret clergy sin lifted, and a seemingly endless red tide of revelations, cover-ups, and disorderliness poured into the consciences of Catholic laity the summer of 2018, Church leaders remained, startlingly, mostly silent….
Then one morning in Baltimore, on November 13, 2018 — 146 days after the Washington Post broke the story of McCarrick’s depravity — an unknown bishop from a tiny diocese rose from his chair beneath a sky heavy with clouds. Joseph Strickland, a slender, soft-spoken man from a mostly Protestant diocese, shared a few questions he’d been asked by members of his Tyler, Texas flock. He spoke for four minutes and sixteen seconds, beginning his comments humbly and kindly, like the teenage boy who speaks for the first time to the parents of the girl he’d like to ask out on a date. Then, softly, he revealed his heart.
“The whole McCarrick reality,” he said, shrugging his shoulders in a manner that revealed awkwardness. “How did that happen if we really believe that what was going on was wrong? And I think that that is a core issue that is sort of out there in the air. We’ve heard something about the whole question of homosexuality … It’s part of our deposit of faith that we believe homosexual activity is immoral.
“The question with the McCarrick situation is — how did he get promoted, how did all that happen if we really are all of one mind that [the act of homosexuality] is wrong and sinful? There seems to be questions about that, and I think we have to face that directly. Do we believe the doctrine of the Church or not? There’s a priest [Fr. James Martin] who travels around now, basically saying that he doesn’t — and he seems to be very well promoted in various places.”
“Brothers, I think part of the fraternal correction … is to ask, ‘Can [tolerance for homosexual acts] be presented in our diocese — that same-sex marriage is just fine and the Church will one day grow to understand that. That’s not what we teach.”
When he sat back down, nothing would ever again be the same.
Why was this so? Because a number of high-powered cardinals and bishops in the large banquet hall had kept silent about McCarrick for years. And many of those same men had just been told by the uncelebrated, small-town bishop that inviting Fr. James Martin into their diocese was opening the door to scandal. Many of the bishops in the room that day had already warmly invited Fr. Martin in, helping him to become one of the most well-known priests in the world.
It took some time, but Bishop Stickland received his punishment. On Saturday, Pope Francis removed him as the Bishop of Tyler after he declined to resign from office. His removal comes after being subject to a Vatican investigation in June. The Vatican has not divulged what had prompted the investigation, or his removal….
Perhaps 100 years from now, the name Strickland will have attached to it “removed as bishop from Tyler, Texas for administrative failures.”
But I know him to be a good man, as good as any out there — a bishop who lived in a simple one-story adobe and spent countless hundreds of hours there in front of a small monstrance. He did the small things that seemed big to the Texans who loved him. He held high a large monstrance at Tyler’s busiest intersections during the heart of Covid. He weekly joined to lead the Rosary at a women’s Rosary group….
If we love Bishop Strickland, it’s fair to consider what he told LifeSiteNews editor-in-chief John-Henry Westen after his removal on Saturday. “Pray for Pope Francis.”
From Crisis magazine
I heard him speak at the Catholic Answers conference in La Jolla. Definitely not an extremist, but warm, cheerful, and devoted shepherd of his flock.
I am not picking on you but on humankind in general.
It is a bugaboo to me because my spouse does it so much.
After meeting someone and talking to them for a few minutes, they walk away and say “That’s a really nice person.”
You cannot truly assess a person in 3 minutes especially when they might be trying to make an impression.
Likewise, you cannot tell what kind of a person someone is by watching a 40 minute performance when they have pre-prepared a talk.
The devil can fake it for that long.
You cannot tell much about a dead person, or a Supreme Being Whom you cannot see, by reading a book, either– even the Holy Bible. You must make up your own mind like a mature adult, and go on faith. Those who attended this spech, regardless of length, are entitled to their own impressions about this Bishop. You did not attend, so your petty remarks are baseless, pointless. Most people, Catholics and Protestants, were greatly impressed by this Bishop’s leadership at the rally against the filthy, despicable Drag Queen Nuns at the Dodgers’ game.
I did not attend, you are correct, but I watched it on youtube or somewhere.
That was actually when i became super concerned about the situation-when I saw some layperson telling the bishop what to do and say.
Nobody has ever told Bishop Strickland “what to do and say.”
Look at the video a little after the 2 minute mark.
At the 2 minute mark.
Concerns also because he did not correct the man when he called him America’s bishop.
This was after the apostolic visitation.
The fact that he attended after the Bishop of LA asked people to come to Mass instead of going to the prayer rally was a red flag as well.
Then a short while later there was a conference where people were showing support for him and the things they said were very concerning.
Also, a lot of comments here on this website showed that people were looking at him in a way that was concerning. They might have been yours.
People are so grateful that the Bishop came to lead them in prayer, at the Dodger Stadium Prayer Rally. You should have gone and joined this Prayer Rally against the Drag Queen nuns being wrongly honored at Dodger Stadium. I couldn’t go, but joined them, along with thousands of others, from home. Great that you posted a video clip of this inspiring Prayer Rally vwith the good Bishop Strickland leading us all in prayer. Many Protestants came too, and were deeply grateful and inspired.
Strickland is just as bad as Cupich but for opposite reasons.
When my spouse and I meet someone for the first time and that person is a friendly sort, both of us will say, well, what a nice person. That’s it. We try to be joyful. However, when a priest or bishop has spoken at length on various matters we can certainly take his measure and make our decision. Everything Bishop Strickland has said has struck the right chord with me. I hope he never fades from our view because we need him.
You have heard the expression “Watch what someone does, not what he says.”
I choose optimism over cynicism. You should try it.
I did.
I am not sure of the details of what’s going on, so I can’t really comment on the reasons for what has happened. I simply pray for both Bishop Strickland, who I believe to be a good Bishop and for Pope Francis who I hope has good sound judgment in doing what he us doing. Having been fired from two jobs before entering the Seminary in 1974 and having been moved from my first parish after having displeased a powerful pastor I have felt the pain of having to leave. This actually turned out to be the best thing for me even though I felt horrible at the time and still believe that I was treated unjustly. Jesus Himself was treated unjustly, but He did more than just learn a lesson from it. He used that as the occurrence for the salvation of those who believe.
