Pat Smith

1/7 A thread for Catholics under the delusion that strict just war criteria reflect post-Vatican II theological mushiness and quasi-pacifism. Here are some passages from Fr. John McHugh and Fr. Charles Callan, Moral Theology: A Complete Course, Volume I, a standard pre-Vatican II work. First up is a definition of “war” that exposes some currently popular sophistries. Note that by McHugh and Callan’s criteria, the current U.S. conflict with Iran definitely counts as a war. By contrast, the 47 years of tension with Iran (which involved only “passing conflicts,” “skirmishes,” “rivalry in preparedness for war,” “embargo,” “breach of diplomatic relations,” and the like) does NOT count as a war.

“That exquisite intelligence.” The double super secret piece of information where it all makes sense. The administration is keeping it from you for your own protection

Still generally regarded as Sports Illustrated’s worst swimsuit issue.

You do realize the only reason Trump won—both times—is because evangelicals (Protestants) voted for him at higher rates than any other religious group in America? If we were at the mercy of Catholic laity voting patterns, we’d be in the fifth consecutive Democrat presidency since Obama took over in 2008. Now, there is no doubt that Catholic elites dominate the overall conservative movement. But they are a head on a body that doesn’t belong to them. And yes, we should solve that puzzle.

Contemporary sedevacantism is in part the result of the rise of the Pius XII papal personality cult of an ascetic who looked the papal part. The fact that he wasn’t very traditional about, say, liturgy is irrelevant. He looked the part, and he ruled by fiat.

He didn’t come to establish a magisterium. He came to tear the veil. That torn veil in Matthew 27:51 is one of the most theologically loaded moments in Scripture. The veil separated ordinary people from the Holy of Holies where only priests could enter and only through prescribed channels, only with institutional authority. Christ’s death ended that system permanently. The message is pretty clear and that message is that direct access to God is now available to every person. No mediating institution required. The Council of Nicaea was men voting. The Pope is a man. Tradition was compiled by men. Christ came to make all man equal before God. Through Him.

You had Alexander Dugin on your podcast it was literally called “Multipolarity and the End of Postmodernism” Guest: Alexander Dugin 9/3/25. Dugin’s entire worldview requires the Orthodox Church and the Russian state to function as one. He called the invasion of Ukraine a religious act. He believes Russia has a divine mission against what he literally calls the Antichrist, which is Western liberalism. You use Dugin to argue that different civilizations should be free to organize themselves by their own traditions. The problem is you can’t borrow that argument without inheriting what it’s built on. Dugin’s version only works if church and state are the same thing. The phrase “total state,” the name of YOUR own book and YOUR entire brand, was coined by Carl Schmitt. A Nazi Party member who argued that liberalism was a lie, that politics was always secretly theology, and that what the world needed was a strong leader with the power to decide who the enemy is and act without legal limits. Adrian Vermeule is at Harvard Law and is directly shaping how conservative judges think right now. He has cited Schmitt as the primary influence on his entire legal framework. Patrick Deneen’s book reshaped the entire American right. He stood at a lecture and said the movement needed “Schmittian assertion of power to assert the will of those who should be the good guys.” Those are his exact words. These are not fringe people. They have real institutional power and they are using it. Post-liberalism is what integralists started calling themselves in 2020 after a book spelled out what the ideology actually required in practice. The label became toxic so they rebranded. The ideology didn’t change. So the question is simple. How exactly do you plan on implementing any of this without merging church and state? Because every thinker you rely on, every person you platform, and every framework you borrow from requires exactly that to function. At some point the answer can’t just be “I don’t support that.” The ideology has to be able to stand without it. It can’t. Pro-tip: maybe don’t have Dugin your podcast and then make silly claims about Russia gate 2.0.

Hegseth on Iran: The media here—not all of it, but much of it—wants you to think that just 19 days into this conflict, we’re somehow heading toward an endless abyss, a forever war, or a quagmire. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It’s been a long time coming but I’m glad to see Michael O’Fallon & James Lindsay officially come out against Christian morality in American politics Tonight, they both said they oppose Christians advancing a biblically-grounded moral vision of law and politics Masks off

Integralism is the belief that the state must be subordinated to a single institutional church, that the church defines the common good, defines man’s eternal destiny, and that the government exists to enforce the church’s vision of that destiny on the entire population. Who’s church? No one knows. Who makes the decisions for all? No one knows. It is not a democratic proposition. It cannot be voted on. It does not require a majority. It requires only the occupation of the right institutions courts, bureaucracies, administrative agencies by the right people, operating on a long enough timeline that the population doesn’t recognize what’s being built until it’s already built. This is not compatible with the American founding. Not even close. The founding wasn’t just politically pluralist, it was theologically pluralist from its own internal logic. The Judeo-Christian tradition that actually shaped this country carries within it a specific and radical idea: that the covenant is between the individual and God. Not between the institution and God. Not between the state and God. Anyone who stands in the way of that POLITICAL project is a neocon, a Rino, a judiazer, a war monger, an establishment shill, nor true maga. Understand the podcast wars aren’t about grudges, they are about people who see where this authoritarian strand of “maga” is trying to go and they are fighting against it. Because as you can see from responses like this, no one is hiding it anymore. This HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH denominations of Christianity, or Jewish people or Muslim people or any religion. This is about political power. And it’s being taken by deploying Russian malign foreign opps on the conservative right to break them from their theology, demoralize them and make them feel like it’s so hopeless the only way forward is authoritarianism. And if people don’t understand that and quickly, it won’t go well for us on the right.

Zohran Mamdani with more to say on a united Ireland:

Catholic Integralism is a political and economic doctrine that insists the Catholic Church should order the state and the economy. It is unAmerican. Get out.

I’m actually starting to think this is a James Lindsay sock puppet. It’s that stupid. 1) If the separation of Church and State is necessary to be a conservative, Edmund Burke is not a conservative 2) But Catholic integralists would be!