The Evil of Schism

By Fr. Jerry Pokorsky ( bio - articles - email ) | Jul 06, 2026

The Church has just undergone a momentous schism. The Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) ordained bishops without papal approval and suffered ecclesial excommunication.

Since the Council of Jerusalem, described in the Acts of the Apostles, the Church has convened councils of bishops to discuss and resolve questions of faith. Pope John XXIII hoped the Second Vatican Council would present the Catholic faith in terms more readily understood by the modern world. Indeed, the documents do not read like conciliar texts of earlier centuries. With important dogmatic exceptions, the texts are pastoral (and occasionally doctrinally edgy) and encourage thoughtful discussion.

Vatican II’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, was essentially traditional. It permitted limited use of the vernacular in the Mass. The intent was to make the liturgy more accessible to the faithful, though it is unlikely that the Council Fathers envisioned the entire Mass in the vernacular.

The years following the Council were chaotic. The unpopular Vietnam War was raging, and the hippie generation emerged with its theme of “Question Authority.” The cultural zeitgeist became part of the Church. By 1969, the sacred liturgy, which had gently evolved from the Last Supper to the 1962 Roman Missal, underwent a sweeping overhaul. The post-conciliar Mass was given a new format, the previous lectionary was discarded and replaced with an expanded (and frequently censored) one, and the entire liturgy was translated into the vernacular. Poor translations compounded the distress.

It was a perfect storm. The liturgy was upended, and many theologians, as well as much of the clergy, religious, and laity, worked to transform the traditional theology that had been prudently developed over centuries. The ancient liturgy had guided the Church and her teachings in ways that were understandable and defensible from the perspective of Scripture and Tradition. The comprehensive reform caused confusion and consternation.

The French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, with permission of the Holy See, had erected a quasi-religious group known as the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX). During conciliar proceedings, Archbishop Lefebvre voted to approve Sacrosanctum Concilium. According to a close associate, Lefebvre went along with the early liturgical tweaks to the 1962 Roman Missal. But the 1969 release of the Novus Ordo revealed massive changes to the Mass. As the reforms emerged after the Council, Archbishop Lefebvre questioned a number of the post-conciliar theological and liturgical changes that were being implemented. Lefebvre also believed (like several orthodox theologians) that many conciliar texts crossed the line into error.

Some Vatican insiders at that time said that many French bishops vocally disliked Lefebvre and treated him poorly. The Vatican bureaucracy did not invite the SSPX to enter into dialogue regarding their concerns. A little bit of charity might have prevented the disaster. The SSPX was marginalized and penalized. They continued to celebrate the traditional Latin Mass. Eventually, the Holy See canonically suppressed the SSPX, but without a formal schism.

Archbishop Lefebvre ordained priests with valid orders. But when he chose, in direct disobedience to the Pope, to consecrate bishops in 1988, he incurred excommunication and formalized the rupture with Rome. The SSPX bishops and priests are validly ordained and, like the Eastern Orthodox Churches, validly celebrate the sacraments. But they are not in full communion with Rome.

After the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre and the bishops he consecrated, Pope John Paul II, assisted by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, attempted to heal the rupture and formed a new Society, called the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP). The FSSP was established with former members of the SSPX who had refused to enter into schism with Archbishop Lefebvre and his new bishops. The FSSP remains in good standing today.

As Pope Benedict XVI, Ratzinger made significant overtures toward reconciliation. His successor, Pope Francis, restricted broader access to the older form of the Mass, though he permitted SSPX confessions and marriages under certain conditions. Tensions over doctrine and discipline—especially regarding marriage and moral theology—marked his pontificate.

At the same time, some bishops in parts of Europe openly challenged Catholic Sixth Commandment moral teaching. Luxembourg Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, for example, called for the re-examination of the Church’s teaching on sexual ethics—especially homosexual acts—because “the sociological-scientific foundation of this teaching is no longer correct.”

Although Pope Francis did not fully explain his disciplinary decisions in every case, observers have offered differing interpretations. The contrast with his approach to traditionalist communities became increasingly evident. Pope Francis and many Vatican officials appeared more willing to risk alienating traditional-minded Catholics, often criticized as “rigid.” The general reluctance to accommodate those attached to the traditional Latin Mass struck many as inconsistent or even provocative. Perhaps believing Pope Leo would prove more receptive than his predecessor, the aging SSPX bishops decided the time had come to consecrate successors.

When Pope Leo declined permission, he warned that proceeding without a pontifical mandate would incur automatic latae sententiae excommunication for the bishops involved and place the Society in formal schism. The current (2026) declaration of schism is historically significant in that Rome has now formally resolved what had long been contested among canonists.

The history of post-conciliar liturgical reform is admittedly complex, and this overview omits many important details. What should not be controversial, however, is the Pope’s legitimate authority to approve the ordination of bishops in the Catholic Church. Unauthorized episcopal consecrations wound the Church’s visible unity, constitute a rejection of the Roman Pontiff’s authority over the college of bishops, and threaten the integrity of apostolic succession.

Some Catholics attached to the traditional Latin Mass understandably feel marginalized or misunderstood. Their concerns deserve a respectful hearing. Nevertheless, history reminds us that separating ourselves from the visible unity of the Church only deepens the wound.

The Church needs faithful Catholics who are both courageous and obedient. Let us avoid unnecessary polemics, hold fast to the faith, argue the essential precepts of the faith with integrity, and keep our eyes on the Eucharist, mindful of the Lord’s words: “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)