.

Superior Pontiff

for Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas,
deposed November 11, 2023

Our Father in heaven gives the Bread
On which the need of souls is fed.
With doctrine and devotion rife,
I am he, the Bread of Life

Now sin no more, but follow me,
Not blinded by the enemy;
Strong against hellish missives hurled,
I am he, the Light of the World.

Outdoors stands Peter, and without
Authority to broadcast doubt,
As from the housetops comes a shout,
I am he, the Door devout.

Hireling and wolf speak blasphemy,
But I know mine, and mine know me,
The faithful Shepherd, I am he.

Relieving moribund abjection,
Freeing slaves of groveling grief,
I am he, the Resurrection
And Life of them that love belief.

I am he, the only Way,
I am he, the thorough Truth,
I am he, the joyous Life
Who triumphs over jealous strife.

My duty I do not resign,
But forced out, having guarded well,
Still joined to branches true I dwell,
I am he, the very Vine.

I am.

.

.

Margaret Coats lives in California.  She holds a Ph.D. in English and American Literature and Language from Harvard University.  She has retired from a career of teaching literature, languages, and writing that included considerable work in homeschooling for her own family and others. 

NOTE TO READERS: If you enjoyed this poem or other content, please consider making a donation to the Society of Classical Poets.

The Society of Classical Poets does not endorse any views expressed in individual poems or commentary.


Trending now:

96 Responses

  1. Monika Cooper

    I’m so glad you wrote this, for this moment. I love “the thorough Truth”: it sounds like something from a old strong hymn, just the kind of strength we need to draw on now.

    Jesus, the Superior Pontiff, is still with us. And Peter and Paul, who died to save the vines that others spoil, are still alive. . . !

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks, Monika. You’re right to recognize Jesus as the speaker here, describing Himself in many ways that correspond to the spiritual identity of a good bishop. Thus the words apply to Bishop Strickland too. The bishop should be so united to God that his people see Christ in him.

      Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks, Evan, for the link to the news article. As I said when submitting the poem, the event is very significant because Bishop Strickland has done more than simply criticize the Vatican. Since July, he has produced seven pastoral letters affirming traditional doctrine, thus preparing against any modernist perversions coming out of the worldwide Synod that closed in Rome in October. And he is a frequent and effective user of social media. Thank you for allowing me to highlight his work.

      Reply
  3. Joseph S. Salemi

    Bishop Strickland isn’t the only victim of this scumbag Peronista antipope. Bishop Fernandez Torres of Arecibo in Puerto Rico was also forced out, for the same crime of not being sufficiently lickspittle to the modernist heresies flowing from the Vatican.

    These are hardly the only examples — just the most publicized. This Argentine heretic and liar has wrought vengeance on a countless number of Catholic priests, hierarchy, and religious orders, solely because they have spoken up in defense of real Catholicism.

    And yet R&R Catholics insist on calling this prick “the Holy Father.”

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Joe, you are quite right that there have been many victims. And I will admit that until yesterday I had not paid sufficient attention to Strickland. He has even brought up public discussion of your main point here, that the present occupant of the chair of Peter is a usurper not entitled to the power he exercises. In accord with episcopal dignity, he did this carefully and correctly, in such a way that he did not pass judgment. But who else among the bishops has been so clearsighted and realistic as to air the matter? Strickland has, moreover, done much to protect and defend oppressed Catholics. But faith and tradition are his main concerns. He will not appeal to Vatican II “collegiality” as a basis to assert his rights. I have to admire that, however much I might like a more aggressive stance.

      Reply
  4. Wayne

    Jesus said; I am the way the truth and the ligh, no man commeth unto the father but by me.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Exactly, Wayne. I have used all of Jesus’ “I am” statements in this poem, to give a full picture of how that union with the Father through Jesus is achieved by a good bishop like Joseph Strickland. His position demands this union in order that he may guide others to follow the same way. Thanks for your comment!

      Reply
  5. Phyllis Rose Schabow

    Thank you for this fine tribute to the holy Bishop of Texas. He refused to resign. He states that he does not want to be one of the pavements in hell that other hellish residents walk upon. So he clings to the Rock. And bleeds.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks, Phyllis, for your public support of Bishop Strickland. You have done a great deal in letting others, far away from his diocese, know of his Christ-like character.

      Reply
  6. Cheryl Corey

    Margaret, thank you for shedding light on this issue. What are Catholics to do when we have such a radical Pope? It’s no coincidence that the Bishop was highly critical of the Pope. I suspect that the “investigation” was simply a pretext to cancel him.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thank you for commenting, Cheryl. You are right about the “investigation.” It turned up nothing to say publicly about any reason to dismiss Bishop Strickland, even though there must have been complaints and grievances, as there always are. Just goes to show, if the Vatican can spend so much effort to harass good leaders and fellow Catholics, we can surely find and follow and support them. Our lives will be happier for the effort on our part.

      Reply
  7. Joshua C. Frank

    Thank you for this, Margaret. I’m willing to go on record saying that today’s Church hierarchy is a force of evil, not the least of which comes from the pope himself. Priests and bishops who push baby-killing, child molestation and genital mutilation, and all kinds of horrors get promoted to the highest levels of the Vatican, but the ones who believe and teach the actual faith get canned?

    It’s the same crap that happened with Fr. Frank Pavone for his pro-life activism. As you may recall, I wrote a poem about that: https://classicalpoets.org/2023/01/04/a-poem-for-defrocked-priest-frank-pavone-unholy-orders-by-joshua-c-frank/

    For people who, like me, have lost faith in the hierarchy but not the Catholic faith:

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/what-catholics-can-do-whove-lost-faith-in-their-bishops-and-even-the-pope/

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks for reading and commenting, Joshua. I do remember your poem on Father Pavone and you probably remember mine on Father Carota, but I think the following one may have preceded your appearance with us at Classical Poets:

      https://classicalpoets.org/2021/06/28/a-poem-on-father-francis-gloudeman-of-california-by-margaret-coats/

      Father Gloudeman spoke specifically of not seeing signs of the Spirit in high places. He reminded us that others need to see signs of the Spirit in us. Your lifesite link does well to exhort Catholics not to leave the Church. In fact, the first thing anyone needs to do is put time and effort into finding the Church, beginning with a local search. When I think that my grandfather used to drive his family 35 miles, just to go to a Lithuanian Catholic church instead of an Irish or Italian one, it’s not a big deal to look for a Latin Mass and good preaching. Way back when, G. K. Chesterton said the Church had gone to the dogs at least five times, and every time it was the dog that died. My daughter assures me that younger priests are statistically better, and we only need wait for bad boomer prelates to die out. Meanwhile, though, we all have souls to save, and as your resources say, we can’t neglect that task. My poem here uses Jesus’ own symbols identifying Himself and thus describing what to look for.

      As always, best wishes in seeking and finding!

      Reply
      • Monika Cooper

        Do you have Lithuanian heritage, Margaret!? If so, I’ll let you guess why my first name is spelled with a “k.”

        A long drive on Sundays is more than worth it for the liturgical banquet of Latin Mass. “It is a delicacy for kings”: the Eucharist always is but, in the Latin Mass, the royal beauty that belongs to it charges the whole ceremony. And, at the same time, in the community informed by the old rites, our lost villages are found again.

      • Margaret Coats

        You are correct, Monika, about the village-like community formation around the traditional rites. Something about them unhurries people, and friendships tend to grow like weeds.

        My father’s family came from Lithuania. I did not grow up with them nearby, so I didn’t learn any of the language. Just once I’ve done some poems looking in that direction.

        https://classicalpoets.org/2021/07/06/two-poems-on-amber-by-margaret-coats/

      • Monika Cooper

        I love the amber poems. Thank you for sharing the link. There is such a sense of rich harmonies of energies thickening in the aura of the semi-precious substance: the Greek, the Baltic, the pagan, the Christian meta-pagan. The July 6th coincidence crackles with significance.

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Thank you, Margaret.

        The problem with the Chesterton quote is that it ignores the unprecedented crisis that is the modern world. To use my own lines, “It’s never been more than today/That ‘all like sheep have gone astray.’” The modern world is intentionally engineered by the powers that be to turn people away not only from God, but from all that makes us human.

        The closest the world has come to what we have today was the time before the Great Flood. The faith as it existed then had indeed gone to the dogs, and the dog did not die naturally; God had to kill it, along with the whole world except for Noah and his family. The New Testament repeatedly says the End Times will be similar to the days before the Flood, and we’re seeing signs of that already.

        What good will it do that younger priests are better on average if the pope keeps defrocking the ones who actually believe what the Church teaches, and the men in a position to be his successor are no better?

  8. Loretta Garcia

    That was beautiful Margaret! It warmed my heart, brought a tear to my eye, and I thought how comforted good Bishop Strickland would be if he could read it. One of your bests Dr. Coats, thank you!

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Let’s keep him in our prayers, for which I know good priests are always grateful, and they can never get enough of them. I’m sure there will soon be a way to offer him material support as well. Very much appreciate your response to the poem, and I suspect Bishop Strickland may see it as word gets around through social media.

      Reply
  9. Julian D. Woodruff

    Thank you, Margaret. Bp. Strickland needs and deserves our prayers.
    Francis needs our prayers, too. But first he needs to be deposed.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks for the idea, Julian. Don’t know how we depose Francis, but the idea is worth a happy face. Meanwhile many prayers for Strickland, on his own and as a candidate for the next papal election.

      Reply
  10. Cynthia Erlandson

    Beautifully written, Margaret. And thank you, Evan, for the explanatory article.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thank you, Cynthia. The idea of working with the “I am” statements of Jesus make the writing easy. I kept them in order as they appear in John’s Gospel.

      Reply
  11. Brian A. Yapko

    This is a very fine poem, Margaret, which calls attention to a profound injustice. Bishop Strickland serves as a real symbol of all that’s wrong with trying to make the church’s tent so large that membership no longer has any meaning. But where, ironically those who most belong are driven out. Screwtape gave this antipope frighteningly useful advice.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks for making another connection, Brian. Screwtape of course wants to drive out even those he fails to corrupt in other ways, resulting in the loss of as many souls as possible. Jesus, in the total identity He assumes with all the above images from John’s Gospel, attracts everyone to communion with God whose Holy Name is an expression related to “I am.” Not everyone accepts His invitation, but His Church is intended to be the largest possible tent. “Teach all nations whatever I have commanded you.” Canceling the commands cancels Him and, as you say, makes membership in the Church meaningless. The injustice of this bishop’s dismissal is an injustice to Christ and to all who seek God in Him. I appreciate your seeing the profound meaning I’ve tried to express.

      Reply
  12. Phil S. Rogers

    Tyler is less than an hour away. I am not Catholic, but know Bishop Strictland is extremely popular, highly regarded. A man of courage. My Catholic friends are not happy with Pope Francis, but have always been reluctant to criticize.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Phil, thanks for letting us know how Bishop Strickland is honored in his own neighborhood. I am sure it is painful to him, as it is to your Catholic friends, to criticize Francis, who above all should be what my poem describes. But it is a bishop’s duty to cry out against any diminishing of the Faith, which is exactly how Strickland has spoken of Vatican plans and policies. God help us!

      Reply
  13. jd

    A beautiful poem, Margaret. I am assuming that you have not capitalized any of the “he”s because, as you say, “the words apply to Bishop Strickland too”. I think we could come to that conclusion even with capitals. Just one opinion but a strong one. Regardless, I love the poem and would be proud to have written it.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thank you, jd. The beauty of the poem comes from Scripture as interpreted by Pope Benedict, who discusses these titles of Our Lord in the final section of his book, Jesus of Nazareth. Bishop Strickland refused to resign because of fidelity to Benedict who appointed him, so I knew he would appreciate this. You are right that the words “He” in the poem could be capitalized, and would still refer to Strickland. Benedict says that Jesus offers intimacy with God as the essence of His mission, and a reader of the book can see intuitively that the Pope understands himself to be both receiver of this greatest gift never before offered, and giver of the gift in his capacity as Vicar of Christ

      Reply
  14. Roy Eugene Peterson

    The present pontiff is a pimple on the Roman Catholic lineage of faith, devoid of Christian principles, and purveyor of pandering heresies in league with the devil and demons. Thank goodness for the Superior Pontiff who shall ultimately be the judge. The real shame is the heavy weight of souls that shall be lost because of the present pope and his minions (the ones who are following his blasphemies and who elected him in the first place). Praise to you, Margaret, for your courage and understanding of the situation and doing something about it. Bless you!

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Roy, you are right that the real shame in ungodly actions of Church authority is the loss of souls. The glory of Bishop Strickland and many priests who are fighting at the gates of hell is saving souls in danger. These fighters inspire me to praise and support their courage and understanding!

      Reply
  15. Susan Jarvis Bryant

    Margaret, thank you for drawing attention to yet another heinous act in the name of God by the politically driven pontiff.

    I have recently witnessed the departure of a congregation from a church I quit working at because the pastor had an agenda to preach… an agenda not in keeping with God’s word. This congregation has gone on to form a faithful church in keeping with God’s truth because the flock wouldn’t stand for the lies. Aren’t congregations who choose to say “Amen” after witnessing lies and aren’t congregations who won’t directly challenge pretenders with agendas, aiding and abetting the pope (and his staunch followers) in crimes against the Almighty? If flocks recognize lies, surely attending sermons and outwardly embracing, yet inwardly rejecting, makes one complicit in those lies. Isn’t this approach encouraging others to listen to sermons that are detrimental to their spiritual welfare? What about our future generations?

    I am genuinely concerned, and more than a tad confused by the entire charade.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Susan, thank you for reading and commenting, and especially for your concern and questions. The questions you actually express have answers based on Catholic Church teaching and history. I’ll do my best to give them briefly, but it may take more than one comment box, due to my time constraints. The underlying question of how to act in the present situation is best answered by Bishop Strickland. I’m impressed by his approach. It is precisely correct. First of all, he is not leaving the Catholic Church. That would endanger his soul and the souls of many others who depart from Christ in an attempt to depart from evils afflicting the Church. Second, he accepts the deposition as valid. To do otherwise would require dependence on “collegiality,” a modernist notion encouraging bishops to ignore their true position in the hierarchy established by Christ. This notion has already had grievous consequences for parts of the Church whose bishops are flagrantly modernist. Third, he has taken the serious step of calling into question the authority of the person in the papal chair. This he can do, but he knows his opinion cannot decide whether Francis is pope or antipope, despite the diminishing of the Faith done by him. Strickland has denounced the damage to the Faith. He has re-stated the Faith with clarity in pastoral letters as bishop. He is still a bishop of the Catholic Church, though unjustly deposed from being Bishop of Tyler, Texas. He still has the power to teach and to sanctify, though not at present to govern a particular local church.

      In answer to your questions about complicity in evil acts of others, Bishop Strickland is not guilty. God willing, and Christ strengthening him, he will continue to be a good model of orthodoxy and avoid temptations to swerve from the only Way as he bears his personal Cross. There have been many unjust dismissals and exiles of prelates in Church history, so he has saintly models. His duty and the virtues required to perform it are not the same as those of his people–more on that later.

      Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Dear Susan —

      It is easier for members of a Protestant congregation to abstract themselves from a church or a pastor with whom they have irreconcilable differences. Because of the monarchical and hierarchical structure of Catholicism, it is very difficult for Catholics.

