Skip to main content

Is the SSPX in Schism? What is the difference between Disobedience and Schism???

Image
By

 +

JMJ

There remains people ... even today ... who believe that the SSPX is in schism.

The Evidence

So ... let's go through some of the arguments put forward to support that assertion.

3. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(Note 3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre ... have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(Note 4) Vatican: Ecclesia Dei Adflicta

So ... Pope St. John Paul II wrote that the disobedience implies a rejection of the Roman primacy and therefore constitutes a schismatic act. This is followed by the reference to the Canon 751 in the 1982 code of canon law.

Note 3: Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.

Things are vague about what constitutes submission to the Supreme Pontiff. The clear items are when the Pope issues commands and decrees related to Faith and Morals with the intention to bind.

Note 4: Canon 1382 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law deals with the consecration of a bishop without papal mandate. Specifically, it states that a bishop who consecrates someone as a bishop without the required papal mandate, and the person who receives such consecration, incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See. This means the excommunication is incurred automatically upon the commission of the act, without the need for a formal declaration.

Counter Point

Point 1 The Missing Canon

So, the first problem is that Canon 751 was not cited in the Canonical Warning.

Canonical Warning Congregation for Bishops to His Excellency Archbishop

Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop-Bishop Emeritus of Tulle

Since on June 15, 1988 you stated that you intended to ordain four priests to the episcopate without having obtained the mandate of the Supreme Pontiff as required by Canon 1013 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, I myself convey to you this public canonical warning, confirming that if you should carry out your intention as stated above, you yourself and also the bishops ordained by you shall incur ipso facto excommunication latæ sententiæ reserved to the Apostolic See in accordance with Canon 1382. I therefore entreat and beseech you in the name of Jesus Christ to weigh carefully what you are about to undertake against the laws of sacred discipline, and the very grave consequences resulting therefrom for the communion of the Catholic Church, of which you are a bishop.

Given at Rome, from the Office of the Congregation for Bishops, June 17, 1988.

By Mandate of the Supreme Pontiff,

Bernardin Card. Gantin

So, what what we have here is a law that "changed" after the fact and the Canonical warning.  Even in the Catholic Church, I don't think a person can be guilty after the fact.

Point 2 Implied Is Not a Fact

The second point that I would make is that PSJP2 stated that the act of consecration without Pontifical Mandate "... implies in practice a rejection of the Roman primacy ...".  I fail to see how that assertion can be made in the face of the actual intentions stated by Archbishop Lefebvre before he consecrated the four bishops. In other words, "implies" means that something wasn't stated explicitly. So now we have a canonical assertion that Archbishop Lefebvre believed something other than what he stated.

Point 3 The Missing Canon  Revisited

My third point is that, when PSJP2 mentioned that they incurred the penalty of excommunication, he only cites canon 1382, not Canon 751. So it doesn't figure in the excommunication.

Point 4 Rome Says Nope

My fourth and final point is that when I asked the CDF about this in 2014 ... I received the following reply stating that the SSPX is not in full communion. Now I know that some say it is code for schism and I would ask - prove it.  Yes, Rome has used this phrase to include groups that are either objectively schismatic or heretical ... as well as the SSPX which is neither.  So we have term used to collect them all together.

I will be the first to acknowledge that the SSPX is not in a state of full communion.  It is obvious to anyone who understands how the Catholic Church is contituted.




Point 5 Talking Heads Aside

I know that there are many reputable people who have made the assertion that the SSPX is schismatic etc.  In the face of the above, I fail to see how their assertions align with the reality.  


Conclusion

While many want to believe that the SSPX is in schism, the facts noted above just don't support the belief and assertions.  When I first heard that people were saying that the SSPX was in schism because of Ecclesia Dei, I responded simply that it was a scare tactic.  Looking above I have reached the same conclusion again ... 37 years later.

Hopefully, Pope Leo XIV will cut the Schismatic Gordian Knot and enact the 2014 agreement without the footnotes that changed the meaning of the agreement.


P^3


PS. I have discussed disobedience in this collection (link) and would like to draw your attention to  this summary Refresher (link).  Disobedience is just that, disobedience. It does not automatically imply a rejection of the authority of the superior, but that a higher authority requires obedience.  

If that were not the case, then all the bishops who fought Pope Benedict XVI were schismatic :-)


Reference

https://tradicat.blogspot.com/2015/07/a-look-back-cardinal-lara-and-sspx.html

https://tradicat.blogspot.com/2017/10/is-sspx-in-schism.html

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/imply


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

By
I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

By
 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...
Post a Comment
Read more

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

By
 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

By
 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...
Post a Comment
Read more