I believe that Bishop Strickland is doing his best to follow the example of Christ and do what is as full of grace as possible. This is what I love about him. He is showing right now in this situation that be is a man, a Priest and a Bishop who is full of faith, hope and love.
He was asked to resign and refused.
Apparently he is not giving the reasons.
He first claimed it was because he did not institute TC.
Then he claimed that the Pope was being manipulated by “forces in the Church that don’t want the truth of the Gospel, they want it changed.”
I want to address this “following Christ.”
If he had been following Christ, he would not have been asked to resign.
When asked to resign, he refused.
He refused the Pope.
You must read the news correctly. The Bishop clearly stated that he was given no clear reason for being asked to resign. Therefore, he felt it to be wrong to resign– for no reason– and irresponsibly abandon his flocks– for no reason. He stated that he would only resign, if the Pope removed him. Got that? Now, what would you do, if that happened in YOUR job?
No he did not say that or if he did, I would like to see it.
“The conservative website LifeSiteNews, which said it interviewed Strickland on Saturday, quoted him as saying one of the reasons given for his ouster was his refusal to implement Francis’ 2021 restrictions on celebrating the old Latin Mass.
Francis’ crackdown on the old liturgy has become a rallying cry for traditionalist Catholics opposed to the pontiff’s progressive bent. Strickland told LifeSite he refused to implement the restrictions “because I can’t starve out part of my flock.”
He said he stood by his decision, would do it again and “I feel very much at peace in the Lord and the truth that he died for.”
This is from CBS News. did you see that “One of the reasons given for his ouster.”
This is the link to lifesitenews.com
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/bishop-strickland-reacts-to-removal-by-pope-francis-i-feel-very-much-at-peace/?utm_source=featured_news&utm_campaign=usa
This is true, but it is conjecture— do you see that? Bishop Strickland was speculating on possible reasons for his removal. Our archbishop , and many other prelates, quietly ignored “Traditionis Custodes”– an unjust, unnecessary document, very hurtful to good Catholics. Actually, no clear reason was provided, on paper, for this bishop’s firing. He simply was speculating on possible reasons. This firing is similar to what the CCP does all the time, along with other unjust Communist, dictator-led regimes. The CCP imprisoned Jimmy Lai and Cardinal Zen on trumped-up, unjust charges– and some Communists said that these two are “dangerous” to the CCP regime. Their trials for their. alleged ” crimes” have been postponed several times. Same style used by the Vatican, in the case of Bishop Strickland. I am amazed that many of you fail to see the ridiculousness and injustice of Bishop Strickland’s firing– with no clear, objective, written reason, on paper. And also, the idiocy of the Vatican document, °Traditionis Custodes.” It reminds me of the KKK persecuting Catholics, stating that they ” hate” Catholics and their beliefs, and their Latin Mass. I recall defending our beautiful Latin Tridentine Mass in the 1950s, a few times, to prejudiced Protestants, who laughed and said that it was a bunch of “mumbo jumbo,” and that transubstantiation was a lie.
He was told exactly why. He shared a small amount of it.
There was nothing wrong with TC. I know some Catholics do not want to obey.
Bishop Strickland was asked to do certain things which he did not do. Then he was asked to resign. He refused.
Disobedience is not a virtue.
From Church Militant
Bp. Strickland: ‘I was given by the nuncio quite a list of reasons.’
I don’t think Church Militant is the best source for an objective and accurate news report on Bishop Strickland’s case. The nuncio verbally got mad and expressed his feelings to Bp. Strickland. But nothing was written down, and given to Strickland, objectively stating the clear reason(s) for Strickland’s removal.
Yes it was verbal and cordial, according to Strickland, and it happened a week ago.
Asked if any reasons were given for his removal, Strickland said that there were “verbal reasons” given by Pierre that were “quite extensive,” one of which was that he was too outspoken.
From Catholic News Agency
Good people thirst for holiness, and we know it when we see it. God Bless Bishop Strickland.
I guess you missed some things.
I guess you don’t thirst for holiness.
It is not holy to be unjustly and uncharitably attacking the Pope. And this is what Strickland did.
Calling as heretical the Pope’s motu propio “Desiderio desideravit” (which is what Strickland did), when there is absolutely nothing wrong with the moto propio is uncharitable and unjust. Not holy.
Ding Ding Ding! Winner!
Jon is right. Strickland was sanctimonious, not saintly.
A story posted on the Trad site Rorate Caeli shows how separatist and schismatic the Trads are. When their beloved TLM was taken away from them, they up and left the parish. They aren’t Catholics. They are TLM Protestants. Read here about how they abandoned the parish because they couldn’t have their TLM anymore:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2023/11/the-francis-effect-old-st-mary-before.html
Only jon says jon is right.
jon is right 99% of the time
“Jon is right. Strickland was sanctimonious, not saintly.” My oh my, don’t you have a window into Strickland’s soul that the rest of us don’t have! I am envious of your powers.
jon, permit me to agree with you that DD is not heretical. DD goes to great lengths to show the theological content of the Novus Ordo is the same as that of the TLM. One cannot say, therefore, that it is heretical. Nevertheless, however, I think Pope Francis is deeply misguided in both TC and DD. For one, if the theology is the same, why the draconian measures of TC? Then consider that one must acknowledge that the practice of the reformed liturgy needs to be purged of abuses and cleaned up, and needs to be reconnected to Catholic liturgical tradition in its concrete observance. For this to happen, I believe the celebration of the traditional Latin mass acts as a counterweight to the excesses that occur all too often in celebration of the reformed liturgy. As Benedict viewed matters, the existence of the traditional Latin mass, aids the reformed liturgy from spiraling down into triviality or even into lunacy.
Just to provide one example of the service the TLM can provide in calling the reformed liturgy to greater fidelity to tradition, we can mention the use of the propers of the Mass. How many parishes celebrating the reformed liturgy can say they do justice to the rich spiritual treasure to be found in the Mass propers and to the treasure of sacred music in general? Almost none in my experience. To be sure the propers can and should be translated into the vernacular and the settings suitably adapted. I’m not claiming that the propers need to be universally and exclusively observed or that alternatives should not be permitted. But neither should they be a dead letter. Unfortunately, it is not likely that the propers, vernacular or otherwise, will ever really find their place in the Mass again if the TLM falls into the dust bin of history and fails to provide an example in this regard. And that is a tragedy, just one of many.
