Canonical situation of the Society of Saint Pius X

The canonical situation of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), a group founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, is unresolved.

The Society of Saint Pius X has been the subject of much controversy since 1988, when Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta were illicitly consecrated at the Ecône, Switzerland, International Seminary of Saint Pius X as bishops in violation of canon law. Lefebvre and the four other SSPX bishops individually incurred a disciplinary latae sententiae excommunication for the schismatic act;[1]⁽ⁿ³⁾ the excommunications of the four living SSPX bishops were remitted in 2009.

Talks between the society and the Holy See are at an impasse, and the Holy See considers that the society has broken away from communion with the Catholic Church.[2] Although the Holy See has granted to all priest members of the society the faculty to give sacramental absolution validly to those who attend its churches and has authorised local ordinaries to grant permission for celebrating marriages of followers of the society (see sections on faculties below), the Holy See has declared in a letter to the society dated 26 June 2017 and approved by Pope Francis on 20 May 2017 that full re-establishment of communion is conditional on its members making the 1998 profession of faith,[3] accepting explicitly, with the degree of adhesion due to them,[lower-alpha 1] the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and subsequent church teachings, and recognising not only the validity but also the legitimacy of the rite of Mass and the other sacraments celebrated according to the liturgical books promulgated after that council.[5]

The society, on the other hand, maintains that it was canonically established and has never been canonically suppressed,[6] and that, in "the present crisis in the Church", when "heresy, and even apostasy, is widely spread amongst the clergy", "the Church mercifully supplies jurisdiction" for the good of the faithful.[7]

1988 protocol

In May 1988, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith signed a protocol intended to regularize the canonical status of the SSPX.[8] The first part of the protocol was doctrinal in which Lefebvre agreed that the SSPX would:

• promise fidelity to the Catholic Church and its pope
• accept the doctrine of the magisterium found in Lumen gentium section 25
• pledge to avoid all polemics and to have a positive attitude of study and of communication with the Holy See
• recognise the validity of the Mass and of the sacraments as promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II
• promise to respect the common discipline of the church and her laws, including special provisions granted to the SSPX

The second part of the protocol was juridical which negotiated rights and responsibilities of the SSPX as a group, and conditions of individuals affiliated with the SSPX that included that:

• the existing SSPX would be canonically erected as a clerical society of apostolic life of pontifical right within the Latin Church with special provisions for public worship, care of souls, and other apostolic activity
• the statutes of the canonical society of apostolic life would require approval by the pope to assure doctrinal compliance
• either the local bishops or the Holy See would confer SSPX priests jurisdiction "with regard to the faithful"
• the canonical society of apostolic life would be granted the right to celebrate Tridentine liturgical rites
• lay SSPX adherents would "remain under the jurisdiction of the diocesan bishop" but could request sacraments administered by SSPX priests
• a special seven member pontifical commission, which would include two SSPX members, would be established to coordinate relations with the Curia and diocesan bishops, to resolve problems and conflicts, and to "exercis[e] vigilance and lending assistance to consolidate the work of reconciliation and to regulate questions relative to the religious communities having a juridical or moral bond with" the SSPX
• a proposal to licitly consecrate an SSPX member as a bishop would be submitted to John Paul II
• the Superior General of the society of apostolic life would send dimissorial letters to any bishop who agrees to ordain members of the society of apostolic life
• an amnesty could be granted to illicit SSPX places of worship which were erected without the authorization of the local bishops
• convalidation of existing invalid marriages celebrated by SSPX priests could be resolved by decree
• regularization of existing illicit ordinations of SSPX priests could be resolved by decree

Ratzinger and Lefebvre suggested in the protocol that:

• the consecration of an SSPX member as bishop seems useful for "practical and psychological reasons"
• on the doctrinal level, the superior general should not be the SSPX member who would consecrated as bishop but should be a member of the pontifical commission for stability

The protocol was to be submitted to John Paul II for his approval. However, Lefebvre quickly developed misgivings and declared his intention to consecrate a bishop as his successor, even without a pontifical mandate.[9]

A meeting took place in Rome on 24 May. It is said that John Paul II promised to Lefebvre that he would appoint an SSPX member as a bishop, chosen according to the normal procedures, and that episcopal ordination would take place on 15 August. In return, Lefebvre would have to request reconciliation with the church on the basis of the protocol of 5 May. Lefebvre presented three requests:

