Who did the 2 July decree excommunicate? Checking a OnePeterFive report against the text

The decree’s operative declaration concerns bishops. It declares that Bishop Alfonso de Galarreta and the four priests he consecrated (Pascal Schreiber, Michael Goldade, Michel Poinsinet de Sivry and Marc Hanappier) have incurred ipso facto the latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See, and that Bishop Bernard Fellay, who took part as co-consecrator and so publicly adhered to the schismatic act, has incurred the latae sententiae excommunication of canon 1364 §1. It closes with a general warning that clerics and lay faithful who adhere to the Society’s schism would incur latae sententiae excommunication ipso facto, without naming anyone else (decree, Italian original; Rorate Cæli translation). The decree cites canon 1387 of the Code of Canon Law in the 2021 numbering of Book VI, which punishes both a bishop who consecrates someone a bishop without a pontifical mandate and the person consecrated, together with canon 1364 §1, under which an apostate, heretic or schismatic incurs latae sententiae excommunication (Code of Canon Law, Book VI). Vatican News, The Pillar and EWTN News all reported the six bishops as declared excommunicated (Vatican News; The Pillar; EWTN News). The decree was signed by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández with the secretaries of the dicastery’s disciplinary and doctrinal sections.

Apart from the four men it says were consecrated bishops, the decree names no SSPX priest; it mentions clerics only in its general warning. The explanatory note states that the sacred ministers belonging to the SSPX are in schism, must be considered schismatics and are subject to the excommunication provided for by law under canon 1364 §1, citing Ecclesia Dei 5c and nos. 5–6 of a 1996 note of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts (note, Italian original; Vatican News). That 1996 note had said that the ministerial activity of Lefebvrist deacons and priests within the movement is a more than evident sign of formal adherence to the schism (PCLT note, no. 6). The 2026 note also states that SSPX ministers administer the sacraments illicitly, and that the sacrament of penance they administer and the marriages at which they assist are invalid (note, no. 3; EWTN News; Crux). Crux summarised the outcome as the SSPX declared schismatic and its clerics excommunicated, and the Associated Press reported that the Society’s priests, about 750 of them, were declared schismatic and therefore excommunicated (Crux; AP). The SSPX rejects the charge of schism. In March, FSSPX.News argued that consecrating bishops against the Pope’s will, without conferring jurisdiction on them, is not in itself schism (FSSPX.News); on 13 July the Society announced that it had filed a preliminary recourse against the decree with the Dicastery, which it says suspends the decree’s execution under canon 1353 (FSSPX.News).

For lay people, the explanatory note says that those who formally adhere to the Society under the conditions set out in the 1996 note of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, which it says remains in force and adopts as its own, are to be considered schismatics and excommunicated (note, Italian original; Vatican News). The 1996 note says formal adherence involves two complementary elements: an internal one, freely and knowingly sharing the substance of the schism and placing that choice above obedience to the Pope, and an external one, expressing that choice, its clearest sign being exclusive participation in the movement’s own ‘ecclesial’ acts, though the note adds that even this is not an unequivocal sign, since some of the faithful may take part in its liturgies without sharing its schismatic spirit. It adds that occasional participation in the movement’s liturgical acts, without adopting its attitude of doctrinal and disciplinary disunity, is not enough, and that cases must be judged one by one in the external and internal forums (PCLT note, nos. 5 and 7). The DDF’s statement of 13 May had already cited Ecclesia Dei 5c, which calls formal adherence to the schism a grave offence against God carrying excommunication (Vatican News; Ecclesia Dei). On 2 July the Dicastery also published a procedure for reconciling lay faithful. It says a penalty on lay people cannot be presumed automatically and must be assessed case by case; it gives members of the SSPX Third Order and lay people who habitually attend while formally sharing the Society’s doctrinal positions as examples of established imputability, and says that those who attended solely for liturgical or spiritual reasons, or who do not reject the Magisterium or the Pope’s authority, are not to be considered imputable (DDF procedure, Italian original; Rorate Cæli translation, which adds the word ‘ordinarily’ not found in the Italian; AP). The note also exhorts all the faithful to refrain from the Society’s celebrations and activities, and for lay people in the non-imputable group who seek reconciliation, the procedure says it is enough to approach a priest in full communion and resolve not to attend the Society in future. In the Dicastery’s texts, attendance is therefore not treated as formal adherence in itself, while the faithful are asked not to attend.