All in all, I think approach of seeking mutual enrichment between the two forms as proposed by Benedict XVI was the more sound approach and was more likely to bear healthy fruit in the long run than is the current (destructive) approach imposed by Francis. I say destructive because Francis has destroyed something that was working to engender the very liturgical fruit he desired from the Novus Ordo. Note: some of these ideas are based on Robert Leblanc’s comments on https://www.hprweb.com/2022/07/overview-of-desiderio-desideravi/.
We lived decades without the Latin Mass.
They gave permission for the Latin Mass again, with restrictions, to accommodate people and priests when Lefebvre and his bishops were excommunicated.
Pope Benedict XVI took away the restrictions to meet a temporary need.
It is still available now but with restrictions.
What is more destructive is if Pope Francis had left things as they were with Pope Benedict’s “Summorum pontificum” without addressing the dissent, disobedience, and heresies in those who are using the Missal of Pope John XXIII to register their disagreement and dissent from Vatican II.
What happened is that the generosity and graciousness of Pope Benedict’s “motu propio” was abused by those who wish to divide themselves from the erroneously so-called “Vatican II Church.”
Such divisive attitudes are more deadlier and more destructive for the Church which is called to unity. “Ut unum sint,” people.
jon, might I ask for a link giving Strickland’s exact wording on DD? Thanks in advance.
Dan, this is the thing that disappeared. You can find references to it online but not the original. I think someone probably pointed out to them their error, maybe?
It was not Strickland’s words. I do not know who wrote it but there was at one point an email address at lifesitenews.com that you could contact to sign it.
They misinterpreted what the Pope wrote and thought that he said that you could receive the Eucharist if you just had faith.
He did not say that at all. He said that everyone is invited to the supper of the wedding feast of the Lamb but the world does not know it. Meaning everyone is invited to be Catholic.
Another thing that disappeared was the youtube video of a guy saying that he told Strickland that he could turn his diocese around in 6 weeks (or months, I can’t verify because they took it down.) And Strickland said “come on down.” and they did it. They got the diocese straightened out.
From what I have heard that was part of what the apostolic visitation was about and part of the complaints from priests in the diocese. There was apparently a sudden large firing of employees and also priests who would get intimidating phone calls.
I only heard about this on youtube. I do not know anybody involved.
Yes thank you for your reply. I found an article https://wherepeteris.com/critics-letter-fails-to-make-case-that-pope-francis-is-a-heretic/ that made the case you just described. I doubt we here will ever find Strickland’s exact words–only that he signed the document along with many others critical of DD. There is a fine article on DD https://www.ncregister.com/commentaries/desiderio-desideravi-connecting-some-papal-dots which illuminates the weaknesses of DD without impugning its orthodoxy and is worth the read.
Again, many thanks for getting back to me. This is the kind of support and fellowship, if I may use the term, that we posters can have with one another.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/read-full-statement-saying-pope-francis-teaching-on-holy-communion-already-condemned-by-council-of-trent/
No. you do your own legwork.
https://www.kltv.com/2023/11/12/east-texas-pastor-speaks-popes-removal-tyler-bishop-strickland/
I have seen the video many times, of Bishop Strickland’s excellent 2018 address to the USCCB. Bishop Strickland did a good, honest job, very faithful to Jesus Christ. He was wrongfully fired for no reason– because he is truly spiritual, an honest, good, faithful, devout Catholic prelate. What of Bishop Strickland’s big group of 21 seminarians, studying for the priesthood– an unusually large number, for a very small diocese. What will be their futures? Almighty God, Who sees all, and knows all– will have the final say on this matter.
It does not matter if your bishop changes while you are in seminary.
Yes, the Bishop of the Diocese where you are studying to become a priest, does indeed matter very much. If your next bishop is wayward, liberal, LGBT-promoting, women’s “reproductive rights”–promoting, not pro life-promoting, etc. etc.– and rejects good, faithful, devout Catholic seminarians– watch out. Good seminarians will have to leave, ASAP– and find a good Diocese, with a faithful, holy Catholic bishop.
it DOES matter;
git real
It matters to some extent. What if the new bishop of Tyler is Bishop James Martin, S.J.? I think that would matter to the seminarians.
It shouldn’t.
But I do see if a seminarian feels that they could not promise obedience to that new bishop, it might be something he should pray over.
The Strickland story has been one of the major stories in Catholic news and gossip this year.
This guy did not keep up with the story if he thinks anything Bishop Strickland said at the bishop’s meeting 5 years ago was the reason for his dismissal.
If Strickland had stayed off Twitter, he’d still be a local ordinary.
He immediately took his twitter down.
i was looking for some of the videos that were problematic and could not find them either.
I have had that problem before now as well.
And there is no reason he or his supporters would be required to keep them up.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishop-strickland-rosary-rally-conference-catholic-bishops/
Bishop Strickland is in Baltimore praying the Rosary outside the Bishop’s meeting.
He ain’t going nowhere. Unless people stop giving him attention.
Bishop Joseph Coffey, Auxiliary Bishop for the Military Services, will join Bishop Strickland in leading the Rosary Rally. We are asked to invite bishops of our own dioceses to join these two. I have been deeply inspired when Bishop Strickland has done this at past USCCB meetings. A true, deeply honest and sincere soldier of Christ, wounded for Him on the battlefield. I deeply admire him. As an emeritus bishop, Bishop Strickland no longer has voting rights, but may attend all USCCB meetings. He is deeply close to Christ, an excellent spiritual leader for us to follow– and imitate. He will continue to preach and live Christ’s true teachings, and will bring a rich harvest of souls (including mine, hopefully) with him, to Heaven– die to self (selfishness and sin)– all for Christ. Why don’t you come, too, smh?
Did they let him in the meeting? Or was he bounced?
I got the impression that he did not try to go in the meeting, but he could go. he is still a bishop.
The Babylon Bee got in on the fun: 🐝
https://babylonbee.com/news/pope-francis-fires-bishop-for-being-too-catholic
There is a rumor that Pope Francis is going to make an infallible pronouncement that will force Catholics to choose between him and the Trads. Accept the infallible pronouncement, and you are Catholic. Reject the infallible pronouncement, and you’re a heretic.
