Theo's Dad 🇺🇸

#romancatholic, #american, #BBN, #LGRW, #onepride

[Theo's Dad 🇺🇸 @pcmccarthy_m]

@DutchRojas @molsjames And the acquisition cost is $4-6k

[Michael J. Matt @Michael_J_Matt]

Pope Leo’s Letter to the SSPX

Dear Friends: The Catholic Church is on the verge of civil war. The Vatican has greenlit the homosexual lifestyle, as I proved in last week’s Underground (link in comments), and this week we have Cardinal Bob McElroy teaming up with Father Jimmy Martin for an alphabet soup conference that beautifully confirms what I was saying last week.

And who’s getting excommunicated? Certainly not Cardinal Bob or Father Jimmy! But wait, there’s more!

This morning, Pope Leo sent a letter to the leadership of the Society of St. Pius X, warning them not to tear the “seamless tunic” of Christ’s Church in half tomorrow. He says he is finally ready to dialogue.

“Trust us! We’re from the Vatican, and we’re here to help!”

I'm sorry, but maybe His Holiness should have thought of that before continuing his predecessor’s mad rampage to cancel the Latin Mass worldwide -- a big part of the reason why the SSPX is seeking recourse in the emergency provisions of Canon Law to safeguard the Traditional Mass and Sacraments.

With due respect, does His Holiness think we're suffering from Stockholm Syndrome to such an extent that as the Vatican continues to ruthlessly rip the Latin Mass out of our lives, we’d somehow welcome a papal sermon on how the SSPX is tearing the seamless tunic apart? Since that Latin Mass is the only Mass our children ever knew, Traditionis Custodes is basically an encyclical letter instructing our children to go to hell.

Trust the Vatican? Why ever would the SSPX do that?
And what about the Vatican's role in tearing the “seamless tunic” to shreds by throwing traditionalists out of their churches, treating their priests like criminals, and driving their communities into gymnasiums? Just ask Bishop Michael Martin of Charlotte how it works.

And this is to say nothing about the clerical sex scandals that have been rocking the Church ever since our children can remember. But the SSPX is the problem, because they want to establish oases of Catholic life for our kids in the middle of the spiritual desert the Vatican has made of the Catholic Church?

Meanwhile, we’ve got some Novus Latin Mass buffs – perched precariously on the fence, moistened fingers in the air – trying to please the guards by throwing the SSPX even further under the bus: “The SSPX are behaving like Protestants,” they solemnly inform their follower. “We are NOT like THEM!”

It’s not that I don’t admire their courage to speak in the absence of knowledge but were it not for Archbishop Lefebvre, these guys would never have had the Latin Masses Francis canceled in the first place. Why not? Because that Mass would have died the death in August of 1988.

But that doesn't stop these windbags with liturgical preferences and an assigned seat in the choir loft. Nope, they tell us that Archbishop Lefebvre and his successors are "no better than Martin Luther."

Okay, but two talking points about that:

1) From the point of view of the ecumenical all-religions-are-good Vatican, even if that were true -- and the SSPX is just a modern iteration of Martin Luther -- wouldn't that be a good thing?
2) Ever since Pope Paul VI invited six Protestant consultants to Vatican II, the Vatican has been obsessively Protestant-friendly. Why, we even got a thoroughly Protestantized Mass out of the deal.

So, if the SSPX were to act more Protestant, they obviously wouldn't be getting excommunicated in the first place. This might be quite funny, I suppose, were it not so tragically indicative of a massive state of emergency in the Catholic Church... that starts right at the top!

Like and share (link in comments). No matter where you come down on the SSPX, do not let Cardinal Tucho Fernandez blow us all apart. The SSPX is NOT the problem in the Church today. Pray for the Pope, pray for the SSPX, and unite the clans.

In Christo Rege,
Michael J. Matt

[The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts @solari_the]

Hero of the Week: June 29, 2026: Warner Mendenhall, Esq. (1962-2026)

Ohio attorney Warner Mendenhall passed away in early June, mourned by many in the health freedom movement.

His bio on the Mendenhall Law Group website says it all. Describing his journey from politics to law—it was after serving two terms on the Akron City Council in the 1990s that Mendenhall decided to go to law school—he determined that his passion and calling were to help “give ordinary people the power to stand up to government abuses, corporate fraud, and bank malfeasance.”

Mendenhall became more widely known during the Covid plandemic. Notably, as Sasha Latypova recounts, he took on the case of whistleblower Brook Jackson against Pfizer, “which was key to revealing the military nature of Project Covid.” Latypova adds that it was her discussions of the Jackson case with Mendenhall that helped her realize that “Pfizer did not defraud the government, they delivered the fraud that the government ordered.”

Full Report: https://t.co/IdCDDY3l9C

Subscribe to https://t.co/V2yzRAVIaZ

[Grace Ashford @IGraceAshford]

🚨Candace Owens has been sitting on evidence for so long.

Evidence that proves Charlie Kirk did not die from a single gunshot.

She stayed silent on purpose.

She wanted people to come forward.

She wanted to see who was telling the truth and who was spinning a narrative to cover up what really happened.

She wanted them to expose themselves.

And they did.

[Arcivescovo Carlo Maria Viganò @CarloMVigano]

Instead of acknowledging the devastating crisis facing the Catholic Church due to the conciliar and synodal revolution, Cardinal Müller—defying all reason—maintains that the post-Conciliar Hierarchy has never deviated from Tradition and that the Society of Saint Pius X is mistaken in asserting otherwise.

Müller proposes a renewed version of the motu proprio “Ecclesia Dei adflicta” to replicate the fraud of 1988, passing off fidelity to the immutable Magisterium as schism, while framing the acceptance of the Council’s errors as orthodoxy.

We have reached the point of “credo quia absurdum.”

The Conciliar and synodal Church claims the power to reshape reality, bending it to fit its own narrative. It demands uncritical and contradictory assent from the faithful, under pain of excommunication.

His Eminence believes that the clergy and laity associated with the Society can be appeased by being offered a substitute for what they already possess—much like tossing a bone to a chained dog.

Müller will soon discover—as will the members of the Ecclesia Dei institutes—that reducing the denunciation of the Conciliar coup to a mere ceremonial issue is a shortsighted, ideological choice, especially when the Hierarchy has no intention of yielding even slightly on the heretical principles it promotes.

Let him ask Fernández: one may haggle over the doctrine of Grace with Lutherans and bestow high honors upon an Anglican heretic, yet expressing the slightest reservation regarding the fetish of Vatican II is forbidden.

And yet, Müller maintains that the post-Conciliar Church has not strayed from the path of Tradition...

The pseudo-Catholic conservatism of these “gatekeepers” serves the implementation of synodality and must be scornfully rejected.

[Christ The King @Catholic_State]

Archbishop Casey told our Catholic men's group, through his rector, that we couldn't pray the Rosary on the Cathedral steps this year — he wanted to stay "neutral" toward the Pride Parade next door. Scripture, the Fathers, and the Catechism say a bishop can't be neutral toward sin.

https://t.co/XBHpE6jVjr

[Deacon Nick Donnelly @ProtecttheFaith]

How come the priests performing gay pride Masses aren't threatened with excommunication?

Oh yer that's right, they're being synodal

[Diane Montagna @dianemontagna]

EXCLUSIVE: Something Is Rotten in the Church in Sweden — https://t.co/erQN1ZRtm5

Catholics in the Diocese of Stockholm call for an apostolic visitation amid reports of corruption at the heart of the country’s only Catholic diocese.

[Cernovich @Cernovich]

"You say you don't go to Church because it's full of hypocrites there? I say you're right, but come anyway, we've got room for one more." - Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

[Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok]

MASSIVE SCANDAL UNFOLDING IN DENVER

You will want to read to the end. Absolutely shocking corruption and coverup.

Denver City Council blocked Denver International Airport from leasing space to Key Lime Air, because the airline worked with ICE.

There was just one problem…

It violates FAA rules.

So what did they do?

City attorney Miko Brown allegedly urged the airport to fabricate an investigation into the airline’s safety record to cover up for illegally discriminating against the airline for political reasons.

When word got out, Brown and Mayor Mike Johnston flat out denied it.

However CBS just obtained an internal airport memo appearing to reveal the entire thing was true.

City officials conspired to discriminate against a private company for political reasons then lied about it to cover it up‼️

The @TheJusticeDept should investigate. @AAGDhillon

[Deacon Nick Donnelly @ProtecttheFaith]

Has Rome excommunicated a single paedophile bishop, priest or deacon for their crimes against children?

Rome thinks reducing them to the lay state is severe punishment enough

The state of the majority of Catholics

[Peter Kwasniewski @DrKwasniewski]

I appreciate Müller's parrhesia. He is not afraid to stand up and speak his mind; in a synodally-controlled, prefabricated meeting, that is all to the good.

However, it's tragic that Müller wants the SSPX to be met with a hammer rather than a sign of peace. It's far too late now, but if the pope had met with Pagliarani, discussed the situation, reviewed the proposed candidates, and granted permission, there would at least have been a real and practical relationship between the 99 sheep and the 1 "lost" sheep. The shepherd wouldn't have just let them wander off into the wilderness (I'm speaking, for the sake of argument, from the perspective of the Society's skeptics). A real personal relationship is worth more than a distant crossfire of documents.

