Excellent letter, as a devout Catholic I am encouraged by your powerful and concis bute expression of the current situation in our church today. I am praying for you and pray for support of your good and and faithful Holy Priest and Bishops. You truly are a light in an ever discouraging world.
Si vis pacem, para bellum accipite armaturam Dei, hoc est ecclesiae militanti.
As a recovering “liberal Protestant,” and confirmed Catholic I see the Catholic Church taking the same path. We attend a small parish in the Chicago area led by a good Priest whom I feel will be removed because of his outspokenness. His bulletin letter was intercepted and removed because it addressed the topic of gay marriage in a way deemed unacceptable. We also attend a church here in the Dallas area where our good Priest of two years, was suddenly reassigned. And last year the bishop came for the installation of the replacement. The Bishop’s homily was all about the importance of complete obedience. There is a concept of Sobornost in the Eastern churches--I have found that only in a small parish in Irving--a 40 minute drive. We continually search for islands of truth--suspect at some time in near future the church will have to go underground again. Than you for your article, it confirms what I was taught in RCIA about obedience.
“I believe all that the Holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.” This is what we all affirmed at our confirmation. I pray that all those in positions of authority - priests, bishops, cardinals, and the Holy Father - believe the same. However, the direction of the “synodal” church appears to be embracing the errors of Protestantism, as many are actively working to undermine the Sacred Deposit of Faith and refute the inerrancy and divine revelation of Sacred Scripture.
May God bless you in your courageous defense of the Faith - and may your example strengthen your brother bishops and cardinals to overcome their fear and similarly stand firm for Christ.
I am very glad to see you have a Substack now, Bishop Strickland, because there is a growing body of people who have turned off all main stream media and are searching for truth by going straight to the source. Substack is a great place. The battle is on... from organizations formed to fight, destroying themselves from within (ie Coalition of Canceled Priests; Church Militant, etc.) to the never-ending stream of wrongly canceled clergy hung out to dry with no cause (such as my own pastor of 20+ years Fr. James Parker, formerly of Holy Cross Catholic Church, Batavia, IL https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fr+james+parker+youtube). I have lately been testing the waters with the TLM, although it's not easy to reconfigure my understanding of the Mass after 60 years and I feel like I have been lied to my entire life with how little the Novus Ordo resembles the original Mass. But I feel at home with the only Mass I've ever known so I'm in both camps trying to figure out how to go forward. What I do know is that the collateral damage of Francis and crew is, by design, to get us so disgusted and disoriented that we leave altogether. But I'm not going anywhere, and that is because of Bishops like you who are speaking out. Thank you so much.
Also I wanted to thank you for the very reverent and powerful Mass that you said on the day of the eclipse. I know I speak for many that we were grateful that you live streamed it.
Thank you for your continued efforts to focus, refocus the Church on the Truth Jesus Christ. It seems absurd that we should even have to have these discussions over 2000 years after Jesus Christ said it so simply, “I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father except through Me.
"If clarification is not given, or worse, if error is confirmed, we must refute the error and look to the Deposit of Faith as our sure guide to truth." Rather than "refute" as such, I heard a priest advise us to say that we sincerely and humbly do not understand and, therefore, fall back on the dogma, which we know must be true.
There are kings of the earth who have despotic authority, which their subjects obey indeed but disown in their hearts; but we must never murmur at that absolute rule which the Sovereign Pontiff has over us, because it is given to him by Christ, and, in obeying him, we are obeying his Lord. We must never suffer ourselves to doubt, that, in his government of the Church, he is guided by an intelligence more than human. His yoke is the yoke of Christ, he has the responsibility of his own acts, not we; and to his Lord must he render account, not to us.
Even in secular matters it is ever safe to be on his side, dangerous to be on the side of his enemies. Our duty is,—not indeed to mix up Christ’s Vicar with this or that party of men, because he in his high station is above all parties,—but to look at his formal deeds, and to follow him whither he goeth, and never to desert him, however we may be tried, but to defend him at all hazards, and against all comers, as a son would a father, and as a wife a husband, knowing that his cause is the cause of God.
And so, as regards his successors, if we live to see them; it is our duty to give them in like manner our dutiful allegiance and our unfeigned service, and to follow them also whithersoever they go, having that same confidence that each in his turn and in his own day will do God’s work and will, which we have felt in their predecessors, now taken away to their eternal reward.
The above excerpt from sermon 15 found in the Newman Reader on October 7, 1866 the Feast of the Holy Rosary has been edited to lose the message of prayer for the Pope and urging a liturgy of reverence. This sermon was written during the reign of St. Pius IX who not only was the longest reigning Pope but transitioned from moderate political liberalism to conservatism.
Dear Pope Pius IX, intercede for we the Mystical Body to be efficacious in our prayers for the Church at present. We are the Church and we have a duty to know and guard and defend the Deposit of Faith.
What a shame that self-proclaimed “Christians” have so distorted Jesus’s message of loving others as one loves oneself with all the clutter of dogma, silly rituals, and demands for compliance with human-created rules and regulations, that they engender contempt among those who reject that clutter. Demands that politicians impose Catholic dogma on a secular population are abhorrent and unAmerican.
There’s plenty for these non-followers of Jesus’s teachings - who are instead slaves to things he never taught nor advocated- to improve themselves. Once they are perfect, they can work on their fellow parishioners, then the Catholic Church as a whole, and then on others who also claim to be Christians. Maybe they will start killing each other again over whose interpretation of a human-written and compiled book is “correct.” That’s the reason separation of church and state is enshrined in our Bill of Rights, but the Catholic Church seems to think it doesn’t apply to them. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Where specifically is separation of Church and State mentioned? And it's not the 1st Amendment, which addresses the establishment of a federal religion.
The Founding Fathers of the United States wrote extensively about the necessity of religion as a foundation for a just and flourishing society. They never intended to keep religion out of government. They only intended to keep government out of religion, to ensure religious liberty.
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” - George Washington
“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams
There are many, many other similar quotes (too numerous to count). If you need evidence that “Separation of Church and State” is a misreading of the Constitution, one needs to go no further than the dollar bill … “In God We Trust.”
That being said, please pray for all those earnestly seeking Truth, that the grace of God leads them to Christ - who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
“God” was put on our coinage and replaced “E Pluribus Unum” - a much less divisive and better motto - during the Red Scare in the 1950s. That’s when “under god” was added to the Pledge of Allegiance, too. All political grandstanding. Just the kind of thing Jesus abhorred.
The fact is that God deserves our worship, because he is the creator of everything. Without him, we are nothing. The Bible makes it very clear that all nations owe him homage.
The capitalized form "IN GOD WE TRUST" first appeared on the two-cent piece in 1864 and initially only appeared on coins. Since July 1, 1908, all U.S. gold coins, dollars, half dollars, and quarters included this motto.
Sacred Scripture is very clear about the need for nations to trust in and acknowledge God.
“Arise, O God, judge the earth, for yours are all the nations.” (Psalm 82:8)
“Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!” (Psalm 46:10)
“All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him, for dominion belongs to the Lord and he rules over the nations.” (Psalms 22:27-28)
“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” (Matthew 28:19)
Throughout the centuries, the Bible chronicles how nations who abandoned God fell into ruin. Salvation history is a repeating theme of nations abandoning God, then returning to Him.
“If then my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my face and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and heal their land.” (2 Chronicles 7:14)
I understand that in today’s culture, we perceive anything divisive as bad. However, clearly distinguishing between good and evil is a spiritual work of mercy. Remember that Jesus himself was divisive. He came to divide, based on our acceptance or rejection of God’s grace in our lives. Jesus came not to bring peace, but the sword - to separate the repentant from the unrepentant. He is the judge of our eternal salvation or damnation.
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword.” (Matthew 10:34)
“He will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” (Matthew 3:12)
Our Founding Fathers wrote extensively on the fact that our nation’s prosperity is completely dependent on God, and that we must remain a religious and moral people. Today, it’s easy to see the consequences of our turning away from God as a nation. Today, everywhere one looks - good is called evil, and evil good. Most people can’t distinguish between virtue and vice. As a result, our country is dying on the vine.