I gotta admit, that would be a shrewd move on Francis’ part. Force a choice: you’re with Peter or you’re not. You can’t quibble with an infallible declaration. You have to accept it in order to be in full communion with the Church. If you reject an infallible pronouncement, then you separate yourself from the Church.
HUH?
Exactly who did you hear that rumor from?
“There is a rumor that…” No chance. Infallible pronouncements concern dogma, not Church discipline.
Francis could define a dogma that the Trads would not want to accept. Let’s say something like there are no intrinsically evil acts. “Therefore, exercising my ministry as successor of Peter, assisted by the Holy Spirit, in order that all the faithful may be certain about a matter crucial to living a life of faith, I infallibly declare that no moral act is intrinsically evil in itself (non malum in se) and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the faithful as revealed by God.”
That would cause most Trads to defect to the SSPX.
The justification for such a declaration would be that an act in itself can have no moral evaluation apart from the moral agent’s intention and the circumstances of the act: all three are necessary to weigh in making a moral evaluation.
Such a declaration would pave the way for the moral permissibility of acts that conservative Catholics, Trads especially, consider to be intrinsically evil: contraception, fornication, and homosexual acts. Most Trads would not accept such a dogmatic definition; hence, they would be forced to leave communion with the Church due to their rejection of that newly defined dogma.
” Let’s say something like there are no intrinsically evil acts.” Pope Francis would not promulgate such piffle, as it would upset not only Trads but the whole lot of Catholic moral theologians, whether they be lay, priests, bishops, cardinals and popes. Yes, the Catholic Church teaches that some acts are intrinsically evil. According to St. Pope John Paul II, intrinsic evil refers to those actions that are always evil regardless of motivation or circumstances. These acts are hostile to life itself, violate the integrity of the human person, and are offensive to human dignity. Examples of such acts include homicide, genocide, abortion, and slavery.
But all those examples you provided include intentions and circumstances in the act. It matters greatly whether the death of the fetus is directly willed in a procedure before it is called “abortion”. The church permits medical procedures that result in the death of a fetus, as long as the fetus’ death is not directly willed, and such procedures are not called abortions. Abortion contains within its definition the will of the acting agent. Therefore abortion is not an act evil in itself, apart from will and circumstances. If an act that produced the death of a fetus were evil in itself, then surgery to remove a cancerous uterus while a woman is pregnant would be considered immoral and be called an abortion, for it results in the death of the fetus. But the church teaches such a procedure may be morally permissible by reason of the principle of the double effect. Killing a fetus is not evil in itself, otherwise the church would not teach that medical procedures that kill a fetus are sometimes morally permissible. You say “abortion” and you think you are excluding intent and circumstances, but you’re not. More is at play in an abortion than an act that kills a fetus: intention and circumstances are part and parcel of the act defined as abortion.
Intrinsically evil acts, as you and the church have used the term, include intentions and circumstances in their analysis. Some moral theologians argue that there are no intrinsically evil acts in themselves, apart from intentions and circumstances, which is why Pope Francis could make such an infallible dogmatic declaration that no act may be judged to be morally evil in itself without consideration of the agent’s intention and the circumstances of the act. So no sexual acts in themselves, for example, could be judged to be immoral by the mere fact of what is physically being done by people with their genitals. There could be circumstances that make such acts morally permissible by virtue of the wills and circumstances of the agents. That would have implications for the moral evaluation of contraception, extra-marital sex, and homosexual acts.
Abortion is an intrinsic evil. It is always immoral.
You are confusing it with miscarriage which is not immoral.
Intrinsic evils are those which are always immoral no matter the intent or the circumstances. Murder is not an intrinsic evil. Stealing is not an intrinsic evil.
Adultery is.
Sodomy is.
Murder is not an intrinsic evil? What the?
This discussion is showing Catholics are all over the map on morals.
Stealing is not an intrinsic evil? What?
Murder is not an intrinsic evil because of war and self defence.
Stealing is not an intrinsic evil because there are conditions such as starvation where one might need to steal food to stay alive. You might need to steal someone’s gun in order to keep them and everyone around them safe. You might need to steal a notebook showing a person plans to attack a school to give it to the police.
These things do not become good acts. They become necessary evils.
more on evil, I am a retired math instructor, not a theologian. You say “Some moral theologians argue that there are no intrinsically evil acts in themselves, apart from intentions and circumstances, which is why Pope Francis could make such an infallible dogmatic declaration, ” to which to this untrained poster can only appeal to Veritatis Splendor & JP II. Those theologians you reference come as a surprise to ,me. I didn’t know anyone thought along these lines–but again– I am a mathematician of sorts only. Would not such a pronouncement by Pope Francis pretty much bulldoze all moral reckoning prior to his pontificate, including moral conclusions that are de fide? This is an honest question from a perplexed poster, and I would appreciate your help or that from anyone reading this, and , oh yes, thanks in advance.
Dan, there are no Catholic moral theologians who say what this person says.
Sin does have to be intentional. A rape victim is not guilty of fornication or adultery or sodomy or whatever the attack was.
That is distinct from morality.
Sin is sin. It is always wrong.
There are sometimes when culpability could be lessened, such as stealing medicine to keep someone alive. Or killing in self-defense. Or when coerced or threatened or extorted.
Dogmatic definitions are not about morality.
I refer you to a book called “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.”
They have not been, but they could be. Vatican I defined that the pope may make an infallible solemn definition concerning faith or morals. Look it up. I refer you to “Pastor Aeternus” from Vatican I.
OK I looked it up. It says that but he is not going to make an infallible declaration that nothing is sinful.
Look what he did today.
Here is part of the problem for so many people:
I was re-watching an interview with Bishop Strickland where he was complaining about James Martin and how people living a sinful lifestyle could go to him and get support.
He talks to the interviewer who is married with kids and makes the assumption that he is living holily.
So gay people are automatically assumed to be sinners and heterosexual people are assumed to be living the Church’s teaching.
Heterosexuals could be doing all kinds of sins but when we walk into Church, people act like we are not.
We could be committing every sin and more that the homosexuals are committing.
Most of the sexual sins listed in the catechism are about heterosexual people.
