Confessions administered by priests of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X would remain valid as long as the Pope does not expressly revoke the faculties granted by Francis, whereas marriages celebrated without delegation from the bishop would be null due to defect of form.
This is how Archbishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta, canonist and former secretary of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts, explained it in an exclusive interview with AdVaticanum regarding the consequences of the decree issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith following the episcopal consecrations celebrated by the SSPX without pontifical mandate on July 1.
Arrieta does not downplay the gravity of what occurred. He describes the consecrations as “a deep wound to the unity of the Church instituted by Christ” and rejects the “state of necessity” invoked by the Fraternity to justify the ordination of bishops in open disobedience to the Pope.
In his view, the problem is not limited to a disciplinary infraction. The new consecrations reveal a deeper divergence regarding the very constitution of the Church and make “highly problematic” any future doctrinal dialogue.
The decree declares an excommunication already incurred
Arrieta explains that the decree from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith did not impose a new penalty, but publicly declared an automatic excommunication already provided for by canon law.
“The decree now issued represents what is usually called a ‘due act,’” he noted. The Dicastery was obliged to record that the bishops involved had incurred latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Holy See.
The sanction also extended to the co-consecrating bishop. According to Arrieta, there was in this case no doubt about the freedom with which those involved acted, unlike other illicit ordinations in which there may have been external pressures.
The decree also included an express warning to priests and faithful not to adhere to the schism.
Not all the faithful are automatically excommunicated
The situation of the faithful who attend SSPX chapels cannot be resolved automatically.
Arrieta distinguishes between those who consciously accept a schismatic position and manifest it externally, and those who have been linked to these communities for years by family tradition, ignorance, or good faith.
For there to be formal adherence to the schism, it is not enough to attend Mass occasionally. There must be an interior acceptance of the rupture with Rome and an external conduct that makes it visible.
The canonist admits that some faithful might not incur a penalty due to lack of grave culpability. He warns, however, that good faith cannot be used as a general excuse and that conscience must be formed in accordance with the teaching and authority of the Church.
Confessions would remain valid
The most relevant issue for the faithful concerns the validity of the sacraments.
In the case of confession, the priest needs a specific faculty to absolve validly. Pope Francis granted that faculty to the priests of the SSPX during the Jubilee of Mercy and later decided to maintain it without setting a deadline.
Arrieta maintains that, since it was a concession made directly by the Pope, only another pontifical act can withdraw it.
“These priests received the faculty to hear confessions through a pontifical act, and to revoke it requires an act of the same nature,” he stated.
Therefore, as long as there is no express decision by the Roman Pontiff, the absolutions imparted by priests of the Fraternity would remain valid, although their ministry would continue to be illicit.
AdVaticanum asked the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith whether any papal act had been promulgated revoking those faculties. The response was only: “No comment.”
Marriages could be null
The situation of marriages is different.
In 2017, Francis allowed diocesan bishops to delegate to SSPX priests the faculty necessary to assist validly at marriages. This was not a universal concession to all priests of the Fraternity, but an authorization dependent on the ordinary of the place.
Following the new episcopal consecrations and the declaration of schism, Arrieta considers it “improbable” that a bishop could legitimately grant that delegation.
In its absence, marriages celebrated solely before an SSPX priest would be canonically null due to defect of form.
The difference is therefore clear: the faculties to confess come directly from a pontifical act that has not yet been revoked; those necessary to assist at a marriage depend on a specific episcopal delegation.
The SSPX appeal has little chance of success
The Fraternity has filed a preliminary appeal against the July 2 decree. However, a source close to the Dicastery cited by AdVaticanum considers it unlikely to succeed.
The reason is that the excommunication was not imposed at Rome’s discretion, but occurred automatically upon the commission of the offense. The decree merely declared it publicly.
The necessary starting point for lifting a penalty of this nature would be the repentance of those who performed the episcopal consecrations without pontifical mandate.