Holy See rules SSPX bishops excommunicated, strips faculties for two sacraments

The Decree and Note from the Vatican were published Thursday morning and come as the response to the SSPX's consecration of four bishops against the Pope's will.

VATICAN CITY (PerMariam) — Following the Society of Saint Pius X’s consecration of four new bishops, the Holy See has declared all six of the Society’s bishops are now excommunicated, and further warned of heavy penalties for the clergy and faithful attached to the Society.

Following through with its prior warnings from May 13 and from June 30, the Vatican has now announced that the penalty of latae sententiae excommunication has been incurred by all six SSPX bishops: Alfonso de Galarreta and Bernard Fellay, Pascal Schreiber, Michael Goldade, Michel Poinsinet de Sivry, Marc Hanappier. The first two were consecrator and co-consecrator at the July 1 ceremony, while the other four were those in receipt of the order of bishop.

All six SSPX bishops, July 1, 2026

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s Decree cites the reasons as being “episcopal consecration of four presbyters, without a papal mandate and against the will of the Supreme Pontiff,” and then for Bp. Fellay as having “publicly adhered to the schismatic act.”

SSPX rejects Pope's request and consecrates four bishops

Nor is the Vatican’s action limited merely to the bishops of the Society.

“Clerics and lay faithful are warned not to join the schism of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, because they would ipso facto incur the penalty of latae sententiae excommunication,” reads the Decree.

In an accompanying Note from CDF Prefect Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, such weighty penalties levied against the clergy and faithful were further explained. The Note, which goes even further than the Decree, reads:

1. Sacred ministers belonging to the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X are in schism and must therefore be considered schismatics (cf. Ecclesia Dei, 5 c; Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Explanatory Note on the Excommunication for Schism Incurred by Adherents to the Movement of Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, August 24, 1996, 5–6), and are therefore subject to the excommunication provided for by law (can. 1364 § 1 CIC).

2. As regards the lay faithful, those who formally adhere to the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X are to be considered schismatic and excommunicated under the conditions established in the Explanatory Note of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts of 1996 (cf. ibid., 7), which remains in force and which this Dicastery endorses.

3. Finally, the holy People of God are hereby warned that the sacred ministers of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X administer the sacraments unlawfully, and that the sacrament of penance administered by them and marriages solemnized by them are invalid.

Thus by virtue of the accompanying Note, the Holy See appears to excommunicate not only the six bishops, but also the SSPX clergy.

The Note also removes the authorization for the sacraments of Confession and Marriage, thus stating that a celebration of these sacraments by SSPX clergy “are invalid,” since Canon Law stipulates authority as a requisite for validity.

Paragraph 2 in the CDF’s July 2 Note bears directly on the lay attendees of the SSPX and the 1996 document it cites explains how actions might be construed as “formally” adhering to a schism. The 1996 text is lengthy, but demands careful reading since it is a topic on which there will now be widespread debate and discussion. Relevant passages from the 1996 text state:

As stated in Motu proprio no. 5 c), the latae sententiae excommunication for schism applies to those who “formally adhere” to the said schismatic movement. Although the question of the exact scope of the notion of “formal adherence to schism” should be referred to the competent Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, it seems to this Pontifical Council that such adherence must involve two complementary elements:

a) one of an internal nature, consisting in freely and consciously sharing the substance of the schism—that is, in opting in such a way for the followers of Lefebvre that this choice is placed above obedience to the Pope (at the root of this attitude there will usually be positions contrary to the Magisterium of the Church);

b) another of an external nature, consisting in the outward expression of that choice, the most manifest sign of which will be exclusive participation in Lefebvrian “ecclesial” acts, without taking part in the acts of the Catholic Church (this is, however, not an unambiguous sign, since it is possible for some faithful to take part in the liturgical services of Lefebvre’s followers without, however, sharing their schismatic spirit). {Emphasis not original}

6. In the case of Lefebvrian deacons and priests, it seems beyond doubt that their ministerial activity within the schismatic movement is a more than evident sign that the two requirements mentioned above (no. 5) are met and that there is therefore formal adherence.

7. In the case of other faithful, however, it is obvious that occasional participation in liturgical acts or activities of the Lefebvrian movement—without adopting the attitude of doctrinal and disciplinary disunity characteristic of that movement—is not sufficient to constitute formal adherence to the movement. In pastoral practice, it may prove more difficult to assess their situation. Above all, one must take into account the person’s intention and the translation of that inner disposition into action. The various situations must therefore be judged on a case-by-case basis by the competent authorities of both the external and internal forums. {Emphasis not original}

No response has yet come from the Society, and it appears that they were not informed of the Decree and Note prior to learning about the texts from members of the press. Newly consecrated Bishop Paschal Schrieber was celebrating a first pontifical Mass when the documents were published by the Vatican at 9am Rome time.

Cardinal Fernández had told me just yesterday that he hoped dialogue with the SSPX would be possible in the future. “They didn’t consider useful the dialogue we’ve proposed. But we hope in future, thanks to the action of the Holy Spirit, it’ll be possible. I’m sure, but we’ll need time.”

In issuing such a stringent series of penalties against the Society, the cardinal is unlikely to attract them back to the discussion table, especially when the Society is so firmly convinced of the justification in performing the consecrations. Newly consecrated Bishop Goldade stated yesterday: “If the Catholic Church in her Tradition brings forth life, the modernist church is a desert that kills everything that it touches. It kills the supernatural life, the sources of grace & has placed man in the place of God.”

Nevertheless, Cdl. Fernández remains convinced that the Vatican’s penalties will cause an exodus of members or attendees of the SSPX. “The Church, as a caring mother, will welcome with sincere affection and deep concern all those who wish to return to full communion,” he wrote in the Note.

In order to accommodate such individuals, Nuncios in each country will reportedly “establish procedures that the Ordinaries may follow in various cases.”

However implementing the Decree and Note will be particularly difficult when it comes to the question of members of the faithful attending SSPX Masses. In order to judge whether or not such individuals are “formally” adhering to an act judged as schismatic, the Vatican would essentially have to judge the internal forum, something which it cannot precisely do.

Indeed, even as the 1996 Note from the Vatican {cited July 2, 2026 by Fernández} outlines, “it is possible for some faithful to take part in the liturgical services of Lefebvre’s followers without, however, sharing their schismatic spirit,” meaning that the mere act of attending an SSPX Mass does not imply a joining of the determined schism.

Fake reporting will proliferate from many, including ecclesial figures, with the argument being widely made that attending an SSPX Mass is an act of schism and leads to automatic excommunication. But in contrast the Vatican has said the opposite in the 1996 Note, and it was this very note which was cited anew today.

A more formal response from the SSPX is yet to emerge.