• the proposed episcopal ordination must take place on 30 June
• not one, but three bishops, must be consecrated
• a majority of members in the proposed pontifical commission must be SSPX members

The Holy See's view

Following the 1988 episcopal consecrations without a pontifical mandate, Pope John Paul II declared that the illicit consecrations were a schismatic act which "impli[ed] in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy" and that all six bishops involved in the ceremony had incurred automatic excommunication under the 1983 Code of Canon Law.[1]⁽ⁿ³⁾ John Paul II wrote, in Ecclesia Dei, that "the root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition."[1]⁽ⁿ⁴⁾ John Paul II reminded "that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God" and schism is a delict against religion and the unity of the church with a penalty of excommunication.[1]⁽ⁿ⁵⁾ The individual excommunications of each of the SSPX bishops did not extend to the other SSPX members.

Ecclesia Dei commission

At the same time, John Paul II set up the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (PCED) to help SSPX members and adherents who wished "to remain united to the Successor of Peter in the Catholic Church while preserving their spiritual and liturgical traditions" to enter "full ecclesial communion".[1]^(n6a)[10] The PCED issued many formal written clarifications about the canonical situation of people involved with the SSPX.

Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts

In 1996, the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts (PCILT) responded to an enquiry from Bishop Norbert Brunner, of the Diocese of Sion, Switzerland, that "in the case of the Lefebvrian deacons and priests there seems no doubt that their ministerial activity in the ambit of the schismatic movement is a more than evident sign of the fact that the two requirements" for formal adherence to the schism "have been met".[11]^(nn5-6)[lower-alpha 2] The PCILT added: "On the other hand, in the case of the rest of the faithful it is obvious that an occasional participation in liturgical acts or the activity of the Lefebvrian movement, done without making one's own the attitude of doctrinal and disciplinary disunion of such a movement, does not suffice for one to be able to speak of formal adherence to the movement."[11]⁽ⁿ⁷⁾ It stated that its judgment was about the existence of the sin of schism, since for the existence of the canonical crime of schism, which entails excommunication, the conditions listed in canons 1323–1324 of the Code of Canon Law must also be met.[11]^(nn8-9) While its reply concerned only one diocese, the PCILT said that, if there was serious general pastoral confusion about the canonical situation of SSPX members, the Holy See could issue a general decree on the matter. The Holy See has not yet done so.

Likelihood of schism

In 1999, the PCED stated that it was likely, but not certain, that the SSPX members were adhering to a schism, which would mean that they were excommunicated, but that people who, "because of their attraction to the traditional Latin Mass and not because they refuse submission to the Roman Pontiff or reject communion with the members of the Church subject to him", attended Mass celebrated by SSPX priests, were not excommunicated, although, the longer they frequented SSPX chapels, the greater the likelihood of imbibing a schismatic mentality that would seem to involve adherence to the schism and so excommunication.[12] The PCED judged that documentation sent to it in 1998 clearly indicated the extent to which "many in authority in" the SSPX conform with the formal definition of schism.[13]

Moral impediment

In 1995, PCED explained that it "morally illicit for the faithful to participate in" SSPX Masses "unless they are physically or morally impeded from participating in a Mass celebrated by a Catholic priest in good standing" and added that not being able to assist at a Tridentine Mass "is not considered a sufficient motive for attending such Masses."[14] The PCED explained that although the ordinations of SSPX priests by SSPX bishops are valid, SSPX priests are prohibited from exercising a priestly function because SSPX priests are not incardinated into local diocese or religious institutes which are in full communion with the Catholic Church. The PCED also explained that the Masses celebrated by SSPX priests are valid but illicit, and that Penance and Matrimony by SSPX priests are invalid because SSPX priests lack conferred faculties.[lower-alpha 3]

Separation but not schism

Apart from the formal declarations by the Catholic Church, Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, president of the PCED, commented about the status of the SSPX in a 2005 interview that the 1988 consecrations, without a pontifical mandate, created a "situation of separation ... even if it was not a formal schism."[16] Castrillón Hoyos commented in 2005, about a 2004 meeting between Pope Benedict XVI and Fellay, that it was said at that meeting that, in Castrillón Hoyos words, "It cannot be said in correct, exact, and precise terms that there is a schism. ... They are within the Church. There is only the fact that a full, more perfect communion is lacking ... a fuller communion, because communion does exist."[17] Castrillón Hoyos commented in 2007, when asked "Does the Indult support ecumenism, 'ad intra' (internal)?" Castrillón Hoyos answered that he "reject[s] the term ' ecumenism ad intra '." He explained that the SSPX priests and adherents "are not schismatics" since,

It is Lefebrve who has undertaken an illicit Episcopal consecration and therefore performed a schismatic act. It is for this reason that the Bishops consecrated by him have been suspended and excommunicated. The priests and faithful of the society have not been excommunicated. They are not heretics. I do, however, share Saint Jerome's fear that heresy leads to schism and vice versa. The danger of a schism is big, such as a systematic disobedience vis-à-vis the Holy Father or by a denial of his authority. It is after all a service of charity, so that the Priestly Society gains full communion with the Holy Father by acknowledging the sanctity of the new Mass.[18]

2009 declaration of no canonical status and no legitimate ministry

In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed that: "Until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church."[19] The status of the SSPX was not changed by Benedict in 2009. This has to some extent been superseded with regard to the exercise by SSPX ministers of ministry within the Catholic Church, but not as regards the canonical status of the society as viewed by the Holy See.

On 20 November 2016, Pope Francis personally extended for priests of the society, until further provisions are made, the faculty by which "those faithful who, for various reasons, attend churches officiated by the priests of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, can validly and licitly receive the sacramental absolution of their sins", a faculty he had already granted for the duration of the 2015–16 Jubilee Year.[20] Confession, along with marriage, requires the granting of the required faculty for validity: "The valid absolution of sins requires that the minister have, in addition to the power of orders, the faculty of exercising it for the faithful to whom he imparts absolution" (Code of Canon Law 966.1).[21]

In a document from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, published on 4 April 2017, local ordinaries are authorized to grant SSPX priests faculties to validly assist at marriages. For validity of marriage, marital consent must be declared "before the local ordinary, pastor, or a priest or deacon delegated by either of them" (Canon 1108).[22] This priest, deacon or lay person (see can. 1112) is called the one who "assists" (is present). The one who assists is necessary in all cases except when one who is described as "competent to assist" cannot be found and either of these situations apply: "danger of death; [or] outside the danger of death provided that it is prudently foreseen that the situation will continue for a month". In that case, the parties may exchange consent before witnesses alone (Can. 1116.1).

For any priest, other than the pastor (parish priest) or local ordinary of the parties, to be "competent to assist", he must receive the faculty from the parties' pastor or local ordinary. The 2017 letter from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith specifically grants local ordinaries (not the pastors) permission, in some circumstances, to delegate SSPX priests to assist at the celebration of marriages of faithful who follow the pastoral activity of the society. Insofar as possible, the local ordinary is to delegate a priest of his diocese (or at least "a fully regular priest") to receive the consent of the parties during the marriage rite, which is then followed by Mass celebrated perhaps by a priest of the society. If this is not possible and "if there are no priests in the Diocese able to receive the consent of the parties, the Ordinary may grant the necessary faculties to the priest of the Society who is also to celebrate the Holy Mass".[23]

The Holy See and sanctions at the diocesan level

In 1991 Bishop Joseph Ferrario, of the diocese of Honolulu, declared that six adherents of the SSPX movement were excommunicated for, among other things, procuring the services of SSPX Bishop Richard Williamson to illicitly administer confirmation. They sought hierarchical recourse from the Holy See to reverse the decree. The Holy See found in a review of the case that the submitted facts of the case were not formal schismatic acts so the decree lacked foundation under the cited canons and was therefore invalid; Ferrario should have, instead, imposed penalties under canon 1373.[24]

In 1996, one of the earliest proponents of the Tridentine Mass, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, of the diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, issued a warning that Catholics within the diocese who are members of the SSPX incur excommunication.[25][lower-alpha 4]

In 2014, Bishop Marcello Semeraro, of the diocese of Albano, Italy, issued a warning that Catholics within that diocese would incur excommunication for attending SSPX Masses or receiving sacraments from SSPX priests "because the society has no canonical status."[26]

The society's view

Extraordinary jurisdiction

The SSPX considers itself faithful to the Catholic Church and to the popes, up to and including Pope Francis. The SSPX bishops do not claim ordinary jurisdiction over SSPX adherents, which would make the latter subject to them, not to the local diocesan bishops,[27] and would amount to an obvious challenge to the Holy See's authority and an act of schism. Instead the SSPX claims to possess extraordinary jurisdiction. This is of specific importance in Catholic canon law in relation to the sacraments of confession and marriage.

