In the seminary at Écône, the cradle of Catholic traditionalism, the Priesthood of St. Pius X consecrated on 1 July 4 fresh bishops without the approval of Rome. The Vatican speaks of schism and excommunists by law. The Brotherhood responds that in a state of higher necessity, it defends the religion and sacraments which must not be exposed to the hazard of extinction. A dispute old as post-socior improvement returns with full force.
Four Sakres in the cradle of traditionalism
The ceremony took place on 1 July, at the feast of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus, at the global Seminary of St. Pius X in Swiss Écône. The main consecrated was Bishop Alfonso de Galarreta, 1 of the hierarchs ordained by the founder of the movement. He was assisted by Bishop Bernard Fellay, a longtime ruler of the Brotherhood. The fresh sacrics were welcomed by 4 priests: Paschalis Schreiber, Michael Goldade, Michel Poinsinet de Sivry and Marc Hanappier.
The Brotherhood emphasizes from the beginning that they will service as auxiliary bishops, without their own jurisdiction. This discrimination is crucial in the full dispute. It is not about creating a parallel structure with its own dioceses, but about ensuring that the hands of the Brethren will not deficiency the ability to give ordination and confirmation.
Review of 1988
It is hard not to see in Écône the echo of events from almost 4 decades ago. In 1988, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the Brotherhood, ordained 4 bishops besides without a papal mandate. John Paul II then felt that the consecrated and consecrated had contracted excommunication by law itself. The Lefebvre referred to a state of higher necessity to the end: the belief that during the crisis of religion the work to transfer it was higher than the disciplinary prohibition.
History added an unexpected comment to this argument. In 2009, Benedict XVI removed excommunication from the surviving bishops, and 2 years earlier he restored the full right to Mass in classical life. To conventional groups, this was proof that Roman punishment was not the last word, and part of the Brotherhood's right came to a quiet confession.
Vatican talks about schism, Brotherhood about duty
This time Rome's reaction was fast and tough. As early as 13 May, the Holy See declared that the planned consecrations do not have the papal mandate required and constitute a schizmatic act, and the formal persistence of schism entails excommunication provided for by the law of the Church. On June 29, Leon XIV himself sent a letter to the Rector Major of the Brotherhood, Father David Pagliarani, calling for him to turn back from his way and abandon his consecration.
The brotherhood of the appeal did not listen, though it pointed out that it did so with regret. His RMG explains that it was not possible for the superior to have a individual gathering with the Pope, on which he could explain the reasons for his decision. In this narrative, consecrations are not rebellion, but an act of necessity: without their own bishops the Brotherhood would in time lose the ability to sanctify priests and grant confirmation, or the very basis of its continuity.
What's truly going on?
It's not about discipline or 4 names. Since its inception in 1970, the Brotherhood has questioned part of the heritage of the Second Vatican Council: a fresh approach to spiritual freedom, openness to another religions and, above all, the liturgical improvement that introduced the Mass into Paul VI's life in place of the classical Roman liturgy. Traditionalists argue that the subject of beginning to the planet was to blur awareness of what the sacrifice of Mass is.
They don't want any news. They request the right to what the Church has worshipped for centuries. That is why the dispute over the sacra is indeed a dispute over continuity and the question of whether faithfulness to what has been transmitted can always be considered disobedience.
Faithfulness Waiting for Understanding
The Brotherhood of St. Pius X does not bring the believers out of the Church and does not establish a fresh religion. He repeats that it is Catholic and Catholic to remain, whatever the Roman law firm says about it. The memory of erstwhile excommunications, which have proved reversible, requires careful handling of today’s judgments.
You can argue about canons and procedures. It is harder to deny people who have defended the same liturgy and the same teaching for half a century, the right to believe that they are protecting the treasure alternatively than breaking the law. The question remains uncomfortable for all parties: whether the Church is better served by the uniformity of obedience or uncompromising faithfulness to what he himself called saints for centuries.
