Strickland seems like a genuine guy. I hope he fully wakes up to the Vatican II heresies and denounces the false church at its root like Vigano did. In this scathing rebuke, he literally calls all the bishops heretics, and Francis an apostate (though I don't think he fully realizes that is what he is doing). He still thinks of them as Catholics who can retain their offices.

Bishop Strickland: God will punish bishops for their silence while Pope Francis destroys the Church - LifeSite

It could have been written by Fr. Hewko. 

I would bet $20 that Fr. Hewko gives a h0mily about it within the week!  

i.e. (in his booming voice)
"Strickland is waking up! He is right! But he needs to reject Vatican II, that the new mass gives grace, the new mass miracles are real, etc..." 

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/bishop-strickland-god-will-punish-bishops-for-their-silence-while-pope-francis-destroys-the-church/?utm_source=featured-news&utm_campaign=usa

He could do a lot for Tradition if he just gets that final push of grace. Please pray and fast for his conversion.

100%


Though I would be remiss to not acknowledge my fear for him is that he will end up creating some kind of pseudo-traditional novus ordo schism of the schism cult - like the "underground" Chinese "church". So, hopefully he does put those missing pieces together sooner rather than later. Prayers and sacrifices!

Yes, I saw that Novus Ordo Watch took a shot at Bishop Strickland, since he hadn't gone far enough, for which I rebuked them.  As you put it, they need to pray for him rather than criticize him ... as if that's going to draw him in their direction somehow.

So, I'm hoping that Bishop Strickland now reaches out to +Vigano to take the next steps.  Sometimes it just takes that one extra factor to give something the needed momentum, where if you now have 2 NO bishops defecting from the Conciliar Church and denouncing Bergoglio, you may then add another (perhaps Cardinal Zen, who also recently attached Jorge), and then another ... and at some point it hits a critical mass where it starts moving, like a snowball that starts rolling downhill when that one extra snowflake puts it over the top.

Agreed. Though his prediction about Vigano turned out true, and similarly what he said in the above clip from the 38:00 mm to the 38:08 mm (8 seconds), I think will equally prove true. I never listened to him for his commentary (which is beyond terrible), but he started dropping into my feed when his channel first started because I was watching a lot of SSPX stuff. At that time, I was still defending the ecclesiology of the SSPX, so he angered me as I saw his criticisms as unjust. But like I said above, after studying the SV position long and hard I had a moment of revelation that He actually does understand that R&R is a dead-end and principally not Catholic. The only logical choice is to either be for the Conciliar Church and its popes or completely against it (no middle ground), therefore I was able to see that he is most likely a bad-willed actor trying to keep sheep in the wolves' den rather than the conservative Novus Ordo that he pretends to be. So, from time-to-time I still give him a quick listen to get a feel on how his camp is thinking. I was especially grateful to see the Dimond's put him in his place as an, "useful idiot of Satan" and even 80-lbs-soaking-wet-90-year-old Zen jump on his back calling him out as a, "large man with a tiny beard". Sometimes we can learn from our enemies too. Lofton needs prayers for his conversion.

Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on us and our erring brethren - 300 days.

I can understand why you think that R&R is not Catholic, but then neither is sedevacantism, IMO. They are both reactions to the fact of Modernists having taken over and are occupying the Church. Both are a means for trying to make sense of a terrible situation - an abnormal situation - so we can't expect that there will be a solidly Catholic response, since the Church has not directly ever addressed about how to deal with this type of situation. 

I don't see how anyone can stand Lofton. He's extreme in his views. And not in a good way.

... since the Church has not directly ever addressed about how to deal with this type of situation.

Pope Paul IV addressed it in cuм ex where he says:
"The Roman Pontiff....who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted."

^^This is R&R.

Pope Paul IV addressed it in cuм ex where he says:
"The Roman Pontiff....who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted."

^^This is R&R.

I suppose that "having deviated from the faith" could be the same thing as outright heresy. I would have preferred that the word "heresy" be used in the above quote, so as to make it crystal clear. Just my opinion. There's a lack of precise terminology too, when the sedevacantists try to fit Church teaching into a sedevacantist paradigm. It's never direct, and therefore doesn't quite work. But....to each his own. 

Having read it, you must intentionally be concealing the gravamen of cuм Ex Apostolatus Officio:.....

