A Silent “Excommunication” of All Traditionalists?

Many believe that the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) was excommunicated from the Catholic Church following the much-anticipated consecrations of four new bishops on July 1, 2026 without getting the Papal mandate.

In fact, there is a large contention of pseudo-traditionalists and conservatives who are relishing in the false belief that the SSPX was excommunicated and yet still feel free to criticize aspects of Vatican II and the New Mass while virtuously claiming to be obedient sons of the Holy Father. Ironically, the same rule they used to condemn the SSPX’s members and lay faithful to hell also condemns them as schismatics.

I have explained that these “excommunications” were invalid on both a theological and canonical level. If one reads only a few provisions of canon law, and understands what “schism” is, it is quite clear that no one was excommunicated. It’s not even a close call.

Nevertheless, the rest of the world, including numerous secular media outlets, think the Society’s bishops, priests, seminarians, and even lay people who attend SSPX chapels were excommunicated. And what is even more concerning is the reaction from Catholic conservatives or traditionalists who condemn the Society for the consecrations and agree that such actions constituted “schism.”

The most ardent traditional Catholic influencers opposing the SSPX actions that come to mind are Taylor Marshall and Eric Sammons. They hold themselves out as lovers of tradition and the Traditional Latin Mass but reject the SSPX’s effort to preserve Tradition by consecrating bishops without papal mandate. As far as I know, they primarily attend the TLM in either diocesan parishes or the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP). Someone needs to tell them that is not a get out of hell card.

They think they are saving their souls by attending the TLM in communities that remain perfectly obedient to Leo but reject the actions of the SSPX. The FSSP is the most visible and well known of such communities. They think riding that uncomfortable fence between adherence to the true faith while being perfectly “obedient” to Francis or Leo is what it will take to save their souls.

But here is a major wake up call for these men and others who think they are safe from excommunication simply because they attend the TLM at the FSSP or at other non-SSPX TLM options: They have probably been excommunicated already.

I say this because as this controversy with the SSPX unravels, we begin to see the underlying pressure points between the conservative/traditionalist Catholics and the Vatican exposed for the world to see. It has been there the whole time, but like an elephant in a China shop, Catholics simply did not want to address it while everyone seemed to agree there was a problem with Francis. The election of Leo changed everything.

The SSPX was purportedly excommunicated not just because they consecrated bishops without Leo’s permission, but because they did so in a “schismatic” way. This explains what many perceive to be Vatican hypocrisy because Leo affectionately embraces heretics and true schismatics that consecrate bishops all the time without his permission. The difference with the SSPX consecrations is the reason why they did it.

As John Paul II explained in his 1988 Apostolic Letter (motu proprio) Ecclesia Dei, the SSPX founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, committed a schismatic act by consecrating bishops without permission because Lefebvre held onto an incomplete notion of what Tradition means. John Paul II noted these erroneous ideas resulted in the SSPX rejecting Vatican II. As such, the “schism” was rooted in a doctrinal misunderstanding of what the Church believes in modern times according to the living character of Tradition.

The root of the SSPX schism, according to John Paul II and his successors, lies squarely in its failure to accept Vatican II and the New Mass. This means that to be 100% in communion with the Catholic Church today, according to the post-conciliar hierarchy, one must accept all of Vatican II and the New Mass. Failure to do so constitutes a schismatic spirit at best.

Francis confirmed this understanding in his 2021 Apostolic Letter Traditionis Custodes. As I explained in a recent video, Traditionis Custodes was designed to preserve “unity” according to Francis. He noted that traditionalists began to think the TLM and the New Mass were equivalent and parallel versions of the same Latin Roman Rite, when in truth, only the New Mass is the unique expression of the Roman Rite.

Furthermore, Francis noted that because this desire to critique Vatican II and avoid the New Mass became so strong among some traditional Catholics that it caused them to refer to the post-conciliar Church as a “false Church.”

As I pointed out in my video, the key to understanding Traditionis Custodes—that is the stated motivation behind it—was to remedy the breach in unity caused by those who question the teachings of Vatican II and attend the TLM on a regular basis.

The reality is that there are many Catholics in traditional communities that reject all or parts of both Vatican II and the New Mass as they are written and designed, including FSSP priests and faithful. Of course, they are correct in doing so, but Francis and Leo considered this a betrayal and refusal to submit to their magisterium to the point that is should be considered “schismatic.”

Francis, perhaps exercising more mercy than Leo, decided to issue Traditionis Custodes in effort to heal the schism he perceived without imposing any harsh excommunications. The idea was to begin the slow process of extinguishing the TLM and assimilate traditionalists back into the synodal Church under the new living Tradition. Many traditionalists and conservatives publicly decried this effort to ramp down the TLM. But when the SSPX decided to actually do something to preserve their Traditional society, this simply could not be tolerated.

I would also like to point out that labeling a Catholic as a schismatic is very politically and legally convenient for purposes of shutting down dissent. This is because, according to the Code of Canon Law, a schismatic is automatically excommunicated, latae sententiae. This opens the door for the Vatican to issue a “cut and paste” decree like Victor “Tucho” Fernandez did against the SSPX and declare that an automatic excommunication already took place under the law without actually having to conduct any investigations, hearings, or issue judgments based on the facts.1

To be a true schismatic, one must truly intend to separate oneself from the true Church and the Papacy itself. Has anyone from the Vatican investigated the internal forum of the SSPX bishops and leadership let alone the thousands of lay faithful who attend SSPX chapels? Of course not.

The consequences of this for all those who consider themselves lovers of Tradition but still wish to remain virtuously obedient to Leo and Fernandez, are monumental. Regardless of whether you attend the TLM at the SSPX or not, if you hold reservations about Vatican II doctrinal statements or the New Mass rite itself, the present Vatican leadership considers you outside the Catholic Church.

This begs the question then. Why do some traditional Catholics, like Marshall and Sammons, who criticize the SSPX for being disobedient, insist on raising reservations about Vatican II and attending the TLM, while personally avoiding their local novus ordo parish?

If it is only nostalgia for something that existed in the past, a Catholic museum piece if you will, then they have no right whatsoever to claim Vatican II caused problems or that it is better to attend the TLM. It is very clearly the position of the post-conciliar hierarchy that Vatican II must be accepted without reservation and that the New Mass IS the primary and unique expression of the Latin Rite. One’s nostalgia and love of beauty do not get to override that reality.

On the other hand, if their concerns over Vatican II and desire to avoid the New Mass are due to a fundamental disagreement with some doctrinal aspects, such as the exultation of humanity over God, then they have a disagreement with the hierarchy over the substance of the faith itself.

Is the Mass a priestly sacrifice or a communal meal where the laity must take on clerical roles? Do Catholics worship the same God as Muslims and Jews? Does the Catholic Church subsist in the same Church of Christ with Protestant sects and the Eastern Orthodox? Does one have a natural right to publicly worship and teach false religions to the detriment of the Church? These are all questions that prick the conscience of most traditionalists and even many conservatives.

Many try to escape this catch-22 and avoid making those hard choices by claiming these teachings are ambiguous. Yet, the post-conciliar Popes have been clarifying and interpreting these and other highly heterodox teachings for decades throughout their teachings and practice. It is abundantly clear to anyone, Catholic or not with some common sense and basic reading comprehension skills, that it is the position of the synodal Church that Vatican II teaches something contrary to revealed Tradition and Scripture that was always taught.

Therefore, if those who claim to be traditional Catholics continue to ignore known Vatican II errors and remain attached to the TLM over concerns that their spirtual needs are not being met, they are schismatic and automatically excommunicated according to the rule laid down since John Paul II. This is because there can be no division in the conciliar Church over these matters on the doctrinal level.

Now, we can see why the SSPX did what it did. The Society admits there is a problem on the doctrinal level and needed to take action in order to preserve the true Apostolic faith, despite the resistance of those who claim to hold apostolic authority. It had to be done, especially if most of the bishops, priests, laity throughout the world accept the errors contained in both the Vatican II documents and the rubrics of the New Mass.

The question now as we move forward into the next stage of battling the Church crisis is whether those who admit there is a crisis will be brave enough to stand up to Fernandez and Leo and boldly proclaim that they reject all the errors of Vatican II and the New Mass, while remaining obedient to the true Tradition of the Catholic Church and the teachings of pre-conciliar Popes.

Because that is what Archbishop Lefebvre did in 1988, and that was all the SSPX is doing today. The difference between the SSPX and its so-called traditional critics today is that the Society understands that sometimes one must take action to preserve the faith, even if that means following divine revelation contrary to the ideas of modernist infected churchmen in Rome. Some may call it disobedience, the proper way to state it is obedience to the highest authority.

At the end of the day, perhaps those conservative and traditional SSPX critics should engage in some self-reflection and determine for themselves if they too are already excommunicated before casting stones. Because if Leo and Fernandez are to be believed, chances are they too are in no better position than the SSPX.

A key point that many who engage in this debate over the SSPX miss is that latae sententiae automatic excommunications are imposed based on the illegal act itself (ipso facto) according to the terms of canon law, and not by Leo or any of his agents. When the Vatican decrees that an automatic excommunication took place, they are simply making public what appears to have already occurred (in the past). This certainly carries legal consequences. But they are not imposing the excommunication themselves by their own authority. This is important because if the terms of canon law were not met, in reality, no excommunication ever took place regardless of whether the Vatican chooses to issue a decree.

“there is a large contention of pseudo-traditionalists and conservatives who are relishing in the false belief that the SSPX was excommunicated...”

I am around Ecclesia Dei TLMers all the time and I have not met a single one relishing this. In fact, I think the dominant responses are unease and sympathy with SSPX. “Trad Inc.” online grifters notwithstanding.

I’m admittedly having a bit of a time discerning your opinion in all this, given your choice of articles to bring here.

The selection is definitely a field day for some posters...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

A Silent “Excommunication” of All Traditionalists?

Tradition itself has been excommunicated according to the rule used against the SSPX.