All of us have the impression that we are living through moments of great importance in the history of the Church. These are not new issues; they have been with us for decades, but everything suggests that the time has come to set aside half-measures that only disguise and conceal problems that remain unresolved. The schism—the excommunication of bishops, because they are bishops, from the Society of Saint Pius X—is a point of no return that is generating rivers of ink. Now it remains to be seen whether this “divorce” will be limited to the Society of Saint Pius X or whether it will trigger an earthquake throughout the conservative world. So far, Cardinals Burke and Müller have distanced themselves from the decision. The fear in the sacred palaces is that it will have a multiplier effect: “Let us hope this wave does not bring others with it.” Today we have many repercussions from what has happened; we will try to give as complete a picture as possible of where we stand.
Why the schism?
“We are ready to pay any price to save the Church,” said Father Davide Pagliarani, Superior of the Society of Saint Pius X, in his homily during the Mass at Écône, Switzerland, knowing they will not receive treatment different from that given to Lefebvre in 1988. “The sacrifice God asks of us today is to be treated as rebels, but we wish to serve the Church as an afflicted mother who suffers, a mother who is sometimes betrayed, a mother who needs and deserves to be loved.” He then listed all the problems that led to the rupture. He spoke of a “humiliated Pope” and of the fact that this humiliation ultimately affects the entire Church. “Why don’t they understand us? The problem is that we speak two different languages,” “we speak the language of faith,” “the language of tradition,” and “before us we find a language that speaks of other things, the language of inclusion, dialogue and accompaniment. We, on the other hand, want faith. So, of course, in faith we dialogue with people in order to convert them.”
Parolin’s reaction.
“This is a schismatic act that breaks the unity of the Church and will be subject to sanctions.” “I feel great sorrow” and “I hope that, despite what has happened today, we can resume dialogue and find a solution.”
The return procedure of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The procedure, in force since 1 July, requires priests belonging to the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) who have decided to leave the order to do the following:
- find a bishop, a major superior of a pontifical clerical institute or another ordinary who is willing to accept him ad experimentum,
- write a letter to Pope Leo XIV requesting the remission of the censures incurred by receiving priestly ordination from an excommunicated or canonically irregular bishop, and
- attach documentation of his priestly ordination, a Profession of Faith and a Formula of Adherence, as well as a letter signed by the ordinary explaining his willingness to accept the priest.
If the request of the clerics is accepted, they will enter a probationary period of 1 to 3 years under the supervision of their ordinary, after which the priest may finally be incardinated.
Laypeople who frequently attend the liturgical celebrations of the SSPX and formally share its doctrinal positions, as well as those who are members of the Society’s third order, are also considered to have incurred a canonical penalty and must sign the Profession of Faith and the Formula of Adherence.
The Profession of Faith begins by affirming that the cleric or layperson believes in every article of the Nicene Creed and then declares:
With firm faith I also believe everything contained in the word of God, whether written or handed on by Tradition, which the Church proposes as divinely revealed, whether by solemn judgment or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium. I also accept and hold firmly all and each of the teachings proposed definitively by the Church in matters of faith and morals. Furthermore, with religious submission of will and intellect, I adhere to the teachings which the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops proclaim when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim them by a definitive act.
The Formula of Adherence states, in part:
I accept the doctrine taught in no. 25 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council on the Magisterium of the Church and the adherence due to it.
With regard to certain doctrines taught by the Second Vatican Council, or subsequent reforms in the Sacred Liturgy or Canon Law, which some may find difficult to reconcile with previous declarations of the Magisterium, I undertake to follow a positive approach in their interpretation under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium, so that none of these teachings may be separated from the rest of the Church’s sacred doctrinal heritage. I further declare that I accept the validity of the Sacrifice of the Mass and of the Sacraments celebrated with the intention of doing what the Church does, and in accordance with the rites contained in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the ritual books promulgated by the Supreme Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II. Finally, I promise to adhere to the common discipline of the Church and to its laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by Pope John Paul II.
