SSPX causes split among traditionalists
RORATE CÆLI: Rome and the Econe Consecrations: a Dispassionate Analysis of What is at Stake
Orthodox Catholics are radically split over the Society of Saint Pius X, the consecration of its new bishops, and the excommunications that followed from Rome.
Whatever one's position on whether the excommunications were just or unjust, one thing has become indisputably clear: Rome is now treating the Society as a whole as engaged in schism.
The situation now resembles, at best, that of 1988, but with a far more permanent rift. Comparisons have been drawn to the Old Catholic schism in the Netherlands, in which Jansenist sympathizers were excommunicated alongside other opponents of the First Vatican Council, and the analogy appears at least partially apt. The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith is now encouraging SSPX priests to seek reconciliation with the formal Church in the same manner employed with schismatic groups in the past.
The Society's decision to proceed with episcopal consecrations without a pontifical mandate a second time appears to have hardened both conservative cardinals and Pope Leo against it.
The prominent orthodox cardinals who led opposition to Francis for years — Burke, Müller, and Zen among them — criticized the intended consecrations both before and after they took place.
As a result, the legacy of these consecrations may become inextricably bound up with the success or failure of Pope Leo XIV's pontificate. If Leo demonstrates that he is not a second Francis — that he is in fact more traditional than John Paul II or Benedict XVI, that he liberalizes the Tridentine Mass and promotes bishops and cardinals of a traditionalist disposition — then the consecrations will appear in retrospect to many as premature, impatient, and imprudent. If, however, he disappoints conservatives, many may find themselves returning to sympathy with the SSPX or even joining it. Whether or not it was the Society's intention, the consecrations have effectively become a negative assessment of Pope Leo himself.
The SSPX presented a major challenge to Leo very early in his pontificate. Negotiations were brief, and the Society moved quickly to what can only be described as the nuclear option. After reconciliation talks under both Benedict XVI and Francis, everything collapsed at the outset of the new pontificate. For Leo to respond to the Society's decisions with any degree of leniency would risk implicitly validating the criticism directed against him. For the conservative cardinals who placed their trust in Leo, championed his candidacy during the conclave, and staked their own credibility on him, this early challenge to his authority is likely to be read as an act of sabotage and a fundamental failure of trust.
The semi-retirement of Bishop Fellay appears indicative of a broader trend within the Society: the moderate center has largely disappeared. Clergy and laypeople aligned with the Francis era who view Leo as a restorer have overwhelmingly turned against the SSPX over this decision. The Society's more vocal defenders, meanwhile, tend to be fierce critics of Leo and often of a more radical traditionalist orientation, harboring a deep distrust not merely of Francis but of all recent pontiffs. Archbishop Viganò and his most ardent supporters have openly sided with the SSPX.
The conflict has polarized into two radically opposed camps: those who believe that healing is possible under Leo, and those who believe that Rome has been captured by enemies of the Church and that the present crisis is of eschatological proportions. The consecrations were either gravely wrong or absolutely necessary: there is little ground between these positions.
When Leo was still Bishop Prevost in Peru, he was accustomed to working with some of the most integralist and least Vatican II-oriented clergy within the entire institutional Church. Unlike the SSPX, however, those clergy never publicly challenged the appearance of unity. If any historical analogy involving Jansenism is apt here, it is that of Pope Clement IX and the so-called Clementine Peace: Clement tolerated moderate Jansenists so long as they maintained public obedience. Leo has adopted a similar approach toward ultra-traditionalists and integralists.
Under Leo, Vatican II appears to have been transformed primarily into a question of authority rather than of doctrine. The conflict with the SSPX is over schism, not heresy. The real dispute concerns who has the authority to determine when an emergency situation exists within the Church, and who can be trusted to address it. Pope Leo has proved considerably firmer regarding authority and hierarchy than many initially expected. He is not despotic in the manner Francis could often be; he follows the law, but he follows it very strictly.
After the 1988 consecrations of four bishops, 12 long years were spent by the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) mostly ignored by the Holy See. There were contacts, but subdued
Circumstances changed in the year 2000, when, as part of the great Jubilee, Pope John Paul II opened up the churches of Rome to all Traditional groups. Cardinal Hoyos, Prefect for Clergy (1996-2006) and President of Ecclesia Dei (2000-2005), took the opportunity to open conversations with the SSPX. Rumors from the time assured that a worldwide Apostolic Administration was already then offered to the Society. Negotiations broke down.
Anyway, with the election of Pope Benedict XVI, who, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had spent so much time and effort trying to end the irregularity in 1988, the SSPX had the most sympathetic person they could ever hope for on the throne of Peter.
Negotiations started almost immediately, and the two demands of the SSPX were met in close succession: the freedom of the Traditional Mass for all priests in the Latin Church (Summorum Pontificum, in 2007); and the lifting of the excommunications of the four bishops consecrated in 1988 (January 2009).
What followed were years of agonizing "doctrinal discussions," and, though Pope Benedict XVI offered a variety of different structures for the regularization of the SSPX, they still rejected it. The sense one got at the time (during which this blog already existed, so there is plenty in our archives) was that the then-Superior General, Bishop Fellay, tried to convince his members, but was in the minority.
Under Francis, who had a particular and unexpected affection for the SSPX, even greater concessions were granted by the Holy See: jurisdiction for confessions, granted temporarily for the Jubilee of Mercy, and then extended indefinitely in the Apostolic Letter Misericordia et misera (2016); and jurisdiction for marriages (Ecclesia Dei commission, 2017).
In the 25 years following the 2000 Jubilee, therefore, under 3 different popes of diverse thinking and temperament, the Bishop of Rome, the Supreme Authority of the Church, gave in, again and again. Generous concessions were granted, one after the other. An objective observer, even one who has great love for the reality and work of the Society, and unending gratitude for the work the Society has accomplished through the decades, cannot but be struck by the fact that there were no true concessions by the Society at all.
he new pope was elected in May 2025, and he is his own man. When the consecrations were announced months ago, it was as if an ultimatum had been placed on him, without even giving him enough time to fully assess the situation -- while he was still receiving pleas from regularized Traditional Catholics regarding a reevaluation of Traditionis custodes. An ultimatum is not the best way to test the spine of a new leader. New leaders do not like to be bossed around.
So we reached the inevitable. The drifting apart will continue probably indefinitely. It is a sad situation all around, but it could have been much different if the 25 years of concessions from the Supreme Authority had been reciprocated even in a minor way by the other party.