Heterosexual sinners can walk into any Catholic Church and go up to any Catholic priest and get treated like we are saints.
Actually, he agreed with Father Martin on something.
We could’ve had some clickbait with that one.
“Bishop Strickland says that Father James Martin is right.”
No, go back and re-read the information correctly. Bishop Strickland did not “agree” with Fr. Martin at all. The Bishop simply said that LGBTs are all loved by God, and are welcome in the Church– but repentance of sin is an absolute necessity, for those in the “gay lifestyle.”
Reply to- I said it was a video and no, that is not what he was talking about.
I agree that Bishop Strickland does say the things you said.
But my example was to show you how websites, people, podcasts distort the things said by the people they have decided to besiege (The Pope, Father Martin, etc)
I will look it back up and bring you his exact words.
His words were “I take Father James Martin’s point. “You pick on the gay couple but you allow the heterosexual couple to just shack up and no problem.” Absolutely. The tendency to do that is wrong.”
New verbal abuse on faithful Catholics-calling them popesplainers.
You should be glad that someone has the charity to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Some are even dumb enough to ask: Why do you need to explain him?
Ummm, because you don’t understand him. And we do.
The important thing is that souls are not led into hell.
You cannot go to hell for following the Pope, ever.
That is a guarantee.
There is conjecture that this will end up as a schismatic church that parallels the Catholic Church.
People can go to hell for that.
I do not think that is where they are doing.
But I could be wrong
I did a deep dive into people complaining about his dismissal and man, they make the old sede vacantists look good.
A lot of it is centered on how Pope Francis is not really the Pope or that he lost the papacy for doing something they don’t approve of.
A lot of them seem really mentally ill and illogical.
Pray for these poor people.
Where is your moral conscience and your brain, to tell you right from wrong? Even children know right from wrong, at an early age! Do you follow Church leaders intelligently, according to Christ’s True Teachings– or blindly, out of fear and ignorance– as well as for lazy, selfish comfort and convenience for yourself? Papal favorites like Jesuit Fr. James Martin, “Tucho,” Cdl. Hollerich, etc. — are not true Catholic believers or true Catholic shepherds. They are immoral They believe that the Church must abandon and reject Christ’s teachings, for the gay agenda, as well as for many other terrible sins. Extremely irresponsible! Are you going to take your kids to hear lectures by gay-promoting, sinful Fr. Martin? Tell your kids the honest truth, before God. Follow only Christ and His Teachings. The Catholic Church today, needs to be cleansed.
Did you misplace your comment?
This doesn’t make sense.
The pope favors and promotes Fr. James Martin, S.J., Cardinal Hollerich, “Tucho,” Cardinal McElroy, and many other heretical, immoral Catholic clerics– who are leading people straight to the hot fires of Hell.
Straight to the hot fires of Hell? You make it sound like it’s not a good thing.
Support your thesis.
Prove they are heretical.
Prove they are immoral.
Read and educate yourself in the current news of our Church, and keep yourself well-informed. Don’t ask others to do your work for you.
You know they are not heretical or immoral.
And someone called your bluff.
False clerics like Fr. James Martin, S,J. and others, are clearly heretical and clearly immoral.
Prove it.
I laughed until I was sick recently, when Jesuit Fr. James Martin exclaimed publicly, that he wished he could “canonize” Sr. Jeannie Grammick. She recently had a big meeting with the Pope, and received the Pope’s praise and honor for her “wonderful work” with New Ways Ministry. She noted that she was deeply inspired by Fr. Paul Shanley– a notorious, horrific serial clerical child rapist– to become an activist, to help the “poor, downtrodden LGBTs.” She said that Shanley, who “gave her the inspiration for her ministry,” was her “best friend,” at that time. How about all of evil Shanley’s “poor, downtrodden” victims of child rape?
I think that was 5 years ago and it was during an interview where they have a section “Who would you canonize?” His reasons was that she endured under persecution from her own Church to minister to LGBTQ people.
I remember those times and I did not disagree with the Church.
Re: Sister Grammick and Fr. Paul Shanley-this is not a defense but a reminder. Narcissistic abusers groom their character witnesses and flying monkeys as thoroughly as they groom their victims.
Our wonderful Archbishop Cordileone has asked us all to pray for Bishop Strickland and for the Pope. May God bless them both–and bless Abp
Cordileone.
As of today, over 46,000 Catholics (including myself) have signed LifeSiteNews’ petition in support of Bishop Strickland. Loved watching — and praying along with– his Rosary Rally outside the USCCB meeting in Baltimore, MD. Hundreds of Catholics showed up for the Rosary Rally today! They all went this evening to a nearby Italian restaurant, where they had reserved a large room, on the upper level, and had a big Italian dinner.
I am appalled that Strickland is calling attention to himself outside the bishops’ meeting. He should have stayed away. Go someplace quiet, stay away from cameras, and pray. Jesus said to pray by yourself in your room, not to pray as the hypocrites do by making a show of it.
I say to you, Bishop Strickland has already gotten his reward.
“I am appalled that Strickland..” Dear sir/madam why do you suppose Bishop Strickland went to call attention to himself? A charitable explanation would be that he went to pray. Remember prayer is good anywhere.
Bishop Strickland us not “calling attention to himself.” He has fulfilled agreements to hundreds of Catholics who have asked him to lead the Rosary. He has done this this each year, for Pro Life and other groups. Bishop Joseph Coffey, Auxiliary Bishop for the Military Services, and others joined Bp. Strickland this year, in leading the Rosary. It has been a tradition for years, now. One year, Bp. Strickland agreed to kead the Rosary outside the USCCB meeting, when the USCCB had been wavering on the topic of whether Rep. Nancy Pelosi should receive Communion.
The USCCB has not wavered on whether Nancy Pelosi should receive communion.
It is her bishop’s decision.
Cardinal Christophe Pierre personally asked Bishop Strickland not to participate in the current Fall USCCB meeting. So Bishop Strickland just kept his promise to lead the group in the Rosary, outside the meeting. Cdl. Pierre makes me sick. But God will have the final word, someday. Pierre is age 77, the pope will soon turn age 87, and “Tucho” is much younger, at age 61. The present darkness and evil in the Church will not last forever.