The low level of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Everything suggests that even when they excommunicate, they do it badly. They have it, and we repeat, in Infovaticana «The formula used by Tucho to excommunicate priests and laity lacks penal efficacy» «The two documents published on 2 July by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith—a Decree and an Explanatory Note (Prot. N. 99/2009), both signed by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández and the secretaries Armando Matteo and John J. Kennedy—present defects of canonical technique that drastically limit their real scope. Analyzed in accordance with Book VI of the Code of Canon Law, their juridical effect is reduced to the declaration of six excommunications. With regard to the more than seven hundred priests of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X and their faithful, the formula employed lacks penal efficacy.» «The juridical formula chosen by the prefect—declaring six by decree and all the others by note—leaves without effect, in law, the excommunication of the priests and laity of the Fraternity: where there was penal form there are only six addressees, and where the others are named there is no penal form. If the Holy See intended to extend the consequences of the schism to the whole Fraternity, the law in force required another route: penal law or precept, individual declaratory decrees following the procedure of can. 1720, and express revocation, with pontifical approval in specific form, of the concessions of Misericordia et misera and of 2017. For the moment, none of this has been done.»
The next schism: the Transalpines.
Recent and famous excommunications.
Times change and so do the reasons for excommunications. A brief review makes us reflect on this striking canonical penalty. In the twentieth century several bishops in China were excommunicated for joining the Patriotic Association and ordaining bishops without papal approval. It is reported that John XXIII excommunicated Fidel Castro in 1962 for affiliating with a communist party, preaching communism and supporting a communist government; the basis of the excommunication is the 1949 decree against communism of Pius XII. Romolo Murri, a leader of the Italian Catholic Democrats, was excommunicated for giving speeches against papal policies. François Duvalier was excommunicated for expelling foreign bishops from Haiti. We do not forget that in his time Alfred Loisy, a French cleric associated with modernism, was excommunicated in 1908. The vitandus excommunication was applied to him, by which he was to be isolated from the entire Catholic community except his close relatives. The Spanish priest Luis López Dóriga, deputy of the Radical Socialist Republican Party, was excommunicated in 1933 by Pius XI for his support of the Constitution and laws of the Second Republic, especially referring to the 1932 divorce law. Clemente Domínguez and Manuel Alonso were excommunicated as founders of the Palmarian Church. Juan Domingo Perón was excommunicated for the expulsion of the bishop of Buenos Aires during the events that led to the overthrow of the Argentine President.
Müller and the consecrations.
The headlines are very clear: “I ask for a theological response to the errors that denote heresy in practice”; “Welcoming those who leave, suppressing Ecclesia Dei was a mistake.” “There is ideology in Traditionis custodes; tradition requires pastoral attention.” “It is more than a schism; it is a heresy in practice. Now we must respond systematically to these errors and prepare to welcome those who leave the Society of Saint Pius X.”
To the question “Do they have the mandate?”, the answer was evasive. “A wound, without doubt. They recall the Donatists, who felt superior, believing they had authority to judge the Magisterium and decide what was Catholic and what was not.” His speech at the Consistory had the merit of raising the issue before the Pope. How did the cardinals react? “I was astonished at the number of brothers who positively welcomed my proposals. It is our responsibility as cardinals of the Holy Roman Church to defend orthodoxy. Saint Irenaeus already stated that all churches must harmonize with the Church of Peter and Paul. And he said it against the Gnostics. Moreover, Gnosticism is the basis of all rebellion. It is when human reason claims to be superior to the reason of God. Behind all heresies lies Gnosticism, because it presupposes a superior conception of revelation presented in the visible Church.” Is there more heresy or more Gnosticism in the Fraternity? “There is heresy in practice. Here one cannot distinguish between schism and heresy. The denial of the primacy of the Pope in practice, which they accept in theory, is a practical form of heresy. They recall the liberals and Freemasons of nineteenth-century Germany, who would only have accepted the king’s absolutism if he had accepted their proposals.” How did Pope Leo react to his proposals? “He did not react directly, but he knows my position.” “I am thinking of a structured and systematic response. Of an international theological commission that would address all the errors of the Society to reach the foundation of their opposition. Now it is essential to provide a scientific theological response that allows the Doctrine of the Faith to be definitively clarified.” “The Society of Jesus always speaks of the primacy of the Pope from the First Vatican Council, but then does not accept this doctrine. They want to be Catholic without respecting the fundamental role of the Pope. I would recommend they read what Saint Thomas Aquinas said about the primacy of the Pope. It is the same behavior as Luther, who said he would kiss the Pope’s slipper if he accepted his interpretation of the Gospel. Unacceptable.”
“The ordination of a bishop is an act of the Church; in its absence it becomes a sect. No one can say: ‘I have the right to be a bishop.’ The doctrine of primacy is evangelical; to affirm that it is mere legalism implies a break with the Pope and the destruction of the sacramental structure of the Church. Even Luther did it. They want to be super-Catholics with a Protestant hermeneutic. Like Henry VIII, who said: ‘I am more Catholic than the Pope.’ I reply with Saint Augustine, who replied to the Donatist sects, who proclaimed themselves the only pure church against the sinful church: the Church is a corpus permixtum where sinners and saints coexist. We are all sinners and we are all saints. In any case, it is the faithful who allow themselves to be seduced by this claim who put their souls at risk. The state of necessity cannot authorize going against what Jesus Christ established! Had divine wisdom not already foreseen it? The truth is that the state of necessity is misinterpreted. It exists only in their imagination.”
Reaction of Athanasius Schneider.
What is the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X?
The most developed network is in France, with 46 priories, 186 chapels and 63 schools. Next is the United States, with 22 priories, 131 chapels and 32 schools. Germany has 11 priories and 51 chapels; Switzerland, where the general headquarters and the seminary of Écône are located, has nine priories and 28 chapels. Adding the structures of the 14 districts listed on the official website, the total number of priories rises to 147, 764 chapels and 138 schools.
Who finances the Lefebvrites?
According to publicly available documentation, there is no evidence of a single main financier of the Fraternity or of an international foundation that exclusively supports its activities. The economic system is based primarily on local communities and benefactors. The Italian district explicitly states that the Fraternity “lives exclusively thanks to the donations of its benefactors.” The methods of support indicated include bank transfers, postal orders, PayPal, donations with tax advantages, 5% taxpayer contributions and bequests.
The French financial statements allow a better understanding of the weight of the various sources. In 2023, the religious association Fraternité Sacerdotale Saint-Pie X raised:
- 2.22 million euros from collections;
- 2.13 million euros from donations;
- 1.97 million from the so-called own fund;
- 422 thousand euros for acquisitions and works;
- 9.28 million from bequests, donations and life insurance policies.
Manual offerings alone generated 6.76 million euros, while inheritances and life insurance policies represented the most important item.
The most detailed financial document available corresponds to the French organization. The 2023 accounts, certified by KPMG, include the national headquarters, the priories and the Flavigny seminary, but not the global organization as a whole. During the year the association recorded income of 20.63 million euros, against expenses of 18.77 million euros. The final result was a surplus of 1.86 million euros. In 2022 the surplus was even greater, reaching 2.44 million euros. At the end of 2023, total assets amounted to 67.91 million euros. This figure does not represent immediately available cash: it includes land, buildings, religious structures, securities, accounts receivable, liquidity and inherited goods. The French structure declared approximately 41.13 million euros in net fixed assets, 13.65 million euros in liquidity, 8.65 million euros in financial securities and net equity of over 51 million euros.
The British accounts also confirm the fundamental role of donations, inheritances and real estate. The Society of Saint Pius X, registered as a charity in England and Wales, declared income of 1.89 million pounds and expenses of just over 2 million pounds in 2024. Of its total income, 1.26 million pounds came from donations and inheritances, approximately 430,000 pounds from commercial activities and 154,000 pounds from investments.
At the end of 2024, the entity possessed:
- 14.15 million pounds sterling in real estate and other assets used directly;
- long-term investments of 3.07 million;
- liquidity and other assets of 2.81 million;
- liabilities of approximately 74 thousand pounds sterling.
How much do they receive in Italy from the 5 per thousand?
In Italy, the Fraternity also operates through the Foundation Fraternity of Saint Pius X. It is registered in the National Register of the Third Sector. This allows it to receive 5% of personal income tax. For the 2024 financial year, the foundation collected 1,266 preferences. Nominative options generated €39,902.87, to which were added amounts from generic signatures and the redistribution of smaller amounts. The total amount payable was approximately €41,931. In 2023, 942 preferences were received, for a total of €31,254.
Where are the Lefebvrites in Italy?
The center of the Italian district is in Albano Laziale, on the outskirts of Rome. The house hosts priests, nuns, brothers, a residence for elderly religious, formation activities and spiritual exercises. The Fraternity’s international website attributes to the Italian district a total of four priories (Albano Laziale, in the province of Rome; Montalenghe, near Turin; Rimini; and Silea, in the province of Treviso), 23 chapels, three centers for spiritual exercises and seven schools or educational initiatives.
Among the places where Masses are celebrated or activities organized are Rome, Turin, Seregno, Verona, Bassano del Grappa, Bologna and its province, Lucca, Naples, Corato, Brindisi, Palermo, Ravanusa and Olbia. Some places are permanent chapels, while others are visited periodically by priests from the priories.
The financial strength of the Fraternity.
It lies in its ability to maintain over time a highly motivated community, willing to support priests, seminaries, schools and religious buildings directly. Collections guarantee daily operations. Donations finance new initiatives and renovations. Bequests allow them to acquire properties and accumulate resources. Investments generate additional income. It is a decentralized model, difficult to quantify in its entirety, but solid enough to have allowed the Society of Saint Pius X to expand for more than half a century, despite its constant conflict with Rome.
Over time, the Society of Saint Pius X has also built a vast educational network, considered essential for transmitting to new generations its interpretation of Catholic doctrine and an education rooted in the tradition prior to the Second Vatican Council. It operates approximately 140 schools; the most extensive network is in France, with 63 registered institutions, followed by the United States with 32. These institutions may include primary and secondary schools, boarding schools and institutions where religious instruction, discipline and daily life are organized according to the traditionalist principles of Saint Pius X. These centers are sustained mainly by family contributions and donations.
Pope Leo and Petro at the Vatican.
Pope Leo XIV yesterday received the President of Colombia, Gustavo Petro, at the Vatican in one of the last international commitments of his Government before leaving the Presidency on 7 August. He later held a meeting with the Secretary of State of the Vatican and with the Under-Secretary for the Multilateral Sector of the Section for Relations with States, Mons. Daniel Pacho, according to information from the Holy See. During the meeting at the Secretariat of State “satisfaction was expressed for the good relations between Colombia and the Holy See,” according to the brief communiqué issued by the Vatican Press Office. It highlighted “the positive and constant collaboration between the Church and the State in favor of the promotion of peace, reconciliation and national unity.” During the talks “the socio-political situation of Colombia and the region was also addressed, paying special attention to the repercussions of conflicts, international organized crime and climate change.” This is the second time Leo XIV has received Petro. The previous occasion took place in May last year at the Vatican, on the occasion of the Mass marking the beginning of his pontificate.
Tearing the tunic of Christ.
Leo XIV: “Tearing the immaculate tunic of Christ is a sin of the gravest kind. May the Lord enlighten your consciences and awaken your hearts.” The appeal that had no effect, since the consecrations took place, despite the fact that Don Davide Pagliarani reiterated his desire to remain in communion with Rome and thanked the Pope for his paternal solicitude. SThe scenario of 1988 that everyone hoped to avoid was repeated, when Marcel Lefebvre was excommunicated by John Paul II together with the bishops he had illegitimately consecrated, despite Joseph Ratzinger’s attempts to avoid the rupture and find a compromise.
The Pope cannot be cornered by being told “either this or that” or “accept the consecrations or we will go ahead anyway,” because the pontiff is the successor of Peter. Some have complained that Leo refused to meet with members of the Fraternity, but it is also true that the Lefebvrites showed no sign of humility. How could the Pope receive in audience someone who was preparing, almost as an act of defiance, to proceed with the consecrations, without expressing any sincere desire to reconsider his decision?
To affirm that one desires communion with Rome while violating the papal imprimatur on episcopal appointments is an objective contradiction that cannot be tolerated or justified in any way. Just as it was impossible to justify Lefebvre in his time, despite the fact that many of his criticisms of the Council were widely shared within the Church. Benedict XVI, not Francis, made it clear that the Fraternity could only be considered in full communion with the Church by signing the conciliar documents. Accepting the Council, as correctly interpreted by Ratzinger—that is, in perfect continuity with tradition—was therefore an essential condition to which the Lefebvrites had to adhere. The failure of Pope Benedict XVI’s attempt has demonstrated beyond any doubt how difficult full reconciliation with the followers of Lefebvre really is, considering that Ratzinger himself was the closest pope.
While Lefebvre then had many weighty reasons to reject the Council, his successors seem to persist in a purely ideological and instrumental hostility, when the time is now ripe for an objective reading of the conciliar texts, precisely in the light of the teachings of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. As John Paul II did, Leo XIII must review the norms of the Vetus Ordo, perhaps following the example of his illustrious and holy predecessor, adopting the model of Ecclesia Dei and returning to the bishops the power to decide whether or not to grant the Tridentine Mass. SIt is a matter of preventing the Lefebvrian schism from pushing many Catholics attached to the ancient rite and attracted by tradition to seek refuge in a Church they consider the true one.
Who excommunicates whom?