Absolution of sins and assistance at marriage

To absolve sins legally, a priest must be given the faculty to do so,[28] a faculty that, normally, only the local bishop can give.[29] Similarly, in normal circumstances a marriage can be contracted validly only in the presence of the local bishop or the parish priest or of a priest or deacon delegated by one of these.[30] To overcome this difficulty, the SSPX argues that absolution and marriage under its auspices are valid,[31] because of its interpretation of canon law. For example, canon 144 §1 states, "In common error, whether of fact or of law, and in positive and probable doubt, whether of law or of fact, the Church supplies executive power of governance for both the external and the internal forum."[32] Canon 1335 states,

If a censure prohibits the celebration of the sacraments or sacramentals or the exercise of a power of governance, the prohibition is suspended whenever this is necessary to provide for the faithful who are in danger of death. If a latae sententiae censure has not been declared, the prohibition is also suspended whenever one of the faithful requests a sacrament or sacramental or an act of the power of governance; for any just reason it is lawful to make such a request.[33]

The SSPX also argues that if one believes they are outside of the church,[lower-alpha 5] This opinion has been argued for a recipient who bound to believe that canon 844 §2 applies, which declares that,

whenever necessity requires or a genuine spiritual advantage commends it, and provided that the recipient avoids the danger of error or indifferentism, the recipient who is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, may lawfully receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.[35]

The website advancedchristianity.com published a tract to support the SSPX opinion, the tract claims that in 1989 Cardinal Paul Augustin Mayer confirmed this in a letter that the "principle of 'common error', whether on the part of only one faithful or on the part of the community, can be applied in this case, and such acts are thereby valid"[36]

The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei explained that the sacraments of Penance and Matrimony are invalid because SSPX priests are not granted faculty to administer those sacraments, but that the principle of common error applies to the sacrament of Penance, so if a recipient is genuinely ignorant that the priest in question lacks the faculty to absolve. Such private letters to individuals do not have the force of law for the faithful in general. However, "statements of dicasteries and organisms of the Holy See which touch on faith and morals are not considered infallible, but should be taken as norms of moral certitude."[13] In a letter dated 23 May 2008, the PCED stated:

The Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony, however, require that the priest enjoys the faculties of the diocese or has proper delegation. Since that is not the case with these priests, these sacraments are invalid. It remains true, however, that, if the faithful are genuinely ignorant that the priests of the Society of St. Pius X do not have proper faculty to absolve, the Church supplies these faculties so that the sacrament is valid (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 144).[37][38]

Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy confessions

During the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy, which starts in December 2015 and lasts for a year, Pope Francis established that those people who approach SSPX priests to hear their confession during the jubilee "shall validly and licitly receive the absolution of their sins."[39] The Pope also granted all priests "the discretion to absolve" from the sin of abortion[39] (which usually must be absolved either by the bishop, or by priests authorized to do so by him – there are usually, but certainly not always, many of those made available). The SSPX priests only have the faculty of being able to absolve sins during that Jubilee Year; outside of that time frame they do not have it, and they are still to be considered by Catholics who follow the Vatican to be suspended from all ministries except absolution.

In November 2016 in Misericordia et misera, Francis announced that he had "personally decided to extend this faculty beyond the Jubilee Year, until further provisions are made, lest anyone ever be deprived of the sacramental sign of reconciliation through the Church's pardon."[40]

Marriage impediments

The SSPX provides, for the faithful who request it, a review of marriage annulment decrees emanated from diocesan tribunals, since in its view many tribunals have been granting them without sufficient grounds to do so; in this manner, the faithful can acquire a greater degree of moral certitude when an annulment is doubtful. Critics have interpreted this service as a usurping of the authority to dispense from marriage impediments and to declare marriage annulments, which belongs to the ordinary jurisdiction of diocesan bishops, and which would be schismatic in kind. This has led some priests to leave the SSPX.[41][42]

Canonical censures on members

The Holy See lifts excommunication of bishops

Lefebvre died in 1991 as an excommunicated person. In their 2008 petition, the four surviving SSPX bishops "acknowledged the supreme authority of the Holy Father, and noted that 'the current situation causes us much suffering'." In 2009, the Congregation for Bishops remitted the excommunication of the four surviving SSPX bishops.[43] "By definition, their request carried with it an acknowledgement of the Pope's authority over the Church here on earth." Pope Benedict XVI explained that the SSPX has no canonical status in the Catholic Church for doctrinal reasons and that SSPX ministers "do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church."[19]

Suspension a divinis

Although the 1988 excommunication of the four SSPX bishops was remitted in 2009, the SSPX bishops and priests were still unable to exercise any episcopal or priestly ministry in the Catholic Church.[19][43]

According to canon 1383 of the Code of Canon Law, a suspension a divinis affects SSPX clergy who have been ordained to the priesthood illegitimately.