—
But they are here now, and now is when I’m alive.
Archbishop Broglio: As far as the Conference of Catholic Bishops is concerned, he’s a retired bishop, which means he has a voice in the conference, but he cannot vote. And I’m unaware of any invitation to him not to come to this meeting. It didn’t come from us.
Cardinal Pierre told Bishop Strickland personally not to attend the USCCB meetings. That has nothing at all to do with Abp. Broglio or bishops of the USCCB,. It was only feelings expressed by one man, Cdl. Pierre.
That was actually the best part of the interview.
“It’s a meeting. I mean, I’m not going to beg to go to a meeting.”
He is very relatable on that one.
The Rosary is the best prayer to recite. God bless Bishop Strickland.
Bishop Strickland did the small things…the small things that impress very naïve Catholics.
Did he do his job well?
Apparently not.
I always wondered how he had time as a bishop to do all the interviews, the Bishop Strickland Hour, the Dodgers thing, Rome conferences and still do his job?
Why is he learning to say the Latin Mass when he can say the ordinary form?
Why are the people who support him acting like he is their spiritual leader in opposition to the Pope?
Maybe he was accompanying people? And they misunderstood.
If you don’t hear Christ’s Truth from Bp. Strickland, listen to a similar, honest, authentic, truthful, great Catholic cleric — the Dubia Cardinals, the Holy Bible, the Catechism, Our Lady of Fatima, etc. The Truth may be hard for some to take– especially those steeped in secularism, worldliness, egotism, materialism, lusts of the flesh, lies, corruption and sin– but all must listen. God will keep trying, even using “extreme” means, to try to rescue His wayward sheep from the treacherous cliffs of doom and destruction.
What do you mean by Christ’s Truth?
Well, I just watched the EWTN program, “World Over Live” with Raymond Arroyo interviewing Bishop Joseph Strickland. Very, very intelligent– the whole thing is well explained by the good Bishop. There are a great many Bishops who have done terrible sins, such as covering-up clerical sex abuse crimes. One of Bishop Strickland’s Apostolic Visitation bishops, retired Bishop Kicanas, was liberal, an LGBT-supporter, and was accused of covering-up clerical sex abuse crimes. But Kicanas was never investigated by the Vatican. Reminds me of teachers, police officers, and workers in other fields, who are fired, today, for not accepting Woke ideology and gay marriage, gender ideology, forced DEI training, CRT, etc.. And doctors and nurses forced into performing abortions, pharmacists forced to sell birth control and abortion pills, math teachers forced to lower their academic standards for teaching math, so Black students can succeed– etc. etc. Algebra I is the single most failed high school course– and Blacks and poverty-stricken students are most likely to fail this course. The post-Conciliar Catholic Church has been going down the same perilous path, and has gotten more deeply-entrenched in it, with the papacy of Pope Francis, and is not interested to turn back to Christ’s true teachings. Things will only get worse and worse. and we really cannot stop it. All we can do is pray. I am thrilled that we still have Bishop Strickland and a few other, very honest, reliable, sincere Catholic leaders, to help lead us, in these evil, perilous times. By Canon Law, a bishop should only be considered for removal, for extremely serious reasons– like committing serious sins or crimes, promoting false teachings and heresy, covering- up clerical sex abuse crimes, or committing very serious administrative abuses and crimes. Bishop Strickland was a very normal and good Catholic bishop, like hundreds of other good, normal Catholic bishops. He is also a Canon Lawyer. His “reason for removal” is exactly the same as all good
workers at professional jobs, who get fired today, because their profession has adopted wrongful, liberal, Woke beliefs and policies — and these new, evil changes are permanent, at least for now. We all must turn to God, on our knees, in prayer, daily– especially, the Rosary, and Eucharistic Adoration.
You can read about lots of wrong-doings of the liberal, retired Bishop Kicanas, all through his career. The disturbing case of Kicanas’ mishandling of the case of evil child clerical sex abuser, Daniel McCormack, in the 1990s, when he was Rector of the prestigious Mundelein Seminary in Illinois, and McCormack was a seminarian, who molested several male adults and a minor, and was also an alcoholic– yet, Kicanas thought him acceptable for priestly ordination– is a horror. After ordination, McCormack molested about two dozen children, and eventually was jailed and laicized. Kicanas also filed for bankruptcy, when he was Bishop of the Diocese of Tucson, due to numerous clerical sex abuse cases. He was allegedly passed over for ascending from the Vice-Presidency to the Presidency of the USCCB, a long-standing tradition, in 2010– due to the McCormack scandal.
It does not really matter.
it is like immature people who when pulled over for speeding say “Why didn’t you pull over the guy who passed me?”
It would be a very strange thing, if this papacy came to an end, and a new pope was elected, who decided to call retired Bishop Strickland back l into service, and give him a job someplace, until he turns age 75, ten years from now. Very funny, if Strickland was made an archbishop and then, a cardinal someday– all because a new and different pope needed his talents to help him, and serve the Church. Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, will turn age 75 next year, and will be required to resign. So, Bishop Strickland and Cardinal DiNardo will soon both be retired Catholic prelates. Pope Benedict asked some cardinals to remain on-the-job, beyond age 75. Cardinals may cast votes in papal conclaves until age 80. The Church will need a good cleric to replace Cardinal DiNardo, when he retires. DiNardo was the main consecrator for making Bishop Strickland a bishop, in 2012. The Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston is a metropolitan see of the ecclesiastical province that covers six other suffragan dioceses, in south and east Texas– to include the suffragan Diocese of Tyler, in East Texas.
Whatever is God’s Will. I thought the Pope should have moved him into some kind of service at the Vatican.
I kind of hope that Bishop Strickland will offer himself to the Pope as someone who could go say Mass to those poor Catholics in the Amazon who only get Mass once a year.
The interview was very good. There were some misses though.
What we learned-that the nuncio had pages of reasons for Strickland’s dismissal. He mentioned three (seems like there would be more). Not implementing TC.
Lack of fraternity with his brother bishops. Continuing his presence online when he had been told to “cool it.”
Most important moment: When asked why he read that letter calling the Pope a usurper in Rome, he said ” I was presented”…with the letter (Raymond Arroyo says it was on Facebook) …what I understood from the letter…and what I was being told, was that the Pope was using the authority of the chair of Peter to change what Christ has said.”
