Amid all the proverbial “spilled ink” of today’s Catholic commentariat, I have yet to see anyone address the core spiritual malaise that has given rise to the current impasse between the Society of St. Pius X (FSSPX) and the ecclesial authorities in Rome concerning the consecration of new FSSPX bishops scheduled for July 1, 2026, in Switzerland.
While Catholics take sides in the dispute, and each side produces theological or canonical arguments to support its respective conclusions for or against the impending consecrations, I try to put my finger on the fundamental reason for the present difficulties.
Let me state at the outset that I am not wading into the issue of the legitimacy of those who currently claim and in reality exercise governance over the universal Church. The FSSPX does not question their authority, so I will make my point with that as a “given” for the sake of argument. My own sentiments in this regard are private and shall remain so, buried under a burden of grief and righteous anger at seeing the visage of the Bride of Christ viciously and relentlessly defaced daily by so many ministers of Christ’s Holy Church.
When Archbishop Lefebvre declared his intention to consecrate bishops for his Society—what he would later call “Operation Survival” for Tradition—at the priestly ordinations at Écône, Switzerland, in 1987, and then confirmed his decision in June 1988, against the express will of Pope John Paul II, he lost supporters. Among the most prominent in the Catholic world who up until then had thrown their support fully behind him was Jean Madiran. But he was not the only one who thought Mgr. Lefebvre was actually defying Tradition by this intentional act of disobedience to the Sovereign Pontiff. If my memory serves me right, figures such as Dr. Eric de Saventhem, Hamish Fraser, and Michael Davies found themselves sharing the same concerns as Madiran in opposing the consecrations.
Notwithstanding his opposition to the consecrations, Madiran admitted that the Roman authorities bore the greater responsibility for the rupture with the FSSPX. This conclusion makes perfectly good sense. The stronger party in negotiations has the greater ability to be magnanimous. How true in this dispute with Mgr. Lefebvre. Rome had all the institutional leverage. It could afford to be generous toward the FSSPX. Moreover, it could more easily persuade the faithful to its position than could Lefebvre to his, because it had the Pope, the prelates, the power, the prestige and, most convincing to the average man in the pew, penalties!
Lefebvre went ahead with the consecrations anyway. It was the defining moment of his episcopacy, if not his life. Some count this to his eternal shame, others to his eternal glory. However one views this in retrospect, I find it difficult to believe that anyone, of whatever rank or privilege, could question Lefebvre’s motivation for his actions, namely, the love of souls, for which he had been ordained a priest of Jesus Christ and raised to the episcopacy.
I cannot doubt that this same motivation has moved and still moves the FSSPX to do its work for souls. The Superior General of the Society, Fr. Davide Pagliarani, has revealed as much in his recent public statements justifying the upcoming consecrations.
RELATED: SSPX responds to Vatican threats with profession of faith
This love for souls is the fundamental issue at stake in the ongoing dispute with Rome. Souls in need have a right to their spiritual patrimony—a “legitimate attachment,” to quote the words of John Paul II—in the Latin Church. The Church has always recognized the particular patrimony of various ecclesial communities in union with the Roman See, such as the diverse sui juris communities of the Catholic East. Insofar as Latin Rite Catholics are deprived of widespread and generous access to their particular rites, disciplines, and spiritual heritage, without extraordinary burden or admixture of novelty, they are in grave spiritual need. This is where the FSSPX steps in, not because it claims canonical mission or jurisdiction strictly speaking over souls they serve, but rather because those Catholic faithful, deprived (as described above) in effect by their lawful pastors, if not in fact endangered by them, have requested their aid. This is but a reflection of the Gospel parable of the Good Samaritan, who intervenes out of charity where the priest and Levite have failed in their duty to render aid to their neighbor. In other words, this entire controversy about the FSSPX and Rome comes down to one essential question: who has chosen to love souls, and who has, in effect, chosen not to?
There, I all but said it. The Roman authorities, reflecting and facilitating the general decline of the institutional Church, are objectively failing to love souls and, more particularly, failing in that spiritual fatherhood whose lifeblood is supernatural charity, that two-fold love of God and love of neighbor. The fathers have forsaken the sons, and the sons cannot trust their loveless fathers. The father-son or father-child relationship between Church authorities and their subjects is in shambles. And so we bear the bitter fruits of our own foolishness in the Church. The impending episcopal consecrations in Écône are but a case in point.
So how will this paternal love and corresponding filial trust be restored in the Church? Can it be accomplished in the present urgent case of the FSSPX before July 1st? It does not look hopeful from a mere human perspective. But hope springs eternal.
Who, if anyone, might be the Elijah of our present moment? Recall God’s prophetic word through Malachi. Though it refers to the prophet Elijah’s return and the conversion of the Jewish remnant to Christ, by which the “fathers” of the Old Testament will be reconciled with their converted “sons” in the last days, I take the liberty of making it an expression of my desire to see the restoration of concord in the Church, a reconciliation of our spiritual fathers with their spiritual children in the purity and fullness of the Catholic Faith. ‘’And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers: lest I come, and strike the earth with anathema”(Malachi 4:6).
Yes, this reconciliation would be wonderful to see. It will come, but perhaps only after a well-deserved chastisement and wake-up call from Heaven. In the meantime, we must strive to accomplish what God’s providence puts before us, even if we have little or no obvious sway in the troubles that rock the Barque of Peter. Let none of us forget, whether analyzing the conflict between Rome and the Society of St. Pius X or undertaking any action in daily life: “He that loveth his neighbor, hath fulfilled the law” (Rom. 13:8).
Fr. Martin Hansen
May 18, 2026