Acknowledging that we, as a nation, trust in God is not grandstanding - but rather humility - since without God, we can do nothing.
“I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me and I in him will bear much fruit, because without me you can do nothing.” (John 15:5)
“Those who know your name trust in you; you never forsake those who seek you, LORD.” (Psalm 9:11)
If this is a Christian nation - which it is not - then if all the Christians follow the above the effect would be the same, wouldn’t it? Didn’t Jesus say to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s? If you can’t accept that this is a secular government, and was intended to be secular, then you need to read the writings of Jefferson, Madison, and others who sought to prevent religious strife in the U.S. as was occurring in Europe. We are better for it, as you can see religious persecution and strife around the world today.
I don’t object to anyone’s having the beliefs they choose. But attempting to turn the U.S. into a theocracy is a no go. Christians can’t even agree among themselves as to what their god demands. Disputes about minor differences in dogma got people executed by the “church,” as if that would EVER be approved of by Jesus. I don’t accept Catholic teachings and oppose those who think they should be enforced by the government. Believing that a god impregnated a human woman to be born human/god, only so that the humans to be “forgiven” for the flaws with which they were created by that god would torture and “kill” it, and that the “blood”magically allowed this god to lift the curse it had imposed on them (but only if they believe the story) gives no one moral authority over those who don’t believe it. Their particular dogma should constrain their behavior, not mine. If they don’t like walking their particular version of “the straight and narrow” alone, too bad for them. That’s what they signed up for. Seeking to have the government enshrine and enforce their bigotry and smugness is Unchristian and UnAmerican.
You are correct that the United States would have a difficult time calling itself a Christian nation today - and that the Founding Fathers never established a national religion. That’s the essence of the First Amendment. However, they all did acknowledge that there is a God, which is why “In God We Trust” was never controversial until very recently.
Ultimately, our eternal destiny will rise and fall on truth and truth alone. It is always essential to structure our lives around objective truth, which is immutable and not something that changes based on our feelings. If we feel like we can fly, we’re headed for trouble if we start flapping our arms at the top of a tall building. The same is true for our eternal salvation. It’s important for us to make the right decisions about what is true and how that informs how we live.
You are also certainly correct that Christian disunity is a terrible stumbling block to the faith journey of many, as is the fact that the Church is comprised of flawed and sinful human beings.
I was actually a Protestant for the first thirty years of my life. I found my way into the Catholic Church by reading my way into it. I discovered that the Church teachings most accurately reflect the holistic reading of the Bible (Genesis to Revelation), and is consistent with the traditions and writings of the early Church. It wasn’t until 1,500 years after Christ that Christians began fracturing into over 50,000 Protestant denominations, which was a terrible tragedy. St. Paul warned of the consequences of divisions within the Church (1 Corinthians 1:10).
It’s wonderful that you are earnestly searching for the truth and I understand your frustrations. I pray that you are strengthened on your faith journey. You are not alone in asking the difficult questions that you posed. May God give you abundant graces in your search for truth.
Why not a proclamation of a national religion, then, or even a mention of Jesus or any other deity? Surely you’re not so ignorant as to be unaware that the Constitution applies to state, as well as federal, actions in some regards, and this is one of them.
Perhaps you should read ALL of the New Testament and the accounts of the early fathers of the Church before speaking, lest your ignorance be known to all.
What makes you think I haven’t? Rather arrogant of you. Reading the bible from start to finish converted me from Christianity to atheism, as it became clear immediately that it was not the “eternal word of god.” I tried to keep believing the whole salvation myth, but there’s a reason the clergy want to “direct” your reading and understanding of what the bible actually says. I see very little of Jesus’ first and second greatest commandments being put into action, and lots of outright dismissal of what he did teach. So - I suggest YOU do some reading on your own, as I continue to do because I find the subject fascinating. I dare you to apply critical thinking to the foundation of the faith. Just sketch the story out - it’s very simple.