      Persons who have had enough of Bergoglio’s antics can of course join themselves with Catholic bodies like the FSSP or the SSPX, which are run by solidly conservative Roman Catholic clergy, and which maintain orthodox teachings and traditions. But these groups recognize Bergoglio’s authority, and therefore he can at any moment squelch them or force them to revise their liturgical practices. It’s only a matter of time before the rattlesnake strikes.

      Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks to Joseph for explaining in part the different situations of Catholic and Protestant individuals. Another part of the story is how the Church functions for Catholics. Susan is concerned that hearing (or hearing of) bad teaching at church services might oblige a churchgoer to object publicly or to renounce membership. For Catholics, the sermon or homily is a less important part of church attendance. The main reasons to attend on Sundays and holydays are to fulfill the obligation of divine worship, and to receive the Sacrament which is Christ Himself (or simply to be present with Him if one is not in the state of grace to partake). These purposes can be fulfilled regardless of the quality of the preaching or the sanctity of the preacher. All the priest must do is follow the prescribed rite. It is valid even if he is an abominable sinner. And if he preaches heresy, the people are not tainted with guilt by being present. That question was decided about 1500 years ago.

      Of course it is better to speak out against bad teaching, especially now that pastors, who have the obligation to sustain orthodoxy, often fail. But the most likely failing in Catholic preaching at present is not that it contains falsehood or heresy, but that it is weak and negligent. This does place a personal obligation on those who are present to care for their spiritual lives in other ways. As Joe has said, there are reliable religious orders, and as I have found, vast resources of varied kinds available to persons who make the effort to seek them out. Catholic teaching is no secret–but individuals and groups cannot set themselves up as the Church.

      And neither can pastors and prelates and pontiffs. It is not their Church, but Christ’s, and like anyone else they can leave it by departing from doctrine or authority. From Scripture, history, tradition, and a long record of what is Catholic, their faith and practice can be objectively evaluated. We live in bad times, but this has often been the case. Our main obligation is not to leave Christ’s Church. The failings of the man now standing in the place of Peter’s successor represent a grievous affliction allowed by God to test our fidelity.

      And with regard to future generations, parents more than pastors have the obligation to care for the souls of their own children. This is done in the home, although when it comes to formal worship and the sacraments, parents must go to the Church and teach their children to do so.

      The Church is an object of love to us, as she is to Christ, for she is His bride. This coming Saturday, we have a feast of the Church, commemorating the dedications of the basilicas of Saints Peter and Paul in Rome. It’s a time of joy, looking forward and back from the present distress.

      Last Saturday when I came home from Mass, I had to ask my daughter about Bishop Strickland. She had not heard the day’s news, but was familiar with him as the protector of traditional nuns. When she heard of his being deposed, she expressed impatience for Bergoglio and his generation of clerics to die out. Three friends with whom she went to college are fervent priests. She tells me their entire generation is known to be far more conservative than the prior one or two.

      I have my hope at home and at my local Latin Mass church. Sunday after the Strickland news came out, it was jampacked with people and the outdoor seating was filled. Did they come for a last look? Joe Salemi is right about the danger we face, but we have been fighting most of my Catholic life.

      Susan, I wish I had a shorter and clearer response, but this and the poem are what I came up with. What’s going on in high places is no charade. It’s a trial of belief, piety, morality, and community–those things in which the virtue of religion shines. May we do our parts to follow the best leaders and reflect their light.

      Reply
      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        Dear Margaret and Joe,

        Thank you both very much for your detailed and insightful comments. They have helped me to understand the dreadful situation with the Catholic Church.

        Joe, your mentioning of a “monarchical and hierarchical structure” makes matters all the clearer. I now fully appreciate the Catholic Church is far bigger than the current pope… just as I appreciate the British monarchy is far bigger than the current king. Although, I will say that if King Charles starts to drown the people in a sea of green and red spiel, I may turn my back on the British monarchy. Some may already argue I have already done that by becoming an American citizen. 🙂

        And Margaret, I hear you when you say, “All the priest must do is follow the prescribed rite. It is valid even if he is an abominable sinner. And if he preaches heresy, the people are not tainted with guilt by being present” although, I am not sure that I could rise to religious expectations if I knew a priest was preaching false doctrine and much, much worse. But then I am not a Catholic, which is why I found it difficult to get my head around the current situation and the seemingly dismissive response to it. You and Joe have helped me to overcome my ignorance, and I thank you both wholeheartedly for doing so. It’s much appreciated.

    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Let’s add a few pertinent facts to the discussion. The report submitted to Rome by the two visitants to Tyler, Texas (see below) has not been released, so we have been given no specific reasons at all as to why Strickland was removed from his bishopric. This removal has no color of legality to it, or of due process in canon law. It is the typical thuggish move of an Argentine Peronista.

      The two episcopal visitants who were sent to Texas are pure products of the entire Vat-2 revolution, and have functioned as nothing more than hit-men to provide the Vatican with some kind of excuse for punishing Strickland. Bishop Dennis Sullivan (born 1945) and Bishop Gerald Kicanas (born 1941) are slavishly loyal the Bergoglian organization, and both of them have a long history of devotion to Novus-Ordoism. Sullivan has been a major figure at the CCDHC and at the USCCB. Kicanas was Vice President of the USSCB, Chair of the Board at CARA, and one of the Board of Directors at the National Pastoral Life Center. All these places make up an epitome of trendy Catholic left-liberalism. In addition, Kicanas has been charged with the cover-up of the sexual abuse of children by two priests under his administration — something which might well have commended him to Bergoglio.

      Just providing context, folks.

      Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Evan and Joe, thank you for the additional news and context. I am interested to see that Strickland may in the future give an interview to Jana Pruet, the Epoch Times Texas reporter. She created an excellent summary of the Life Site News interview (the only one he has given so far). It has several good quotes reflecting the man, such as “If you want to change it [the perennial, everlasting, glorious Truth], I’m the problem.” And Joe, nice work providing the shady background of prelates who conducted the Vatican fishing expedition and couldn’t rake up enough mud to justify their efforts.

      Reply
  17. Russel Winick

    Thank you so much, Margaret, for enlightening me (and others) through your marvelous poetry. That’s quite a challenge – but you make it seem easy.

    Reply
  18. Joseph S. Salemi

    Well, the Argentine bully has just done it again.

    Bishop Dominique Rey of France has been sidelined by the Vatican — that is, he has been forced to accept a “co-adjutor” bishop who will run his diocese in all practical respects, while Rey is consigned to figurehead status.

    The reason? Quite simple. Rey is a popular, conservative bishop whose diocese is flourishing with traditionalist Catholics, and who runs a seminary that is packed with eager young men who are studying to be priests — this at a time when most seminaries in France are empty. Some of the seminarians have come from all over Europe.

    Why didn’t Jorge Bergoglio just remove Rey, as he did with Strickland? Well, the furious blowback and bad publicity that the Vatican got because of the Strickland removal scared Bergoglio (Peronistas are dyed-in-the-wool cowards), so Jorge decided to keep Rey in place (nominally), while letting a trusted Vatican appointee wreck his flourishing, vibrant, fully Catholic diocese.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      Thanks, for the sad news, Joe. Instances of Church wrecking abound at an increasing rate. Bishop Strickland has called for the faithful to go “deeper into the Church.” That sounds like the necessary way to counter the longtime tactic of left radicals “gaining control of whatever they can.” But it will involve battle trauma, like that of the 59-year-old Swiss bishop who resigned last year, giving “inner fatigue” as his reason. He has not yet been replaced.

      Reply
  19. Adam Sedia

    This is not what I expected to read. My own reaction to Bergoglio’s latest usurpation was anger and indignation, and I was glad to see this quite different response. Fr. Ripperger stated in an interview that he always has to remind himself that God’s in charge and that all the evil going on the Church right now serves His plan somehow and we need to trust Him. I think this poem states the same thing (but much more beautifully). It is a gentle but powerful reminder of Who’s really in charge, and that “the gates of Hell shall not prevail.”

    Thank you.

    Reply
    • Joshua C. Frank

      All that is true, but that misses the point.

      I believe my own lines express what I’m thinking better than I could otherwise:

      To God’s small flock, our Shepherd seems asleep
      As one more pro-life priest, the Pope defrocks—
      The devil takes the people as his sheep.

      God says that “as you sow, so shall you reap”
      While keeping evil free from bars and locks—
      I lie in bed with dread and cannot sleep.

      Reply
  20. Joseph S. Salemi

    With all due respect, Adam, I agree that everything will work out according to the Divine Will, but far too many traditionalist R&R Catholics are using that truth as an excuse to sink into pietistic quietism and comfort. The recent essay by Edward Pentin at his blog is the latest attempt at Novus Ordo damage control, designed to convince angry Catholics that everything is OK, and that Vatican 2 heresy and Bergoglio’s depredations are all wonderful things that will in the long run bring us victory.

    It’s sort of like the Sioux Indians thinking that their ghost dances and magic shirts will protect them from U.S. Cavalry bullets.

    Reply
    • Adam Sedia

      I didn’t mean to give the impression that I’m an R&R Catholic. I’m firmly in the Barnhardt camp regarding Bergoglio as an antipope. The point I was making was more internal: unnecessary anxiety doesn’t achieve anything productive. When God wants me to act, it will be clear because it will be an outcome I can control. With Bishop Strickland, prayer is all I have power over now, but I have to be ready in case I am called to act more directly (i.e. “face the bullets”).

      Reply
  21. Margaret Coats

    Adam, thank you for your response to my poem. Its approach is needed just as much as anger and indignation, and there are other approaches as well to serving God and His Church in the present crisis. Above I quoted Bishop Strickland’s advice to “go deeper into the Church.” He didn’t say what he meant; I take it to mean whatever greater attention and effort each of us can give to the two purposes of the Church: the glory of God and the salvation of souls. Volunteering may put us in front of the bullets, but let’s do it, not forgetting the essential equipment of prayer and the sacraments.

    Reply
  22. Susan Jarvis Bryant

    Margaret, I wasn’t going to return to your comments page because I am not a Catholic and I’m still getting my head around the Catholic teachings. I am, however, a Christian and believe that God’s truth is the ultimate truth. Why wait for the right moment to call out every tongue that lies in the name of God?

    I speak as a woman of faith who left her position as church secretary because of lies… because God’s Word was being deliberately skewed to pursue a political agenda. I didn’t know what the outcome was going to be. All I knew was that I had to speak the truth. I knew the time was right because any time a lie is told in the name of God, the time is right. My silence would have been complicit in the lies. I knew that God’s truth meant more to me than my reputation or my pay. God’s truth shone as a result of me calling out the lies… an outcome I could never have predicted.

    Surely God’s truth should be held high, and that means calling out lies then and there. How will you know when and how you’re going to make a difference unless you speak up? To my mind, NOW is always the right time in the face of ills against God. I’m struggling to understand the complexities of this entire discussion. Shouldn’t it be a lot simpler than this?

    I cannot get beyond your words: “All the priest must do is follow the prescribed rite. It is valid even if he is an abominable sinner. And if he preaches heresy, the people are not tainted with guilt by being present.” Surely all people, whether priests, bishops, or the congregation, are tainted by guilt if they don’t call lies out when they hear them – that means NOW!

    Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Susan, your comments are quite pertinent, and should be addressed.

      First, concerning priests who are very evil sinners — Margaret’s point about them has to do with the Catholic distinction between “ex opere operato,” and “ex opere operantis.” Ex opere operato means “as a result of the work done.” Ex opere operantis means “as a result of the work of the one doing.”

      For Catholics, the seven sacraments and the rites associated with them are independently functioning channels of grace. It doesn’t matter what moral state the priest is in who ministers them, no more than it matters whose hand turns on a water spigot. The sacraments do their job “ex opere operato” — simply from their being done. Something done “ex opere operantis” means that it is dependent on the activity and will or some individual doer, and therefore his moral condition is part of the deal.

      Since Protestants have a different idea of how sacraments work, they find this distinction unpalatable. They can’t conceive of how a priest who is a murderer can validly confect the eucharistic gifts, or baptize an infant, or give absolution in the confessional. But all of those things are done “ex opere operato,” and the priest’s moral state does not matter. As long as he is a validly ordained priest, nothing else is relevant.

      Nevertheless, you are quite correct to say that we all have the right and duty as Christians (both Catholics and Protestants) to speak out very fiercely and savagely against any of our pastors, priests, ministers, hierarchy, or antipope who twist and pervert God’s laws and doctrines for political purposes of their own. We have to scream and shout and publicly embarrass all these criminals, no matter how high a position they hold. The problem that I have with many of my fellow Catholics is that they are temperamentally disinclined to take this kind of stance, and are always talking about “having respect for the office” (i.e. looking at the man’s vestments rather than listening to his words).

      I accept that a validly ordained priest can preside over the sacramental functions. But when he starts shooting off his mouth with stupid heresies and woke garbage and left-liberal sentimentality, I have no compunction at all about telling him in plain English to go screw himself! I just wish more R&R Catholics would do the same.

      I hope this helps as a clarification.

      Reply
      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        Joe, thank you very much for the clarification, and especially for the words in your closing paragraph. They make complete sense to me. The truth matters enough to call out lies in no uncertain terms. I appreciate your honesty.

    • Adam Sedia

      Prof. Salami is 100% right, but just to add some historical context, not every Christian during the Roman persecutions chose martyrdom; many burnt incense to the gods to save themselves- including priests. When Emperor Constantine released the persecuted Christians from prison, some priests among those released said that the priests who worshipped the gods could not validly perform the sacraments because of their sin. These were called Donatists after their leader. So Pope St. Miltiades condemned Donatism as heresy because requiring a perfect spiritual state of the priest imposed an unfair burden on the faithful. Hence ex opere operato.

      Reply
  23. Margaret Coats

    Joseph, thank you for explaining matters to Susan. And Susan, please excuse me for being otherwise occupied after making the above comment to Adam Sedia. Weekends are my busiest days. I didn’t notice when your comment came in, because I had just enough time to make one comment on a post not my own.

    Joe has explained God’s truth about the sacraments instituted by Christ for the sake of our salvation. He was not justifying my opinion. Why does God sometimes allow sinful priests to administer divine grace, the treasure of a share in His own life for souls? Because salvation is supremely important.

    I was baptized by a heretic and schismatic minister. I heard him preach many times, and do not recall a single lie. I left that Protestant denomination because I found out it didn’t teach the whole truth.

    As a Catholic, I have rarely heard objectionable preaching. I would rather not refer to “lies” because that has become a buzz word for anything the hearer opposes. Just this morning, one of my friends expressed the opinion that lies are all we hear from any source. This person fills friends’ inboxes with forwarded lies from numerous sources. I asked why not stop, then turned the conversation.

    When I do hear something objectionable, I usually follow the Scriptural dictum of first dealing with it person to person. This has nearly always worked, at least by making the offender so uncomfortable that he alters his position or keeps quiet in future. In one case when a priest had made a mistake, he corrected himself publicly in the next sermon.

    Sometimes I make handout sheets explaining and supporting truth that is not denied but obscured. This is one way of dealing with bishop and bureaucrats, and getting the message out to many others.
    Sometimes I purchase flyers or booklets and distribute them. Joining demonstrations is another means of objecting to the objectionable. I thank individuals and groups who organize them.

    Joe says Christians have a right and duty to speak against others (especially those in Church authority) who pervert doctrine for political purposes. Susan holds the more extreme position that Christians who hear heresy or lies become guilty of the same heresy or lies if they do not speak out against these things immediately. I said previously that this question had been decided against her opinion about 1500 years ago. The falsehood involved said that Christians who had weakened and offered incense to the emperor during persecution could NOT be forgiven. Let me make it quite clear that there was no question about token paganism being acceptable. The question was whether the offense was forgivable. Catholics said yes, and heretics said no. Catholics further said that if your pastor preached this heresy and you listened without denouncing him, you did not thereby become a heretic. Why? These puritanical pastors could be savage to those who did not agree with them. The Church avoided puritanical guilt by association. There are ways of being complicit in another’s sin, but these need to be judged carefully. I say “Blessed be God’s Holy Name” when I hear profanity, but I don’t confess to having used profanity if I hear someone else do so, and then fail to bless the Holy Name loudly enough immediately afterward.

    We can be brave and tough without thinking or speaking ill of others who don’t follow our ways in a painful situation. As you say, Susan, meeting that obligation of serving God brings its own rewards. May He bless you abundantly!

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Margaret, you say that Susan is “… thinking or speaking ill of others…”
      That is not true.
      What I see is a woman with a pure heart trying to understand an organization that has been making excuses for its failings for two thousand years, and then enshrining those excuses into church law that the faithful must follow…
      I guess you’re right, we must follow our leaders even if they are communists, thieves and child molesters.
      The reason that we must hold up these holy criminals?
      Because that is the rule that they made 1500 years ago… so just follow along… and make sure that donation is in the mail!!! peasant.
      I think Jesus would be clearing out the Temple…

      Reply
      • Phyllis Rose Schabow

        Actually, Jesus cleansed the temple of the first International Bankers who were using usury and huge exchange rates, and those buying and selling in a temple built for the worship of God, not gold. The Church is the spotless Bride of Christ and she can never err. It is church MEN, like Judas Iscariot, who make the most noise with their heresies and schisms. One of the greatest teachers in Church history, Dom Prosper Gueranger, OSB, said this, “Heresy is spiritual adultery.” which means that every priest, bishop and pope is wedded to the Church and all her teachings. When one of them goes after lies and errors and prefers them to the Spotless Bride and True Teaching, he becomes an enemy of Christ the Bridegroom – the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. If he dies in that condition, there is no heaven for him.

      • Phyllis Rose Schabow

        Hi Mike! Of course, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” So all Catholics go to confession, the laity, priests, bishops and all popes. Some of them go daily. But no one, not even the pope himself, has the authority to change any of Christ’s teachings. All revelation ended with the death of the last apostle, St. John the Divine. All Catholics must hold what was revealed to His Church, and they have been doing so for 2, 023 years now since the Church was founded on Pentecost Sunday. The Holy Ghost descended upon His Bride, the Mother of God the Son, and all the Apostles gathered in the upper room. This is the birthday of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Jesus Christ “upon this rock,” and He was speaking to Peter, the first recorded Pope of the Catholic Church. History proves there is an unbroken line from St. Peter to Francis Bergoglio. Chesterson said, “No mere human organization could have survived the bungling and outright bad leadership if it were not Divine.”

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Phyllis, you’re missing the point. As Joseph Salemi said:

        “Contemporary Roman Catholics have a VERY REAL PROBLEM on our hands, and it can’t be addressed by genuflections and rote obedience. A very large segment of the Novus Ordo Church (both clergy and laity) have given themselves over to modernist poison and left-liberalism. They haven’t done so out of natural human fear, but because they agree with it and support it!”

        It’s actually even worse than that, because I’ve dealt with traditionalist circles and heard them spout the same left-liberal crap as Novus Ordo Catholics.

        I think we’re in the End Times and Jesus will come well before 2100, because we’re rapidly turning into the world just before the Flood.

    • Monika Cooper

      Thank you for your defense of the Church on this page, Margaret. I didn’t see you accusing anyone in particular of “thinking or speaking ill of others,” but only making a general admonition against it. It’s extremely easy to fall into premature and unjust judgments of characters and motives when so much is not what it seems, when there is so much active deception and at times possibly very justified dissimulation around us. I think most of us have had personal experience of just how easy (!) and can understand and forgive the same fault in others. But, at the same time, we all have to watch our thoughts and words.

      Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Margaret and Adam, the question of the Donatists doesn’t really apply in the case of Susan. The priests who had sacrificed to the emperor acted out of simple human fear. They had not become flagrant heretics who denied received doctrines. They sinned out of weakness, not pertinacious rebellion.

      In Susan’s case, the new woman pastor who took over the church where she worked was a conscious agent of left-liberalism, wokeism, BLM anti-white racism, and every other “current thing.” Continuing to work there would have required Susan to shut her eyes, ears, mouth, and mind to a complete corruption of religion in the name of counter-cultural political activism. Quitting was the only honorable and heroic thing for Susan to do. It certainly would NOT have helped to try correcting the pastor privately, or distributing flyers and booklets.

      Contemporary Roman Catholics have a VERY REAL PROBLEM on our hands, and it can’t be addressed by genuflections and rote obedience. A very large segment of the Novus Ordo Church (both clergy and laity) have given themselves over to modernist poison and left-liberalism. They haven’t done so out of natural human fear, but because they agree with it and support it!

      Such people don’t deserve kind words. They need to be condemned “with burning lips,” as one papal statement says. This is why I encourage a very robust and healthy anticlericalism among traditionalist Catholics, because quite frankly a great many of the hierarchy and priests of the Church have become comfortable treating us as ignorant sheep who are to herded and shorn, and they certainly refuse to hear our complaints about Bergoglianism. We’re told instead that it is “none of our business,” and that we should just shut up and pray and fill the collection plate.

      If we had Catholics who were like Susan Bryant, maybe we’d have more victories.

      Reply
  24. Margaret Coats

    Mike Bryant, you have made a mistake by quoting some words of mine and reading them in a misleading way. Let’s be clear. You say “Margaret, you say that Susan is ‘thinking or speaking ill of others.'” Not so. I said, “We can be brave or tough without thinking or speaking ill of others who don’t follow our ways in a painful situation.” “We” in that statement refers directly to myself and Susan, since I am addressing her. I had described some ways in which I act in such a situation. “We” thus clearly includes me. “Our ways” means Susan’s and mine.

    I go on in the following sentence to address Susan. “As you say, Susan, meeting that obligation of serving God brings its own rewards.” There I refer to Susan’s way, which she had described and then spoken of its rewards. I agreed with Susan that she had met an obligation of serving God.

    I conclude by wishing blessings upon Susan for serving God. “May He bless you abundantly!”

    Those three sentences make up the entire paragraph and they constitute praise of Susan.
    They do not support the notion that I accuse Susan of speaking or thinking ill of others.

    I was, however, responding to Susan’s words. These are hers, not mine. In my reply, I disagreed with her judging “all people” to be “tainted by guilt” if they did not act as she described. Here’s what Susan said: “Surely all people, whether priests, bishops, or the congregation, are tainted by guilt if they don’t call out lies when they hear them–and that means NOW!”

    My disagreement with her emphatic statement does not say that she spoke or thought ill of others.

    Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Of course you were speaking of you AND Susan, Margaret. You very carefully explained that your way of handling lies is more involved than, more nuanced than and much preferable to Susan’s. Of course I shouldn’t use the word ‘lies’ at all since it is a buzz word for anything anyone disagrees with. We all must now be very careful to agree with our betters, because they have rules and writings that are hundreds of years old that explain precisely why everything they do is just fine. These rules even have nice little Latin descriptives which must add to their godly weight.
      You, Margaret have had your problems with your first pastor, and I have had my own problems. I might have actually been able to save some souls by speaking up earlier about the predations that occurred to me and others at the hands of a genuine sadist, and later, child molester by the name of Brother Damian Victor Galigan.
      It’s past time we spoke up against the predators, liars and communists that are hiding behind an accepting, and yes, complicit laity.
      When we stand at judgment, there will be no priest holding our hand.

      Reply
      • Margaret Coats

        Cut it out, Mike. I explained that I have used multiple approaches, and I suppose Susan and you have done likewise. I’m not the enemy of other Christians, and I am most grateful to Reverend Archibald McNair for conferring the sacrament of baptism that put me on the way of salvation when I was six months old. And to many, many spiritual fathers and fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.

      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        Margaret, I commented on your poem to express my concern at Bishop Strickland’s plight and to ask questions in order to fully understand the situation from the Catholic Church’s perspective. I am grateful for the replies I’ve received, and I am still trying to process them by researching and learning. I didn’t want to return to the page once again and further detract from the sentiment of your poem. I am, however, extremely concerned by your high-handed dismissal of the very problems that are crushing the credibility of the Catholic Church.

        Mike’s horrifying experiences with the Catholic Church (and he is most certainly not alone) has been trampled on by you in your eagerness to relay how grateful you are to the religious figures in your life on your personal road to salvation.

        This saddens me. Please know that as an ex-Catholic, Mike has a strong relationship with God. His problem lies with the Catholic Church because of the dismissal of the evil pervading it – evil dismissed all too casually by those who care more for the institution and its traditions than they do for the souls ruined by it.

        I am not the enemy of other Christians either. I am a concerned Christian trying to understand why and how, and so is Mike.

      • Margaret Coats

        Susan, I am responding to you and Mike first, among the other responses I need to make here, because this is most important. I am glad to hear you say you and Mike are trying to understand. I did not intend to trample upon Mike’s bad experiences. The name of Brother Damian Victor Galigan as a sexual predator was mentioned by him following a long passage of sarcastic contempt directed at me. Mike then said it is past time to speak out against predators, liars, and communists hiding behind an accepting and complicit laity. That seemed to refer to the present time and include myself among the laity accepting of and complicit in predation, lying, and communism.

        If Mike wanted sympathy, I am sorry not to have given it. From what I know of Mike, he did not want sympathy but agreement with the idea that Catholic laity are guilty of those offenses, and do not speak out against them.

        I could not agree, but I thought it best not to say so. Since Mike had mentioned my first pastor, whom I had said was Protestant, I expressed gratitude toward him as someone of your and Mike’s persuasion. I added many others who because of baptism are related to us in Christ.

        The speaking out against sexual predation in the Church began more than twenty years ago, at which time that news came to a head. The most important speaking out on the matter came from indignant lay faithful. The result has been creation of a child protection bureaucracy within the Church. I do not mean to disparage it by using the word “bureaucracy.” That’s just what it is, with persons at every level responsible for programs that are continually revised. I myself have been through more meetings, trainings, and updates than I can count. And fingerprintings and livescans and criminal background checks. With more information from former victims, the programs now are much more sensitive than at first. Some are focused on recovery for those mistreated, but I only know they exist. Mostly it’s prevention by education of clergy, religious, staff, and volunteers.

        With regard to Church support of leftist projects, speaking out has taken many forms over the years as leftists change tactics. The Campaign for Human Development (made to look like a charity) was unmasked long ago, and contributions dwindled so much that it was combined with other collections. Lay faithful still agitate against special collections and make noise if regular collections have any suspicious allocations. Michelle Malkin has done the research and spoken here about the indebtedness of the Church to government funds for settling immigrants. That is a tough one to deal with because the money is not used in ways that lay oversight can see. Little things are being corrected, like a soup kitchen doing political indoctrination unbeknownst to the pastor. Volunteers were dismissed; different organizers were found. This is where the faithful need to step up and be concerned with the glory of God and the salvation of souls in volunteering for Church organizations that do different kinds of work. It’s happening. Outside groups are formed for particular purposes on both sides of the political spectrum. The great thing for Catholic spirit is that leftists are much freer in groups not connected to a church, and would rather have secular prestige. They don’t need church people, and depart if they get little cooperation or much opposition. The opposition is there, but complainers are more prevalent than those willing to do Catholic action. And ranters are unlikely to be in the trenches.

      • Mike Bryant

        Margaret,
        Thanks for your response. I have a feeling that you knew you couldn’t trust the government schools and perhaps you knew you couldn’t even trust private schools. I believe that is why you decided on home schooling for your own children. For that I congratulate you. I wasn’t safe in a private school… St. Joseph’s Academy, Brownsville, Texas.
        And now, the untrustworthy government is passing out hundreds of millions of dollars to untrustworthy churches. The churches are being paid to help settle millions of military age men in every state of our union. The churches are also being paid to distribute parentless children all over the country. Are they being sex-trafficked? There is evidence that it is now rife. Anyone that knows what is happening is aware that CPS and most other three letter agencies cannot be trusted. Bad things are happening, and the churches are complicit. I am including the laity in that guilt because Archbishop Sheen made it clear that only the laity can straighten out the Bishops, Priests and religious. I guess the money must be really good.
        Do we wake up in a house to house war with the terrorists and illegals that are in our midst now before we do something?
        I think it is almost comical that the government that is pushing socialism through hate of Christians and conservatives is now paying those Christians and conservatives to be complicit in their own destruction.
        Of course, the destruction the government has planned for us is nothing compared to what God will bring against those governments. When we say the Lord’s Prayer we are actually asking God to establish His Kingdom here on Earth. He will establish it by destroying every earthly kingdom.
        If our churches are in bed with despicable government actions then we are praying for our own destruction.
        That is very, very sad.
        If our hands are tied, it is time to untie them.
        The government money is tying our hands.

        You are right because the ranters, Strickland and Pavone, have been removed from the trenches by Bergoglio.

  25. Mia

    I have been meaning to post how thought- provoking these discussions are here on SCP. I do not think I have found such thoughtful and knowledgeable debates anywhere else. So I always ask myself whether I should post my tuppence worth.
    Since I was baptised in a Greek Orthodox Church at about four months old I have loved that plain St. Nicholas church which is now in Occupied Northern Cyprus. This month I found out it has been turned into a mosque.
    Personally I disagree with all worshipping of icons but have never found the courage to speak to anyone about it.
    So I have wrestled with and for my faith. It isn’t easy.
    And now to find that church and many others are now mosques. But people everywhere are so ready to march for Palestine which was never an authentic state but totally ignore the plight of Christian Cyprus.
    I do not know what the best way forward is but I do believe in that adage,
    United we stand, divided we fall. I believe the schism in the church helped Constantinople to fall to the ottomans although it may have happened with or without it. And Cyprus was Catholic up to about 1570 when it was captured by the ottomans after many raids. At least I believe it was as it was part of the Florentine empire?
    Are many spiritually good people falling away because of the shepherds?
    Undoubtably so. Is it being done by design? Is it a test?
    Thank you, I know I have digressed a bit but it certainly helps to have discussions. I hope it brings all Christians closer rather than further apart.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Mia, thank you so much for summoning the courage to join the conversation with your valid points of view. The history of your homeland and your personal experiences add great weight to the discussion, and you have every right to be concerned. I would like to try and answer your questions from my perspective as a Christian brought up in the Church of England faith.

      I believe the Christian churches are threatened right now, by design. Christians don’t belong in a Marxist world. Spiritually good people are falling away because of their shepherds – yes. When I first worked for the church in my town in Texas back in 2013, there were around 200-250 parishioners. When I left in 2022, there were around 50-75 and now, nearly all of them have left to form their own church because of their agenda-driven shepherd. I also believe that the future of the Church is endangered by those sheep who don’t bleat at the top of their voice when they know there’s a wolf in the pulpit. That wolf may well be responsible for sending their very own lambs to the slaughter… they shouldn’t remain silent in the presence of one who doesn’t have God’s word on his lips.

