Pope Francis does not have the right to dismiss Bishop Strickland without cause
Since the authority of the bishops does not come from the pope, but from Christ, and since that authority may not and cannot be justly removed except when there is just cause, Pope Francis has no power to 'dismiss' a bishop as if the bishop were his house servant.
Pope Francis during
his weekly audience, April 12, 2023.Screenshot/YouTube
- 11
Thu Nov 23, 2023 - 2:13 pm EST
Listen to this article
0:00 / 7:02
(LifeSiteNews) — On November 16 Raymond Arroyo conducted an excellent interview of Bishop Strickland. The prelate demonstrated once more his love for Christ and for His Church and spoke like a prophet or a Church Father, as Bishop Schneider has pointed out recently. There was one point, however, that I think needs clarification.
Amidst many truths, the bishop stated that the pope is above canon law and therefore had the right to “dismiss” him without procedure and without just cause. But, of course, this is not accurate. The pope is the supreme human legislator of the Church and, therefore, he is, in a way, above the particular canons of the Code, although he is subject to them while they are in force. No bishop can find permanent protection from tyrannical acts of the pope by just invoking canon number xx or yy of the Code of Canon Law, because the pope can change them. This is so because the Church is a monarchy.
However, the Church is no tyranny. The pope is the vicar of Christ the King, not of Satan the Tyrant. We, as Catholics, should not forget that above human law, and as its foundation, we find divine and natural law. Canon law is not just a system of regulations established by Church authorities. It is an intelligible structure of the Bride of Christ and of its decisions and enactments. The Church was established by Jesus Christ with a canonical structure: Simon was the Rock whose faith will not waver; the Apostles are the columns with authority received directly from Christ. From the beginning we find the “Apostolic Canons,” and from that foundation emanated the particular structures and regulations through the ages. All this was established to preserve the deposit of Faith and to perpetuate the salvific mission. Without this structure and this end, the pope has no authority whatsoever.
This is the reason for which the Second Vatican Council in the Dogmatic Constitution Dei verbum stated very accurately that the Magisterium is not above divine revelation:
But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed. (n. 10)
WATCH: Hundreds stand with Bishop Strickland as he leads Rosary rally outside USCCB meeting
— Article continues below Petition —
Stand with Bishop Strickland as Pope Francis removes this faithful shepherd who loves the Church
Show Petition Text
51395 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 55000!
Add your signature:
Haut du formulaire
Bas du formulaire
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
This subjection of the magisterium to divine Revelation is analogous to the subjection of the supreme legislator to divine and natural law. The classics of canon law presuppose this whole intelligible structure. Let’s examine briefly the Decretum Gratiani.
In its Distinctio Prima, C. 1 the Decretum states that there are divine and natural laws that in Latin are denominated fas; and there are human laws that in Latin are denominated mores established according to ius. In C. 2 it is stated that ius is what is just. Notice well: not whatever the whim of a tyrant desires, but what is just. In C. 5 the law is understood as something recommended by reason. It must be coherent with religion, expedient to discipline, and fruitful for salvation. In C. 7-9 Gratianus introduces natural law, civil law, and the law of peoples.
In Distinctio Quarta, C. 2, following authorities, Gratianus declares that the law must be just, honest, possible, according to nature, according to customs, fit for the circumstances, needed, expedient, well known, clear, not directed to private interest but to the common good.
In the Second Part of the Decretum, Causa XXIV, Quaestio 2, C. 4, we find a very interesting passage. It is asked whether the Pope can absolve a person who is dead based on Christ’s institution, “whatsoever you tie on earth, etc.” The reply is clear: “de eo, qui in diuino iudicio est constitutus, nobis fas non est aliud decernere preter id, in quo eum dies supremus inuenit.” That is to say, the pope does not have power to change what has been established by divine decree. In Second Part, Causa XXV, Quaestio 1, C. 4 it is stated that it is not licit for anybody to contradict laws divinely established and that the higher the position of the person who does contradict the laws the graver the sin of contradicting them would be.
The same was declared by John Paul II in Ordinatio sacerdotalis: “I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women […].”
Haut du formulaire
subscribe to our daily headlines
Bas du formulaire
Haut du formulaire
US Canada Catholic
Bas du formulaire
We can now apply these principles to the case of Bishop Strickland. It is true that the constant tradition, also in canon law, declares that the Apostolic See has the power to judge all other bishops. And we must confirm this universal power of jurisdiction. But it is a power of jurisdiction, not of issuing arbitrary and tyrannical orders. “Ius” is “what is just,” and “jurisdiction” is “to say what is just.”
Since the authority of the bishops does not come from the pope, but from Christ, and since that authority may not and cannot be justly removed except when there is just cause, the pope has no power to “dismiss” a bishop as if the bishop were his house servant. This decision, the dismissal of Bishop Strickland, should have been contested (and perhaps still could be contested). The grounds for this lie not just on the concrete canons of the Code that were violated (although also on them, because canon law teaches that they oblige the pope as well: “when laws have been established, there is no freedom to subject them to judgment, but it is necessary to judge in accordance with them.”: Gratianus, Distinctio IV, C. 2), but on the divine Constitution of the Church. This is especially apt now that it has become clear that the reason for the “dismissal” was that Bishop Strickland opposes the heretical agenda of the pope and his allies, including the minions of none less but Theodore McCarrick.
The most basic principle that we must keep in mind is that the Church is the Monarchy of the vicar of Christ the King on earth, not the tyranny of the vicar of Satan the Tyrant. Therefore, the actions of the pope, under pain of nullity, must be subject to the laws he himself or his predecessors have enacted and to divine and natural law.
READ: Cardinal Müller: Pope Francis allowing ‘trans’ people to be godparents is ‘confusing and harmful’
Topics
Tagged as
- Bishop Joseph Strickland
- Bishop Schneider
- Decretum Gratiani
- Dei Verbum
- Magisterium
- Pope Francis
- Raymond Arroyo
