He is not flawless, but he is our hero. Pope Francis has, foolishly, given our Resistance a martyr to rally our spirits.
Alone among our American bishops (except for Cardinal Burke of course), he has spoken clearly, fiercely, relentlessly, fearlessly against the synodol nonsense of the Vatican. It is such a refreshment for the mind and soul! Someone is saying: "The Emperor has no clothes!"
A serious mistake, in my view, was the lecture in Rome in late October in which he quoted, favorably, from a friend's letter which referred to our Pontiff as a "usurper" and referred to the "cowards gathered in Rome for the Synod." They were not his words but he was clearly in agreement. That language was inflammatory, disrespectful, extreme, and not befitting a bishop. In a show with Raymond Arroyo, recorded Wednesday (Nov. 15), a week after his dismissal, he did not retract. He explained (as he has repeatedly) that he is not a "sedevacantist;" that he accepts the authority of the pope. What he meant by the word "usurper" is that Pope Francis is using his (genuine, legitimate) authority to undermine our legacy of faith. He explained that the letter was very personal for him, challenging him to speak the Truth boldly, setting aside fear of man.
That particular speech was not greatly relevant, however, since his removal was pretty certainly already determined by the Vatican.
It was enlightening for me to observe the bishop on the Arroyo show, just a week after the hatchet fell. He was calm, serene, confident, clear. He passionately protested his love for the Church and loyalty to Rome. He again encouraged everyone to persevere in prayer, the pursuit of holiness, and fidelity to our received Faith. No shrill indignation, anger, victimization, narcissism, hero complex. He explained that he was asked to not attend the bishops' conference and he complied. He gathered with others outside of the meeting, kneeling on the asphalt to pray the rosary. I found that edifying. I found him charming.
He is clearly an intense, conscientious man. I know the type as I am in the club. He cannot help himself: he cannot not speak the Truth as he receives it. He is a no-nonsense guy; no people pleaser; not a "nice guy." He is a strong leader. He is the man you want leading the troops up the hill. He has an abrasive edge to him. He is not real sensitive and open to the other side of the argument.
In sharp contrast to the rest of the episcopacy, his passion for truth is not balanced by the Catholic intuition for unity, diplomacy, discretion, compromise, and tolerance. That is probably his weakness as a bishop. Apparently, about 5 years ago he cleaned house in his Tyler diocese, clearing out those pulling in the opposite direction. That kind of decisiveness is a strength and a weakness. Catholic life, especially for the hierarchy, is the tension between speaking the Truth clearly, and an openness to disagreement, an accompaniment of those weak in insight and faith, an acceptance of intellectual dissonance on behalf of a deeper union in the Spirit. The bishop is challenged, with every disciple, to "speak the Truth in Love." Most of us tend to fail in truth or in love. Strickland gets A++ on Truth. On Love not so good. His own subjective intentions are pure. He is not feeling hate or indifference. But much of his language is in fact offensive and polarizing. But I love him because the remainder of the American episcopacy seem to be overly compliant, codependent, enabling of a dysfunctional papacy. I have been heartened to hear recently how unhappy Francis and his delegate Cardinal Pierre are with what they see as a resistant American Church. My perception has been that the strong resistance is from laymen: Reno, Arroyo, Royal, Martin, Chapp, and others. I do not see the episcopal resistance but I am glad that it is being felt in Rome.
The diocese underwent a visitation a few months ago and there are allegations of administrative problems. But on the show Strickland candidly shared what he was told: lack of fraternal closeness with other bishops (meaning he sees things differently), failure to implement repression of the Latin Mass, his aggressive social media presence including his opposition to the synod. It has been pointed out by many, including Cardinal Mueller, that dismissal of a bishop requires a serious canonical crime or real emergency. The theological argument is far from that bar. The dismissal was an insult to the episcopacy.
Were I a bishop, I would want to be as clear and courageous as Strickland. But temperamentally I am more congenial and irenic. My intellect is like his; my heart is more conciliatory, less combative. Let's recall two 20th century ecclesial heroes with qualities that might complement and purify those of Bishop Strickland.
Regarding the firm Vatican repression of the modernist movement in the 1900s, the name of Baron von Hugel is mentioned after Loisy and Tyrell as a leading light. The later two were excommunicated. By contrast, von Hugel complied; re-directed his energies into the study of mysticism; and developed a rich understanding of the distinct dimensions of our faith as intellectual, institutional and mystical. He patiently suffered the discipline of the hierarchy; and humbly deferred to the intellectual rebuke as he surrendered more deeply to the life of prayer. He is an excellent example for Bishop Strickland and all of us in the Resistance; the intellectual confusion and institutional chaos cannot inhibit us in our love for Christ and his Church. Strickland understands this: thus his serenity.
A few decades later Henri de Lubac, the Jesuit theologian, was silenced by the Vatican. He also complied. He also wrote a masterpiece about Catholicism in which he elaborated his profound understanding of and love for the Church. He lived to see, a few decades later, his vindication in Vatican II. His witness of humble, obedient, hopeful silence is also a lesson for all of us.
The bishop has shared that he received a locution from the Queen of Martyrs, directing him to prepare for martyrdom. Is that from the Holy Spirit? Or his own psyche? Or even from the devil, causing dissension and conflict in the Church? On this, I go with the Holy Spirit. The content is solid! Martyrdom, understood first as witness to Christ and his Truth and secondly to willingness to suffer for it, is essential to discipleship. It was normative for early Christianity: baptism brought with it a readiness to die for Christ. The "form of martyrdom" is imprinted on our soul with baptism, confirmation and orders. Across the Church, for example within the Charismatic Renewal and the Neocatechumenal Way, this word is being spoken. It comes from heaven. That is not to say that everything the bishop has done is an expression of this Word. Speaking of "usurper of the chair" and "cowards" is clearly not from the Holy Spirit. So we find here, as with all things human, a dense combination of the good and the bad.
Bishop Strickland at the moment has no plans. He seems hopeful, humble, serene, and yet resolute to be faithful to his duty as bishop to announce the truth. May he, with the rest of us, grow in holiness, wisdom and love. And we, the Resistance, pray the same for Pope Francis and his lieutenants, our antagonists!
No comments:
Post a Comment