Leo XIV has written to the SSPX.
UPDATE: Fr. Pagliarani’s response to Leo HERE
LETTER OF POPE LEO XIV
TO THE SUPERIOR GENERAL
OF THE PRIESTLY FRATERNITY OF SAINT PIUS X
___________________________________
To The Reverend
Davide Pagliarani
Superior General
of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X
With a paternal heart, and aware of the responsibility entrusted to me by the Lord as the Successor of the Apostle Peter, I address you and, through you, the bishops, priests, seminarians and faithful connected to the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X.
The Church recognizes the devotion to liturgical life, commitment to priestly formation, apostolic zeal and desire for fidelity to Tradition that characterize many people and communities connected to your Fraternity. This has motivated the attentive and generous attitude that my Predecessors have consistently shown to you.
In this spirit, and filled with Christian affection, I plead with you and ask you with all my heart: please turn back! I urge you to consider carefully the spiritual good of the faithful, because the schismatic act you are about to undertake would deprive them of the licit and, in some cases, even valid reception of the Sacraments, which they love and seek for their sanctification.
The Church is open to a path of dialogue and understanding that the Holy Spirit can make possible and fruitful.
I pray for you, because to tear the seamless garment of Christ is a sin of extreme gravity. May the Lord enlighten your consciences and awaken your hearts. With a sorrowful yet hopeful heart, I feel it is my duty, through the authority received from Christ, to ask you to desist from your intended act. I entrust these intentions to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Mother of Good Counsel.
From the Vatican, 29 June 2026
Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul
LEO PP. XIV
UPDATE:
Letter from the Superior General in Response to His Holiness Pope Leo XIV
The Superior General
To His Holiness
Pope Leo XIV
Ecône, 30 June 2026
Most Holy Father,
Thank you very much for the letter that Your Holiness so kindly addressed to me.
I have been deeply touched by Your paternal solicitude.
For a long time, I had hoped to have the opportunity of meeting You in person, in order to express to You directly our sincere desire to serve the Church. Unfortunately, that opportunity has not presented itself.
I ask only that You consider the sincerity of this intention, which is in no way feigned. Paradoxically, in the present circumstances, we believe it to be our very duty to do everything possible to mend Christ’s seamless garment, torn by forces and pressures incompatible with a truly Catholic spirit. I ask only that You consider the authenticity of this intention before making a decision concerning the Society of Saint Pius X. It is not yet too late.
Far be it from us to separate ourselves from the Roman Church. We desire, on the contrary, to serve her by means that are extraordinary, as one would assist a mother in distress who requires particular help, even if such help is not understood by everyone. Yet I am certain that the Holy Father could understand it.
The Holy See has shown itself capable of understanding very complex situations and of allowing time for discernment.
May I therefore filially ask Your Holiness to take the time necessary for that discernment.
If my own words are not sufficient, I would ask You to reflect upon two very simple facts. First, in 1988 the Society was already declared schismatic, for reasons and in circumstances entirely analogous to those of today. Yet, after so many years, we are speaking together as a father and his son. Your Holiness is paternally urging me to avoid a schism which, theoretically, has already taken place. Does not Your very attitude—whose paternal concern I deeply appreciate—constitute proof that the Society is neither schismatic nor hostile to the Church?
Secondly, some years ago, the Holy See entrusted two bishops of the Church with the task of engaging in dialogue with the Society of Saint Pius X: Bishop Vitus Huonder, then Bishop of Chur, now deceased, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana. Both, after taking the necessary time for discernment, recognised the profoundly Catholic spirit of the Society and bore public witness to it.
Above all, however, I venture to address Your Holiness in the name of the thousands of souls who have rediscovered the Catholic faith and the practice of religion through the apostolate of the Society. This is a fact of which Your predecessors themselves took note. These souls have but one desire: to attain salvation through this instrument which Divine Providence has placed at their disposal. They have suffered, and they are sincere. I am confident that Your paternal heart as universal Shepherd will be moved by this very particular situation. One day, all the difficulties between the Holy See and the Society will be resolved. A gesture of understanding on Your part, far from harming unity, could only manifest before the world and before all Christians Your concern for unity and Your goodness as a father.
I leave all this to Your consideration. I renew my prayers for Your Holiness.
For a long time, even before Your election, I have been praying to Saint Rita for the present situation. I saw in the election of an Augustinian Pope a sign of hope. I am certain that the Saint will intercede. It is never too late.
Please give us Your blessing.
I take this opportunity to remain, with the deepest devotion in Our Lord,
Don Davide Pagliarani
I sincerely don’t understand why Pope Leo refused to have a face to face meeting with them. And to pretend that the papacy and the cardinals and bishops who have waged open war (and are STILL waging open war) against diocesan Catholics devoted to the TLM (priests and laity), tossing them out of parishes, suppressing their communities, denying them the sacraments, have not also participated in the rending of the unity of the Church seems disingenuous.
This is a sad short letter, there is nothing in it that attempts to reconcile the situation. It is a legal step allowing them to move forward with excommunications. If the Holy Father truly cared with all of his heart, he would have granted them an audience and talked to them.
There was a path to reconcile this and the Holy See has chosen not to take it. The hammer of justice will fall hard on this traditional group of faithful priests. Meanwhile Rome will allow women pretending to be Bishops into St. Peter’s, will not sanction Bishops ripping out altar rails or canceling ad orientem, even though that is beyond their authority. Will allow open supporters of gay marriage and abortion into their audience and “synodal” way.
I am extremely disappointed with our Holy Father. I had hoped he would be a healing element for the Church after Pope Francis tore open old wounds that has started to heal.
I pray for a peaceful end to this situation and mercy from the Holy See.
So disappointed in Pope Leo, but I’m not surprised.
Notably, no one from Rome has said the Consecrations will never happen, just that they must not occur tomorrow.
The attempt at reconciliation is right there in the second to last paragraph. Underscoring it, of course, is the requirement that the Society ceases and assists from their intended objectively excommunicable action.
Again, no one has said that they’ll never get new bishops, just that now is not immediately the time. I wonder if anyone at the Dicastery for Bishops has yet vetted the candidates.
It would be good to avoid a repeat of last time, when Bishop Williamson proved himself to be of questionable character and has even schismized from the Society. We pray that it’s not the case this time, and it’s not reasonable to presume that it is. But by the same token, the Society seems to be operating according to a pretty arbitrary timeline.
Due respect given, this letter is little short of meaningless. An invitation to dialogue or else be excommunicated. The only thing that makes it news is that it comes directly from Leo rather than mediated through Tucho.
Yes, there are some nice words about the SSPX. But actions, such as giving Card. Besa-me sole responsibility for handling the situation, speak louder than words–as do inactions, such as the pope refusing to meet with them even once.
I am increasingly unimpressed with how the Vatican is handling this. I can’t say I fully agree with the Society, but I have great sympathy for them. But as I’ve said before, I’m not sure what else the Vatican would be doing differently if their affirmative intentions were to definitively cut off the SSPX.
Too little. Too late. Rome has created this mess. Could have been avoided.
The letter could have easily said, I, Pope Leo, grant permission for these consecrations. Case closed. However, that doesn’t fit into their true agenda of discarding the Old Rite altogether.
I’d encourage people to read Cardinal Müller’s intervention in the consistory the other day. In addition to the (correct) call for creating a way to receive those who break away from the SSPX, he ends with the following reflection on the Council of Trent:
“During the Council of Trent, the eminent Polish cardinal Stanislaus Hosius said to the Protestants of his time—and his words apply equally to the Lefebvrists of our time—:
Catholicus non est, qui a Romana ecclesia in fidei doctrina discordat.
He is not Catholic who disagrees with the Church of Rome in the doctrine of the faith.”
https://infovaticana.com/en/2026/06/29/full-text-of-mullers-intervention-at-the-consistory-comes-to-light-defense-of-the-papacy-criticism-of-the-synodal-format-and-response-to-the-fsspx/
@Discerning Altar Boy
So . . . . the FSSP accepted “the original deal” that had been offered to Archbishop Lefebvre. Where’s their bishop? It’s been 38 years.
I do not understand why so many people feel that meeting face to face or receiving them would change anything.
@Fr. Reader – It might not have changed anything, but it might have changed a great deal. Certainly many things are understood in face-to-face encounters that are not well communicated or understood via distant correspondence, especially when delivered through a figure as odious as Cardinal Tucho.
However, the point is, we’ll never know, because Pope Leo couldn’t be bothered to even try. Had he tried and it had not worked, he would have lost nothing. If anything, his last ditch appeal would hold more weight because it would be consistent with his efforts to date. However, if it had worked, even to the point of simply convincing them to attempt a renewed dialogue before proceeding with the consecrations, who knows how much might have been won.
History is replete with missed opportunities. This will surely be remembered as one such case.
i am baffled that on the .va site there is a version of the letter in, of all things, Arabic while there is not one in Latin.
@WVC
The FSSP don’t seem to have problems finding bishops to do their ordinations. In that sense they “have” quite a number of bishops by now.
@TheCavalierHatherly
Aside from the fact that your response is trying to skirt around the very obvious answer which is, “No, the Vatican never gave them the promised bishop,” this is an absurd premise to rest one’s hat upon.
The FSSP have no representation directly linked with their order or their mission to voice their needs or concerns within the Vatican, and they are entirely at the whims of bishops who have no official affiliation with them. If a local bishop allows them to build chapels and start a ministry within his diocese, they could just as easily get kicked out by the same bishop or by his successor. This is not hypothetical – it’s literally happened. Never mind the gross offense to justice and charity, it’s practically impossible to provide for a stable future if the entire practice of the faith is subject to the whims of the current bishop. And if Pope Francis had declared that traditional ordinations were also forbidden under T.C., do you think many of the FSSP friendly bishops would have been willing to continue to ordain men for the FSSP? Especially when so many of them won’t even lift a finger to defend their own parishioners and priests against T.C.?
To go even further, do you honestly think the FSSP would even get as much support as they have if it weren’t for the external pressure put on the Vatican by the existence of the SSPX? It was the 1988 ordinations that brought about the creation of the Ecclesia Dei commission and orders. And I can’t help but notice that in Arlington, after decades of refusing to allow the FSSP to establish a foothold within the diocese and after years of negelct under the implementation of T.C., the current bishop is finally allowing them to establish a chaplaincy on the same date as the SSPX consecration and in the same location as the growing SSPX chapel in Front Royal. Coincidence? Yeah, right.
So pretending that the FSSP “have” their own bishops is no better than wishful thinking.
This article sums my thoughts up surprisingly well. It even touches on another dynamic at play: the Vatican accepting the SSPX would entail putting the Vatican at risk of losing face over, or even worse possibly needing to backtrack on, some of the bad wording, misreadings, misinterpretations, and misapplications of Vatican II. Much easier to get rid of them, instead.
https://nuntiatoria.substack.com/p/leo-xiv-can-stop-the-sspx-schism
I have heard it directly from high-ranking members of the Fraternity that they don’t want a bishop, because they are fraternity of priests
“The Church is open to a path of dialogue and understanding that the Holy Spirit can make possible and fruitful.”
Oh that it be true!
That dialogue cannot be reasonably engaged with Cardinal Fernandez at all. A panel of theologically stable Cardinals — with the Holy Father’s frequent engagement — is required.
The SSPX needs bishops to function and it has only two bishops left. Unless at some point they have consecrations they will eventually will have none and will no longer be able to function. In fact, it has been the refusal of this Pope and the prior Popes to allow any consecrations that has caused the SSPX to engage in a “schismatic act.” Unless the whole point is to ultimately destroy the SSPX, why can’t a way be found to allow some consecrations? Unless there is some possibility that delay and discussion would ultimately lead to some new bishops for the SSPX, Pope Leo is essentially asking the SSPX to slowing commit suicide.