And you must intentionally be disobeying the directive given to us by pope Paul IV.

You do realize that the beginning of the first paragraph of cuм ex is all about heretic popes, don't you? He is saying that, because he cannot be judged by anyone in this world, there is nothing anyone can do about a heretic pope but we can contradict him, i.e. not do what he says.

1.In assessing Our duty and the situation now prevailing, We have been weighed upon by the thought
that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff, who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fulness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted...

You may choose to read it that way - I will not dispute it. I guess we will just have to wait a little bit longer to find out Paul IV's exact sense of that choice of wording. I could counter, to say one has deviated from their course does not imply shipwreck. But heresy is full-on shipwreck. The pope personally may deviate from the faith (occult). But if he were to steer the baroque into the shoals and crash it (public) - then you would have Christ leading us all to damnation.

I choose to read it in the same sense that he wrote it. He is quite explicit and clear throughout the entire docuмent, except for this paragraph? No. I quoted the pope describing R&R which is the directive he gave.

And no, the pope is not Christ, and the pope only leads those to damnation who want to follow him there. Nobody, but nobody (you  can reference yourself as an example), can be led to where they do not already want to go, plus it is so much easier to simply follow the wolves. The degree of culpability of the masses who follow may be less, but God does not permit us to be mindless in this world. If all the faithful would have followed the example of the pioneering trads in the 60s, the devil would have had to concoct some other means for this crisis.

But I would only add - at least for myself - that I have no power to judge anyone. I can only judge their actions/beliefs. In the case of the principle I am using, it is not me who has "dethroned" anyone, but rather God and I am merely witness to this fact which has been made known to me by their manifest and public heresy.

This is the common sede pillar, i.e. that he was dethroned by God, but the fact is that all the cardinals in the conclave(s) elected and accepts them as popes, and on that account we must also. God did not give us a choice in this matter, that's why there are cardinals. We witness his heresies and obey Pope Paul IV's instructions about what we are to do when the pope is a heretic and we can save our souls, because that is the direction a pope gave us to follow. That is the teaching of the Church telling us the only thing that we can do about heretic popes.

What do you think of Stickland's rebuke anyway and what is next for him?

Time will tell, but if the bishop is sincere he will absolutely be expelled from his office the same way as +Vigano and the multitude of priests and bishops before him. Until then, for me, he is not with us yet, still against us.

Could you explain a little more about how you view the situation in Strickland's context. I take it you think of him as a legitimate bishop. You mention him being expelled from his office but did that not already happen when he was replaced in Tyler TX.? Vigano was declared in schism and excommunicated but was already retired from any offices he held if I am remembering correctly. So, I think Laughton has it right that the next step for him would be "laicization", because they cannot actually hit him the same as Vigano (excommunication) who has denied both Vatican II as legitimate and Francis as being pope. Strickland has done neither. He seems to think the pope can be an apostate/heretic and many of the bishops can be heretics while still retaining their offices, which is the practical mindset of R&R.

From Strickland's Letter,

"I think that St. Jude had men such as many of you in mind when he described men who feast “together without fear, feeding themselves, clouds without water, which are carried about by winds, trees of the autumn, unfruitful, twice dead, plucked up by the roots, raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own confusion; wandering stars…” (Jude 1:12-13)."

From the Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 12-13. These are spots in their banquets; (see 2 Pet. ii. 13.) in which they commit unheard of abominations, twice dead, which signifies no more than quite dead, clouds without water, &c. All these metaphors are to represent the corrupt manners of these heretics. Wi.

Oddly, if he had read the commentary for the preceding verse he would have seen,

Ver. 11. They have imitated, or gone in the way of Cain, who murdered his brother; and they have a mortal hatred against the faithful. They have imitated Balaam[8] and his covetousness, (see 2 Peter ii. 15.) and Core, (Num. xvi.) who with others opposed Moses; and as these sinners perished, so will they. Wi. — Way, &c. Heretics follow the way of Cain, by murdering the souls of their brethren; the way of Balaam by putting a scandal before the people of God, for their own private ends; and the way of Core or Korah, by their opposition to the church governors of divine appointment. Ch.

Laicization would be a pretty drastic step to take in the case of a bishop, especially one who has not come right out and done something occasioning this (such as McCarrick's misdeeds).  And they didn't laicize Vigano.