In 1991 Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, assisted by Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta consecrated Licinio Rangel, who reconciled with the Church a decade later.
I ask the Holy Spirit to reign in the hearts of all who discuss this publicly, for the good of all separated brethren, Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox. God makes beautiful things out of dust. Let it be so here.
If I'm reading this correctly, it does indeed mean that any laity or clergy continuing to attend SSPX Masses and receive the Sacraments from them are excommunicated. I wonder if this means also attending their schools or other functions hosted by them.
I welcome corrections if this is not the case and my understanding is skewed.
Short answer: clergy are automatically considered to have formally adhered (this fits with point 1 in the new note, which says they are schismatics subject to excommunication), and the lay faithful are case by case: formal adherence requires an internal element, "sharing the substance of the schism," and an external element, such as "exclusive participation" in SSPX liturgies.
The 1996 note mentions that "there is the possibility that some faithful may take part in the liturgical functions of Lefebvre’s followers without sharing their schismatic spirit," in which case there would not be formal adherence to schism.
One other detail: the 6 bishops are excommunicated, whereas the SSPX priests are "schismatics, ... and are thus subject to the excommunication provided for by law." The Vatican is not saying that the clergy are automatically excommunicated, and instead seems to be allowing for local ordinaries to declare the excommunication of SSPX clergy in their diocese.
They have revoked the faculties for the valid celebration of marriage and reconciliation, however, in an attempt to draw the faithful back from participating in the SSPX. Ed did an analysis on the excommunication question here: https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/excommunication-communication-what
Could JD give a little explainer about the excommunication mechanisms for priests and lay people? I have a fuzzy sense, but the explanatory note references documentation that's above my paygrade.
Are we to make anything of the fact that the note gives the two already-existing bishops the title of bishop, but does not do so for the newly-consecrated quartet? Is the Dicastery leaving open the question of whether these four are actually bishops?
Under canon law and sacramental theology, that'd challenging to justify, as the apostolic mandate isn't necessary for validity, only for liceity. So far as we can tell, all requirements for validity were met yesterday.
Not quite the first since 1988.
In 1991 Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, assisted by Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta consecrated Licinio Rangel, who reconciled with the Church a decade later.
Thanks for pointing this out. I've changed it to "the first SSPX group consecrations."
I ask the Holy Spirit to reign in the hearts of all who discuss this publicly, for the good of all separated brethren, Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox. God makes beautiful things out of dust. Let it be so here.
If I'm reading this correctly, it does indeed mean that any laity or clergy continuing to attend SSPX Masses and receive the Sacraments from them are excommunicated. I wonder if this means also attending their schools or other functions hosted by them.
I welcome corrections if this is not the case and my understanding is skewed.
Yeah I'm wondering what exactly "formally adhere" means in this context
There's a little more clarification here:
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2026-07/fraternity-saint-pius-x-ways-to-repent-return-full-communion.html
The Pillar did an explainer back in May: https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/if-the-sspx-consecrations-happen
Here's a previous Pillar article that answers that question: https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/if-the-sspx-consecrations-happen
Short answer: clergy are automatically considered to have formally adhered (this fits with point 1 in the new note, which says they are schismatics subject to excommunication), and the lay faithful are case by case: formal adherence requires an internal element, "sharing the substance of the schism," and an external element, such as "exclusive participation" in SSPX liturgies.
The 1996 note mentions that "there is the possibility that some faithful may take part in the liturgical functions of Lefebvre’s followers without sharing their schismatic spirit," in which case there would not be formal adherence to schism.
One other detail: the 6 bishops are excommunicated, whereas the SSPX priests are "schismatics, ... and are thus subject to the excommunication provided for by law." The Vatican is not saying that the clergy are automatically excommunicated, and instead seems to be allowing for local ordinaries to declare the excommunication of SSPX clergy in their diocese.
They have revoked the faculties for the valid celebration of marriage and reconciliation, however, in an attempt to draw the faithful back from participating in the SSPX. Ed did an analysis on the excommunication question here: https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/excommunication-communication-what
Could JD give a little explainer about the excommunication mechanisms for priests and lay people? I have a fuzzy sense, but the explanatory note references documentation that's above my paygrade.
From May: https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/if-the-sspx-consecrations-happen
Are we to make anything of the fact that the note gives the two already-existing bishops the title of bishop, but does not do so for the newly-consecrated quartet? Is the Dicastery leaving open the question of whether these four are actually bishops?
Under canon law and sacramental theology, that'd challenging to justify, as the apostolic mandate isn't necessary for validity, only for liceity. So far as we can tell, all requirements for validity were met yesterday.