I appreciate your prayers, because it shows goodwill on your part. However, I’ve made several attempts as an adult to regain my childhood belief. The more I learn about the bible and lack of any supporting evidence for its claims, though, the less likely that has become. The story makes no sense to me. I’m glad it helps you, so long as you don’t impose it on others.
This is part of the problem with the protestant "Sola Scriptura" understanding, there is no support for the bible independent of the Church which codified it and taught it for 2000 years. The proofs of Christ's divinity and salvation from Him can be found by studying the Church itself, and in context the testimony of Jewish and Roman witnesses to the events. The historic evidence is far greater than most events that we would consider completely factual. Numerous witnesses to the resurrection refused to deny it on pain of death and accepted martyrdom, this is not the behavior of charlatans. This martyrdom is attested to in both Jewish and Roman sources and consistent with the Church's own accounts. There are no human institutions that have lasted 2000 years, and none has done more good than the Church that Christ founded. That you refuse to acknowledge these facts is sufficient evidence of your ignorance.
So, we are to disobey and dissent from even the Pope if it does not fit with our *private interpretation* of Papal teaching? That sounds more like Protestantism than Catholicism. It also goes against what the Church has always taught with respect to even non-infallible teachings, eg., Lumen Gentium 25, Donum Veritatis, etc., etc., etc.
Respectfully, I don’t believe the central point of the Bishop’s article focuses on an interpretation of papal teaching … notwithstanding, because papal teaching should always be clear and unambiguous. Rather, what the good Bishop is stating is that - in order to protect the Sacred Deposit of Faith (a core responsibility of all bishops) - there must be a hermeneutic of continuity among all papal teachings. This is very evident when one reads prior papal encyclicals and apostolic exhortations, which are all available on the Vatican website, and are incredibly consistent and clear in their teaching. If a priest, bishop, cardinal, or even a pope comes along and contradicts Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, or the constant teachings of the Magisterium - those teachings must be understood as false, because it suggests that God is fallible and it undermines the very teaching authority of the Catholic Church established by Jesus Christ. Many prior popes condemned the introduction of such “novelties” through the grave error of modernism, which treats God as a potter’s clay who can be molded to fit how we want to live.
As an extreme example, if a pope claimed that Christ was not both true God and true man, we would be required to reject that teaching. Although this papacy has not claimed something so egregious, many other statements have been made that contradict that which the Holy Catholic Church has always taught. There are also clear indications that heterodox forces within the Church are conspiring to redefine what Sacred Scripture, the Church Fathers, and the constant teaching of the Church has always proclaimed are grave sins. It is not a matter of democratic consensus to define what is sinful. That authority belongs exclusively to God and God alone.
For a statement to be considered infallible, the Pope must speak ex cathedra (from the chair of Peter). This is only done on rare occasions in any papacy. Pope Francis has yet to declare an ex cathedra teaching.
Nonetheless, we must always pray for the Pope and all of the hierarchy, that they do not fall into error.
"Nihilism, a philosophy that proclaims all values are baseless, focuses on the use of the will to dominate. It is a rejection of absolute truth, and it puts forth the false idea that “truth” is merely the expression of the will, and pure & unadulterated truth does not exist. In this context, each person can make up truth as he sees fit, or he can determine that truth is whatever the authority figure he recognizes determines it to be."
I am reminded of the famous quote from Cardinal John Henry Newman when he was asked to toast the Pope: "I toast the Pope, but I toast conscience first." But in a postmodern age where the concept of absolute truth has been rejected--which is the rotten fruit of the Renaissance--conscience alone is an insufficient authority.
I am not Roman Catholic, but I would suggest sola scriptura is a necessary authority, coupled with what Jesus said of the Holy Spirit in John 16:13: "But when the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own authority, but he will speak what he hears,"
Excellent letter, as a devout Catholic I am encouraged by your powerful and concis bute expression of the current situation in our church today. I am praying for you and pray for support of your good and and faithful Holy Priest and Bishops. You truly are a light in an ever discouraging world.
Si vis pacem, para bellum accipite armaturam Dei, hoc est ecclesiae militanti.
