On his blog site “Bishop Strickland’s Substack,” Bishop Strickland, who has clearly benefited from his premature retirement by studying and reflecting on the current situation of the Church, published a long post titled “Building a Staircase.”
The least one can say is that his thinking, clearly animated through love of Christ and the Church, is progressing at a fast and rapid pace.
The theme of his text is based on an analogy of a staircase built by Christ which connects the earth to heaven: “The steps on this staircase are the sacraments . . . and the Deposit of Faith is the framework. . . The sacraments are efficacious signs for they truly bring to earth (and join) what they symbolize. In order for this to happen, as we know, it must be ‘symbolized’ correctly (the staircase must be constructed of the right materials) both in ‘form’ and in ‘matter.’”
“If either is changed, the form (the words spoken) or the matter (the physical part of the Sacrament), then the validity is destroyed. Therefore, every board of this staircase is an integral part of the whole,” he concludes. Before he begins to denounce the attacks on this staircase that come from inside the Church, a staircase that must be defended with his own blood.
When Did These Attacks Occur?
That is the question posed by the bishop emeritus of Tyler. To which he responds: “Many point to Vatican II as the culprit.” And little later, he points to 1958, the year of John XXIII’s election, “very often this year is highlighted as the beginning of the turmoil in the Church which we presently see boiling over in countless ways.”
The reason was the convocation of the Second Vatican Council by Pope Paul VI. He continues: “It does seem that there has been a systematic attempt at the demolition of what had been considered ‘unreformable’ before Vatican II,” which was put in motion by the Council. And then wondering how, he does not hesitate to describe it.
“They have done this by attempting to confine what was of heaven to an earthly definition, and this is done most effectively by attempting to substitute man-made materials for what was given from heaven,” and he points out that this attempt is futile, since man cannot destroy Christ’s staircase, but he can “ape” it.
The Result
Bishop Strickland fully recognizes: “There can be no doubt that much changed after Vatican II. There was a new emphasis on the Church walking with the ‘world,’ and this definitely opened the door to theological views that compromised the Church’s unique identity. Ideas like ecumenism struck a blow to the staircase,” he claims.
Then he continues: “With Vatican II, a focused movement began to encourage the Church to engage in ‘dialogue’ with other denominations. Yet I have to ask, ‘What was there to dialogue about?’ Christ gave us His Church.”
“It is clear now that it has been the logical progression of what came forth from Vatican II that we are now at the point where the Holy Father can make a statement like, ‘All religions are paths to God,’ [Abou Dhabi Document on Human Fraternity] and the majority of bishops and cardinals just nod, never saying a word.”
The American bishop then cited Boniface VIII’s bull Unam Sanctam (1302) recalling the unity of the Church, then the encyclical Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum (1914) on the fullness of the Catholic faith to which “it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected.”
Attempts to Falsify the Staircase
Bishop Strickland then condemns falsifications of the staircase: “There have been many, many other boards that men have attempted to place since Vatican II that are made of man-made materials. They have tried to substitute man-made materials for heavenly ones because they thought that the original materials were ‘out-of-date.’”
Then he adds that “Nothing was as damaging to the staircase, though, as the changes that occurred in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” And it is then that he recognizes the providential intervention of Archbishop Lefebvre “who founded the Society of Saint Pius X (the SSPX), a traditionalist priestly society, was labeled disobedient, a rebel and even schismatic in the 1970’s and 1980’s for refusing to celebrate the New Mass.”
He even justifies the consecrations: “Lefebvre felt the Church was experiencing a profound ‘crisis of faith’ due to the infiltration of modernism and liberalism. He felt that there was an active attempt to pry off the boards of the staircase and to replace them with boards of the world. He consecrated four ‘tradition-minded’ bishops without papal approval.”
“[H]e felt that without bishops who upheld traditional teachings and the Tridentine Latin Mass that the continuity of the Church’s Tradition would be at risk. And, thus, he made sure the staircase was preserved intact,” he very succinctly explains. He notes that Archbishop Lefebvre “had repeatedly sought approval for years after having been previously told that approval would be granted.”
The Novus Ordo Mass
Although formed in the New Mass, he does not hesitate to point out its defaults: “There is no doubt that with the New Mass there has been a diminished focus on Jesus Christ . . . we have also witnessed drastic neglect of the Real Presence of Jesus Christ that rises to the level of blasphemy in many instances since Vatican II.”
He provides the reasons: “When the liturgy shifted its focus to the
people and away from Jesus Christ, it opened the door to extreme neglect
of His Sacred Presence.” He points out the disappearance of the altar
rails that marked “the distinction between the sanctuary (where the
altar is and which represents heaven, where our staircase leads) and the
rest of the Church (which represents earth, and where our staircase
begins).”
And he continues: “it is a fact that the New Mass represented a break in centuries of Liturgical continuity. And with that has come a massive decline in Mass attendance, vocations, and belief in core Catholic teachings.” Summorum Pontificum sought to remedy the situation, but Traditionis Custodes undid that.
Then the bishop emeritus cited Pope St. Pius X’s bull Quo Primum on the perpetual validity of the Tridentine Mass. He then strikingly associates with it words from Archbishop Lefebvre’s June 29, 1976 ordinations homily, wherein the founder of the Society of St. Pius X magnificently described the richness of the Holy Mass.
The SSPX Is Not Outside the Church
The American prelate maintains that: “I feel that it is also important to state here that the SSPX is not outside the Catholic Church, and that although it is canonically irregular, it is not schismatic. Bishop Athanasius Schneider has done extensive study on the SSPX, and as a result, he has given a clear and consistent defense of the Society. He has stated that Catholics may attend SSPX masses and receive sacraments from its clergy without concern.”
The prelate did not hesitate to write: “I would like to quote a famous declaration that Archbishop Lefebvre made in 1974. It is clear that Archbishop Lefebvre walked an apostle’s path and was led to establish a safe place, a refuge, where could be found the Mass of the ages in its pure form, a place where the Deposit of Faith would be protected, and the staircase preserved intact, even while the ape of the Church was pulling off boards and throwing out all that is most precious.” And he quotes the Declaration of November 21, 1974 in full.
His conclusion is without equivocation: “The Archbishop did not write this in a spirit of rebellion – but rather as a rallying cry for all those who want to fight for Christ the King. I offer this same declaration as also my battle cry to fight for Him.” In other words, Bishop Strickland has made the Declaration his own as a standard of Christ the King!
We must recognize in the bishop emeritus a certain courage and a personal reflection in which he takes a position in the current fight in a determined way, while knowing how to attribute what he owes to those who preceded him in the fight.
An earlier article on this site – on the subject of an exhortation made to the American bishops – noted his right intention and his courage, too rare among bishops today. He hoped “that this would lead him to gradually retrace the threads of the crisis, and to become aware of its origin in the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar reforms.”