That is absolutely not true. It is not OK and whom was he being told that by?
This is the crux of the problem. Why does he not understand things and why does he listen to people who would say something like that?
Is is brainwashed?
Most people seem to think that he is a simple, pious, nice person who was completely misled by the people he brought into the diocese of Tyler.
Strickland practically dared Pope Francis to can him. As this story has unfolded, I have less respect for Strickland than before. At first I sort of sympathized with him, but now I realize that just as Pope Francis had to shut down the Latin Mass because it was a hotbed of antipapal dissent, so too he had to shut down Mr. Strickland because he was becoming a hotbed of antipapalism.
FYI– to be consecrated a bishop is the highest level of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Bishop Strickland is retired– “Bishop emeritus.” He is not a so-called “Mr.” You know, Jesus Christ made lots of honest statements that greatly angered the Pharisees, too. He made lots of hypocrites very mad. He also took a great big whip, and overturned the tables of the money-changers at the Temple, and drove them all out. The very great and most holy Son of God, and Second Person of the Blessed Trinity– does not think nor see things, as we lowly humans do. The Jews in power finally got so mad, that they had Our Lord arrested on false charges, tortured– beaten, whipped– and killed. And then, He rose from the dead, victorious, invincible. Christ and His holy teachings are God’s Truth– eternal and absolutely indestructible. Bishop Strickland stands faithfully with Christ, and preaches His eternal, indestructible Truth to us.
It 100% looked like he was baiting the Pope. At one point, he even said it “The Pope can fire me.”
And yes, the people who were attracted to Strickland were not good.
He did nothing to stop that.
Bishop Strickland needs a good spiritual director.
He needs solitude, silence and simplicity.
He should take 3 years off for prayer like St. Paul.
He needs to get away from the people who flatter him and who have set him up as an anti-pope.
He needs to get away from anyone who criticizes the Pope (God can handle the Pope) or any Cardinal, Bishop, priest who challenges the Pope.
He needs to pray his Rosary daily (and not in public and do not tell anyone you are praying it). He needs to do his Holy Hours as humbly as possible.
Exterior practices without the interior practices that should accompany them become toxic.
Christ did much worse. He got Himself falsely arrested, tortured, whipped, beaten and killed, for telling the Truth to the big Jewish leaders, the hypocritical Pharisees. He was not ignorantly “rebelling” against them, or “baiting” them. He was doing His duty, as the Son of God, telling them the truth, and calling them to repentance. His holy cousin, St. John the Baptist, had an even worse fate, before Him, for calling out sinful King Herod, warning him to repent. In St. Mark 6:4, Jesus tells us, “a prophet is not without honor, except in his own country.” Our Lady of Fatima told us the truth, too– we should all listen to her. Our Church is not right with God, and needs to be cleansed.
Our Lady of Fatima did not say that our Church is not right with God and needs to be cleansed.
The Catholic Church is holy.
There are ‘sinners in her bosom.:
We all need to be cleansed in the Blood of the Lamb.
Every Catholic and Christian has their share in the Martyrdom of Christ.
Our Lady of Fatima called sinners to repentance. She prophesied that the Catholic Church would undergo great trials. So get busy and listen to her!
Bishop Strickland is not Jesus being martyred.
Watch the interview with the man telling him “his future is bright.”
Re-reading my post, I see that the second line reads differently than I intended it.
I did not intend to say that the individuals who like Bishops Strickland were bad people.
I intended to say that it can be a bad situation when a lot of people are attracted to a bishop or priest or even a lay person.
It can become a personality cult. When he saw that developing, he should have stopped it.
The way he should have stopped it and should still stop it is by saying “no.”
Can I have an interview? No
Will you give a speech? No
Will you do my podcast? No.
He should not let websites, podcasters, organizations use him to boost their income.
And he should not ever say anything bad about the Pope or any one else.
He should not pretend there is a crisis in the Church, because there isn’t.
What he did was right.. Just say “pray for him, them, whomever.”
I agree that it can be a bad situation when a lot of people are attracted to a bishop, a priest, a lay person … but you forgot that it can also be a bad situation when people are unhealthily attracted to a Pope. There is that aspect of a personality cult that you brought up.
Our church has waaaaaaayyyyyyy too much personality worship. It’s present in every aspect of church: cults of personality develop around the pope, a bishop, a theologian, a blog author, a musician, a news commentator, and so forth. Some people have made quite a name for themselves in the small pond of the church when they would be nobodies in the larger pond of the world.
A website or podcast as well.
You are correct.
Axiom, I agree that a personality cult could develop around a Pope. That is the problem many Protestants have with having a Pope.
We have been given a Pope and we have to trust him.
We have to understand that a Pope is an instrument in the Hand of God and that he is temporary.
But yes, it could happen.
I would say Whoopi Goldberg’s attitude toward him is a path toward that wrong attitude, if you are familiar with it.
Bishop Strickland does not attract people based on a “personality cult. ” Catholics desperate for Christ’s Truth listen to him, amid the horrific deceptions, lies and evils of many Catholic clerical leaders. They are also desperate for their children and families to receive the Truth of Christ. If you are married and have kids, you will understand. Long, long ago, when Cardinal Burke was Bishop of LaCrosse, Wisconsin, good Catholics raved about his faithfulness to Catholic teaching– and encouraged myself and my family to move to the Diocese of LaCrosse. Many Catholics and their families did move to the Diocese of LaCrosse– all because it was led by an excellent, faithful Catholic bishop.
The situation you describe is dangerous. And yes, that is a personality cult. Catholics are not supposed to do that.
If you do not understand the Catholic Faith, please read the Catechism or there is a podcast by Father Mike Schmitz where he read the Catechism every day. It is on Youtube and other podcast apps.
No one should be giving you concern about any Church leader and their teaching on the Faith.
Please do not let your concern about some decisions made by church leaders turn into a grave sin or be exploited.
A good prayer for every day-
Lord, God Almighty, you have brought us safely to the beginning of this day. Defend us today by your mighty power, that we may not fall into any sin, but that all our words may so proceed and all our thoughts and actions be so directed, as to be always just in your sight. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Also- St. Patrick’s Breastplate is a powerful prayer of protection. It is long so I will not post it here.