      Reply
      • Mia

        Thank you for your very kind reply. I really understand the dilemma all Christians of every denomination face.
        I really hope that those parishioners who went on to form their own church flourish.
        Each one of us must do what we can and what our conscience tells us to do.

        So now I have realised one thing. That we are all different and our calling might be different. One might do more by staying and fighting within and someone else through leaving and starting anew. The worst thing must be to do nothing. I know this has made me think about what I am doing!?

        PS And I thought we had difficult conversations before on other threads but this seems to be especially difficult!

    • Mike Bryant

      Mia, of course the sheep must be involved. The Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen said:

      Who’s going to save our Church? It’s not our bishops, it’s not our priests and it is not the religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes and the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that the priests act like priests, your bishops act like bishops, and the religious act like religious.

      There is an article about Archbishop Sheen on Wikipedia that is well worth a read.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_J._Sheen
      He was the ideal Catholic for many years. I watched him on television. Bishop Strickland would have been a worthy successor to Sheen.
      Archbishop Sheen’s beatification has been put on hold by the Vatican. It is no mystery why…

      Reply
      • Joseph S. Salemi

        Mike, your honesty and your anger are more than welcome in our current predicament. In fact, I’d say that they are God-sent.

        Just as a side note: the people of Argentina have just elected a new President, Javier Milei. He is a tough right-wing populist, and he has publicly called Bergoglio “a left-wing son of a bitch.”

        That’s the kind of anticlericalism we need today.

        Like all of Argentina, Milei knows that Bergoglio has done everything in his power to cover up pedophilia or excuse it. This is why Bergoglio is afraid to make a visit to his native country.

      • Mike Bryant

        Thanks, Joe. When I was a child I couldn’t find my voice. But I’m not a child anymore and I am doing all I can to wake people up.
        Speaking of Argentina,

        https://bigleaguepolitics.com/pope-francis-parties-with-transgender-prostitutes-in-the-vatican-to-commemorate-world-day-of-the-poor/

        There are also kind words in the article on Archbishop Strickland and Father Pavone.

        Maybe we should say a prayer for Javier Milei… do you think prayers for Bergoglio would help?

      • Mia

        I blame it all on priests not being allowed to marry. Not only is it one of the root causes of evil in some cases but it also has meant that over two thousand years Christianity could have had so many more christian families. What a loss! It is interesting that the church can make unbiblical changes but cannot change this very thing that isn’t really something required by God. He gave man someone to help him and told them to go forth and multiply.

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        Mia —

        Allowing priests to marry would not solve the problem of priests who are sexually attracted to underage children and adolescents. Homosexual priests preying on these young persons are the issue, not heterosexual priests who might have an affair with an adult woman.

        In the medieval period, many heterosexual priests had concubines, unofficially tolerated as long as they were not flaunted to cause scandal.

      • Margaret Coats

        Mia, Joseph is right about marriage not satisfying those who tend to abuse children. MOST abusers are married, as we know from criminal records of persons who gain access to children as school teachers or relatives.

        But the important reason for priestly celibacy is because it is Apostolic Tradition, supported in the Bible. “Apostolic” means it comes down directly from the Apostles chosen by Christ. I hope you will be interested in what I can relay from a book written by Christian Cochini, S.J. It is relevant to married clergy in churches Eastern and Western. Father Cochini looked at the issue by gathering every scrap of evidence of married clergy anywhere up to the end of the 7th century. He stopped there because that was when Eastern churches decided to give permission for priests (but not bishops) to be married.

        Starting with the Bible, Peter was the only apostle who had been married, because he had a mother-in-law. But his wife is never mentioned, so he must have been a widower. All the apostles clearly give up family life of any kind while they follow Jesus. Afterward, a “sister-woman” accompanies one or two of them. That is not a word for “wife.”

        In the early missionary centuries, married men who were Christian converts sometimes became priests. Clearly local priests were needed in newly converted places! Evidence is overwhelming that these men separated from their wives upon ordination. But because the Church did not want to break up marriages, wives had to give explicit permission for the husband to become a priest. That was a strong law known from much evidence.

        The rule of celibacy was sometimes broken because of human failings. But we know it existed because of much discussion about correcting these failings in early church councils and imperial laws. Writings of the Fathers also testify to priestly celibacy as required.

        The first local church to allow marriage for priests was the one in Persia (Iran). Soon Faith in that area became decadent, with false teachings arising as the priesthood was improperly handed down from father to son. The same thing happened in several other lands that went from allowing clerical marriage to accepting heresy throughout the local church and ultimately to Muslim conquest.

        Father Cochini analyzes this to suggest strongly that clerical marriage weakens the Church wherever it is allowed. It can be allowed, we know, but it deprives the Church of strength in a way hard for us to understand.

        I think of this using the Jewish concept of mitzvot, or blessing. Today, it is not an absolute rule of Judaism to eat only kosher food and keep the Sabbath religiously. Persons who do not do these things still consider themselves Jewish, but they are thought to be depriving themselves of many blessings.

        For the Church of Christ, clerical celibacy is such a great blessing that it seems to have converted nations and kept the Faith pure.

        The book “Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy” not only explains many things about celibacy but contains all the ancient documents in translation. The English edition came out in 1990. It takes forever to read, so I only recommend it if someone is REALLY interested.

        I apologize, Mia, for not having answered your comments earlier. I will get back to the others when I have time, but I had to do this one because the book came to sight as soon as I looked at my bookshelf!

      • Mia

        Yes, I see now, the problem is far too complex and my answer too simplistic.

        I think I’ll go and try to write another nursery rhyme

      • Mia

        Dear Margaret,
        I think our comments crossed so my earlier comment was written before I read your response.
        I need time to read it properly but I realise now from Prof. Salemi’s and your comment that I have waded in on an issue I should have been wise enough to leave alone.
        I will try and get hold of the book you mention because I am interested as I have been pondering many issues for a very long time.
        Ps. I have googled Bishop Strickland and now know something about him.

      • Mike Bryant

        Hey Josh, yeah, Milei is definitely NOT your Reagan conservative. He is a Libertarian. The pendulum has swung so far toward collectivism, perhaps it will now swing too far toward freedom. No matter what happens, of course, Christians must be about taking responsibility for the truly evil practice of taking money from the feds to resettle terrorists and to deliver children to sex traffickers.
        I recently talked to an old friend who is very proud of his involvement in this money-making endeavor. Besides the money his church is getting from the Feds, the church is getting his tithe! When I explained to him what was happening, he decided that we are no longer friends. It’s hard to convince someone of something, when their paycheck depends on them believing the opposite.

        It breaks my heart to see this little girl. There are many like her. We must wake up and speak up and never stop speaking up. Our churches are complicit.

        https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1726326260937478235.html

        Of course, as Christians, we must stop this, and other terrible practices taking place in our churches no matter how authoritarian are churches are. Our churches must be separate from the politics of the day. Can you imagine early Christians having Contracts with imperial Rome to prepare and then clean up the Colliseum after the Circuses?

        Speaking of lies, Tucker Carlson has done a thirty minute speech that offers a unique perspective of where we are…

        https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1727090631850492257?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1727090631850492257%7Ctwgr%5E461e227c2c48a25995f8728d261c41dccc2c0b8d%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatfinger.com%2Fhome3%2F

  26. Joseph S. Salemi

    Prayers always help, Mike.

    But after ten years of horror, this Bergoglio’s antics can’t surprise me any longer, no matter how degraded and indecorous they might be.

    A “Pope” partying with trannie prostitutes? Is there anything that this guy won’t do?

    Reply
  27. Mia

    Oh dear,
    not something about him. But more about him.
    What comes from posting in a hurry.

    Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Josh, it was predictable that Bergoglio would finally decide to stand up with the left-liberal chorus to condemn Israel for defensing itself. The man simply can’t bear not being a part of “the current thing.”

      As for Milei changing his tune, that was a very slick Peronista move on Bergoglio’s part. He calls up the newly elected Argentine president to congratulate him and make nice. Naturally Milei has to reciprocate in some way, and calls him “the Holy Father.” This was deliberately designed to make Milei look hypocritical. Pope Putz scores a point.

      Diplomatic exchanges and greetings are always purely formalistic. We all addressed the leader of the Third Reich as “Chancellor Hitler” before the war started.

      Reply
  29. Mia

    Dear Margaret,
    I have had time to read your post properly now and can understand the issue a little more now.
    Yes the Greek Orthodox Church allows some priests to marry although they cannot become bishops etc. It was one such village priest that I remember so well even after all these years that taught me all about the love of Jesus. He was married with a family. His face shone when he spoke and he radiated warmth and affection for his class. I suppose I have based my views on him.
    There was an olive grove right next to the church then and in my childish imagination I imagined Jesus walking there. There were shepherds outside the village too and it was as if I was living in biblical times!
    Later on going abroad real trials and tribulations began, it seems that we must all face them one way or another, I survived because of my faith. I often thought that we had moved to Sodom and Gomorrah because I had so much knowledge of the bible at a very young age and precisely because I attended church every Sunday where a part of the bible would be read . So it wasn’t long before I had heard the whole of the New Testament.
    This very month I have heard that very church there has now been turned into a mosque by the Turkish invaders and settlers who displaced my entire family both my mothers side as well as my fathers.
    I don’t know why but the whole situation hardly gets a mention anywhere. when I do mention it, and I do, often, eyes usually glaze over and I can imagine many reading my posts thinking, oh no not Cyprus again , give it a rest Mia!
    But I do not include your good self or most others here who have commented back so kindly.

    But I digress. Should priests be allowed to marry? I am still of the opinion that they should be given the choice. In fact isn’t there a passage in the New Testament that suggests just that. If any of you wish to remain celibate it is to be desired but if you feel you can’t then by all means marry. I have paraphrased it. Now I must look it up.
    Thank you for giving so much time and thought to my comments.

    Also thank you prof, Salemi , Susan and Mike . I find that we might not change the world but I know it helps me to have discussions such as these.
    I hope that in some way I may be able to help too.

    Happy thanks giving tomorrow.

    Reply
    • Joshua C. Frank

      “I don’t know why but the whole situation hardly gets a mention anywhere. when I do mention it, and I do, often, eyes usually glaze over and I can imagine many reading my posts thinking, oh no not Cyprus again , give it a rest Mia!”

      Why? Because the world has been taken over by the devils incarnate we euphemistically call leftists, who hate Christians because they hate Jesus and everything He stands for. If it were Christians invading a Muslim land, you can bet they’d be all over the subject.

      I don’t react as you describe. I believe word needs to get out. What if you wrote and submitted a poem about Cyprus and what’s going on there? That would be the best way to get the word out.

      Reply
      • Mia

        Thank you Joshua, I really appreciate your kind reply.
        I would love to write a poem but so far I have not been able to.
        I seem to be able to make some attempts but find it difficult to create something worthwhile. I have one or two short poems in Greek that are not bad but they are awful when translated.
        I do think though that the more I post and comment the more it helps me to communicate about the issue. So now not only will I remain hopeful that one day I might manage a credible poem I will make more of an effort. Thank you for your encouragement.
        I wish you all the best. I really did not think that you were one of those not willing to listen. That is why I find myself returning to this site over and over again. Not least because of the excellent poems and knowledge of everyone here of course; it is without doubt one of the best places to be!

    • Mike Bryant

      Mia, I think the verse you are looking for is 1 Corinthians 7:28.
      Also, many agree with you.

      Reply
  30. Margaret Coats

    I Corinthians 7:25-28

    Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord, but I give counsel, as having obtained mercy of the Lord, to be faithful.
    I think, therefore, that this is good for the present necessity, that it is good for a man so to be.
    Art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife.
    But if thou take a wife, thou hast not sinned. And if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless, such shall have tribulation of the flesh. But I spare you.

    Verse and context show that Saint Paul speaks of all Christians male and female, not of priests. This is the Biblical support for teaching that virginity is superior to marriage. It is, without meaning that persons who marry do ill, or that persons already married should seek to change.

    Now what does Jesus say to the men He chose as Christian priests? First He tells them that marriage is indissoluble. Then comes Matthew 19:10-12

    His disciples say unto him, if the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.
    Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given.
    For there are eunuchs who were born so from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made so by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take.

    Celibacy required for the priesthood, and for some other vocations, is a divine gift. The apostles accepted, as very recently did a young man I know, who will be ordained after two more years of training. The Church gave him five years before asking him to accept the gift.

    “Eunuch for the kingdom of heaven” means a man who disciplines his heart, not one who mutilates his body. In the third century Origen was said to have misunderstood this, but we are not sure he did. No one should misunderstand Our Lord now.

    Reply
      • Margaret Coats

        Yes, the Wife had her jolly interpretation of Scripture, and as many husbands as the Samaritan Woman at the Well, I believe. Come to think of it, that woman (now Saint Photina) turned the conversation with Jesus from her life to the thorny issue between Jews and Samaritans about where to worship.

    • Mike Bryant

      Wasn’t Peter married? And weren’t others of the apostles married?

      Also, weren’t at least four of the popes married?

      Weren’t the Levite priests married?

      Reply
      • Margaret Coats

        Mike, if you’re really interested in those first two questions, I’ll recommend the same book I mentioned to Mia, “Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy,” by Christian Cochini, S.J. It contains all the evidence about married clergy from the first seven centuries of Christianity, starting with the New Testament. You read the documents themselves in addition to what the author says. As I warned Mia, it takes forever (metaphorically).

      • Mike Bryant

        No thanks, Margaret. I know the answer. Peter was married and Jesus was just fine with it. Also the answer is yes to the other questions I asked. I do understand that there are many reasons and subtleties that explain why the Catholic Church adopted this lifestyle for all priests, just as there are reasons why we are not supposed to point out the evil shortcomings of the clergy and the religious.

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        I think we need to make a distinction between celibacy and chastity.

        Strictly speaking , “celibacy” just means the condition of not having a legally recognized spouse (that is, not having gone through the sacrament and public ceremony of marriage). But “chastity” refers to the practice of total continence (that is, avoiding any illegitimate sexual activity). Just because you’re “celibate” doesn’t mean that you are living a life of chastity, as any lusty but unmarried 18-year-old can tell you.

        The eventual imposition of the universal rule of celibacy in the Latin Rite certainly had the spiritual and scriptural motives that Margaret has mentioned. But a more pressing mundane motive was the need to preserve Church property from being caught up in inheritance disputes with the legitimate sons of priests or hierarchy. By denying priests and other clergy the right to wed, the problem was solved. Any children a priest or bishop or abbot had with a mistress or a concubine were illegitimate, and had no legal standing to claim their father’s property by inheritance.

        Was the “celibate” priest also supposed to be “chaste”? Sure, ideally speaking. But most of the hierarchy were sensible enough to realize that men are weak when it comes to sex, and some priests were surely going to have affairs, or keep concubines, or pay for the services of prostitutes. But these would just be personal, private sins that had no bearing on Church property, or Church discipline.

        The poet John Skelton was an ordained Catholic priest, but he kept a mistress in his rectory, and sired a son on her. There was some grumbling from his parishioners, but Skelton just brought the infant to church with him on Sundays, presented him to the congregation, and asked if they could honestly find anything wrong in this innocent little kid. Skelton was “celibate,” but he was not “chaste.”

      • Mike Bryant

        Thank you so much, Joe. That makes everything crystal clear.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.