Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Ladislaus on July 27, 2025, 08:02:52 PM
-
So, I walked into an SSPX chapel this morning for Sunday Mass (there are times where it's my only option), and so there's some unknown priest there who, based on what he did (or did not do) during Confession and his homily ... seemed rather suspicious.
Since SSPX have been gaslighting anyone who questions the validity of NO Orders, I'd like to set up a website that has not only the names, but also the pictures of priests who came over from the Novus Ordo and have NOT been conditionally ordained, a set of "most wanted" posters.
Problem is that you can walk in and get surprised. More and more SSPX have become secretive about priest assignments (don't even post them online), with some arrogant attitude that it's none of the lay faithful's business. So nowhere is the priest's name listed in the bulletin, and he doesn't mention his name from the pulpit ... so this is where that "most wanted" website with pictures would be nice to have.
It would also bring visibility to SSPX shenanigans and possibly put some pressure on them.
There might also be a comments section where people can report "sightings" of the culprits ... details about where and when, so that, for instance, the faithful who may have missed that week, or not known who the priest was ... would be aware that there could be non-consecrated bogus hosts in the tabernacle left over from the non-priest when they go to receive the following week.
If I had the funds to do so, I would love to bring a class action lawsuit against SSPX for false advertising, and seeking damages for the faithful who may have received bogus Sacraments. SSPX claim to provide Traditional Masses, but may in fact be providing simulations thereof. It would involve proving in a civil suit that according to the principles of Catholic theology there's positive doubt regarding the NO Orders and that by Canon Law we are forbidden from assisting at such Masses.
Just fed up with their cocky, arrogant gaslighting ... and I believe it's why they stopped posting priest assignments, schedules, etc. ... whether on chapel websites or on their new centralized "scheduling" app that's undoubtedly meant to control the flow of information.
So if anyone wants to post the name of SSPX "priests" come over from NO without conditional ordination, and their current "home base" location ... please post them on this thread, and if you have pictures, that would be great ... but if not I'll try to get some, either finding them online or else making contact with someone where they might be located.
I'll register a domain along the lines of www.sspx-fake-priests.com or www.sspx-fake-priest-tracker.com ... to put some heat on these duplicitous arrogant fools. It might be expanded at some point to other dubious "priests" floating around out there.
We have various lists of known valid priests, but not a succinct list of known-to-not-be-conditionally ordained, and we don't have pictures ... and to me pictures are the key.
-
Of course, the other deplorable nonsense commited by SSPX is to have NINE priests at a single priory (as in this case here, link below) ... though one or two are possible fakes ... while there are many relatively-large chapels (some with sizable schools) that lack daily Mass and a resident priest, where the faithful hope they don't die suddenly during the week before Father flies in on his whirlwind tour for the weekend. Or, yeah ... maybe you could call the local Novus Ordo presider / presbyter and hope for the best.
https://dickinson.tx.sspx.org/en/religious-staff-31453
That needs to be exposed also. I can start listing chapels where you have several hundred in attendance on Sunday, many families, schools, many children ... deprived of the Sacraments, daily Mass, more opportunity for actual spiritual direction so, what? ... these guys can live it up with 9 of them at the priory just so none of them has to work all that hard? I heard stories in Florida where they have lavish meals, expensive wine, cigars, etc. ... paid for by the faithful who are often struggling with large families, as many chapels languish without a permanent priest or two. Do they not even realize that having a priest stationed at a place where there are many children might actually help foster more vocations?
I honestly have no idea what they're doing any more and am beginning to wonder if they're not like my parents used to say of priests behind the Iron Curtain, where many became priests just so they could have a cushy life without having to work too hard, or hold down real jobs ... and walk around acting like bigshots insisting that the faithful bow their heads to them in reverence, whereas if they were let go from SSPX, they'd have to work their way up to assistant manager at a McDonald's.
There's an almost-endemic arrogance among these new crop of priests, too ... where the faithful are not allowed to even question their sacrosanct judgment.
One does wonder where a certain amount of anti-clericalism has come from.
-
It may be best if people can post anonymously for something like this.
-
Lad, this is a good cause and I would be happy to contribute to the funds for the domain. Let me know in DMs.
-
Obviously fr. Fulton would be the first that comes to mind, and then it appears that they skip adding descriptions for certain priests in the link sent by Ladislaus… isn’t fr. Fewel one of the Novus Ordo priests too? Are they skipping his description of purpose?