The Prayer to St. Michael is necessary and consecrate yourself to the Immaculate Heart.
Always pray not to be led astray.
Never criticize the Pope. Criticism of the Pope is a sure sign of a stray path, especially if it is untrue.
No. You are not old enough to understand the extremely bad situation in the post-Conciliar Catholic Church. Some kids do “get it,” when they are horrified to see Drag Queen shows at Notre Dame U. and abortion-promoting, feminist professors. Many alumni angrily sent back their Notre Dame diplomas from the 1950s and before, (pre-Conciliar years) over the evil Obama fiasco in 2009.
I think the devil does that just to get Catholics to attack the Church, Catholic universities, the Pope, priests, bishops and Cardinals.
People fall for it.
“Catholics desperate for Christ’s Truth”
You should have received Christ’s Truth before you were baptized or if baptized as an infant, before you received the Sacraments of Confession and First Communion.
Unintelligent comment. Go follow Fr. James Martin and Tucho.
I follow Christ.
I stand with Jesus.
We have a great Jesuit cleric, deeply faithful to Christ, who was wrongfully silenced and banished from his excellent teaching post at USF, many years ago– Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J.– a fine Jesuit martyr, for Christ. I was so deeply shocked and heartsick, when that happened. He went on to be a top professor and administrator at the new Ave Maria University, in Florida, and he founded the highly successful Ignatius Press, in SF. He published all the great works of his teacher, Pope Benedict XVI. He is now age 82, bless him. An excellent Jesuit priest, for Christ and His Church.
Your bar for martyrdom is pretty low.bar for martyrdom
You are far too young to understand the vast amount of persecution by the extremely wayward Jesuit Order, in today’s Church.
Show it to us.
The best thing he could do would be to go and make friends with Father James Martin.
Fr. Martin is very capable of being friends with people who disagree with him.
I think Bishop Strickland is too.
They could combine their talents and the fan bases.
That would be healing for the Church in America.
“They could combine their talents and the fan bases.” You assume on being friends they might find agreement on core issues, or am I mistaken? This will only happen when Kamala Harris becomes Pope.
They already have agreement on core issues.
They may come to understand that they are two sides of the same coin.
I am sure that Bishop Strickland does not disapprove of outreach ministries but just how it is being done.
I am sure the Father Martin understands the sinful nature of homosexuality and just believes that everyone knows it already.
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2023/11/13/bishop-strickland-removed-pope-francis-246485?cx_testId=12&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=2&cx_experienceId=EX7CE8EAI0YE#cxrecs_s
This is the fairest piece I have seen and explains that he was not being punished.
The administrative removal is a more recent development in church history, said Father Beal, who noted the procedure is used to address cases “when someone’s ministry has become detrimental or ineffective.”
Father Beal said the administrative removal of pastors for such reasons was not instituted until 1910. The current procedure is laid out in canons 1740-1752.
“With pastors, there’s a clear process to follow,” said Father Beal.
However, “with bishops, it’s up to the Holy See — the pope, ultimately — and the Dicastery for Bishops to determine the process,” he said.
“Usually it is preceded by an apostolic visitation, where people appointed by the dicastery, usually other bishops, go to the diocese in question and interview or take testimony from people — including the bishop himself — and render a report,” Father Beal said. “And then there is a decision based on that.”
The article is informative but fair? I have very strong doubts. For there is this: That decision [to remove a bishop] is “a pastoral judgment on the part of the pope, ultimately,” said Father Beal. “I don’t know that they have a process with criteria. If there is, it’s not been published, and so it’s not available to canon lawyers to critique.” While the article says the removal was due to administrative problems (which appear in every diocese) the criteria appears subjective as far as we know. Pope Francis could relieve half the bishops in this country for administrative/moral failures if he wanted. That he chose Bishop Strickland and only him, when he was the only bishop to question his job as pope, makes the a strong case that Strickland was a stone in his shoe that had to be removed. I would never trust American magazine to speak objectively about any Jesuit. They defend their own.
Dan, not administrative problems, like mismanagement.
He was told to stop the social media. He did not.
He is misleading thousands of people.
No he is not “misleading thousands of people.” Bp. Strickland caused many faithful Catholics and their spouses and children to want to move to his Diocese or just listen to him preach, because he is a Catholic leader very faithful to Christ– unlike Cupich, McElroy, Jesuit Fr. James Martin, “Tucho” and his erotic “kissing book,” the bad German bishops, Cdl. Hollerich, etc. People are sick of all the sexual sins– like allowing clergy to bless gay couples— etc.. preached by bad clerics. They are looking for good Catholic leadership. And they worry for their kids. If you were married with children, you, too, would be worried sick.
All sex outside marriage is a sin. The teaching of the Church has not changed. You do not need to follow any particular Catholic bishop. They all say that.
No they do not all “say that.” Some fail to accept Catholic teaching. Many today, accept the LGBT ideology. Many do not care if you receive Communion and are divorced and remarried withoot an annulment– or are “living together,” or are a gay couple.
Or a gay couple living together before marriage.
Prove it.
This is how you know who got in trouble. Instead of saying “I disagree with whatever…” you generalize to the point of slander and lying by saying “they fail to accept Catholic teaching.”
I know of no Catholic teaching that any bishop fails to accept.
If you would stick to what they said that bothers you and tell the truth, it would be better.
So you don’t like the 30 year old kissing book. What of his other writings have you read?
The kissing book really has nothing to do with doctrine or theology.
It was just a poetic encouragement for young Argentinians to wait for sex until marriage. Since it is out of print, I assume that you may not have read it.
Yes. They do care and they understand their responsibility to bring them to Christ and to holiness.
Bishop Strickland has issued a new letter. I feel that he is being disingenuous about the reasons he was removed. However, his advice to his followers is correct:
DO NOT ever, ever leave the Church. She is the Bride of Christ. She is now undergoing her Passion, and you must resolve to stand resolutely at the cross. It is important to attend Mass every Sunday and as often as possible, to spend time in adoration, to pray the Rosary daily, to go to confession regularly, and to call always upon the saints for assistance. I urge you to persevere that you might say in the end, “I have fought the good fight to the end; I have run the race to the finish; I have kept the faith.”