There are men who are like lonely callers in the desert, and we know from the Bible that it is usually the Spirit of God that rests on such men.
Joseph Strickland, the emeritus Bishop of Tyler, Texas, who was unjustly deposed by Francis, is such a man. He shares the same fate as the prophets of the Bible, namely that no one listens to him.
Yet millions now listen to Bishop Strickland; only his fellow bishops do not.
When Strickland recently asked them to finally take a stand on the fact that Francis no longer teaches the Catholic faith, his words fell into silence. No one dared to come forward to support the Texan who spoke the truth so fearlessly, no bishop in the U.S. and certainly no one elsewhere.
Nevertheless, what Strickland said remains true: Francis stands for a new, for a “synodal” church and with it for a new faith that is no longer Catholic and which must be decisively rejected! No one is obliged to believe in a “synodal” church. On the contrary: the traditional faith of the Church forbids this.
While the bishops remain silent about all this, the superior of the German district of the Society of St. Pius X clearly called a spade a spade. He described the Pope’s “synodal church” as “diabolical,” a “betrayal of Christ’s mission,” and “anti-Gospel.”
But no one is bothered by this either. In the ranks of the bishops, a voice from the Society of St. Pius X is listened to even less than the one from Texas. Instead, the silence of the bishops orchestrates a polyphonic apostasy: that of the Pope and a large part of the Catholic world, and it almost seems as if this is a new “normality.”
But where does the indifference of those who are appointed guardians of the truth come from and who do not serve God with their silence, but Satan, the “father of lies” (cf. 1 John 3:8)?
Could their apostasy have arisen out of nothing? Hardly. Instead, it had probably been latent for a long time, and it only took a pope like Francis for it to finally become visible.
The controversial document Fiducia supplicans, which was published a year ago, perhaps shows this most clearly: in it, the Pope himself permitted the “blessing” of irregular “couples,” i.e., the blessing of homosexuals and adulterers.
In the eyes of Holy Scripture, such a “blessing” is an abomination and blasphemy. Nevertheless, the document has remained in force to this day, and the (minor) resistance of the bishops was stifled from the outset.
The significance of Fiducia supplicans is therefore twofold: the document is the Magna Carta that most conspicuously documents the bishops’ general apostasy. And it makes visible the forces that have been at work in the Church for far too long, i.e., the numerous homosexuals among the bishops and cardinals.
It is certainly no secret that the clergy has traditionally been infiltrated by homosexuals, even if they are reluctant to speak openly about it. This also applies to the higher clergy. Serious estimates (in the absence of reliable data) put the figure at a good two-thirds, and even if it were less (which I don’t believe) the Church still holds an unprecedented record.
There are many reasons for this, above all sociological ones. Among the older clergy in particular, right up to the Pope’s generation, there is an above-average number who have escaped social reprisals by opting for celibacy.
Today things are different, at least in Western societies, and the homosexuals stranded in the priesthood and especially in the episcopate are now vehemently pushing behind the scenes of the Vatican for the Church to open up to the new course. To put it bluntly: the Church has fallen into the hands of older homosexual men.
It is only against this backdrop that it is understandable that the Pope made possible the egregious with Fiducia supplicans and at the same time encountered so conspicuously little opposition: Very few people cared about the “blessing” of sin and apostasy from God; most of them obviously identified with it long ago and deliberately instigated the document under the leadership of Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández.
Since then, at the latest, nothing has been the same: what is commonly known as “gay heresy” has hijacked the Church with the Pope’s approval, and more and more bishops and cardinals are now hypocritically claiming that they have suddenly “learned something new” in a “synodal process of listening.” They have understood – as if by a miracle – that homosexuality is “willed” by God and is by no means a sin, contrary to revelation and the 2000-year-old teachings of the Church.
An astonishing change, don’t you think? Or is it not more likely that all these prelates were just seizing the opportunity to finally justify their predisposition and “approve” it with the help of the Pope? Who else could promote “gay heresy” if not those most reverend gentlemen who are themselves “gay” and who are only driven by it and not by the “Holy Spirit”?
It is as inconceivable as it is true: the Church is in the Babylonian captivity of homosexual senior clergy who, starting with the “gay heresy,” are now gradually installing a new pseudo-church, precisely the one that Bishop Strickland warns us about the Pope’s “synodal church.”
The barque of the Church is thus experiencing something like the mutiny on the Bounty, but with one crucial difference: the captain himself is here with the mutineers, and the men who, like Strickland, close themselves off to the “gay” mutiny almost have their backs to the wall.
Meanwhile, the Antichrist reigns in the house of the Lord, and the Pope himself has erected an idolatrous altar to him with Fiducia Supplicans. It will not be the last, should Francis remain in office for much longer.
I would disagree with all those who attest that Francis is not the legitimate pope and that this is the only reason why these hair-raising conditions are possible. There is no other pope but Francis. But it probably took a pope like him to expose the workings of Satan in the Church and take it to the extreme. Yes, Francis is the legitimate pope, and he is pope not to the glory of God but to the eternal shame of the Apostolic See, which he has desecrated with Fiducia Supplicans.
And yet: perhaps God only wanted to make the disfigurement of His Church visible through Francis in order to restore it through a worthier successor to Peter? Who knows?
Until then, it is important to listen to the voices of the right men, namely those who do not represent “gay heresy” and thus their own disposition, but who, like Bishop Strickland, are the voice of God. “He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” (Mt 11:14).