📉 The schism of inconsistency: the begging of the Society of St. Pius X at the feet of apostate Rome

🤔 The paradox of submissive disobedience

The present article analyzes the communiqué issued by the General House of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) on February 2, 2026, regarding the decision to proceed with new episcopal consecrations. The document, far from representing an act of heroic fortitude, reveals the deep identity crisis and theological contradiction that plagues the Lefebvrian movement. A close analysis of the text Society of St. Pius X Announces NEW EPISCOPAL CONSECRATIONS for July 1, 2026 exposes a Society that, tragically, diagnoses the poison in the Church but insists on asking the poisoners themselves for the antidote. The event, scheduled for July 1, 2026, is not merely a historical repetition of 1988, but an aggravation of the ecclesiological schizophrenia of those who attempt to "recognize and resist," seeking canonical authorization from a hierarchy they themselves denounce as the destroyer of the Faith.

🗣️ The chronicle of a foretold rupture and the illusion of dialogue

The text reports that, on the feast of the Purification of Our Lady, the Superior General of the SSPX, Father Davide Pagliarani, announced in Flavigny-sur-Ozerain the decision to consecrate new bishops. However, the neuralgic point of the criticism lies in the attitude prior to this announcement. According to the statement, in the previous August, Pagliarani requested an audience with the "Holy Father" - identified in the text's future scenario as Leo XIV - to explain the situation "filially."

Here lies the supreme contradiction denounced: the SSPX claims to be in a "state of necessity" generated by the crisis in the Church, a crisis perpetuated and deepened by modernist Rome. However, in a flagrant act of inconsistency, the Superior General submits himself to ask permission from this same revolutionary power. The original text cites Pagliarani stating that he wrote a second letter addressing the "Society's particular need to ensure the continuation of its bishops' ministry" (Novus Ordo Watch, 2026). The response from Rome, or lack thereof, was the predictable indifference or refusal, which led the SSPX Council to invoke the "unanimous opinion" to proceed without a papal mandate.

This posture reveals a structural flaw in the Society's thinking: if the Pope is the Vicar of Christ and the supreme authority, disobedience to him in a grave matter such as episcopal consecration constitutes schism; if, on the other hand, the current hierarchy has lost its authority or faith, making the "state of necessity" legitimate, then the request for authorization is an absurd theater, a legitimation of the error one intends to combat. The SSPX wants the sacraments of Tradition but insists on receiving them with the "imprimatur" of conciliar confusion.

⚖️ The justification by the "state of necessity" and the response from Rome

The summary of facts points out that the SSPX leans on the historic declaration of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre from 1974, reiterating that the Society "does not seek primarily its own survival: it seeks primarily the good of the universal Church" (Pagliarani apud Novus Ordo Watch, 2026). However, the original text mocks and criticizes the effectiveness of this rhetoric. It is foreseen that, just as in 1988, the Vatican will invoke the 1983 Code of Canon Law - which the SSPX accepts ambiguously, "more or less" - to declare the latae sententiae excommunication of those involved, according to canons 1013 and 1387.

The criticism deepens by noting that, for the SSPX leadership, the number of bishops to be consecrated (estimated between four and eight) is irrelevant to the canonical penalty, but essential for global sacramental logistics. The text suggests that the punishment will be the same, whether for one or for a hundred bishops. However, the true punishment is not the excommunication from a Rome that the SSPX claims to resist, but the exposure of the futility of their rapprochement efforts. The text observes that "all of the SSPX's rapprochement efforts with Rome will have been in vain" (Novus Ordo Watch, 2026).

Furthermore, the probable revocation of faculties to hear confessions and witness marriages, which had been "mercifully" extended by the predecessor, Francis, in 2015/16, is highlighted. The criticism here is scathing: the SSPX accepted juridical crumbs from Francis, partially integrating itself into the conciliar structure, only to see these concessions withdrawn when the reality of the doctrinal conflict imposed itself. This demonstrates that there is no possible compromise between Catholic Truth and modernist error; the SSPX's attempt to walk on this razor's edge resulted only in confusion for the faithful.

🏚️ Ecclesial consequences and the fragmentation of the traditionalist movement

The article projects a somber scenario for the cohesion of the traditionalist movement. The SSPX's attitude of defying "Leo XIV" while claiming fidelity to the papacy will generate, according to the text, a new wave of defections. Many faithful and clergy, fearing the stigma of formal schism (Canon 1364 §1), will migrate to "indultist" organizations like the Institute of Christ the King or the Fraternity of St. Peter, which will emphasize their "full communion" with the apostate hierarchy.

The analysis points to the collapse of the "recognize and resist" (semi-trads) position. The controversy over the consecrations will place a "tremendous strain" on this community, dividing it over the validity of the excommunications and the justified degree of resistance. The text predicts a "boom in podcasts and articles" from influencers like Peter Kwasniewski, Taylor Marshall, and Michael Matt, who will try to rationalize the chaos.

In short, the SSPX finds itself trapped in its own dialectical trap. By refusing to accept the vacancy of the See or the loss of moral authority of the modern hierarchy, but acting as if that authority did not exist in practice, the Society perpetuates a revolutionary mentality disguised as tradition. The act of consecrating bishops without a mandate, although necessary for the preservation of the sacraments, is stained by the continuous theoretical validation of the "chiefs of the current confusion" to whom they beg for recognition. As the text concludes, "it is 1988 all over again," a tragic repetition of a cycle of partial disobedience that does not resolve the crisis of the Church, but institutionalizes it in ghettos of controlled resistance.

NOVUS ORDO WATCH. Society of St. Pius X Announces NEW EPISCOPAL CONSECRATIONS for July 1, 2026. Available at: https://novusordowatch.org/2026/02/sspx-announces-new-bishops-consecration/.