Posted on 11/27/2023 3:40:08 PM PST by ebb tide
Bishop Joseph Strickland issued an open letter to the faithful on Monday, November 27, 2023. Below is the full text.
An Open Letter to the Faithful from Bishop Joseph E. Strickland:
As I am sure you have heard by now, I have been removed as Bishop of the Diocese of Tyler. I was asked to meet with the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, and in that meeting I was read a list of the reasons I was being removed. I would make these reasons available to you if possible; however, I was not given a copy of this list at that time, and I have not been able as of yet to obtain a copy despite my requests.
In the reasons that were read to me, no mention was made of administrative problems or mismanagement of the diocese as the reasons for my removal. The reasons given seemed to be related, for the most part, to my speaking the Truth of our Catholic faith, and to my warnings against anything that threatened that Truth (including things that were being brought up at the Synod on Synodality). Also, mention was made of my not walking alongside my brother bishops as I defended the Church and her unchangeable teachings, and of my not implementing the motu propoio Traditionis custodes, which were I to have implemented, would have required me to leave part of my flock unfed and untended. As a shepherd and protector of my Diocese, I could not take actions which I knew with certainty would injure part of my flock and deprive them of the spiritual goods which Christ entrusted to His Church. I stand by my actions as they were necessary to protect my flock and to defend the Sacred Deposit of Faith.
This is the time for everything now covered to be uncovered, and everything now hidden to be made clear. In fact, it was in a time when things were being hidden regarding disgraced now-former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and the Church sex abuse scandal that it seems I first entered the Vatican’s radar. My main crime, then as now, seems to always have been about bringing to light that which others wanted to remain hidden. Sadly, it now seems that it is Truth Himself, Our Lord Jesus Christ, that many desire to be hidden.
Although I am now without a diocese, I am still a bishop of the Church and therefore a successor of the apostles, and I must continue to speak Truth even if it requires my very life. I want to say this to all of you today – 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.”
May Almighty God bless you, and may our Holy and Blessed Mother intercede for you and point you always to her Divine Son Jesus as we enter this Advent season.
I remain your humble father and servant,
Bishop Joseph E. Strickland
If only for the fact that he was more subtle than Bergoglio, and that he died before a single document of Vatican II was promulgated. Given the transitional period between Pius XII (definitely a true Pope) and Paul VI (definitely not a true Pope), it is only natural that the ostensible pontificate of John XXIII would be more ambiguous. As I said, I’m of the opinion that he **was not** a true Pope; the exact *point* at which that occurred is something I’m less certain of (whether he lost the pontificate due to manifest heresy, or if he was ineligible for election due to being a pertinacious heretic prior to that point, public appearances notwithstanding).
(And to answer your other question, given that John Paul I publicly adhered to Vatican 2 in its entirety - even to the point of remarking that they “must have been wrong” on the question of religious liberty as it was understood prior to V2 - I’m inclined to say no.)
Is there a particular point to your inquisition with regards to my thoughts regarding who was or was not a Pope?
Yes, there is. It seems you're decisive about the legitimacy of some "popes" but indecisive about that of other "popes".
And I'm wondering why and by whose authority you make such decisions.
If, by the hand of God, Bishop Strickland, is elected Pope at the next, hopefully soon, conclave, would you acknowledge his as a true Pope?
Why? Can you explain this to me?
And you've been unable to gather from my prior posts that Vatican II is the rather prominent dividing line? How is that decisive or indecisive?
And I'm wondering why and by whose authority you make such decisions.
I can't bind anyone's conscience but my own, as I lack canonical authority. But I can determine that "A" and "Not A" are mutually exclusive. If the Church taught "A" prior to Vatican II (to the point of outright condemning "Not A" as heretical or erroneous), and the 'Church' teaches "Not A" after Vatican II, then faith demands that I hold fast to what came before in light of the Church's own indefectibility. It's as simple as that.
(Though, I find it rather interesting that you would lecture me about by what "authority I make such decisions" when you have numerous posts criticizing the Novus Ordo, Vatican II, etc.)
If, by the hand of God, Bishop Strickland, is elected Pope at the next, hopefully soon, conclave, would you acknowledge his as a true Pope?
I don't know.
Because through Vatican II, he attempted to impose a non-Catholic religion upon Catholics. Through the Novus Ordo Missae, he attempted to impose a non-Catholic rite of worship upon the faithful.
In light of prior magisterial teaching regarding the Papacy and the Church's own indefectibility, Paul VI did things that were simply impossible for a true Roman Pontiff — protected as they are by the Holy Ghost with regards to the charism of the papal office — to do.
I agree that VC II is the root of the crisis in the Catholic Church.
But do you think we'll never have a true Catholic pope because of that?
The Church always retains the capacity to choose another head. How that will manifest is something I do not claim to know with certitude, given the extensive and unprecedented nature of the crisis.
You might find this article (and the series it belongs to) to be a worthwhile read: Papal elections, including without cardinals - Journet & Cajetan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.