(https://i.imgur.com/aMHnvgu.jpeg)
-
Yes, Fewel is not conditionally ordained and admits it readily. Likewise, he does not hesitate to refer people to the Novus Ordo clergy if they need Sacraments in the absence of SSPX priests.
-
That is a splendid idea.
However, I wonder if it would not be more quickly and easily done if we were to post the list of names of priests WHO HAVE BEEN ORDAINED BY OUR BISHOPS.
It used to be that the Seminary newsletter ("Verbum") was publishing the pictures and small biography of the Priests and Deacons ordained in Winona every summer.
If we could find a way to get old issues from the last 20-25 years, or any such other source (Angelus? Regina Caeli Report?), we could then have a list of the Priests we know are validly ordained. It would be a "VALID FOR SURE" list.
Any SSPX priest NOT ON THIS LIST would automatically be suspicious. His name could be added to a separate list called: "TO BE INVESTIGATED".
If it is proven that the suspicious priest was conditionally re-ordained, his name would be removed from the TBI list and added to the list of "VALID FOR SURE" priests, and the name of the Bishop who ordained him be added.
If it was proven the the priest on the TBI list was NOT re-ordained, then we would add his name to a third list called: "DOUBTFUL VALIDITY".
I think it would be easier and quicker to proceed this way.
-
David Fulton. Stationed primarily at Our Lady of Sorrows in Phoenix, Pastor at Sts. Peter and Paul in ABQ.
Ordained in the new rite by two new rite and one old rite bishop. Principal ordaining bishop was new rite. Who knows if the other two participated.
Never conditionally ordained.
-
David Fulton. Stationed primarily at Our Lady of Sorrows in Phoenix, Pastor at Sts. Peter and Paul in ABQ.
Ordained in the new rite by two new rite and one old rite bishop. Principal ordaining bishop was new rite. Who knows if the other two participated.
Never conditionally ordained.
Considering this priest shares the tabernacle with other priests, that would imply all communions received in this chapel are suspect
-
I will help in any way, either by donations or calling people or research. Please let me know.
-
David Fulton. Stationed primarily at Our Lady of Sorrows in Phoenix, Pastor at Sts. Peter and Paul in ABQ.
Ordained in the new rite by two new rite and one old rite bishop. Principal ordaining bishop was new rite. Who knows if the other two participated.
Never conditionally ordained.
By way of a farewell party announcement, the priestly departures were made known while I was still out of town. When I returned I heard that Fr. Pons was leaving, disturbing to me because I found him the most willing, available, and helpful of all our priests. As yet no changes appear in even yesterday’s bulletin masthead, 7 priests listed.
Yesterday one confessional was occupied by “guest priest.”
This morning I read as above that “Fr. Fulton” is in Phoenix.
Can anyone list the replacements?
-
That is a splendid idea.
However, I wonder if it would not be more quickly and easily done if we were to post the list of names of priests WHO HAVE BEEN ORDAINED BY OUR BISHOPS.
It used to be that the Seminary newsletter ("Verbum") was publishing the pictures and small biography of the Priests and Deacons ordained in Winona every summer.
If we could find a way to get old issues from the last 20-25 years, or any such other source (Angelus? Regina Caeli Report?), we could then have a list of the Priests we know are validly ordained. It would be a "VALID FOR SURE" list.
Any SSPX priest NOT ON THIS LIST would automatically be suspicious. His name could be added to a separate list called: "TO BE INVESTIGATED".
If it is proven that the suspicious priest was conditionally re-ordained, his name would be removed from the TBI list and added to the list of "VALID FOR SURE" priests, and the name of the Bishop who ordained him be added.
If it was proven the the priest on the TBI list was NOT re-ordained, then we would add his name to a third list called: "DOUBTFUL VALIDITY".
I think it would be easier and quicker to proceed this way.
This website lists many of the men who were ordained in the SSPX. If you can read Spanish (or use a translator), there is a lot of useful information.
https://elintegristamejicano.blogspot.com/ (https://elintegristamejicano.blogspot.com/)
-
Yes, Fewel is not conditionally ordained and admits it readily. Likewise, he does not hesitate to refer people to the Novus Ordo clergy if they need Sacraments in the absence of SSPX priests.
A newChurch priest shows up at the seminary or priory and requests the milk of Catholic tradition, and what does the SSPX superior say?
Bp. Fellay should feel the heat.
This is a good refresher on the Novus ordo bastard rite of Holy Orders, compared to Tradition.
