February started off with a chaotic flurry of Rome and SSPX interactions.
I've pulled together quite a list of internet articles (see below) and more keep appearing on my regular searches. ... So I think I need to stop adding as of today.
I think that there are only two documents that bear a separate analysis - the two press releases made by Rome and the SSPX. One element that I learned is that the SSPX intends to consecrate five bishops.
We now know that the SSPX is going to proceed with the Consecration of Five (5) Auxiliary Bishops. I will post another article on this event in more detail once time allows.
Here is a discussion by John-Henry Westen on his YouTube Channel Sign of the Cross.
My only comments at this time on the events are:
We've been in this situation in 1988, so what is old is new again.
For those who feel that the SSPX is leaving communion, yeah ... no. This does not materially change the situation of the SSPX as the legal aspects of the excommunications have been lifted, but the SSPX still is still not in 'full communion' as they say these days.
Regarding the meeting between the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Superior General of the FSSPX
On February 12, 2026, a cordial and sincere meeting took place at the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith between the Prefect, His Eminence Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, and the Superior General of the FSSPX (Society of Saint Pius X), the Reverend Don Davide Pagliarani, with the approval of the Holy Father Leo XIV.
After clarifying certain points presented by the FSSPX in various letters, particularly those sent between 2017–2019 — among other matters, discussion concerned the question of the divine will regarding the plurality of religions — the Prefect proposed a specifically theological dialogue process, with a well-defined methodology, concerning themes that still lack sufficient clarification, such as the difference between an act of faith and “religious submission of mind and will,” or the different degrees of assent required by various texts of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and its interpretation. At the same time, he proposed addressing a series of topics listed by the FSSPX in a letter dated January 17, 2019.
The purpose of this process would be to highlight, in the debated topics, the minimum requirements necessary for full communion with the Catholic Church and consequently to outline a canonical status for the Fraternity, together with other aspects requiring further study. [Tradicat: So ... what is the state of the Chinese Catholic Church in this regard?]
It was reiterated on the part of the Holy See that the ordination of bishops without a mandate from the Holy Father — who holds ordinary supreme power that is full, universal, immediate, and direct (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 331; Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus, chaps. I and III) — would imply a decisive rupture of ecclesial communion (schism), with grave consequences for the Fraternity as a whole (John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, July 2, 1988, nos. 3 and 5c; Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Explanatory Note, August 24, 1996, no. 1).[Tradicat: I find it interesting that he doesn't actually cite the canon's that were cited in 1988 (link). There have been changes to the code and the correct canon is now 1387 (link) but the wording remains as well as the section. It is not in the section on the Unity of the Church.]
Therefore, the possibility of carrying out this dialogue presupposes that the Fraternity suspend the announced decision regarding episcopal ordinations. [Tradicat: We now know that is not going to happen.]
The Superior General of the FSSPX will present the proposal to his Council and will give his response to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.
In the case of a positive response, the steps, stages, and procedures to be followed will be established by mutual agreement.
All the Church is asked to accompany this journey, especially in the coming time, with prayer to the Holy Spirit. He is the principal agent of the true ecclesial communion willed by Christ.
[Signed] + Victor Fernández
[Source for the Italian text: Matteo Matzuzzi on X]
Communiqué From the General House: Meeting in Rome
On 12 February 2026, Reverend Father Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X, was received at the Palace of the Holy Office by His Eminence Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. This meeting had been proposed by the Cardinal following the public announcement, on the 2nd of February, of future episcopal consecrations within the Society of Saint Pius X.
The conversation, held one-on-one at the Cardinal’s request, lasted an hour and a half and took place in an atmosphere that was both cordial and frank. It enabled Father Pagliarani to listen attentively to the Prefect and to clarify the scope of the 2nd of February announcement, as well as the meaning of the steps taken with the Holy See over the recent months.
The Superior General was thus able to present, in person, the current situation of the Society of Saint Pius X and its duty, in the spiritual necessity in which souls find themselves, to ensure the continuation of the ministry of its bishops.
Above all, he emphasised the spirit of charity in which the Society envisages these consecrations, as well as its sincere desire to serve both the souls and the Roman Church.
Finally, he renewed his desire that, given the wholly particular circumstances in which Holy Church finds itself, the Society may continue to operate in its current situation – exceptional and temporary – for the good of the souls who turn to it.
For his part, Cardinal Fernández offered a different approach to the question. Relayed in an official communiqué swiftly published by the Holy See, his proposal consists of “a specifically theological path of dialogue, according to a very precise methodology, […] in order to highlight the minima necessary for full communion with the Catholic Church”, which would make it possible “to define a canonical status for the Society”.
These exchanges would seek, in particular, to reach agreement on “the different degrees of adherence required by the various texts of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and their interpretation”. The Cardinal stated orally that, while it would be possible to engage in dialogue about the Council, its texts could not be corrected.
As a prior condition for this dialogue, it is required to suspend the decision regarding the announced episcopal consecrations.
The Prefect of the Dicastery specifically asked the Superior General to present this proposal to the members of his Council and to take the necessary time to evaluate it.
Father Pagliarani will therefore respond within the next few days. He will write directly to Cardinal Fernández and will also make his response known to the faithful.
The Superior General renewed to Cardinal Fernández his wish to be able to meet personally with the Holy Father. He remains very peaceful and is grateful for all the prayers offered. He continues to commend this situation to the prayers of the faithful.
+ JMJ Well Gary Campbell, former SSPX Priest and now laicised has posted a new article on WherePeterIs. https://wherepeteris.com/thoughts-of-a-former-sspx-priest-on-the-july-1-consecrations/ These words stuck out: Heck, they have built a five-star hotel, wine bar, and Walmart on the opposite bank of the Rubicon! They are not in danger of entering a state of schism, for they are already in a state of schism. I believe he doth protest too much. All the actual facts indicate that the SSPX was not in a state of schism before July 1st and an examination of the decree of excommunication highlights the either ineptitude of those in charge or a desire to leave the barn door open. The chasm between an act of disobedience and act of schism remains just what is has always been - an inconvenient barrier that person(s) in Rome seek to bridge but appear incapable of succeeding. The SSPX re-stated that they recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and feel obliged by conscience...
+ JMJ People seem to be mesmerised by train wrecks. They just can't turn away as the disaster creeps forward along train tracks towards the crossing where a car, truck, bus, trailer awaits its destruction. Trads have been watching the train wreck that is this crisis of the Catholic Church for decades. The trade war between the Canada and the US has reminded me that the news is addictive. The first time I was addicted what from 2009 to 2014 when I was closely following the Rome / SSPX discussions. I was at work watching a live-stream as Bishop Fellay disappeared into the Vatican. The lead-up to this moment had been intense as the 'resistance' got freaked out and the cultural cracks between doctrine and conspiracy theory widened. In the decade since then other things have emerged, wars, rumours of wars, conspiracies, celebrity Catholics etc. Now we have a new addiction and its name is Trump. Lately, no matter how much I try, I find myself wonderin...
+ JMJ What Is Tradition? The basic premise, from my perspective, is that what was taught before cannot be contradicted by the 'present' magisterium, only deepened and expanded upon. I recall the Roman theologians called the SSPX protestants while the SSPX called them modernists. I believe this was all surrounding the concept of Traditon. SSPX's Understanding of Tradition One accusation made against the SSPX is that they don't have a correct understanding of 'Tradition'. This is how the SSPX understands Tradition: I finally profess that Tradition is not a dead memory, but the living transmission of the doctrine received from the Apostles. It remains living, in distinction to Revelation, which is closed. It is so both in the activity of the Magisterium of the Teaching Church and in the profession of Faith of the Church Taught, of which the sentire cum Ecclesia is the result of the teaching of the Magisterium. Tradition may be called ‘living’, not in the sense t...
+ JMJ Immediately after the council (i.e. Second Vatican Council) things changed in Catholic Church around the world. Some of the Veteran Trads gave a good fight in those early years. In this story, three friends in Quebec agreed that what they were hearing from the pulpit reeked of heresy. After a while, they decided that it was time to take some action. The following Sunday all three of them took up their position in the front pew, directly in front of the pulpit. It wasn't difficult as the front pew was rarely occupied even in this era. They had a plan! As the sermon began the men sat there staring at the priest, waiting. Then it happened. A statement that deviated from pre-conciliar teaching leapt from the priests lips. The reaction wasn't explosive ... it was passive-aggressive ... in a way. As if on cue, the three men shook their heads, left to right. The priest paused, studdered a little and continued. All was good for a few minutes before some other...
+ JMJ In the ramp up to the consecrations the noise floor in the intergnat grew to a constant din. This was one of the few the peeped its signal over the noise. https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/finding-common-ground-between-rome-and-the-sspx The key issue is contained in this paragraph: In the lead-up to the planned July 1, 2026, episcopal consecrations, the SSPX rejected Rome’s offer of doctrinal dialogue on the grounds that “we both know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the fundamental orientations adopted since the Second Vatican Council.” Fr. Pagliarani also said that his previous attempt at dialogue in 2019 was shut down by Rome because of an assumed irreconcilability. It seems that, from the Society’s perspective, and perhaps from Rome’s too, their positions are incompatible. If memory serves, Rome killed any opportunity for an open discussion by stating that Vatican II was not up for debate. So it was a still-birth and ...
Comments
Post a Comment