Late on Tuesday afternoon (EST), the transcript and video of Bishop Joseph Strickland’s October 31 address to the Rome Life Forum were shared on the LifeSiteNews website. In this speech, the controversial bishop of Tyler, Texas expressed radical views even more extreme than those he has shared in the past.
Early in his speech, Strickland said that he had written an outline of what he intended to say, but that before his planned remarks, he wanted to read “a letter from a dear friend.”
He then described his friend as “a deep, deep believer, a lover of our Lord Jesus Christ, a true disciple, a lover of the Church, a lover of the Petrine office in every aspect of our Catholic faith.” And he said that he received this letter as “a deeply challenging message to me,” adding, “it’s not just to me, it’s to all of us. It says some strong things. But I want to assure you that this friend has a deep love for Christ and His Church, for Pope Francis.”
Parts of this letter were posted on LifeSite a week ago, including its opening sentences:
Francis is an expert at producing cowards by preaching dialogue and openness in a welcoming spirit and by highlighting always his own authority. He makes it seem that one who opposes him and what he proposes is an enemy of the Church. And yet it is not the blood of the cowards that is the seed of the Church. It is the blood of the martyrs.
Last week’s article also highlighted passages read by Strickland that describe the participants in the recently-concluded synodal assembly as “cowards,” arguing that to “play nicely” with them is to “mock the martyrs.”
As inflammatory and insulting as those comments are, the November 1 article left out the most controversial sections of the letter read by the bishop, including statements that openly reject the legitimacy of Pope Francis’s pontificate, such as (emphasis added), “Would you now allow this one who has pushed aside the true Pope and has attempted to sit on a chair that is not his define what the Church is to be. ‘As for the beast, it was and is not. It is an eighth but it belongs to the seventh, and it goes to destruction.’”
This statement — essentially a declaration of sedevacantism — caused Strickland to pause and interject, “You’re probably smarter than I am. I’m not sure what that last part is talking about, and I didn’t have the chance to ask.” The last sentence was a quote from scripture — Revelation 17:11 — a passage historically interpreted by anti-Catholic Protestants as a reference to the pope as a false ruler on the road to perdition. This argument has more recently been adopted by schism-minded Catholics as a reference to Pope Francis.
Nevertheless, Strickland continued to read the letter, which next suggested that Francis is an “usurper” who supports abortion and does not believe repentance is necessary for salvation (emphasis added):
Christ has proclaimed the sanctity of life. It cannot be otherwise than sanctified, because He has created it, and He has died for it. And yet this usurper of Peter’s chair has counted life as nought, for he has endangered souls by proclaiming that they are justified before God as they are, with no need of repentance. And he has welcomed those who glorify abortion and has offered to correct no correction, thereby counting the lives of all those babies who have perished in this manner as nothing.
The letter concludes with what its author (and the bishop) likely see as a courageous battle cry:
Play nicely? While the devil leads souls to hell? Play nicely? While Francis proclaims the devil’s voice to be the voice of the Holy Spirit? The streets of Rome are now littered with cowards. Where is the one who will say with Ignatius of Antioch, ‘Now I begin to be a disciple. Let fire and Cross, flocks of beasts, broken bones, dismemberment, come upon me. So long as I attain to Jesus Christ.’
After reading the letter, Bishop Strickland commented, “As I said, those are challenging words.” He also said, “Hopefully you’ll agree that that letter from a friend that I just shared reminds us, this part of our walk—for every one of us here, men and women, clergy, laity, all of us—this is a very challenging portion of our Emmaus walk of faith.”
I don’t think these are Bishop Strickland’s original thoughts, but his presence at events like this and the people he’s allowed to influence him — including Remnant editor Michael Matt, LifeSiteNews editor John-Henry Westen, his radio cohost Terry Barber, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Deacon Keith Fournier, Scott Hahn, and whoever wrote that letter — have certainly led him into dangerous territory.
He also made clear that he has chosen decided to ignore the advice of those who disagree with him about the pope and his fellow bishops. I have been told that many of the priests of his own diocese, who are deeply worried about the dangerous path that the friendly priest they once called “Joe” has been following, have approached him and asked him to stop his public behavior. Some have even asked him to resign — a very risky decision for a priest to make of his bishop — for the sake of the diocese and his own well-being. Strickland made it very clear later in his speech that he does not intend to stop, saying,
And frankly, one of the most frustrating things that’s coming out of the Vatican and supported, at least, by Pope Francis, is the attack on the sacred. The Lord—it’s Him! That’s why I’m in trouble, because I can’t deny Him. I don’t care who tells me, you must. I can’t do that.
If you know anything about me, you know that I can get stupid; all of us can, maybe me more frequently than all of you, but yeah, I can be imprudent. But I think the prevailing imprudence—and that letter from my friend kind of alludes to this—the prevailing imprudence in our Church today is not speaking out inappropriately; sometimes I may do that. I’d rather do that than not speak out when it’s necessary, absolutely necessary.
The problem is not, as the bishop presents it, a matter of imprudence or “speaking out inappropriately.” The problem is that he has adopted a radical and reactionary ideology, embraced conspiracy theories and false doctrines, and aligned himself with extremists. We might pray that his short pause after reading the sedevacantist passage aloud from the letter by his “friend” was a brief moment of clarity, but it didn’t seem to bother him as he powered through the rest of his speech.
At one point he confesses to a feeling of isolation, asking, “Am I the only bishop that really believes this?” Unfortunately, I don’t think he’s the only one. That said, he’s likely the most outspoken active diocesan bishop who has been brainwashed to this degree by conspiracy theories and traditionalist propaganda. The Church is a communion, and our visible source of unity is the pope. When a bishop becomes aware that his views are out of step with the pope and the other bishops, that should be a sign that he is the one in error.
Those who attack the ecclesiology and Magisterium of the Church and falsely malign the Successor of Peter are not martyrs, but schismatics. Bishop Strickland’s protest against the pope and his teachings — and on faithful bishops in communion with him — are the real attack on the sacred.
(Editor’s note: Minor editorial corrections have been made since this article was initially published.)
Image: Screenshot
Mike Lewis is the founding managing editor of Where Peter Is. He and Jeannie Gaffigan co-host Field Hospital, a U.S. Catholic podcast.
Popular Posts