Denver, Colo., Jul 25, 2023 / 12:00 pm (CNA).
In a recent podcast, Bishop Joseph E. Strickland of Tyler, Texas, denied any wrongdoing related to the Vatican inquiry into his conduct and that of his diocese and said the recent apostolic visitation was “not fun.”
The Vatican’s delegates were “looking at everything,” Strickland told a prerecorded show of the “Bishop Strickland Hour,” scheduled to be broadcast by Virgin Most Powerful Internet Radio on July 25.
“There have been some administrative issues, and I’m sure people are concerned,” the bishop said. “I’m sure there are people saying that there must be something really bad, and something’s really gone wrong for this apostolic visitation [to happen].”
“I’ve got nothing to hide,” he said in a show excerpt posted to YouTube.
Strickland said the apostolic visitation was “not fun” and compared it to “being called to the principal’s office.”
An apostolic visitation is a specific form of canonical visitation in which any ecclesial superior visits or sends a delegate to persons or institutions under their authority to maintain sound doctrine and morals or correct abuses. The pope can initiate apostolic visitations throughout the universal Church in his capacity as the supreme pontiff.
The apostolic visitation of Strickland and his diocese was supervised by the Vatican’s Dicastery for Bishops. This rare form of intervention points to possible disciplinary action against Strickland.
As CNA reported June 25, a source in the diocese told EWTN News on background that the apostolic visitation consisted of interviews with diocesan clergy and laity throughout the preceding week before concluding with a meeting with Strickland. Bishop Emeritus Gerald Kicanas of Tucson and Bishop Dennis Sullivan of Camden, New Jersey, led the inquiry.
The process addressed the bishop’s social media use but also questions related to diocesan management, according to the source.
Strickland, 64, is a popular but polarizing figure. Many U.S. conservatives appreciate his outspokenness and staunch defense of the unborn, marriage, the traditional Latin liturgy, and Catholic orthodoxy. He shares his views and commentary with 136,000 followers on the social media site Twitter.
Strickland has headed the Diocese of Tyler since 2012. The bishop has faced criticism for what some see as intemperate social media posts unbecoming of a prominent U.S. prelate, including a May 12 tweet that suggested Pope Francis was “undermining the deposit of faith.”
Discussing the Vatican inquiry on his radio show, Strickland repeated that the process was difficult.
“It’s not something that I would volunteer for, to go through an apostolic visitation,” he said. “It kind of puts a shadow over the diocese.”
The bishop said he thinks he was subject to the visitation “because I’ve been bold enough and loved the Lord enough and his Church, simply preaching the truth.”
Without being specific, he said: “The sad thing is that too many people are bringing a false message that is harmful to the world and to the mystical body of Christ that is the Church.”
“But the false message will never prevail,” he continued. “It will never destroy the faith of the people who know their faith and are strong in faith. Sadly, there are too many that aren’t well-catechized, and they’re easily deluded by false gospels that are out there.”
Commenting on people on Twitter who say “Bishop Strickland’s on the way out,” the bishop said: “Maybe they’re right.”
“But the reality is that I’m happy serving as a shepherd of the Diocese of Tyler. I consider it an honor that I don’t deserve,” he continued. “It’s a lot of work. It’s a lot of challenges. I have made mistakes, but the goodness of the people and the grace of God have allowed us to do some really good things.”
Strickland’s tenure has also coincided with positive signs of spiritual and administrative health in Tyler.
Currently, 21 men are in priestly formation for the territory of only 55,000 Catholics, a rate of seminarians-per-Catholic considerably higher than most other U.S. dioceses. The diocese is also reportedly in good financial shape, shown in part by its ability to raise 99% of its $2.3 million goal for the 2021 bishop’s appeal six months ahead of schedule.
“The finances are in order, we have a great finance team, development is strong, we have a good number of seminarians,” Strickland told his radio show. “And I go to the different parishes, celebrating confirmation, the people are very welcoming. They say they’re praying for me.”
“It’s humbling to see the concern of the people, the faith of the people… It’s humbling but also uplifting to see the goodness of the people,” he said.
Strickland emphasized his love of God and his efforts to evangelize but also suggested he didn’t need to be corrected.
“The joy of continuing to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a joy I know that won’t stop you and won’t stop me if we do it with love, with charity and clarity, with humility, always ready to be corrected,” he said.
“But when we’re speaking the truth of Jesus Christ, there is no correction,” Strickland continued. “And the world can try to shout us down, but it won’t work.
Several U.S. bishops have faced apostolic visitations in recent years.
The Vatican in November 2022 reportedly sent an apostolic visitation to the Diocese of Knoxville, Tennessee, where Bishop Richard Stika has recently been embroiled in allegations of sex abuse cover-up. The Vatican has reportedly asked Stika to resign, but he remains in office.
Bishop Daniel Fernandez Torres of the Diocese of Arecibo in Puerto Rico was reportedly the subject of an apostolic visitation before his removal from office on March 9, 2022. The Vatican never provided any official reason for his removal, but his metropolitan, Roberto Archbishop Octavio González Nieves of San Juan, said it was due to “insubordination towards the pope.”
This was likely related to Fernandez Torres’ break from the practice of his fellow Puerto Rican bishops by not sending his diocese’s seminarians to a newly established national seminary. He also refused to sign a joint statement on the duty to receive a COVID-19 vaccination.
New York’s Diocese of Buffalo was the subject of an apostolic visitation in October 2019 after its then-leader, Bishop Richard Malone, faced significant criticism for his handling of clerical sexual abuse in the diocese. Pope Francis granted his request for “early retirement” in December 2019.
Bishop Martin D. Holley was removed from the Diocese of Memphis, Tennessee, on Oct. 24, 2018, following a three-day apostolic visitation in June 2018 that reportedly looked into allegations of mismanagement of diocesan personnel and finance.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
As long as we’re looking at past visitations, we might as well go back to the Visitation on Seattle back in 1985. The concluding and publicly available letter to Archbishop Hunthausen from Apostolic Pro-Nuncio Pio Laghi (November 14, 1985) balanced the good with the bad.
The five included “concerns” were these:
“(a) The need to bring into clear focus–working together with priests, religious and theologians–certain teachings of the Church and their implications for the pastoral practice of the Archdiocese. These include the role of conscience in making moral decisions; the role of the Magisterium in giving definitive guidance in matters of faith and morals; the nature and mission of the Church, together with its sacramental and hierarchical structure; an anthropology which provides an authentic understanding of the dignity of the human person; and a Christology which correctly reflects our Catholic faith concerning Christ’s divinity, His humanity, His salvific mission, and His inseparable union with the Church.
“(b) In particular, the need to present more clearly the Church’s teaching concerning the permanence and indissolubility of marriage and to ensure that the Archdiocesan Tribunal, both its constitution and practice, conforms with all the prescriptions of the revised Code of Canon Law.
“(c) Greater vigilance in upholding the Church’s teaching, especially with regard to contraceptive sterilization and homosexuality.
“(d) The need to ensure that pastoral practice regarding the liturgical and sacramental ministry of the Archdiocese is in accord with the Church’s universal norms, especially in the celebration of the Eucharist. This includes, for instance, routine intercommunion on the occasion of weddings or funerals. Such a need also involves the Sacrament of Reconciliation, mentioning particularly the proper sequence of first confession/first communion and regulations regarding general absolution.”
“(e) The need to review the ongoing education of the clergy and the selection and formation of candidates for the priesthood., and to be clear that laicized priests are excluded from certain roles in accord with the rescripts of their laicization.”
In which of these concerns of the Church has Strickland been remiss, or not?
None. Unfortunately, this is not 1985, and JP II is not the Pope.
I guess all Francis’ talk about dialog doesn’t apply to shepherds who challenge or reject his narrative. A sad state of affairs.
Speaking as a political scientist, Paris was too easy. Puerto Rico was the test case to cancel. Few Bishops spoke up. Tyler should be exiled soon, like Tucho did to poor Emeritus Archbishop Aguer. With the Synod, pressure is mounting on Ordinaries to march in the Synodal Pride Parade or at least keep their mouth shut – beats being homeless. Each region has Bishops on the hit list. Hopefully, the purge will be short lived.
They are Christ’s apostles; they don’t belong to Peter. Peter belongs with them and they with him. Wasn’t James permitted martyrdom before Peter was.
He mustn’t look at them as a political scientist or call the alienation “hope” whether short-lived or not in order to make it somehow not alienation.
Pope Francis hasn’t clarified the ambiguity concerning “legalizing homosexual civil union” that “he stood for”. He should remedy it and dispel the storm.
That one is fairly easy to do. Other strange things he has done may not be easily rectified even if when they are accurately described to him with love.
Those who overlook the falsehoods of life (power, pride and lust) are polarizing. They disrupt all that is truly good (beauty, truth and love). Bishop Strickland is merciful by not condoning evil.
Joseph Strickland is a true bishop.
Mike Lewis – at “Where Pedo Is” – has already engaged in his usual character assassination against Bishop Strickland. It would be really illuminating to have someone like John Zmirak conduct a forensic analysis of the financing of Mike Lewis. His writing is predictably nefarious, like that of Mark Shea, only without the obscene Trump Derangement Syndrome formulas.
How do you spell injustice?
Easy: V-A-T-I-C-A-N.
Clergy like you who mock the Holy Father are the reason so many young people today embrace atheism. I pray God have mercy on you for any young person who you have driven to atheism and anti-theism through your poor example as one bearing the indellible mark of sacred orders.
I’m truly curious about the assertion here. Are you actually claiming that young people are so sensitive to criticism of Pope Francis that when they hear someone (especially clergy) make negative comments about him that they lose belief in God? How, exactly, does that work? If that is the case (and I’m am not convinced in the least), then it is incredibly irrational on the part of these alleged young-people-turned-atheist. Anyhow, some evidence of this would be great to see.
Would you change the way you write, edit, and moderate CWR if the evidence was produced?
Would clergy like Deacon Edward start conducting themselves on social media in a manner that dignifies the clerical state?
Our Lady of Fatima warned Sister Lucy in both the second and third secret that there would come great persecution in the Catholic Church against the Holy Father and Catholics who stand with him.
Today the persecutors include both clergy that cultivates social media likes rather than souls, and online Catholic media.
That persecuted Pope is widely seen as JPII.
In my interpretation of the visionary, the figure in white under attack represents the whole Church not the Pope.
A points out a serious problem at large and B replies that A is a closed up non-communicative intellectualist. What B has done is add to the problem. Insisting that A must receive counselling does nothing for the problem.
Waiting 30 years to get to debrief A does nothing for the problem. You could wait 500 years it’s still a problem unaddressed and unresolved in the right ways. Copy-catting A and sustaining the problem is the same problem not dealt with as and when it should be.
Plain as day. Plain as a moonless night. Plain as the sun at noon in a cloudless sky. Plain as the full moon bursting through the storming empyrean rage. Plain as the sand on the seashore.
Where was this energy when JP II and Benedict XVI were Pope?
I hope you are not trying to pit St John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI against Pope Francis. All three speak with the voice of St Peter.
What say you Mark D.
People get upset with Pope Francis and show their dismay because it’s a familial atmosphere. Why call it mocking. Or perhaps they feel somewhat put out themselves for being left in the lurch by strange sayings and doings and reports and one or two of them do mock at that; yet some understanding would move you to empathize.
More. Rapporteurs “pro-Francis” now add their own 2 cents or big bills, say what they will with pepper and spice etc. and no-one can correct them; and you Mark D and others let it all pass unchecked. How come is that.
“Pro-Francis”?
Of course I am pro-Francis. I am an orthodox Catholic. I believe the Church teaching that St Peter speaks through his successors. And I see where attacking the successor of St Peter eventually leads. My old friend Gerry Matatics is one example. More recently, former Catholic Answers radio host Patrick Coffin is another.
In truth my favourite pope personally since the Second Vatican Council has been Pope Benedict XVI. (Which is no surprise to anyone who knows me since prior to his election to the See of St Peter, Josef Ratzinger was my favourite western theologian of the past century)
However, Pope Emeritus Benedict made it clear on several occasions, both publicly and his memoires, that he fully supports Francis as pope. Who am I as a simple lay Catholic to question Pope Benedict’s example?
Mark D I sense you could be all one way binary yes-or-no such as we are not supposed to be as the rapporteurs relate about it.
Then aside from you I notice that the “pro-Francis” rapporteurs (as I have them, some call them talking heads) aren’t all saying the same thing nor do they mean the same thing even when they use a common vocabulary.
Also I note that an image of “seamless garment” was introduced which is a complete distortion of the Scripture yet it escapes everyone who would have the responsibility or office to redress it.
So much of these types of issues is necessarily intellectual but this word “intellectual” got too generalized as a pejorative I think very hard to bring back into a right focus.
Other twists can be highlighted, this will do for now. Matatics is free to deepen faith in a more traditional line and your use of his story does not resolve anything. The same for your referencing JPII and Benedict and your equation among Popes.
But your equation among Popes could just be immoderate by itself.
Mark D: Knock off the hysterical posturing and virtue-signaling. It’s unbecoming of a grown man.
The outrageous behavior of this Vatican has been well-chronicled. If you choose to ignore the facts, I can’t help you. But trying to shame me as a member of the clergy comes across as woefully desperate.
Simply put, Bishop Strickland is guilty of publicly proclaiming Christ in deference to the whims and diktat of bergoglio.
Surely Paul Rasavage meant to say that Bishop Strickland proclaimed Christ ‘in defiance of’, rather than ‘in deference to’ the whims etc. Or possibly that he proclaimed Christ ‘without deference to’ the whims etc. Incidentally, I noticed that this pope has suggested that the CDF was acting immorally under Cardinal Ratzinger. I wonder what we should think of this ‘investigation’ of Bishop Strickland.
The Vatican inquiry is the equivalent of “leaving a horse’s head in the bed.” Serves as a warning not only to Bishop Strickland, but any other bishop who may be thinking about stepping out of line.
Not so much a “witch hunt” in the traditional sense of rooting our evil but a witch hunt in the modern sense of “being hunted by witches” to perpetuate evil.
“but a witch hunt in the modern sense of “being hunted by witches” to perpetuate evil.”
That’s all a witch hunt ever was. Because they *always* project.
Bishop Strickland is a WONDERFUL man and true defender of the faith. He is the epitome of Catholicism. Without a doubt, the Truth with Clarity and Charity.
Bishop Strickland says “I have made mistakes”. Let the Vicar of Christ show the same mercy to his bishop that Christ Himself showed regularly to his Apostles. Let Pope Francis say to Bishop Strickland – “Feed my sheep” or “Feed our sheep” and let the good bishop carry on in boldness tempered with the humility Our Lord expected of the sons of Zebedee. Let us for once have in this pontificate a true unity, not a head-hunting.
From here it seems to me that the Pope does NOT like America or its citizens, he especially does not like those of us who disagree with him and so he uses his power to make life hard on them, them including me.
We’ll get through this.
All of this makes me want to rewatch the Death of Stalin movie. This too shall pass. There will be other Popes. Christ gave us the papacy.
Having been blessed to know Bishop Strickland, should the worst come, I offer him the good example of St. Athanasius in exile. He used his time out of office to spread the teaching of Nicea, pray in the desert and write the Life of St. Anthony, send out holy letters to his former flock, etc.
You’re absolutely right. It’s not about holding on to power. It’s about being obedient to the fatherhood of God and proclaiming His truth. Those who lust after power – especially among the bishops and the Vaticanista sycophants- will ultimately find themselves destroyed by the very power they lust after. Don’t doubt me.
The fact that Bishop Strickland who keeps, holds, and teaches The Catholic Faith is being investigated by those who do not keep, hold, or teach The Catholic Faith, is evidence enough that The Veil Has Been Lifted, exposing The Great Apostasy, led by apostates who deny The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, and thus The Divinity Of The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity.
What are we waiting for?
Christ’s Sacrifice On The Cross will lead us to Salvation, but we must desire forgiveness for our sins, and accept Salvational Love, God’s Gift Of Grace And Mercy; believe in The Power And The Glory Of Salvation Love, and rejoice in the fact that No Greater Love Is There Than This, To Desire Salvation For One’s Beloved.
“Hail The Cross, Our Only Hope.”
“St.Michael The Archangel Defend us in battle!”
“For where your treasure is there will your heart be also.”
Peter D’s summary of a eighties visitation is what a visitation should be: is the Catholic Faith being taught? Having delicious numbers of vocations should indicate that the Holy Ghost is at work here and is wonderful in our seeing.
What’s happened here is like something out of the cutting room floor to Goodfellows: the boss ain’t happy and these are dangerous times, accidents can happen capish?
Really sad times, but look at the evidence!!!!
“…Denies Wrongdoing…”?
Was he accused of wrongdoing or there is there an unfortunate innuendo suggested by the headline?
“By their fruits you shall know them”
“We wish to raise our grave concern over the apostolic visitation to Bishop Strickland.”
Friday, August 18, 2023
The part Father Z chose to excerpt:
We wish to raise our grave concern with the recent apostolic visitation of Bishop Joseph E. Strickland and the Diocese of Tyler by papal representatives. There are two grounds for our concern. First, no special circumstances exist in the Diocese of Tyler, whether spiritual or administrative, that warrant an apostolic visitation. Second, the visit to a diocese without such special circumstances when public and demonstrably grave circumstances of heterodoxy and moral failure exist in other unvisited dioceses worldwide raises legitimate questions about the justice and charity of the process, as well as potentially gives rise to scandal among the faithful.