How Can Vatican Modernists Accuse Anyone of Schism When They Have Separated Themselves from the Faith?

David Martin | The Daily Knight

On July 2, 2026, the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) issued a decree declaring that the July 1, 2026 episcopal consecrations of four priests by the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (SSPX) constituted an “act of a schismatic nature.” The DDF’s reason was that the consecrations were done without Vatican approval, but how can today’s Vatican declare the approbation of anything when most of what they promote has no approval from On High – homosexuality, feminism, synodality, illegal migrant intrusion, and today’s new religion of man? Can we take the Vatican seriously today?

The Vatican decree states that the excommunication occurred ipso facto (by the very fact) so that it was automatic (latae sententiae) under Canon 1387 and Canon 1364 §1 CIC 2021. The decree says that both the consecrating bishops and those consecrated were excommunicated.

“Both the Bishop who, without a pontifical mandate, consecrates a person a Bishop, and the one who receives the consecration from him, incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.” — Canon 1387, Rorate Caeli

The Illicit Consecration of Bishops Doesn't Necessarily Incur Excommunication

However, Canon Law also states that the illicit consecration of bishops doesn’t necessarily incur ipso facto excommunication. This only happens if the consecrating bishops deliberately defy the pope for the purpose of being independent from Rome, but if the bishops recognize the primacy of the pope and are acting in the best interests of the Church with the intention of being united with Rome, excommunication does not occur.

This applies even if the judgement of the consecrating bishops is flawed by impulse or fear, but as long as they mean well and they believe it is for the best interests of the Church the bishops are not in schism.

The Vatican’s claim that the SSPX wishes to separate themselves from Rome is the furthest thing from the truth since it is the Vatican that wants the Society to separate themselves because Rome wants nothing to do with the Traditional Latin Mass that the SSPX exclusively offers. The SSPX attempted many times to dialogue with the Vatican for the purpose of being united with Rome, but Rome continually turned deaf ear to them while imposing compromising conditions that would have caused them to betray the Faith had they complied.

For instance, the Vatican has repeatedly told the SSPX that they must flow with the new synodal direction of the Church and say the New Mass of Vatican II, a stipulation that they have no moral or legal right to impose. Shall the SSPX commit sin just to make heretics happy? Obeying superiors who ask us to err is known as false obedience, which the Church has denounced through the centuries.

We all know that Vatican II was an errant council. Even Cardinal Ratzinger (later Benedict XVI) said this. Though the Council started with the best of resolves it was hijacked in the opening session by Marxist infiltrators.

Pope Paul VI himself never obliged Catholics to adhere to Vatican II. He never had anything good to say about it but rather lamented it. As early as December 1965, he said,

“Profane and secular humanism has revealed itself in its terrible, anticlerical nature, and in one sense has defied the Council. The religion of God made man has met the religion of man who makes himself God.” (December 7, 1965) 

Again the pope said in 1970,

“In many areas the Council has not so far given us peace but rather stirred up troubles and problems that in no way serve to strengthen the Kingdom of God within the Church or within its souls.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Open letter to Confused Catholics)

Cardinal Ratzinger told St. Padre Pio’s close assistant Fr. Dollinger that the Third Secret of Fatima spoke of a “bad council” and a “bad Mass” to come. The bad council was Vatican II, which means it should be scrapped

But now we have Vatican bureaucrats pushing Vatican II on the Church as if it were some sort of super-dogma that supersedes 2000 years of Church teaching. Will the real schismatics please step forward?