As a recovering “liberal Protestant,” and confirmed Catholic I see the Catholic Church taking the same path. We attend a small parish in the Chicago area led by a good Priest whom I feel will be removed because of his outspokenness. His bulletin letter was intercepted and removed because it addressed the topic of gay marriage in a way deemed unacceptable. We also attend a church here in the Dallas area where our good Priest of two years, was suddenly reassigned. And last year the bishop came for the installation of the replacement. The Bishop’s homily was all about the importance of complete obedience. There is a concept of Sobornost in the Eastern churches--I have found that only in a small parish in Irving--a 40 minute drive. We continually search for islands of truth--suspect at some time in near future the church will have to go underground again. Than you for your article, it confirms what I was taught in RCIA about obedience.
Thank you Bishop Strickland!
“I believe all that the Holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.” This is what we all affirmed at our confirmation. I pray that all those in positions of authority - priests, bishops, cardinals, and the Holy Father - believe the same. However, the direction of the “synodal” church appears to be embracing the errors of Protestantism, as many are actively working to undermine the Sacred Deposit of Faith and refute the inerrancy and divine revelation of Sacred Scripture.
May God bless you in your courageous defense of the Faith - and may your example strengthen your brother bishops and cardinals to overcome their fear and similarly stand firm for Christ.
I am very glad to see you have a Substack now, Bishop Strickland, because there is a growing body of people who have turned off all main stream media and are searching for truth by going straight to the source. Substack is a great place. The battle is on... from organizations formed to fight, destroying themselves from within (ie Coalition of Canceled Priests; Church Militant, etc.) to the never-ending stream of wrongly canceled clergy hung out to dry with no cause (such as my own pastor of 20+ years Fr. James Parker, formerly of Holy Cross Catholic Church, Batavia, IL https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fr+james+parker+youtube). I have lately been testing the waters with the TLM, although it's not easy to reconfigure my understanding of the Mass after 60 years and I feel like I have been lied to my entire life with how little the Novus Ordo resembles the original Mass. But I feel at home with the only Mass I've ever known so I'm in both camps trying to figure out how to go forward. What I do know is that the collateral damage of Francis and crew is, by design, to get us so disgusted and disoriented that we leave altogether. But I'm not going anywhere, and that is because of Bishops like you who are speaking out. Thank you so much.
Also I wanted to thank you for the very reverent and powerful Mass that you said on the day of the eclipse. I know I speak for many that we were grateful that you live streamed it.
Thank you for your continued efforts to focus, refocus the Church on the Truth Jesus Christ. It seems absurd that we should even have to have these discussions over 2000 years after Jesus Christ said it so simply, “I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father except through Me.
John 14:6
"If clarification is not given, or worse, if error is confirmed, we must refute the error and look to the Deposit of Faith as our sure guide to truth." Rather than "refute" as such, I heard a priest advise us to say that we sincerely and humbly do not understand and, therefore, fall back on the dogma, which we know must be true.
So what are you saying and about whom?
Beautiful! Thank you so much Bishop Strickland for the clarification. I am sharing this everywhere. God Bless you.
John Henry Newman, sermon October 7, 1866
There are kings of the earth who have despotic authority, which their subjects obey indeed but disown in their hearts; but we must never murmur at that absolute rule which the Sovereign Pontiff has over us, because it is given to him by Christ, and, in obeying him, we are obeying his Lord. We must never suffer ourselves to doubt, that, in his government of the Church, he is guided by an intelligence more than human. His yoke is the yoke of Christ, he has the responsibility of his own acts, not we; and to his Lord must he render account, not to us.
Even in secular matters it is ever safe to be on his side, dangerous to be on the side of his enemies. Our duty is,—not indeed to mix up Christ’s Vicar with this or that party of men, because he in his high station is above all parties,—but to look at his formal deeds, and to follow him whither he goeth, and never to desert him, however we may be tried, but to defend him at all hazards, and against all comers, as a son would a father, and as a wife a husband, knowing that his cause is the cause of God.
And so, as regards his successors, if we live to see them; it is our duty to give them in like manner our dutiful allegiance and our unfeigned service, and to follow them also whithersoever they go, having that same confidence that each in his turn and in his own day will do God’s work and will, which we have felt in their predecessors, now taken away to their eternal reward.