Notes

1. Archbishop Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, stated that in Vatican II documents dogma must be distinguished from directives, orientations and suggestions for pastoral activity as, for instance, in the Nostra aetate declaration on the relation of the church with non-Christian religions. Dogma, according to the note with which the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith accompanied publication of the 1998 profession of faith, must be firmly accepted and held, the other teachings need only be adhered to "with religious submission of will and intellect".[3] Accordingly, Pozzo said that the difficulties raised by the SSPX regarding church–state relations and religious liberty, the practice of ecumenism and dialogue with non-Christian religions, certain aspects of liturgical reform and their concrete application, are not obstacles to canonical recognition of the society, and could after such recognition continue to be discussed and clarified, so as to overcome misunderstandings.[4]
2. Some statements about attendance at Mass and reception of the sacraments from an SSPX priest are given in Devillers, Arnaud (Summer 2002). "A response to Christopher Ferrara". The Latin Mass. Ramsey, New Jersey: Keep the Faith. ISSN 1064-556X. Archived from the original on 14 April 2004.
3. The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei reaffirmed various statements in 2003.[15]
4. The 12 organizations which are "incompatible with the Catholic Faith" that Bruskewitz named include the SSPX, Planned Parenthood, Hemlock Society, Call to Action, Catholics for a Free Choice, and masonic organizations.[25]
5. Bishop Chandler Holder Jones of the Continuing Anglican Anglican Province of America, wrote that the SSPX, "now appears to be, by the description of its Superior General Bishop Fellay, Old Catholic. That is, its position is precisely analogous to the status of the Old Catholic Church of the Netherlands, ... as it has refused definitively to accept the ordinary magisterial authority of the modern papacy."[34]

References

1. Pope John Paul II (2 July 1988). "Ecclesia Dei". vatican.va. Archived from the original on 29 January 2015.
2. "CDF prefect says SSPX in schism, suspended from sacraments". Catholic Culture.org. Retrieved 5 July 2017.
3. Profession of faith made obligatory by Pope John Paul II by the motu proprio Ad tuendam fidem of 18 May 1988
4. "Certains textes conciliaires peuvent être objet de "discussion" avec la FSSPX, selon le Vatican" [Some Council texts can be the subject of "discussion" with the SSPX, according to the Vatican]. La Croix (in French). 7 April 2016. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
5. Medias-Presse-Infos (1 July 2017), "Le cardinal Müller, comme Benoît XVI en 2012, met un coup d’arrêt à un possible accord doctrinal avec la FSSPX". For an English translation, see Novus Ordo Watch, "'Cardinal' Müller throws Monkey Wrench into SSPX-Rome Reconciliation"
6. "Legal existence of SSPX". Society of Saint Pius X, District of Great Britain. Retrieved 5 July 2017.
7. "Supplied jurisdiction & traditional priests". Society of Saint Pius X, United States District. Retrieved 5 July 2017.
8. Ratzinger, Joseph; Lefebvre, Marcel (5 May 1988). "Protocol of agreement between the Holy See and the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X". unavoce.org. Archived from the original on 19 August 1999. Unofficial English translation of French original.
9. Lefebvre, Marcel (30 June 1988). "The sermon of His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on the occasion of the episcopal consecration ..." sspxasia.com. Singapore: Society of Saint Pius X, District of Asia. Archived from the original on 4 February 2011.
10. "[Profile of the] Pontifical Council Ecclesia Dei". vatican.va. 20 May 1996.
11. Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts (24 August 1996). "The Excommunication of Followers of Archbishop Lefebvre". catholicculture.org. Translation and commentary by Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Archived from the original on 19 September 2015. Retrieved 19 September 2015.
12. Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (28 September 1999). "N. 539/99". unavoce.org (letter of response to personal questions). Archived from the original on 21 June 2009.
13. Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (27 October 1998). "N. 343/98". ewtn.com (letter of response to personal questions). Irondale, Alabama: Eternal Word Television Network. Archived from the original on 28 May 2000.
14. Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (29 September 1995). "N. 117/95". ewtn.com (letter of response to personal questions). Irondale, Alabama: Eternal Word Television Network. Archived from the original on 6 March 2000.
15. Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (18 January 2003). "Letter by Msgr. Camille Perl regarding Society of St. Pius X Masses". unavoce.org (letter of response to personal questions). Archived from the original on 2 February 2003. This does not provide the protocol number used to authenticate documents.
16. Castrillón Hoyos, Darío (2005). "Rapprochement by unhasty stages, but not too slow either". 30giorni.it. Interview with Gianni Cardinale. Rome. Archived from the original on 13 February 2006.
17. Castrillón Hoyos, Darío (27 January 2006). "They are within the Church". cardinalrating.com. Translation by unknown of Italian television interview. Archived from the original on 12 February 2006.
18. Castrillón Hoyos, Darío (8 February 2007). "The President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, Cardinal Hoyos hopes for reconciliation with the Society of St Pius X". blogspot.com. Translation by unknown of German interview. Archived from the original on 14 February 2007.
19. Pope Benedict XVI (10 March 2009). "Letter of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI to the bishops of the Catholic Church concerning the remission of the excommunication of the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre". vatican.va. Archived from the original on 9 January 2015.
20. "Apostolic Letter Misericordia et misera (20 November 2016)". w2.vatican.va. Retrieved 5 July 2017.
21. "Code of Canon Law - IntraText". www.vatican.va. Retrieved 9 April 2017.
22. "Code of Canon Law - IntraText". www.vatican.va. Retrieved 9 April 2017.
23. "New pastoral provisions for Sacrament of Marriage for SSPX". Retrieved 5 July 2017.
24. "Honolulu diocese and the "Hawaii six"". sspx.org. Society of St. Pius X. Archived from the original on 2 May 2004. Retrieved 17 May 2009.
25. Thorburn, Timothy (19 March 1996). "Extra synodal legislation: Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz". ewtn.com. Archived from the original on 16 May 2000.
26. "Bishop forbids attendance at SSPX services". thetablet.co.uk. London. 3 November 2014.
27. Cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 107 and canon 65
28. Code of Canon Law, canon 966
29. Code of Canon Law, canon 969
30. Code of Canon Law, canon 1108
31. Angles, Ramon. "The validity of confessions & marriages in the chapels of the SSPX". sspx.org. Archived from the original on 18 October 2011. Retrieved 21 September 2015.
32. canon 144 §1
33. canon 1335
34. Jones, Chandler Holder (11 January 2013). "SSPX". blogspot.fr. Archived from the original on 20 September 2015.
35. canon 844 §2
36. "S.S.P.X. Jurisdiction for Confession and Matrimony". advancedchristianity.com. [s.l.]: [s.n.] Archived from the original on 12 December 2013.  This tertiary source reuses information from other sources without citing them in detail.
37. Mershon, Brian (11 July 2008). "PCED confirms officially: Society of St. Pius X within the Church, not in formal schism; Catholics commit no sin nor incur any canonical penalty for Mass attendance". renewamerica.com. Archived from the original on 30 July 2010.
38. McNamara, Edward (21 June 2011). "Mass with the Society of St Pius X". zenit.org. New York: Innovative Media. Archived from the original on 25 June 2011.
39. Pope Francis (1 September 2015). "To my venerable brother Archbishop Rino Fisichella President of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization". iubilaeummisericordiae.va. Archived from the original on 7 September 2015. ... through my own disposition, I establish that ...
40. https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_letters/documents/papa-francesco-lettera-ap_20161120_misericordia-et-misera.html s. 12
41. Neville, Robert L. (17 December 1997). "Letter to Bishop Bernard Fellay". traditionalmass.org. Archived from the original on 13 March 2005.
42. "Is the Society of St. Pius X in schism?". sspx-schism.com. Archived from the original on 14 October 1999.
43. "Catholic Bishops' Conference statement on lifting of excommunications of SSPX Bishops". catholic-ew.org.uk (Press release). Catholic Communications Network. 27 January 2009. Archived from the original on 31 January 2009. Retrieved 17 May 2009.