Comparison of Old & New Apostolic Consecrations
(https://youtu.be/h6QbSvXw3o8?si=LCooQXpGNW5f9V2a)
It demonstrates that Bp. Fellay has broken his Apostolic vows of providing the “Full Priesthood” to Society priests.
-
This is sometimes a helpful list in checking on the status of priests and those who claim to be priests: https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/6-9-25-Catholic-Candle-List-of-priests-who-claim-to-be-priests.pdf (https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/6-9-25-Catholic-Candle-List-of-priests-who-claim-to-be-priests.pdf)
-
Catholic Candle has this list of priests: https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/6-9-25-Catholic-Candle-List-of-priests-who-claim-to-be-priests.pdf
-
If this website happens, we need to work together with other sites that have already started a list (i.e. sites posted on this thread). And also reach out to other sites (i.e. novus ordo watch, traditio.com, TIA, etc). We need as many Trads who have a "pulse" on chapel activity as possible.
Traditio.com seems to do a good job of receiving & updating info on a monthly basis.
-
That is a splendid idea.
...It used to be that the Seminary newsletter ("Verbum") was publishing the pictures and small biography of the Priests and Deacons ordained in Winona every summer.
If we could find a way to get old issues from the last 20-25 years, or any such other source (Angelus? Regina Caeli Report?), we could then have a list of the Priests we know are validly ordained. It would be a "VALID FOR SURE" list.
...
8*******************
Many Verbum Issues are physically at the Catholic University of Washington. Former seminarian Frank Lomica donated them Dec 2003.
1983 - 88, ( 1997?)
Special Collections, Society of St, Pius X, Box 5, Folder 5
They have a phone number for info.
Many many other docs about SSPX, Cor unum etc.
https://findingaids.lib.catholic.edu/repositories/2/archival_objects/197963
I also have some older copies in my house...I'll check later
God bless!
St Innocent I, pray for us.
-
Great suggestions. We COULD probably also keep track of priests KNOWN to have been ordained or at least conditionally ordained.
I know there are lists out there with some names, but they are not exhaustive, and the best tips I've found are actually here on CathInfo.
Using a thread in Anonymous would certainly be best.
Really, the scenario that comes to mind is what occurred to me on Sunday morning, where I walk into Mass, go to Confession (got there very early), and it doesn't SOUND like the priest who's usually there, and his behavior in Confession already sends off some alarm bells. Then he emerges and it's not someone I recognize. His name is not listed in bulletin, nor does he announce it from the pulpit -- and the style / quality of his sermons also adds to the suspicion (you can tell an NO sermon when you hear one, and this was at least borderline, though neo-SSPX are getting harder and harder to tell apart).
Well, I could have stepped out in the vestibule and perused such a website as I peruse it to see if his picture looks familiar to those on a list from the rogue's gallery of fake priests.
This will also serve to put pressure on SSPX.
Oh, and I would also want to track based on tips such as "Fr." [such-and-such] was at St. [so-and-so] last Sunday, and he did appear to consecrate a ciborium, so next week might be cookie roulette. I advise not coming here next Sunday if you wish to receive Holy Communion".
I'm SO fed up with the arrogant gaslighting from SSPX that I'm ready to take the gloves off. Yeah, sure ... I'll be refused the Sacraments even from valid priests once they put my face to it, but the younger ones don't know me as well.
But in case one slipped through, it would be good to have pictures of the known-valid priests (SSPX-ordained or confirmed to have been conditionally ordained) ... yet it would be by far the much longer list (as of this time anyway), so it may not be as usable.
-
I have started this and the pinned thread can be found here: https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/ordination-validation/
If you would like to take this over- please let me know and I can gather the information I have collected so far and send via email. My contact information is in the thread and, because I travel so much, you might be the better man to take on the task.
I do not recommend posting pictures or locations for safety reasons ( mentioned in the thread).
-
And, yes, there used to be a publication ... I think it was under the umbrella of "Cor Unum" which had a list of all SSPX priests, year of ordination, and who ordained them. Of course they started getting rid of that, since they don't want to draw attention to the problem. Also, I think the last time I saw a list of "Priest Assignments" published was in 2020, and I strongly suspect that they occsaionally shuffle some priests around on purpose just to "stick it to" the faithful who have problems with their acceptance of NO Orders.
Well, I for one am pretty tired of it.
We all know darn well WHY they're doing it, and it's not because they've sincerely concluded by just a rational study of the raw evidence, without any bias, that there's absolutely no rational, prudent, or positive doubt possible that would justify even a CONDITIONAL Ordination.
So, some posters on X are undoubtedly parroting back the SSPX talking points to defend them, claiming that Ordaining valid priests would be a sacrilege. Yeah, no duh ... that's why there's such a thing as CONDITIONAL Ordination, where the formula ensures that it cannot happen, since if he's already ordained, no ordination takes place per the express manifest intention of the one ordaining (via the formula). Now, one COULD indirectly bring dishonor to the Sacrament even by using the conditional, if someone started just conditionally administering those Sacraments to anyone with a pulse "just in case", i.e. based on a negative doubt ... since perhaps the minister is scrupulous and/or neurotic.
But that is most certainly not the case here. We have a bunch of Modernists who set out by their own admission to radically transform the Church, and we see how they radically changed at least the Rite of Episcopal consecration. That first video put out by SSPX had the priest at least admitting this. So I guess they had to march the Modernist Heretic Fr. Paul Robinson out there to do damage control ... though I haven't seen his take on it yet. In any case, a serious change to the Rite, into some form that has no direct precedent, by those with suspect motives, quite possibly infiltrators ... yeah, that absolutely qualifies to introduce a sufficient level of prudent positive doubt that would require conditional administration of these Sacraments.
Here's another thing. Even if I myself were convinced that the NO Orders were valid, I would nevertheless recognize that many serious, intelligent, and sincere men have problems with it, and that suffices to require a conditional ... with the alternative being that I now willl impose my judgment (against those of these other men) on the consciences of all those who attend SSPX chapels. Now let's say I'm wrong ... where there was some fallacy or missed distinction in my reasoning. Well, I just subjected countless souls to invalid Sacraments ... and I am liable to hellfire for it, ESPECIALLY if my "judgment" was not really sincere or intellectualy dishonest, driven by the political motives of reconciling with the Modernist Religion.
These people are pretending the status quaestionis is comparable to a negative doubt along the lines of, "I didn't hear Father say the words of consecration, what if he got them wrong?" Ridiculous and dishonest gaslighting.
So ... upside of conditional ordination ---> making it morally certain that the faithful at your chapels are receiving valid Sacraments.
So ... possible downside? ---> Bergs and Pervost might be upset with you and call off talks.
I see no other downside. No, there's no harm being done to the Sacraments, and no "sacrilege" if you're wrong.
It's 1000% about politics and they need to be absolutely ashamed of themselves ... and their judgment will be harsh before God for subjecting souls to invalid Sacraments, or even if they just so happen to be right, for POSSIBLY subjecting souls to invalid Sacraments.
-
[cheap talk]
Talk is cheap. You should've done it before publicly talking about plans to do it. Now, all you did was telegraph to the enemy so they can take precautions to evade your net.
Fool.
-
I have started this and the pinned thread can be found here: https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/ordination-validation/
If you would like to take this over- please let me know and I can gather the information I have collected so far and send via email. My contact information is in the thread and, because I travel so much, you might be the better man to take on the task.
I do not recommend posting pictures or locations for safety reasons ( mentioned in the thread).
Thank you. I know there are different threads on this subject. Perhaps I'll compile yours and others I find into a single ANONYMOUS forum post so that others who may be afraid of excommunication from neo-SSPX might have a place to post.
What safety reasons?
It's precisely my intent to post pictures of the priests to expose the stealth introduction of pseudo-priests into chapels.
As for locations, we need to post those too, since SSPX refuses to.
What is this, where we have an underground church where the Communist authorities will arrest them if they find out they're functioning?
That's nonsense. In most ordinary situations, which priest is at which chapel or which prior, can be ascertained from widely available sources. What we're dealing with are situations where one "fills in" for another, and just happens to be un-announced. There's no safety consideration whatsoever.
-
Some ideas/brainstorming...
(1) I think it would be possible to compile a list of LEGIT sspx priests with their consecration bishop and year. I think Traditio.com has some of this. Could also include deceased priests (as Traditio does) so that if someone is looking for a priest, they may not know they died.
PROS:
- I know a lot of the names of older sspx priests. I am not as up-to-date on the newer ones.
- Some members may want to pray for deceased priests as well.
CONS:
- A big negative to a listing of all LEGIT sspx priests is that (in the case of big brother), we would be helping them to track down such if things get nuts.
- Maybe they already know this? Probably. Just throwing out a 'yellow light' for this idea.
(2) In the case that the sspx goes indult in the next few years (which is entirely plausable), would it also make sense to compile a list of LEGIT 'sede' priests?
- sspv, cmri, etc.
- I'm sure there are some "odd" priests in these groups who should be watched too.
(3) To add to the list of possible "fake" priests, we should add any/all "priests" which are associated with Fr Pfeiffer, and any other wayward priests who are larping as bishops.
(4) I'm sure there are some "independent" priests who are also LEGIT and also dubious.
In other words... should this site be all-consuming and cover all Trad activities? Putting aside the big CON of the govt, I think yes. But the govt question is one i'm not sure how to access. It's certainly a risk. Just not sure how big of one vs the risk of dubious priests.
-
Talk is cheap. You should've done it before publicly talking about plans to do it. Now, all you did was telegraph to the enemy so they can take precautions to evade your net.
Fool.
You're an idiot ... and your buffoonery is one of the reasons I stopped posting here, making an exception for this endeavour alone.
You've continued to make a foolish cuck out of Matthew by constantly turning up here and making his "bans" utterly worthless. I also suspect that you're a troll, throwing incendiary over-the-top racist garbage onto the board in order to possibly set people up here.
In any case, they can't "take precautions" ... and without cooperation for others, it's not something I could ever possibly do on my own. I can't travel the country myself interviewing individual priests to determine the status of their conditoinal or non-conditional ordination.
-
Talk is cheap. You should've done it before publicly talking about plans to do it. Now, all you did was telegraph to the enemy so they can take precautions to evade your net.
Fool.
Even if we snapped our fingers and the site was complete today, there's nothing the sspx can do (besides fraud) to conjure up an ordination. Either the guy was conditionally ordained or not. If the new-sspx lies and says he was, we couldn't prove otherwise. Your point is baseless.
-
CONS:
- A big negative to a listing of all LEGIT sspx priests is that (in the case of big brother), we would be helping them to track down such if things get nuts.
- Maybe they already know this? Probably. Just throwing out a 'yellow light' for this idea.
See, I think "they" already know who they all are anyway. They know who all of us here on CI are. They have the resources ... and whether we use a fake name, post in "Members", or even use a VPN, they know who we are. AND they likewise know who all the SSPX priests are and where they are, probably at all times, and at every moment. I doubt this would contribute even .1% more to the intelligence they already have. They probably know that I am typing this right at this moment.
I recall that one AI company is trying to get one of the old reactors at Three Mile Island fired back up just to power "AI", but we all know that this AI isn't for our benefit, but it's for controlling and tracking us.
-
Even if we snapped our fingers and the site was complete today, there's nothing the sspx can do (besides fraud) to conjure up an ordination. Either the guy was conditionally ordained or not. If the new-sspx lies and says he was, we couldn't prove otherwise. Your point is baseless.
Right, and neo-SSPX would be caught between a rock and a hard place, where if they suddenly start claiming that, "yeah, we conditionally ordained all of them" ... well, then they might as well actually do it then if they say they're doing it (unless we have among them some Satanists who are deliberately just trying to get invalid Sacraments out there). Since their primary motivation appears to be not getting on the bad side of the Modernists, this would in fact undo that anyway ... UNLESS they contact the Modernists via back channels and tell them, "hey, we're taking heat, so we're going to tell everyone we conditionally ordain even if we don't". There's really no way to combat that degree of malice, if there are men in their ranks who are THAT evil. Hopefully there are enough honest men among their priests who would not themselves lie when asked about it.
-
See, I think "they" already know who they all are anyway. They know who all of us here on CI are. They have the resources ... and whether we use a fake name, post in "Members", or even use a VPN, they know who we are. AND they likewise know who all the SSPX priests are and where they are, probably at all times, and at every moment. I doubt this would contribute even .1% more to the intelligence they already have. They probably know that I am typing this right at this moment.
I recall that one AI company is trying to get one of the old reactors at Three Mile Island fired back up just to power "AI", but we all know that this AI isn't for our benefit, but it's for controlling and tracking us.
I agree, just wanted to point out a yellow flag, just in case.
-
I agree, just wanted to point out a yellow flag, just in case.
Yes, I undertand. I just feel that the possible harm done to the faithful being subject to potentially invalid Sacraments outweighs what IMO extremely tiny little advantage this might hand over to the powers that be, and if any harm does come of it, the SSPX will be accountable for playing these games in the first place. If someone doesn't want to participate in providing information, then obviously that's entirely up to them. This behavior of theirs is so incredibly outrageous that I just feel that something must be done about it.
-
Right, and neo-SSPX would be caught between a rock and a hard place, where if they suddenly start claiming that, "yeah, we conditionally ordained all of them" ... well, then they might as well actually do it then if they say they're doing it (unless we have among them some Satanists who are deliberately just trying to get invalid Sacraments out there). Since their primary motivation appears to be not getting on the bad side of the Modernists, this would in fact undo that anyway ... UNLESS they contact the Modernists via back channels and tell them, "hey, we're taking heat, so we're going to tell everyone we conditionally ordain even if we don't". There's really no way to combat that degree of malice, if there are men in their ranks who are THAT evil. Hopefully there are enough honest men among their priests who would not themselves lie when asked about it.
Yes. And if the new-sspx lies about conditional ordinations, then at least we are covered by God. We did all we could do.
-
You're an idiot ... and your buffoonery is one of the reasons I stopped posting here, making an exception for this endeavour alone.
You've continued to make a foolish cuck out of Matthew by constantly turning up here and making his "bans" utterly worthless. I also suspect that you're a troll, throwing incendiary over-the-top racist garbage onto the board in order to possibly set people up here.
In any case, they can't "take precautions" ... and without cooperation for others, it's not something I could ever possibly do on my own. I can't travel the country myself interviewing individual priests to determine the status of their conditoinal or non-conditional ordination.
This is, at least, the second time you have called Matthew a cuck. You did it, at least, once, on another thread.
I can easily find the ordination status - conditional or non-conditional - of any and all priests in less than an hour. Photo IDs, too.
-
This is, at least, the second time you have called Matthew a cuck. You did it, at least, once, on another thread.
I can easily find the ordination status - conditional or non-conditional - of any and all priests in less than an hour.
We're trying to help FAMILIES who are less tech-savvy and don't have HOURS to look up multiple priests, as the new-sspx is constantly moving them around. Think about people who aren't you.
-
We're trying to help FAMILIES who are less tech-savvy and don't have HOURS to look up multiple priests, as the new-sspx is constantly moving them around. Think about people who aren't you.
That's not what I'm referring to...
Edit: and I can get photo IDs associated with the conditionally and non-conditionally ordained.
-
That's not what I'm referring to...
Edit: and I can get photo IDs associated with the conditionally and non-conditionally ordained.
Ok, that's great. This will be very helpful. Thank you.
-
Ok, that's great. This will be very helpful. Thank you.
But I'm not going to give it to you guys. :laugh1:
-
That's not what I'm referring to...
Edit: and I can get photo IDs associated with the conditionally and non-conditionally ordained.
Told you this guy ^^^ is likely a fed, unless he's lying about access to Photo IDs. That's why he continues to come back here and make incendiary, over-the-top, hateful, racist comments, not only to make Traditional Catholics look bad, but also to suck people in so they can be dealt with later.
-
Ok, that's great. This will be very helpful. Thank you.
I've been saying for some time now that the guy is likely a fed, since nobody makes the types of bizarre, over-the-top-and-crudely-racist comments that this guy makes without having some agenda. They're so ridiculously inflammatory as to be unnatural, and a caricature of racist comments ... meaning it was done deliberately.
Let's add this post of his to the mix ...
Carol Morja works in federal and private intelligence.
She was born and raised in Nebraska.
She had a bachelor's degree before enlisting as security forces and being stationed at Whiteman AFB in 1999.
Blond hair. Blue eyes.
She is, now, 50 years old.
They tried to scrub her records but they can't scrub it from me.
-
Told you this guy ^^^ is likely a fed, unless he's lying about access to Photo IDs. That's why he continues to come back here and make incendiary, over-the-top, hateful, racist comments, not only to make Traditional Catholics look bad, but also to suck people in so they can be dealt with later.
He is indeed glowing right now. :laugh1:
-
Since SSPX have been gaslighting anyone who questions the validity of NO Orders, I'd like to set up a website that has not only the names, but also the pictures of priests who came over from the Novus Ordo and have NOT been conditionally ordained, a set of "most wanted" posters.
Count me in to help. The focus to start with on NO rite, no conditional ordination priests should keep it achievable for the first stages.
-
But I'm not going to give it to you guys. :laugh1:
Do you have a folder with information and a picture of each of us yet? :laugh1: :laugh2:
-
This is, at least, the second time you have called Matthew a cuck. You did it, at least, once, on another thread.
Lads is just trying to embarrass Matthew to motivate him to ban you.
His boycott of the forum hasn’t worked. No cares about his forum misdirections.
:sleep: