Society Of Saint Pius X

Dom Alcuin Reid warns against possible SSPX excommunications in a homily for the Sunday after the Ascension, saying Catholics attached to the older liturgical rites have faced exclusion and “ecclesiastical displacement” since Traditionis custodes In these days after the Ascension, as the Paschal candle stands extinguished and we wait in expectation and hope for the consoling fire of Pentecost, the Sacred Liturgy of our Holy Mother the Church gives us a somewhat stark warning about living as faithful witnesses to Christ. “They will put you out of the synagogues; indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father, nor me,” we are informed by the words of Our Lord Himself in this morning’s Gospel. Historically, these words apply to the expulsion of early Christians from the Jewish synagogues as it became clear that Christian faith and life was a substantial development of Jewish belief that the authorities of the time deemed unacceptable. Christianity rightly boasts of and venerates its roots in the Old Covenant, but it remains a fact that the New Covenant fulfils the Old and surpasses it. The Old Covenant no longer suffices. Because of this reality, Christians were expelled from Jewish synagogues and, as we see clearly in the martyrdom of St Stephen (cf. Acts 7), were indeed killed out of a supposedly godly zeal. But what are we to make of this prophecy today? We hear it proclaimed only days after the Holy See has threatened to excommunicate those who plan to consecrate new bishops for the Society of St Pius X, and the new bishops themselves, at the beginning of July. (In spite of much sensational reporting, there is no question of the excommunication of their faithful.) The parallel is not exact: there are many issues involved, and they are complex. But the echo of Our Lord’s prophecy at this time is unnerving, particularly given the zeal with which those who wish to celebrate according to the older liturgical rites of the Church have been excluded from their churches and chapels since the liturgical, historical and pastoral travesty that is the Motu Proprio Traditionis custodes of 2021, which has brought about further disunity and division whilst purportedly seeking unity through the imposition of a ritual uniformity never before known, or required, in the life of the Church. Many are the good and loyal Catholics who have experienced expulsion from their places of worship and the killing off of the sources of grace and pastoral care for themselves and their families at the hands of prelates who, seemingly, “do this because they have not known the Father, nor me.” We ourselves have had to step outside of the system, as it were, in order simply to survive: something no one wishes to do, but which, in extraordinary times, may become truly necessary in conscience. Necessity is the key, as the Society of St Pius X often says. For the older liturgical rites are not a matter of mere aesthetic preference: they are the integral source and summit of our Christian life and mission and guarantee a ritual and doctrinal integrity that is, at best, “watered down” in their successors and which, if we examine the increasingly poisonous fruits of the virus of synodalism that has been unleashed in the Church, is at times utterly compromised, if not downright rejected, by those who would proscribe that which, of its very nature, “remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.” (Benedict XVI, Letter, 7 July 2007.) Maintaining the rites of the usus antiquior, including the Divine Office, the sacraments and sacramentals, is not a personal “choice”: it is the conviction that, at this time in the history of the Church, they are necessary to guarantee a continuity of faith and life with the Church founded by Christ on the Apostles, at a time when other means do so less effectively or are at times hijacked for ends utterly inimical to the Deposit of Faith. This is not to malign the good will of many of those in authority, or of clergy, religious and laity who have struggled for decades, and who continue to struggle, to be faithful, often in the face of much opposition and, at times, from bishops and other ecclesiastical superiors. Nor is it to question the validity of the newer rites when celebrated correctly. This is, however, to underline the pastoral necessity, that is, the necessity for the salvation of souls, of free access to the Church’s unadulterated rites and teaching: something that the fruits produced by communities who celebrate them make abundantly evident. Sadly, this is a reality which still seems to be ignored. What, then, can we do when the choice seems to be between disobedience and dissolution? This is no small question, and we do well to consult St Thomas Aquinas and other sound theologians on its implications. In doing so, we find that material disobedience to positive law, as distinct from Divine law, can, extraordinarily, be tolerated for a truly necessary good: a father must feed and protect his family. There is no virtue in allowing them to starve to death or to be destroyed by danger. At certain times we must act outside the norm. And, as the fourth century martyrs of Abitene teach us so eloquently, sacramental starvation is not tolerable: sine dominico, non possumus (without the Sunday Eucharist, without the liturgy and the sacraments, we simply cannot live). But first and foremost, we must pray. In the context in which we find ourselves, the counsel of this morning’s Epistle is particularly pertinent: “Keep sane and sober for your prayers,” St Peter insists. So too he urges us: “Above all hold unfailing your love for one another, since charity covers a multitude of sins. Practice hospitality ungrudgingly to one another. As each has received a gift, employ it for one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace.” Prayer, charity, hospitality and mutual service are most certainly necessary at all levels of the Church in our times, and persevering in each of them will bring many graces, particularly for those who are persecuted or who, as it were, find themselves “ecclesiastically displaced”. In these days when we await the coming of the Counsellor whom Our Lord promises to send us from the Father, we can, then, each redouble our prayers that the Spirit of Truth shall truly inhabit those in authority and, as we shall sing in the Sequence of Pentecost, flecte quod est rigidum, fove quod est frigidum, rege quod est devium. (Bend what is inflexible, warm what is chilled, correct what has gone astray.) Not only should we beg Almighty God to send the Holy Spirit to melt the hearts that govern the Church, we should also implore Him in particular to fill the Holy Father with His sevenfold gifts of wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord in the exercise of his unenviable but utterly crucial duty to protect the integrity of the Deposit of Faith and the unity of the Church under it, of which the Sacred Liturgy is the living source and sacramental. The Holy Father needs our prayers at this time! Let us begin praying earnestly that, through the inspiration and gifts of God the Holy Spirit, charity and Truth will prevail on all sides and all talk of excommunication shall cease; that true hospitality will be shown; and that those who have been given the gift of the episcopacy and papacy will employ them, as good stewards, in the service of all their flock after the example of the Good Shepherd Himself (cf. Jn 10). With the help of our prayers, through the power of God the Holy Spirit, this can yet come to pass. Dom Alcuin Reid is the Prior of the Monastère Saint-Benoît in Brignoles, France, www.monasterebrignoles.org

Bishop Marian Eleganti speaks to AdVaticanum on the appeal of the traditional liturgy, Islam and the Society of St Pius X. Eleganti addresses the fallout of the Second Vatican Council, the place of the old rite and the pertinent questions facing the Church in the West The Benedictine Bishop Marian Eleganti, former Abbot of St Otmarsberg Abbey and auxiliary bishop of the Diocese of Chur until 2021, is well known for his defence of the truth and beauty of Catholicism in the face of an increasingly hostile West. A principled churchman, he has often paid the price for adhering to his conscience, stepping down as the Swiss bishops’ youth bishop in 2018 due to disagreements with other bishops at the 2018 Youth Synod and offering his resignation in 2021 at the age of 65, a full ten years before the mandatory retirement age for bishops. In this interview, he sits down with AdVaticanum to reflect on his years of priestly ministry and to offer his erudite analysis of the challenges facing the Church in the twenty-first century. He addresses Islam, the Society of St Pius X, the liturgy and the fallout of the Second Vatican Council with the characteristic clarity that has made him a much respected voice within the Church. AV: Your Excellency, you were born in 1955 and have recounted serving as an enthusiastic altar boy in the traditional rite in your childhood before being retrained for the Novus Ordo. You have described the post-conciliar liturgical intervention as “a rather violent, provisional reconstruction of the Holy Mass… associated with great losses that need to be addressed”, noting differences especially in the prayers, postures, and ad orientem orientation. Young Catholics today, who often know little about the texts of Vatican II, are increasingly drawn to the Tridentine rite for its beauty and transcendence. In your view, what specific elements of the ancient liturgy address the spiritual hunger of this generation, and how would you respond to claims that restricting the Traditional Latin Mass is necessary for ecclesial unity? +ME: I believe that the appeal of the Old Liturgy for young people lies primarily in several key aspects. Firstly, its focus, and the centrality, on God or Christ, rather than on the community. The general orientation of everyone (the congregation and the priest) is towards Him. Another is the palpable reverence associated with the encounter with the transcendent God or the present Christ. There is also the stillness and silence, reminiscent of the worship of the Lamb in the Book of Revelation. I believe people are also drawn to the solemnity and dignity of the vestments, liturgical objects, and the altar, as well as the overall design of the sanctuary. Finally, Gregorian chant, which has been a trend for some time, even in secular circles. Reverence, faith, prayer, love, and inner devotion or participation have their roots in the heart. They can be found just as easily in the Novus Ordo. I am the same person in any rite. How I stand before God and celebrate Him is decided within me. It is not the form that makes me devout. Devotion is either present or it is not, regardless of the form. The inner self then also takes on the proper mode of expression; it does not work the other way around. I kneel because I am devout; I am not devout because I kneel. If a form becomes associated with false thinking, it can become a divisive force and a question of “to be or not to be”, which a rite never is. Every form has advantages and disadvantages, and the wise person distinguishes without doing wrong. Why did Jesus call the outwardly righteous Pharisees whitewashed tombs? The discrepancy between what is inside and what is outside can be very great, whatever form it takes. AV: Building on your recent calls (including in early 2026 reflections) for renewed study of the liturgical crisis under a new pontificate, such as the marginalisation of the tabernacle and overemphasis on the “meal character”, do you see a path for restoring wider access to the Tridentine rite beyond the restrictions of Traditionis Custodes? What concrete pastoral measures would you recommend to bishops to allow the old liturgy to flourish again as a living treasure? +ME: We have so many rites in the Catholic Church. We should accept them for what they are: mere rites. We must infuse every rite with love and devotion; otherwise, it misses its mark. The Old and New Rites, as such, have nothing to do with whether we recognise the Council or not, or how we deal with its texts or reforms. These questions are not to be resolved at the level of the rites. Whether the New Mass corresponds to the vision of the Council Fathers who inspired it is a historical question. The answer may vary. Why don’t we simply give hearts the freedom to pray as they wish and to honour God as they like, without disqualifying any person or rite? The Church must set the framework for this. That is not a problem. Rites are not absolute. In a validly administered sacrament, the believer always finds God, regardless of the rite, provided, of course, that the sacraments are celebrated as the Church prescribes and with the inner attitude and dignity I have described above. AV: Your Excellency, you have described the post-Vatican II era as bringing “an indescribable decline in the practice and knowledge of the faith, widespread liturgical formlessness and arbitrariness” instead of the expected “springtime”. Official statistics from the Annuario Pontificio 2026 and Annuarium Statisticum Ecclesiae 2024 confirm a 13-year decline in priestly vocations that has accelerated recently, with major seminarians worldwide falling from 106,495 in 2023 to 103,604 in 2024 (a 2.72% drop), following prior yearly declines, with Europe seeing particularly sharp losses and a net global priest decrease of 734 between 2022 and 2023 despite Catholic population growth. What, in your view, are the specific post-conciliar developments or practices that have contributed to the excesses and loss of the sacred, and how should they now be corrected within the life of the Church? +ME: On the topic of the Old Rite, we must remember the causes of this phenomenon do not lie in the Novus Ordo. The Council Fathers had intended a modest liturgical reform. Excesses, lack of form, trivialisation of the sacred, liturgical disobedience, community-centredness, the absence of priests, or even a hostility towards priests, are phenomena of the post-conciliar era that cannot be attributed to the Council’s texts, any more than post-conciliar heretical tendencies can. The worst of all evils is the practical irrelevance of God in our society and the turning away from Christianity, which has been replaced by ideologies or other forces that have an extremely destructive effect on everything that was once sacred to the so-called Christian West. Nothing better has taken its place. This is becoming increasingly clear. AV: Specifically, focusing on vocations, this multi-year decline has hit Europe and the Americas hardest, with empty seminaries and ageing clergy in many places, while Africa and Asia show some growth. What would you propose to reverse it? +ME: There are many young converts and those seeking baptism. They want to build Christian marriages and families. This is where we need to invest our efforts. We must impart knowledge of the faith to children and young people, provide them with support, and introduce them to the sacraments; we must accompany young families. As a parish priest, I would begin by celebrating Holy Mass as deeply and beautifully as possible, accompanied by brief catechesis. Following the liturgy: fellowship, love, and joy; parents forming friendships, children getting to know one another and playing together. People and charisms gather around every devout priest. With Holy Mass at the centre of life, the Church begins to renew itself. If the priest is a bride in love, the community he gathers around him will soon be the same. This brings an unimaginable momentum. AV: In your October 2025 article “Homosexuality in Society and in the Church: An Elephant in the Room”, you identified the “widespread homosexuality in the clergy and its significance in the abuse crisis” as the ignored “elephant in the room”, calling it a phenomenon sui generis with negative consequences that must be named, while noting that silence renders other prevention efforts incomplete. What pastoral experience or observations led you to this conclusion, and do you think enough is being addressed openly despite earlier calls for psychological screening? +ME: This is not a matter of my own subjective impressions or pastoral experience, but of pure statistics. I wrote to Pope Leo XIV about this. All Church studies on abuse show a disproportionately high number of male victims. It does little good to turn a blind eye to this. There is a factual correlation, without implying that clergy with a homosexual orientation are predestined to commit abuse because of their orientation. The same applies to heterosexuals. There are also many cases of sexual abuse outside the Church, but society primarily focuses on and is scandalised by those within the clergy. To sin means: I could have acted differently, but everyone has their own preferences. AV: As auxiliary bishop emeritus of the Church in Switzerland, you have witnessed the challenges of secularisation in the country. What is your current assessment of the state of the faith in Switzerland, and are there any emerging Swiss “hotspots” of renewal among younger generations rediscovering the faith? +ME: Generally speaking, I give the Swiss very poor marks when it comes to their spiritual life and their connection to the Church. While most of them have been baptised, they have never truly become disciples of Jesus. I say this merely as an observation. It may not necessarily be their own fault. That said, there are genuine hotspots of faith. As the bishop for youth, I was right in the thick of it. Even today, I rejoice in the growth of these hotspots. AV: Your Excellency, you have been clear in your statements that the SSPX’s planned episcopal consecrations on 1 July 2026, without papal mandate, would constitute a “schismatic act” rupturing visible unity with the Pope, citing issues of autonomy, non-incardinated priests, and self-positioning as the true Church. What is the current attitude towards the SSPX within Switzerland? Do you perceive growing support for the SSPX among the faithful? +ME: The Society of St Pius X has gone to great lengths to justify its decision, both internally and externally. Many faithful simply love the traditional liturgy without truly identifying with the Society’s ideology. They are, in fact, often put off by what they sometimes encounter in parishes. I would not say that there is growing support for the Society of St Pius X among the faithful. AV: On the broader European scene, Cardinal Gerhard Müller has recently described mass migration from Islamic countries into Europe as posing significant challenges to integration, warning of risks such as cultural strain, potential social conflict, and growing Muslim influence in public life if not managed carefully. Your Grace, how do you assess the compatibility of large-scale Islamic immigration with preserving Europe’s Christian identity? What role should the Catholic Church play in addressing this, balancing the Gospel’s call to charity and welcome with a realistic consideration of the demographic, religious, and social shifts underway? +ME: Islam, not just so-called Islamism, is, by its very nature, an anti-Christian religion, in theory and in practice. Christianity has never fared well under Islamic rule. This remains true today. Wherever Islam holds sway, Christianity is being decimated to the point of near extinction. I consider Islam incompatible with the Western idea of freedom and the secular state. Ultimately, only the numerical balance will decide which of the two, Christianity or Islam, will disappear and perish or remain in a state of tolerance. Even secular political entities like the European Union exhibit anti-Christian traits today. Due to Islam’s incompatibility with the Christian idea of the separation of state and politics and church and religion (“Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s”), I consider Islam to be incompatible with the Judeo-Christian tradition of the West, which still strongly shapes our thinking and political system. The more Muslims are naturalised into our societies, the worse it could become unless Christ converts them and sets them free. AV: And finally, Your Excellency, could you offer your thoughts on the recent scandal in the Diocese of Chur, Switzerland, where three people shared the Eucharist with their pets? +ME: I cannot understand why the Holy Eucharist is celebrated in connection with the blessing of animals. Animals do not belong in a sacred space. They can be blessed outside the church, if one wishes. It is simply terrible that the sacraments, above all the Holy Mass, are no longer understood. The Holy Eucharist is viewed by many as a mere symbol and treated accordingly. But it is the Body of Christ, that is, the living, mysteriously present Person of the Lord. It causes me great pain to hear of such profanations. AV: Thank you, Your Excellency, for your continued dedication to the Church.

Archbishop Arrieta speaks to AdVaticanum on his retirement, his first impressions of Pope Leo XIV, the Order of Malta, and the ongoing canonical tensions surrounding the SSPX Archbishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru, Secretary of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts, has reached the age of 75, the mandatory retirement age for a bishop, on April 10. To mark the milestone, the Spanish canonist sat down with AdVaticanum to reflect on nearly two decades of service as secretary across three pontificates, his plans for retirement, and the evolving work of the dicastery. He shared his impressions of Pope Leo XIV as he approaches the anniversary of his election, offered a candid assessment of the irregular situation of the Society of St Pius X, and evaluated the 2021 reform of Book VI of the Code of Canon Law, as well as addressing current canonical questions regarding the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, liturgical unity under Traditionis Custodes, and the dubia from priests of the Diocese of Charlotte. Born on April 10, 1951 in Vitoria, Spain, Archbishop Arrieta was ordained a priest of Opus Dei in 1977. A distinguished academic and jurist, he helped establish the faculty of canon law at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome, where he has taught for many years. Appointed Secretary of the then Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, he was ordained a titular bishop in 2008. AdVaticanum: Your Excellency, having just turned 75 and therefore being at the point of submitting your resignation in accordance with canon 401 §1, many in the Church are curious about the next chapter for a canonist of your stature who has served the Dicastery for nearly two decades. After such an intense period of service in the Roman Curia, what would you most like to do in retirement? Archbishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru: We will have to take things one step at a time, always trusting in divine providence. As for me, I have always been involved in the field of canon law, both in the Roman Curia and at the university. I plan to continue living in Rome, also because I am a member of various commissions and working groups within the Roman Curia. Furthermore, if possible, I intend to spend more time in the academic environment, continuing my studies and publications on canon law. I am still teaching courses on canon law and Vatican law, both at the Faculty of Canon Law of the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross and at the Faculty of St Pius X in Venice: two institutions I have seen come into being and to which I feel particularly attached. God willing, in the near future I will be able to carry out these teaching duties with greater peace of mind and collaborate with both faculties. Furthermore, I hope to be able to devote myself a little more to pastoral work, which I have missed for many years. AV: As Secretary since your appointment in 2007, spanning the final years of St John Paul II’s pontificate, the entire Benedict XVI era, the full Francis pontificate, and now the early months under Pope Leo XIV, you have had a uniquely continuous vantage point on the work of what was then the Pontifical Council and is now the Dicastery for Legislative Texts. In your view, what are the most significant shifts you have witnessed in the dicastery’s day to day functioning? +JA: In a way, the major changes the dicastery has undergone in recent years are also reflected in the changes to its name over the years. At the beginning of John Paul II’s pontificate, the dicastery was called the “Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law”; it was later renamed the “Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts”, because, starting in 1990, it also had to deal with the Eastern Code of Canon Law in addition to that of the Latin Church. Subsequently, it was renamed more generally the “Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts”, since the role of “interpreting” universal laws had become rather secondary, and the dicastery devoted itself more to revising the universal norms of the Church or to offering consultative opinions on normative documents of the Holy See or of the Episcopal Conferences. Now, however, the name is “Dicastery for Legislative Texts”, and while retaining all the other functions it had in the past, most of its time is devoted to assisting bishops and superiors in the application of canon law in light of new circumstances arising throughout the world. This is very interesting work, because canon law is a body of law in force throughout the world and is confronted with the legal systems of every country in the world, as well as with vastly different cultures and sensibilities. AV: Having served under several Popes, what are your first impressions of working with Pope Leo XIV? +JA: In addition to his personal qualities, his profound spirituality, practical mind and missionary heart, the Pope has a particular fondness for institutional and orderly governance. I believe this stems from his experience leading a religious institute with a long standing tradition within the Church and a widespread presence throughout the world. Furthermore, I believe that, with regard to his style of governance and, in particular, his attitude towards justice and the law, we must appreciate the fact that the Pope received a university education as a canonist and, above all, that he did not limit himself to studying canon law, but had to teach it as a professor of canon law in Peru and, for some time, also practised it as an ecclesiastical judge in the courts. He therefore possesses a very concrete and comprehensive experience of the law that not everyone has, ranging from the purely theoretical to the didactic, and to the practical exercise and application of the law in the service of justice. AV: The SSPX continues to occupy a unique and, for many, pastorally sensitive place in the Church, with the announcement of the July 1 episcopal consecrations. With the recent proposal from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith for a structured theological dialogue aimed at identifying “minimum requirements” for full communion and a possible canonical status, contingent on suspending the announced July 2026 episcopal ordinations without papal mandate, what is your canonical assessment of the current irregular situation of the Society? +JA: For me, this is a very painful matter, especially because during Pope Benedict’s time I had the opportunity to familiarise myself with their situation and to meet with some of their superiors on several occasions. They feel the need for ministers to celebrate certain sacraments, but I believe it was a grave mistake to have presented this matter as an imposition on the Holy See, announcing directly, as if it were a fait accompli, that they intended to carry out episcopal ordinations. This is the attitude of those who, from the outset, consider themselves outside the Church, a stance that contradicts their own awareness that they do not possess ecclesiastical jurisdiction. In fact, when they had to impose disciplinary sanctions for certain conduct by some of their priests, they turned to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which granted them the authority to do so. Moreover, Pope Francis had directly granted their priests the authority to hear confessions worldwide and issued instructions so that diocesan bishops could grant them the authority to assist at weddings, thereby ensuring that the marriages would not be invalid for the Catholic Church due to a lack of canonical form. Now all of this risks being compromised, which is a heavy responsibility for those who decide not to obey the Pope’s instructions. AV: Your Excellency, you personally spearheaded much of the work on the 2021 revision of Book VI of the Code (Pascite gregem Dei), which updated sanctions to better address contemporary situations such as clerical abuse, the attempted ordination of women, and offences against the sacraments. With several years of application now behind us, how do you evaluate the effectiveness of these changes in practice? +JA: The dicastery’s reform of Book VI of the Code has been one of the primary tasks since the pontificate of Pope Benedict, who, drawing on his many years of experience as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was well aware of the practical limitations of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which, in fact, was rarely enforced. It was the future Pope Benedict who laid the groundwork for effectively combating child abuse beginning with the promulgation of the Curia’s 1988 law, the apostolic constitution Pastor Bonus. He was the one who promoted, in the final years of John Paul II’s pontificate, the new penal regulations against abuse, assuming jurisdiction over the matter within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which he himself presided over, because the local episcopate was not managing it effectively. However, the reform of canon penal law required more in depth work, because it was necessary to overcome the prejudices and naivety of the immediate post conciliar period, which had in fact influenced the drafting of the penal norms promulgated in the 1983 Code. Now the principle of criminal legality has been explicitly restored, along with the duty of the ecclesiastical authority to act, without thereby losing the necessary humanity that the penal law of the Catholic Church necessarily entails. VA: The reforms of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta initiated under Pope Francis, particularly the appointment of a special delegate, the drafting of a new constitutional charter, and the emphasis on the Order’s religious character, have raised interesting canonical questions about the relationship between a sovereign subject of international law and the Holy See. Some observers have described it as the Vatican effectively “regulating another country”. Canonically speaking, how do you understand the Holy See’s authority over the Order in light of its dual nature as both a lay religious institute and a sovereign entity? +JA: I have little information on this subject, apart from some theoretical reading and study: I am unfamiliar with the practical realities and concrete needs, so I cannot offer an opinion. I have always believed that, in Church law, concrete situations cannot be resolved with “off the shelf” solutions, but must be tailored to fit, like a suit. Since the Church is a spiritual reality, in which it is the Holy Spirit who moves the initiatives of Christians, “copy and paste” or cookie cutter solutions are of little use; therefore, it is necessary to go through an evaluation by the authority that gives the appropriate legal form in accordance with the flexibility inherent in Church law. With that in mind, it has always seemed to me that, from a legal standpoint, the solution under canon law regarding the institution you mention should have begun with the recognition of its international legal personality and, within the framework of that formal recognition, resolved the religious issues and the remaining matters of various kinds. More specifically, since this is an entity that many countries recognise as sovereign, I believe greater consideration should have been given to the instrument of a concordat: a concordat between the Holy See and the Order, similar to those signed with many countries, would have provided a formal framework consistent with how it is actually perceived in the international arena, and within that framework, the various spiritual and charitable issues raised by this important entity could have been resolved with realism and practicality, etc. AV: A question frequently raised by faithful Catholics attached to the Vetus Ordo concerns how recent liturgical norms, such as those in Traditionis Custodes and its dubia, are to be reconciled with the broader canonical framework for divine worship and the rights of the faithful. From your perspective, how does one provide a clear and authoritative interpretation that safeguards both the unity of the Roman Rite and the legitimate spiritual needs of the faithful who find deeper nourishment in the earlier form? +JA: It seems to me that the Holy Father is fully aware of all these experiences and that he seeks to address them in the best possible way by appealing to everyone’s sense of unity and sensitivity, so that we may coexist with expressions of diversity that do not undermine unity and respect for authority. I believe that promoting unity is one of the central themes we find in the Pope’s words throughout these months of his pontificate. It is not permissible, however, to use the banner of the liturgy to shatter unity or the reverence due to legitimate ecclesiastical authority. Balance is needed. It is important to move forward while respecting the rights of the Christian faithful, and at the same time, we must obey and share in the spirit of unity. AV: Your Excellency, on January 5, 2026, thirty one priests of the Diocese of Charlotte, roughly one quarter of the active clergy and two thirds of them pastors, submitted a formal dubia to this dicastery seeking clarification on whether Bishop Martin’s practices, which explicitly permitted or even favoured by universal liturgical law, such as the use of altar rails, kneelers and prie dieux for the reception of Holy Communion, as announced in the bishop’s pastoral letter of December 17, 2025. The dubia raise fundamental questions about the limits of a diocesan bishop’s liturgical authority in relation to the rights of the faithful and the stability of universal norms. As the dicastery’s Secretary responsible for the authentic interpretation of ecclesiastical law, what is your canonical assessment of the core issues presented in this dubia? +JA: For several years now, our dicastery has been publishing on its website the various opinions and consultations we are asked to provide, omitting, of course, any personal references, whenever we believe they may be of general use to the Church. For us, it is also a way to engage with the legal world and with new situations arising in various parts of the world, seeking to stimulate studies and in depth analysis of specific aspects of canon law. Regarding individual cases, however, as is logical, we are bound to maintain absolute confidentiality, also out of respect for the individuals involved. AV: Thank you very much for your time, Your Excellency, and for your many years of service to the Church.

Bishop Bernard Fellay has warned that the faithful may face excommunication, as indications from Rome suggest a response is being prepared to possible episcopal consecrations without papal mandate In a surprise turn, the former superior general of the Society of Saint Pius X has warned that the faithful may face excommunication, as indications emerge that Rome has prepared a response to possible episcopal consecrations without a papal mandate. In an exclusive sermon transcript obtained by Advaticanum , Bishop Bernard Fellay told those present at confirmations on Good Shepherd Sunday at the Immaculata in St Mary’s, Kansas, that such a development was increasingly likely. “I prefer not to be a prophet here, but I’m pretty sure that there is an enormous probability that all of you, we included, may be excommunicated, declared schismatic, there is a very high probability because they already said it in public. So, they are so to say forcing themselves to do it. But whatever, God can do miracles. It’s not the end.” He continued by framing the homily in spiritual terms, telling the congregation that “our history shows that God wants us to be a sign of contradiction, a sign that reveals hearts. And a sign of contradiction means the Cross. We must be ready to carry it.” Beyond his warning on possible excommunication, Bishop Fellay used the homily to deliver an extended meditation on the nature of the Church, drawing repeatedly on the theme of Good Shepherd Sunday and the Gospel’s declaration that there shall be “one shepherd and one fold”. He began by stressing that the Church, like the human person, possesses both a visible and an invisible dimension, cautioning against what he described as a tendency to remain at the surface. “God has created us with both body and soul,” he said. “There is a visible part and an invisible part, and both are absolutely real. Indeed, the invisible part, the soul, is far more important. Yet we must not set them in opposition. To separate body and soul is to have death, nothing more.” Developing the point, he compared the Faith to a lake whose depths are often ignored. “Many people are content to admire its beautiful surface and believe they know everything about it. But if you truly wish to understand the lake, you must look beneath the surface.” The same, he said, applies to the Church, which cannot be reduced to outward appearances alone. He referred to the longstanding principle Ecclesia de internis non judicat , that the Church does not judge interior dispositions, and linked this to the sacraments, explaining that while matter and form are visible, intention remains hidden and is presumed when the rites are followed. Faith itself, he continued, is likewise interior, but must be outwardly professed. Citing Scripture, he warned: “These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.” Turning to the liturgy, Bishop Fellay urged the faithful to deepen their engagement with the prayers of the Holy Mass, recommending that they be read in advance so that participation would not remain merely external. He drew on Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s Spiritual Journey, describing the liturgy as “the breathing of the soul” when properly united to interior prayer. He contrasted two approaches to worship, saying that one could remain at “the beautiful surface” or “dive deeper”, and insisted that this distinction applied to all aspects of Christian life. Even ordinary daily actions, he said, could be transformed if consciously offered to God: “If, every morning, we offer our entire day to God, all our actions, joys, and sufferings, then everything becomes an act of charity, praise, and glory to God.” The bishop also employed a more pointed comparison when speaking about the liturgy, likening it to a vessel containing grace. “The surface is important. Consider a glass: the liquid inside is more valuable, but without the glass the liquid is lost,” he said, before adding: “This is precisely what has happened with the new liturgy. They have made holes in the vessel of grace. The Traditional Mass is like a full-flowing river of graces, while the new rite often yields only a few drops.” He went on to describe what he called three pillars of the Church’s visible unity: unity of faith, unity of liturgy and unity of government. Each, he argued, had been “severely struck”. On the unity of faith, he claimed that belief had diminished significantly in various parts of the Church, asserting that outward profession did not always correspond to interior conviction. “They may still recite the Creed outwardly, but interiorly the faith is dead. Whoever denies even one truth of the faith has lost the faith entirely.” The homily was delivered in relation to the question of episcopal consecrations and possible sanctions. According to this publication’s Vatican correspondent, Niwa Limbu, officials within the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith are preparing for the possibility of a formal declaration of excommunication not only of bishops but also of priests belonging to the Society. Vatican correspondent Nico Spuntoni, writing for Il Giornale, relayed that “as far as I know, the Dicastero for the Doctrine of the Faith is already prepared for the possibility of excommunicating the SSPX following the ordinations.” The Holy See has already set out its position in clear terms. In a statement issued following a meeting between the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the superior general of the Society, it reiterated that episcopal ordinations carried out without pontifical mandate would have grave consequences. The statement said that “the ordination of Bishops without a mandate from the Holy Father, who possesses supreme, full, universal, immediate and direct ordinary power (cf. CIC, can. 331; Dogmatic Constitution Pastor aeternus, chapters I and III), would imply a decisive rupture of ecclesial communion (schism) with grave consequences for the Fraternity as a whole.” Other less official reporting suggests that a similar course may now be under consideration. The blog Rorate Caeli, citing anonymous Roman sources, reported on April 25 that Pope Leo XIV has “decided to follow the ‘1988 jurisprudence’” in relation to any forthcoming consecrations by the Society. According to the report, a decree has already been prepared “similar in tone and content to the one promulgated by Pope John Paul II through Cardinal Bernardin Gantin … on 1 July 1988.” For now, both the warnings from the Holy See and the words of the Society’s leadership indicate that a decisive point may be approaching.