The Official Catholic Church Is Alienating Its Faithful Base By Victoria White Berger

[Geee]

American Thinker

Here in the West, ‘regular’ Catholics in the pews are worried about and baffled by Pope Francis, who regularly pounces on and ‘takes sides’ on secular and political subjects, far more than did any of his predecessors.

The Pope’s recent salvo (while not against traditional marriage, but not for it, either—which marriage is a Catholic Sacrament, holy, inviolate and unique between man and woman) is his most recent upset. His highly ambiguous recommendation of the ‘blessing’ of gay couples within the Catholic Church is now, predictably enough, in fierce debate. The disputes came only a day after the Pope’s public statement approving (later, partially disavowing) the ‘blessings.’ Francis seems to enjoy poking the bear. His popularity in the U.S. is beginning to falter.

Disrespect towards, and ignorance of, Catholic Canon Law — promulgated long ago to regulate the behavior of the whole Church, as loyal to Christ alone — is in full view and coming from the top at the Vatican, and from the liberal, D.C.-based Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), and from the ‘consecrated’ priestly and religious bureaucracy in many Catholic orders and schools -- all in historic decline.

There are recent questions regarding papal abuse of canonical law, as coming out of the Vatican, among the case of the pope's removal of Bishop Joseph Strickland from his office in Tyler, Texas, where he was outspokenly orthodox and quite popular.

According to Catholic Vote:

 

Fr. Gerald Murray, an expert canon lawyer and commentator on EWTN’s “The World Over,” told CatholicVote on Monday that “we do not know why Pope Francis removed Bishop Strickland, because he did not give any reason for his action. That omission leads to speculations as to the reason, which are then taken by some to be facts.”

Catholic Vote suggested that the move appeared to be personal, and vindictive, which was not consistent with canonical law.

 

Murray explained that “removal is ordinarily a penal measure,” although

“it can be done in the case of physical or psychological impairment. The Holy See has not published a decree for Strickland’s removal, which is required in canon law, unless the pope exempted himself from that requirement, in which case that exemption should be made by a decree. That decree should be published.”

“The removal of a bishop from office without specifying if he committed a canonical crime or if he was found to be impaired offends against basic justice and charity,” Murray argued. “He is deprived office without, it seems, the benefit of due process, including an appeal, and his good name is called into question.” :snip: