LEO OPPOSED, DEFIED: VAT2 TURNS TO CUSTARD

To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address, FB Messenger or X. 

 

One cannot be the visible head of a body of which one is not a member.

 

 

Doesn't this incident just tell us all we need to know about Leo and Tucho's Freemasonic new religion and its new Mass? A Novus Ordo chaplain tells a seriously ill man on his admission to hospital that as he's SSPX laity, he should ask the nurse to change his chart from 'Roman Catholic' to 'no religion'. The nurse politely tells the chaplain to get lost. If that man had died without a priest he could have been lost for all eternity - and how many nurses are there in the world who'd protect possibly thousands of sick and dying Catholics from condemnation to hell, due to Rome's false, invalid and unjust Decree?

Leo and Tucho clearly care nothing about loss of souls - but the delicious irony is that if any such evil, NO busybody chaplains find fault with aspects of Vatican II (as any thinking Catholic does), then they're just as 'schismatic' 'as the Society of St Pius X. 

Because the root of the SSPX schism, according to John Paul II and his successors, lies in the Society's refusal to accept Vatican II. To to be 100% in communion with the Catholic Church today, according to the post-conciliar hierarchy, you must accept all of Vatican II. It will go very hard with Trad Inc Catholics who clutch their pearls over SSPX 'disobedience' and 'schism', and at the same time rightly revile the vile Vatican, to realise that they themselves are 'excommunicated'. 

What a good thing for Tucho that his decree was invalid. Otherwise he'd have accidentally excommunicated almost all of the flock - every Catholic on the planet except those who think Vatican II is fine and dandy. But don't go thinking that would have got Tucho sacked. No. There are reasons why he remains in Leo's employ which can only be surmised, not proven. As yet. 

And don't go thinking, either, that the Vatican cares about the authenticity of its decree. Leo and Tucho care only that the public perception is that the SSPX is 'excommunicated'. And in putting that one across, they're ably assisted by Satan's pearl clutching brigade.

That shoddy 'excommunication' edict proves the Vatican is panicking. Their new, counterfeit, conciliar religion was supposed to be the spiritual show pony for the demonic global elite and Agenda 2030, to replace the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. But the Traditional Latin Mass - whose chief champion is the SSPX - has refused to lie down and die like it was supposed to, after Traditionis Custodes. Instead, the traditional movement, inspired by the love of Christ engendered by Him in the Most Holy Eucharist, has flourished the world over, to the consternation of the communists in Davos and their puppets in the Vatican.

It's not only the Society but also the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer (FSSR) who are consecrating bishops this month without Rome's say-so. The co-founder of the  Congregation, New Zealander Fr Michael Mary, will be ordained by Bishop Pierre Roy, a Canadian, on Papa Stronsay in the North Sea on July 25.  Unlike the SSPX, +Roy is a self-declared sedevacantist. (Spoiler alert: expect to see many more of the faithful -  those who have eyes to see and ears to hear - claiming the sede status long since used by conservative Catholics as a pejorative.)

Roy congratulated the Transalpine Redemptorists on surviving “the nauseating stench of the conciliar hydra” and embracing a position that asserted “the current vacancy of the Apostolic See.”

And what's more:

Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga, a former bishop in Kazakhstan known for surviving communism and his previous outspoken criticism of Pope Francis and the direction of the Catholic hierarchy, sharply criticized the Vatican’s excommunication of the priests and laity of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) after its July 1 consecration of four new bishops without a papal mandate, while praising the order.

 

Archbishop Lenga, 76, slammed the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s (DDF) under Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández decree that excommunicated the Society’s newly consecrated bishops, all clergy, and in some cases, its laity, claiming "this is proof that the Vatican has departed from Christ and the authentic faith. 

 

"[The SSPX] are not separating themselves from Peter; rather, the false Peter has separated himself from them. It is precisely this false Peter who deserves to be expelled from the Church, because he is not doing what he is supposed to do." https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archbishop-who-considered-fr

Renowned canon lawyer Father Gerald Murray explained Friday why a recent document from the Vatican seeking to extend episcopal excommunications against the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) to priests and laity represent a significant canonical error.

 

“This is a canonical mess,” Murray told EWTN host Raymond Arroyo during an episode of The World Over. “An explanatory note can explain what a decree contains. It can’t add to a decree. So, the decree did not say the priests were excommunicated. Therefore, the explanatory note cannot do that having legal effect. 

 

“This was a canonical mistake on the part of the authors of this document. It’s very regrettable. Same applies to lay people,” he said.https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/this-is-a-canonical-mess-fr-murray-explains-why-sspx-priests-laity-are-not-exco

6 months to prepare it, best quality parchment and the best canon lawyers, and Tucho and Leo produced a wonderful 'decree' and a note to please the burn-them-at-the-stake crowd which amount to nothing. No excommunications. No restrictions on the sacraments, no nothing.

Vatican II is turning to custard. 'Pope Leo XIV' and his handyman Cardinal Tucho Manuel Fernandez are ecclesiastical Keystone Cops.

How very apt was today's Gospel: 

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. (Mt 7:15-21.)

The tree of Vatican II and the evil fruit of its bastard child, the Novus Ordo (New Mass), are  in plain sight for all with eyes to see. It will one day indeed be cut down by God, Who orders all things to the good of those who love Him and are called to be saints. (Rom 8:28.)

From the Catholic Esquire: 

A Silent “Excommunication” of All Traditionalists?

 

Tradition itself has been excommunicated according to the rule used against the SSPX.

Many believe that the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) was excommunicated from the Catholic Church following the much-anticipated consecrations of four new bishops on July 1, 2026 without getting the Papal mandate.

 

In fact, there is a large contingent of pseudo-traditionalists and conservatives who are revelling in the false belief that the SSPX was excommunicated and yet still feel free to criticize aspects of Vatican II and the New Mass while virtuously claiming to be obedient sons of the Holy Father.

 

Ironically, the same rule they used to condemn the SSPX’s members and lay faithful to hell also condemns them as schismatics.

 

I have explained that these “excommunications” were invalid on both a theological and canonical level. If one reads only a few provisions of canon law, and understands what “schism” is, it is quite clear that no one was excommunicated. It’s not even a close call.

 

Nevertheless, the rest of the world, including numerous secular media outlets, think the Society’s bishops, priests, seminarians, and even lay people who attend SSPX chapels were excommunicated.

 

And what is even more concerning is the reaction from Catholic conservatives or traditionalists who condemn the Society for the consecrations and agree that such actions constituted “schism.”

 

The most ardent traditional Catholic influencers opposing the SSPX actions that come to mind are Taylor Marshall and Eric Sammons. They hold themselves out as lovers of tradition and the Traditional Latin Mass but reject the SSPX’s effort to preserve Tradition by consecrating bishops without papal mandate.

 

As far as I know, they primarily attend the TLM in either diocesan parishes or the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP). Someone needs to tell them that is not a get out of hell card.

 

'Trads' Eric Sammons and Taylor Marshall

 

They think they are saving their souls by attending the TLM in communities that remain perfectly obedient to Leo but reject the actions of the SSPX. The FSSP is the most visible and well known of such communities. They think riding that uncomfortable fence between adherence to the true faith while being perfectly “obedient” to Francis or Leo is what it will take to save their souls.

 

But here is a major wake up call for these men and others who think they are safe from excommunication simply because they attend the TLM at the FSSP or at other non-SSPX TLM options: They have probably been excommunicated already.

 

I say this because as this controversy with the SSPX unravels, we begin to see the underlying pressure points between the conservative/traditionalist Catholics and the Vatican exposed for the world to see. It has been there the whole time, but like an elephant in a china shop, Catholics simply did not want to address it while everyone seemed to agree there was a problem with Francis. The election of Leo changed everything.

 

The SSPX was purportedly excommunicated not just because they consecrated bishops without Leo’s permission, but because they did so in a “schismatic” way. This explains what many perceive to be Vatican hypocrisy because Leo affectionately embraces heretics and true schismatics that consecrate bishops all the time without his permission. The difference with the SSPX consecrations is the reason why they did it.

 

As John Paul II explained in his 1988 Apostolic Letter (motu proprio) Ecclesia Dei, the SSPX founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, committed a schismatic act by consecrating bishops without permission because Lefebvre held onto an incomplete notion of what Tradition means. John Paul II noted these erroneous ideas resulted in the SSPX rejecting Vatican II. As such, the “schism” was rooted in a doctrinal misunderstanding of what the Church believes in modern times according to the living character of Tradition.

 

The root of the SSPX schism, according to John Paul II and his successors, lies squarely in its failure to accept Vatican II and the New Mass. This means that to be 100% in communion with the Catholic Church today, according to the post-conciliar hierarchy, one must accept all of Vatican II and the New Mass. Failure to do so constitutes a schismatic spirit at best.

 

Francis confirmed this understanding in his 2021 Apostolic Letter Traditionis Custodes. As I explained in a recent video, Traditionis Custodes was designed to preserve “unity” according to Francis. He noted that traditionalists began to think the TLM and the New Mass were equivalent and parallel versions of the same Latin Roman Rite, when in truth, only the New Mass is the unique expression of the Roman Rite.

 

Furthermore, Francis noted that because this desire to critique Vatican II and avoid the New Mass became so strong among some traditional Catholics that it caused them to refer to the post-conciliar Church as a “false Church.”

 

As I pointed out in my video, the key to understanding Traditionis Custodes—that is, the stated motivation behind it—was to remedy the breach in unity caused by those who question the teachings of Vatican II and attend the TLM on a regular basis.

 

The reality is that there are many Catholics in traditional communities that reject all or parts of both Vatican II and the New Mass as they are written and designed, including FSSP priests and faithful. Of course, they are correct in doing so, but Francis and Leo considered this a betrayal and refusal to submit to their magisterium to the point that it should be considered “schismatic.”

 

Francis, perhaps exercising more mercy than Leo, decided to issue Traditionis Custodes in effort to heal the schism he perceived without imposing any harsh excommunications. The idea was to begin the slow process of extinguishing the TLM and assimilate traditionalists back into the synodal Church under the new living Tradition.

 

Many traditionalists and conservatives publicly decried this effort to ramp down the TLM. But when the SSPX decided to actually do something to preserve their Traditional society, this simply could not be tolerated.

 

I would also like to point out that labeling a Catholic as a schismatic is very politically and legally convenient for purposes of shutting down dissent. This is because, according to the Code of Canon Law, a schismatic is automatically excommunicated, latae sententiae.

 

This opens the door for the Vatican to issue a “cut and paste” decree like Victor “Tucho” Fernandez did against the SSPX and declare that an automatic excommunication already took place under the law without actually having to conduct any investigations, hearings, or issue judgments based on the facts.1

 

To be a true schismatic, one must truly intend to separate oneself from the true Church and the Papacy itself. Has anyone from the Vatican investigated the internal forum of the SSPX bishops and leadership let alone the thousands of lay faithful who attend SSPX chapels? Of course not.

 

The consequences of this for all those who consider themselves lovers of Tradition but still wish to remain virtuously obedient to Leo and Fernandez, are monumental. Regardless of whether you attend the TLM at the SSPX or not, if you hold reservations about Vatican II doctrinal statements or the New Mass rite itself, the present Vatican leadership considers you outside the Catholic Church.

 

This begs the question then. Why do some traditional Catholics, like Marshall and Sammons, who criticize the SSPX for being disobedient, insist on raising reservations about Vatican II and attending the TLM, while personally avoiding their local novus ordo parish?

 

If it is only nostalgia for something that existed in the past, a Catholic museum piece if you will, then they have no right whatsoever to claim Vatican II caused problems or that it is better to attend the TLM. It is very clearly the position of the post-conciliar hierarchy that Vatican II must be accepted without reservation and that the New Mass IS the primary and unique expression of the Latin Rite. One’s nostalgia and love of beauty do not get to override that reality.

 

On the other hand, if their concerns over Vatican II and desire to avoid the New Mass are due to a fundamental disagreement with some doctrinal aspects, such as the exultation of humanity over God, then they have a disagreement with the hierarchy over the substance of the faith itself.

 

Is the Mass a priestly sacrifice or a communal meal where the laity must take on clerical roles? Do Catholics worship the same God as Muslims and Jews? Does the Catholic Church subsist in the same Church of Christ with Protestant sects and the Eastern Orthodox? Does one have a natural right to publicly worship and teach false religions to the detriment of the Church? These are all questions that prick the conscience of most traditionalists and even many conservatives.

 

Many try to escape this catch-22 and avoid making those hard choices by claiming these teachings are ambiguous. Yet the post-conciliar Popes have been clarifying and interpreting these and other highly heterodox teachings for decades throughout their teachings and practice. It is abundantly clear to anyone, Catholic or notm with some common sense and basic reading comprehension skills, that it is the position of the synodal Church that Vatican II teaches something contrary to revealed Tradition and Scripture that was always taught.

 

Therefore, if those who claim to be traditional Catholics continue to ignore known Vatican II errors and remain attached to the TLM over concerns that their spirtual needs are not being met, they are schismatic and automatically excommunicated according to the rule laid down since John Paul II. This is because there can be no division in the conciliar Church over these matters on the doctrinal level.

 

Now, we can see why the SSPX did what it did. The Society admits there is a problem on the doctrinal level and needed to take action in order to preserve the true Apostolic faith, despite the resistance of those who claim to hold apostolic authority.

 

It had to be done, especially if most of the bishops, priests, laity throughout the world accept the errors contained in both the Vatican II documents and the rubrics of the New Mass.

 

The question now as we move forward into the next stage of battling the Church crisis is whether those who admit there is a crisis will be brave enough to stand up to Fernandez and Leo and boldly proclaim that they reject all the errors of Vatican II and the New Mass, while remaining obedient to the true Tradition of the Catholic Church and the teachings of pre-conciliar Popes.

 

Because that is what Archbishop Lefebvre did in 1988, and that was all the SSPX is doing today.

 

The difference between the SSPX and its so-called traditional critics today is that the Society understands that sometimes one must take action to preserve the faith, even if that means following divine revelation contrary to the ideas of modernist infected churchmen in Rome. Some may call it disobedience, the proper way to state it is obedience to the highest authority.

 

At the end of the day, perhaps those conservative and traditional SSPX critics should engage in some self-reflection and determine for themselves if they too are already excommunicated before casting stones. Because if Leo and Fernandez are to be believed, chances are they too are in no better position than the SSPX.

1 A key point that many who engage in this debate over the SSPX miss is that latae sententiae automatic excommunications are imposed based on the illegal act itself (ipso facto) according to the terms of canon law, and not by Leo or any of his agents. When the Vatican decrees that an automatic excommunication took place, they are simply making public what appears to have already occurred (in the past). This certainly carries legal consequences. But they are not imposing the excommunication themselves by their own authority. This is important because if the terms of canon law were not met, in reality, no excommunication ever took place regardless of whether the Vatican chooses to issue a decree.https://catholicesquire.substack.com/p/a-silent-excommunication-of-all-traditionalists

 

The thing about the Transalpine Redemptorists went viral!!! in Argentina

  From Riaan Van Zyl at Integrity Magazine:

Just weeks before his scheduled consecration on July 25, Fr. Michael Mary, F.SS.R., has published what amounts to his final public explanation for accepting the episcopacy from Bishop Pierre Roy, presenting the ceremony not as a personal honor but as a necessary response to what he describes as an unprecedented crisis in the Church.

 

In a declaration released on July 8, the co-founder of the Congregation of the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer, who is now 73, reflected upon a lifetime spent in the Catholic faith and on the convictions that have brought him to this moment.

 

“Our Holy Mother the Catholic Church has been and, by God’s grace, will ever be the great love of my life,” he writes, before lamenting what he sees as the devastation that followed the Second Vatican Council. “The devastation, the destruction, is tangible … And this has come to pass because the warnings of the Popes went unheeded.”

 

From Fr Michael Mary's Declaration

The declaration repeatedly contrasts what Fr. Michael Mary calls the perennial Catholic faith with what he describes as a “new religion.”

 

Employing the Gospel parable of the wheat and the cockle, he argues that the post-conciliar Church has experienced a profound corruption. “There is a new religion. It is not the same Catholic Faith that the world had always known. It is a new religion, a religion of blight.”

 

The title of the statement, An End to the Blight, reflects this central theme. Fr. Michael Mary repeatedly uses the nineteenth century English word “blighter” to describe those whom he sees as having brought destruction upon the visible structures of the Church since the Council.

 

Father’s most significant argument concerns the necessity of bishops for the continuation of traditional Catholic life. According to the declaration, the forthcoming consecration exists to preserve the sacraments and provide leadership for priests and faithful who reject the post-conciliar hierarchy.

 

“The Episcopal Consecration that will be celebrated … will keep the fount of the Sacraments open to future generations.”

 

Fr. Mary also includes an extended quotation from one of the community’s younger monks, who declares his willingness to suffer canonical penalties from what he terms “the modernists.”

 

“The times are dark, but this is no reason for discouragement… holding fast to the Faith of our fathers, whatever the cost may be,” he concludes.

 

Fr. Mary adopts that sentiment as the theme of his own conclusion. He further argues that traditional priests have labored for decades without bishops willing to support them, and that young men entering seminaries have faced hostility for traditional Catholic practices. His acceptance of the episcopal consecration, he writes, is intended to remedy that situation.

 

“It is for these youths without a teacher and these priests without a leader … that, in this late stage of my life, I accept the vocation to which God calls me.”

 

The consecration is scheduled to take place on Papa Stronsay in the Orkney Islands, where the Transalpine Redemptorists have been established for more than three decades.

 

The current state of Tradition

 

Bishop Pierre Roy, Fr Michael Mary

 The Transalpine Redemptorists began as an affiliate of the Society of St. Pius X in the 1980s but made an accord with Rome under the Benedict regime. They have since publicly stated that doing so was a mistake.

EXCLUSIVE: Bishop Roy, Fr. Michael Mary issue statements to Integrity on upcoming consecration

‘The SSPX bishops are consecrated as purely ‘sacramental Bishops’ … we understand our episcopal consecrations as conferring a real episcopal power,’ His Excellency said.

The announcement of the consecration followed closely upon a dramatic development when earlier this year the community formally declared in an open letter that the recent claimants to the papacy could not be regarded as true Roman Pontiffs because of their adherence to the doctrinal errors originating with the Second Vatican Council.

Although many traditional Catholics have criticized the reforms introduced after the Council, relatively few religious communities have publicly embraced this position. Fr. Mary explained why the Redemptorists did so during a recent episode of the Integrity Magazine podcast.

 

The conclusion that the Chair of St. Peter is vacant forms the foundation of Fr. Michael Mary’s latest declaration.

 

“They are not the Church, and they are not our pastors, because they have denied the Faith and the Truth,” the letter reads, quoting a young monk.

 

The excommunication of the priests and faithful associated with the Society of Saint Pius X has intensified discussion regarding the future of organized traditionalist movements. It has also produced more conversations on the topic of sedevacantism.

 

The sanctions imposed against the SSPX have led some Traditional Catholics to question whether “canonical recognition” is practical or even attainable for those who are committed to defending the Catholic faith and resisting post-conciliar reforms. For the Transalpine Redemptorists, that question has already been settled.

 

The consecration of Fr. Michael Mary marks another defining moment not only for the monks of Papa Stronsay but also for the wider world of traditional Catholicism universally as more and more faithful, religious, clergy, and prelates continue to say enough is enough.https://integritymagazine.org/2026/07/09/fr-michael-mary-denounces-vatican-iis-new-religion-ahead-of-consecration-fo