Bishop Joseph Strickland
Pope Francis I (I call him the Red Pope) has “removed” Bishop Joseph Strickland from his leadership of the Diocese of Tyler, Texas–apparently for his sharp conservative criticisms of the pope’s, um, “progressive” policies (https://catholicvote.org/ousted-bishop-strickland-calls-for-prayers-for-pope-warns-of-forces-corrupting-church/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThere%20are%20many%20forces%20working,role%20as%20the%20supreme%20pontiff.%E2%80%9D).
The bishop has refused restrictions on the Latin mass, but it goes deeper than that. The pope, he says, has “many forces working at him and influencing him to make these kinds of decisions.” And, “There are forces in the world that want to reverse the direction, want to change moral teachings, want to totally restructure the Church.”
One can hardly help thinking of St. Paul’s words in Ephesians 6:12:
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
But Bishop Strickland hasn’t said that. He has said he prays for the pope–and for the pope’s conversion.
We have not forgotten that caper of bringing an effigy of the Amazonian “goddess” Pachamama into the Vatican.
And neither has Bishop Strickland.
That is absurd. If any man, including a pope, seeks to change doctrine, it’s meaningless unless it’s backed up in scripture.
Yeahbut, yeahbut! Diversity!
Yeah but, yeah but, yeah but, yeah but, yeah but, yeah but … 🙂
I would agree.
This Pope is a disgrace to the Faith and a scandal to the faithful.
How about the conservative bishops removing Francis.
Very few unretired conservative bishops exist. Also, there is no provision in Canon Law for involuntary removal of a pope. The Cardinals (most were appointed by Francis) could declare him mentally impeded, but this has never happened.