The above excerpt from sermon 15 found in the Newman Reader on October 7, 1866 the Feast of the Holy Rosary has been edited to lose the message of prayer for the Pope and urging a liturgy of reverence. This sermon was written during the reign of St. Pius IX who not only was the longest reigning Pope but transitioned from moderate political liberalism to conservatism.
Dear Pope Pius IX, intercede for we the Mystical Body to be efficacious in our prayers for the Church at present. We are the Church and we have a duty to know and guard and defend the Deposit of Faith.
Thank you for your courageous and faithful leadership! I pray that more Bishops will join you in telling the TRUTH!
God bless you!
What a shame that self-proclaimed “Christians” have so distorted Jesus’s message of loving others as one loves oneself with all the clutter of dogma, silly rituals, and demands for compliance with human-created rules and regulations, that they engender contempt among those who reject that clutter. Demands that politicians impose Catholic dogma on a secular population are abhorrent and unAmerican.
There’s plenty for these non-followers of Jesus’s teachings - who are instead slaves to things he never taught nor advocated- to improve themselves. Once they are perfect, they can work on their fellow parishioners, then the Catholic Church as a whole, and then on others who also claim to be Christians. Maybe they will start killing each other again over whose interpretation of a human-written and compiled book is “correct.” That’s the reason separation of church and state is enshrined in our Bill of Rights, but the Catholic Church seems to think it doesn’t apply to them. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Where specifically is separation of Church and State mentioned? And it's not the 1st Amendment, which addresses the establishment of a federal religion.
Well stated.
The Founding Fathers of the United States wrote extensively about the necessity of religion as a foundation for a just and flourishing society. They never intended to keep religion out of government. They only intended to keep government out of religion, to ensure religious liberty.
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” - George Washington
“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams
There are many, many other similar quotes (too numerous to count). If you need evidence that “Separation of Church and State” is a misreading of the Constitution, one needs to go no further than the dollar bill … “In God We Trust.”
That being said, please pray for all those earnestly seeking Truth, that the grace of God leads them to Christ - who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
“God” was put on our coinage and replaced “E Pluribus Unum” - a much less divisive and better motto - during the Red Scare in the 1950s. That’s when “under god” was added to the Pledge of Allegiance, too. All political grandstanding. Just the kind of thing Jesus abhorred.
Hi Melissa! Thank you for your thoughts.
The fact is that God deserves our worship, because he is the creator of everything. Without him, we are nothing. The Bible makes it very clear that all nations owe him homage.
The capitalized form "IN GOD WE TRUST" first appeared on the two-cent piece in 1864 and initially only appeared on coins. Since July 1, 1908, all U.S. gold coins, dollars, half dollars, and quarters included this motto.
Sacred Scripture is very clear about the need for nations to trust in and acknowledge God.
“Arise, O God, judge the earth, for yours are all the nations.” (Psalm 82:8)
“Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!” (Psalm 46:10)
“All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him, for dominion belongs to the Lord and he rules over the nations.” (Psalms 22:27-28)
“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” (Matthew 28:19)
Throughout the centuries, the Bible chronicles how nations who abandoned God fell into ruin. Salvation history is a repeating theme of nations abandoning God, then returning to Him.
“If then my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my face and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and heal their land.” (2 Chronicles 7:14)
I understand that in today’s culture, we perceive anything divisive as bad. However, clearly distinguishing between good and evil is a spiritual work of mercy. Remember that Jesus himself was divisive. He came to divide, based on our acceptance or rejection of God’s grace in our lives. Jesus came not to bring peace, but the sword - to separate the repentant from the unrepentant. He is the judge of our eternal salvation or damnation.
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword.” (Matthew 10:34)
“He will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” (Matthew 3:12)
Our Founding Fathers wrote extensively on the fact that our nation’s prosperity is completely dependent on God, and that we must remain a religious and moral people. Today, it’s easy to see the consequences of our turning away from God as a nation. Today, everywhere one looks - good is called evil, and evil good. Most people can’t distinguish between virtue and vice. As a result, our country is dying on the vine.