But what it looks like now, according to Müller, is: "We condemn these thousands of priests and religious, and millions of faithful; and if any of them would like to come back, we'll make them sign off on accepting all of Vatican II and the new Mass as a precondition, even if we permit them to keep celebrating the old rite." This is the very definition of intransigent. What you see is the clash of two intransigencies, precisely the opposite of what Benedict XVI pleaded for.

Let me put it this way. Sure, you can raise objections to the SSPX. Their position is not bullet-proof. But Müller's approach is entirely one-sided, as if there has not been incredible confusion and chaos in the Church on earth for 60 years now. Postconciliar popes have often added to the mess by their sprawling documents, inadequate responses, silences, complicities, and scandalous actions (ecumania, Assisi, Koran-kissing, Abu Dhabi, Pachamama, etc.). The abuses of the liturgy have not been stamped out and the lacerations of reform are still bleeding. Pope Francis gave us 12 years of heresy and mafia crime. You'd think that any honest response to the SSPX would begin with a massive admission of collective guilt and a resolve to address precisely those issues that explain why the SSPX exists in the first place—reminiscent of the truly humble admissions of Pope Adrian VI at the time of the Reformation. But no, Müller responds as if all is normal in Rome and it's only the Society that gets Vatican II wrong. Good grief, it's so tone-deaf one hardly knows where to begin.

[Arcivescovo Carlo Maria Viganò @CarloMVigano]

Il cardinale Müller, invece di prendere atto della situazione di crisi devastante in cui versa la Chiesa Cattolica a causa della rivoluzione conciliare e sinodale, con sprezzo del ridicolo sostiene che la Gerarchia postconciliare non si è mai discostata dalla Tradizione, e che la Fraternità San Pio X si sbagli nell’affermare il contrario.

Müller propone una versione rinnovata del motu proprio “Ecclesia Dei adflicta”, con il quale replicare la frode del 1988, spacciando per scisma la fedeltà al Magistero immutabile e per ortodossia l’accettazione degli errori del Concilio.

Siamo al “credo quia absurdum”.

La chiesa conciliare e sinodale pretende di poter rimodellare la realtà addomesticandola alla propria narrazione. Essa esige dai fedeli un assenso acritico e contraddittorio, sotto pena di scomunica.

Sua Eminenza crede che i chierici e i laici legati alla Fraternità possano essere accontentati offrendo loro un surrogato di ciò che già hanno, come si getta un osso a un cane da tenere alla catena.

Müller scoprirà presto — e i membri degli Istituti ex-Ecclesia Dei con lui — che ridurre la denuncia del golpe conciliare a una questione cerimoniale è scelta miope e ideologica, specialmente quando la Gerarchia non ha alcuna intenzione di cedere minimamente sui principi ereticali di cui si fa promotrice.

Chieda a Fernández: si può mercanteggiare sulla dottrina della Grazia con i luterani e tributare onori prelatizi a un’eretica anglicana, ma non è consentito esprimere la minima perplessità per il feticcio del Vaticano II.
Eppure Müller sostiene che la chiesa postconciliare non si sia allontanata dal solco della Tradizione…

Il conservatorismo pseudocattolico di questi gatekeeper è strumentale all’implementazione della sinodalità e va sdegnosamente respinto.

[Peter Kwasniewski @DrKwasniewski]

The introduction of the Novus Ordo coincided with, and certainly partially caused, a mass exodus of Catholics from the Church the likes of which had not been seen since the Protestant Revolt. Such Catholics did not receive the new rite but rejected it. The ever-decreasing number of practising Catholics, at least in the Western world, shows that the NO does not positively appeal to modern man—the entire rationale for its creation.

Moreover, with earlier liturgical “reforms” of the post-Tridentine era, each new edition of the missal totally replaced the previous edition and was used by all clergy and faithful without exception. The new missal, in contrast, was introduced by an apostolic constitution lacking the legal forms necessary to abrogate the previous missal, and some clergy kept using the old missal. And from the birth of the traditionalist movement ca. 1965 (even prior to the promulgation of the NO) onwards, there was always a core group of Catholics who continued with the ancient rites of worship and had as little to do with the modernizations as possible.

Today at Tradition & Sanity, I argue that the NO was never fully and perfectly "received" by the faithful because the 'sensus fidelium' balked at it; and then I draw several important conclusions from this fact.

https://t.co/82N5ynNJ1j

[Dr Mollie James @molsjames]

Is there anyone but pesticide companies, big pharma, and corrupt politicians that have immunity from consequences?

List them if so….

[Catholic Christendom @shiningsweu]

(cont.)

"What’s at Stake with Leo XIV and the SSPX?

1. Vatican II: Pastoral or Dogmatic?

If Vatican II was a pastoral council rather than a dogmatic one, what precisely must Catholics accept?
The answer begins with the intentions of the Popes who convoked and guided the Council.
At its opening in 1962, John XXIII repeatedly emphasized that the Council’s purpose was not primarily to define new dogmas but to present the perennial doctrine of the Church in a manner adapted to contemporary circumstances. The Council itself never issued solemn definitions comparable to those of Trent or Vatican I.

After the Council concluded, Paul VI addressed the matter directly:

“Given the Council’s pastoral character, it avoided pronouncing, in an extraordinary manner, dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility.”

This statement remains one of the most important keys to understanding Vatican II, but the difficulty arises elsewhere.
Much of the Council focused on questions such as religious liberty, ecumenism, relations with non-Christian religions, collegiality, and dialogue with the modern world. These subjects were presented as pastoral orientations rather than dogmatic definitions.
Historically, pastoral action means applying immutable doctrine to particular circumstances. A missionary in first-century Rome and another in twenty-first-century Tokyo may employ different methods, but both preach the same Faith.

Vatican II went beyond adapting methods and introduced formulations that are difficult to reconcile with previous magisterial teaching. Whether one agrees with this judgment or not, the controversy cannot simply be dismissed, because it stems from the Council’s own self-description as pastoral.
The problem is compounded by ambiguity.

Dogmatic definitions are generally precise. Pastoral texts are broader, more descriptive, and more open to interpretation. This helps explain why Vatican II has generated radically different readings over the past sixty years. Some see complete continuity with previous Catholic teaching; others see significant discontinuity.
The very existence of such divergent interpretations raises legitimate questions.
If Vatican II merely restated traditional doctrine, why have generations of theologians and churchmen devoted so much effort to demonstrating that certain passages should not be interpreted according to their most obvious reading? Why has there been a persistent need for elaborate explanations and hermeneutics of continuity?

The issue is whether every conciliar formulation possesses the same degree of authority and certainty as a solemn dogmatic definition.
This brings us directly to Leo XIV’s current position.
If Vatican II deliberately avoided defining new dogmas and was presented as a pastoral council, it is difficult to understand why acceptance of every disputed conciliar formulation should now be treated as a precondition for full ecclesial communion.
The SSPX has long argued that controversial conciliar teachings should be examined in light of previous magisterial teaching rather than accepted merely because they appear in the Vatican II documents.
Whether one agrees with that position or not, it arises naturally from the Council’s own stated pastoral character.

The deeper question therefore remains the same today as it was in 1965: Can a pastoral council be elevated, in practice, to the status of a dogmatic standard against which Catholic faithfulness is measured?
The answer is no. Leo XIV is treating disputed pastoral formulations as though they possessed the same practical authority as dogmatic definitions. Such an approach risks jeopardizing the future relationship between Leo XIV, the SSPX, and the wider traditional Catholic movement. Indeed, that appears to be the course he wishes to pursue."

(to be continued; source: Grand Inquisitor—Inquisition; Substack)

[Dr Taylor Marshall™️ @TaylorRMarshall]

Can the Vatican please prioritize excommunicating “Child Molesting Bishops”?

The fatigue is real. We are tired of the horrific abuse and tired of paying for legal payouts.

Get your act together!

[Dr Mollie James @molsjames]

I left the hospital when they blocked the treatments that worked.

Then I built the clinic I wish I'd worked for. @james_clinic

Now I'm hiring physicians to help me run it.

If you're an excellent doctor who's done asking permission — done with insurance games, 15-minute slots, and watching patients fall through the cracks — read this.

Real medicine. Real autonomy. Operational support so you can actually practice.

Already trained in integrative/functional? Great. Not yet but hungry to learn it? We'll train you — I built the curriculum myself.

Hiring now: Ankeny IA · Chesterfield MO · Texas.

DM me. Tell me why you're done.

[Catholic Christendom @shiningsweu]

Bishop Athanasius Schneider:

"Why is the unconditional acceptance of the texts of Vatican II presented as a conditio sine qua non for full communion with the Holy See, while no comparable requirement exists with respect to the pastoral, disciplinary, or non-definitive teachings of the preceding twenty Ecumenical Councils?"

[Honest Ash @realhonestash]

Candace just covered the crisis actors that immediately told us what the “plan” was. The mic was supposed to simulate a shot in Charlie’s heart/chest.

This is another MASSIVE admission in the Charlie Kirk case 🤯

@RealCandaceO @candaceoshow