Acknowledging that we, as a nation, trust in God is not grandstanding - but rather humility - since without God, we can do nothing.
“I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me and I in him will bear much fruit, because without me you can do nothing.” (John 15:5)
“Those who know your name trust in you; you never forsake those who seek you, LORD.” (Psalm 9:11)
God bless.
Salus Animarum Suprema Lex
(The salvation of souls is the highest law)
If this is a Christian nation - which it is not - then if all the Christians follow the above the effect would be the same, wouldn’t it? Didn’t Jesus say to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s? If you can’t accept that this is a secular government, and was intended to be secular, then you need to read the writings of Jefferson, Madison, and others who sought to prevent religious strife in the U.S. as was occurring in Europe. We are better for it, as you can see religious persecution and strife around the world today.
I don’t object to anyone’s having the beliefs they choose. But attempting to turn the U.S. into a theocracy is a no go. Christians can’t even agree among themselves as to what their god demands. Disputes about minor differences in dogma got people executed by the “church,” as if that would EVER be approved of by Jesus. I don’t accept Catholic teachings and oppose those who think they should be enforced by the government. Believing that a god impregnated a human woman to be born human/god, only so that the humans to be “forgiven” for the flaws with which they were created by that god would torture and “kill” it, and that the “blood”magically allowed this god to lift the curse it had imposed on them (but only if they believe the story) gives no one moral authority over those who don’t believe it. Their particular dogma should constrain their behavior, not mine. If they don’t like walking their particular version of “the straight and narrow” alone, too bad for them. That’s what they signed up for. Seeking to have the government enshrine and enforce their bigotry and smugness is Unchristian and UnAmerican.
Hi Melissa!
You are correct that the United States would have a difficult time calling itself a Christian nation today - and that the Founding Fathers never established a national religion. That’s the essence of the First Amendment. However, they all did acknowledge that there is a God, which is why “In God We Trust” was never controversial until very recently.
Ultimately, our eternal destiny will rise and fall on truth and truth alone. It is always essential to structure our lives around objective truth, which is immutable and not something that changes based on our feelings. If we feel like we can fly, we’re headed for trouble if we start flapping our arms at the top of a tall building. The same is true for our eternal salvation. It’s important for us to make the right decisions about what is true and how that informs how we live.
You are also certainly correct that Christian disunity is a terrible stumbling block to the faith journey of many, as is the fact that the Church is comprised of flawed and sinful human beings.
I was actually a Protestant for the first thirty years of my life. I found my way into the Catholic Church by reading my way into it. I discovered that the Church teachings most accurately reflect the holistic reading of the Bible (Genesis to Revelation), and is consistent with the traditions and writings of the early Church. It wasn’t until 1,500 years after Christ that Christians began fracturing into over 50,000 Protestant denominations, which was a terrible tragedy. St. Paul warned of the consequences of divisions within the Church (1 Corinthians 1:10).
It’s wonderful that you are earnestly searching for the truth and I understand your frustrations. I pray that you are strengthened on your faith journey. You are not alone in asking the difficult questions that you posed. May God give you abundant graces in your search for truth.
God bless.
Why not a proclamation of a national religion, then, or even a mention of Jesus or any other deity? Surely you’re not so ignorant as to be unaware that the Constitution applies to state, as well as federal, actions in some regards, and this is one of them.
Perhaps you should read ALL of the New Testament and the accounts of the early fathers of the Church before speaking, lest your ignorance be known to all.
What makes you think I haven’t? Rather arrogant of you. Reading the bible from start to finish converted me from Christianity to atheism, as it became clear immediately that it was not the “eternal word of god.” I tried to keep believing the whole salvation myth, but there’s a reason the clergy want to “direct” your reading and understanding of what the bible actually says. I see very little of Jesus’ first and second greatest commandments being put into action, and lots of outright dismissal of what he did teach. So - I suggest YOU do some reading on your own, as I continue to do because I find the subject fascinating. I dare you to apply critical thinking to the foundation of the faith. Just sketch the story out - it’s very simple.
Praying for you, Melissa. Keep searching....
I appreciate your prayers, because it shows goodwill on your part. However, I’ve made several attempts as an adult to regain my childhood belief. The more I learn about the bible and lack of any supporting evidence for its claims, though, the less likely that has become. The story makes no sense to me. I’m glad it helps you, so long as you don’t impose it on others.
This is part of the problem with the protestant "Sola Scriptura" understanding, there is no support for the bible independent of the Church which codified it and taught it for 2000 years. The proofs of Christ's divinity and salvation from Him can be found by studying the Church itself, and in context the testimony of Jewish and Roman witnesses to the events. The historic evidence is far greater than most events that we would consider completely factual. Numerous witnesses to the resurrection refused to deny it on pain of death and accepted martyrdom, this is not the behavior of charlatans. This martyrdom is attested to in both Jewish and Roman sources and consistent with the Church's own accounts. There are no human institutions that have lasted 2000 years, and none has done more good than the Church that Christ founded. That you refuse to acknowledge these facts is sufficient evidence of your ignorance.
So, we are to disobey and dissent from even the Pope if it does not fit with our *private interpretation* of Papal teaching? That sounds more like Protestantism than Catholicism. It also goes against what the Church has always taught with respect to even non-infallible teachings, eg., Lumen Gentium 25, Donum Veritatis, etc., etc., etc.
Respectfully, I don’t believe the central point of the Bishop’s article focuses on an interpretation of papal teaching … notwithstanding, because papal teaching should always be clear and unambiguous. Rather, what the good Bishop is stating is that - in order to protect the Sacred Deposit of Faith (a core responsibility of all bishops) - there must be a hermeneutic of continuity among all papal teachings. This is very evident when one reads prior papal encyclicals and apostolic exhortations, which are all available on the Vatican website, and are incredibly consistent and clear in their teaching. If a priest, bishop, cardinal, or even a pope comes along and contradicts Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, or the constant teachings of the Magisterium - those teachings must be understood as false, because it suggests that God is fallible and it undermines the very teaching authority of the Catholic Church established by Jesus Christ. Many prior popes condemned the introduction of such “novelties” through the grave error of modernism, which treats God as a potter’s clay who can be molded to fit how we want to live.
As an extreme example, if a pope claimed that Christ was not both true God and true man, we would be required to reject that teaching. Although this papacy has not claimed something so egregious, many other statements have been made that contradict that which the Holy Catholic Church has always taught. There are also clear indications that heterodox forces within the Church are conspiring to redefine what Sacred Scripture, the Church Fathers, and the constant teaching of the Church has always proclaimed are grave sins. It is not a matter of democratic consensus to define what is sinful. That authority belongs exclusively to God and God alone.
For a statement to be considered infallible, the Pope must speak ex cathedra (from the chair of Peter). This is only done on rare occasions in any papacy. Pope Francis has yet to declare an ex cathedra teaching.
Nonetheless, we must always pray for the Pope and all of the hierarchy, that they do not fall into error.
God bless.
Salus Animarum Suprema Lex
(The salvation of souls is the highest law)
You stated it well, Cardinal Strickland:
"Nihilism, a philosophy that proclaims all values are baseless, focuses on the use of the will to dominate. It is a rejection of absolute truth, and it puts forth the false idea that “truth” is merely the expression of the will, and pure & unadulterated truth does not exist. In this context, each person can make up truth as he sees fit, or he can determine that truth is whatever the authority figure he recognizes determines it to be."
I am reminded of the famous quote from Cardinal John Henry Newman when he was asked to toast the Pope: "I toast the Pope, but I toast conscience first." But in a postmodern age where the concept of absolute truth has been rejected--which is the rotten fruit of the Renaissance--conscience alone is an insufficient authority.
I am not Roman Catholic, but I would suggest sola scriptura is a necessary authority, coupled with what Jesus said of the Holy Spirit in John 16:13: "But when the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own authority, but he will speak what he hears,"
Thank-you Bishop Strickland, this an excellent article, I will keep you in my prayers for sure. Dan