Rome yesterday6Add to bookmarks

On the eve of the episcopal consecrations of Écône, Cardinal Burke closes the canonical door: the SSPX cannot invoke the state of necessity in 2026. A declaration that will weigh on tomorrow's act.
We had been following the rising tension surrounding the episcopal consecrations that the SSPX is to celebrate in Écône on July 1, 2026. On the eve of this solemn act, Cardinal Burke has just publicly ruled via Infovaticana: "The current situation does not constitute a state of necessity." The wording is precise: it is exactly the one that Archbishop Lefebvre had invoked in 1988 to proceed with consecrations without a pontifical mandate, at the risk and cost of excommunication. For Burke, the conditions that prevailed then are not met today. He follows in this the Cardinal Müller, who last week called for a Vatican commission of reconciliation for those seeking full communion.
Canon law is rigorous. Canon 1382 of the 1983 Code imposes latae sententiae excommunication on a bishop who consecrates another bishop without a pontifical mandate, as well as on the one who receives the consecration. The exception applies only if the acting party finds themselves in a grave necessity, proportionate and without any other possible recourse (can. 1323 § 4). However, since Benedict XVI’s motu proprioSummorum Pontificum (2007) and the recent dialogical advances of Leo XIV, the SSPX has had a canonical status in the process of regularization and real avenues of recourse with the Apostolic See. To claim a state of necessity in 2026 is to deny the very existence of these avenues. Burke applies here a doctrinal rigor that is not a closure: it is a call to take the paths that have been opened.
The consecrations of July 1 will weigh on the future of the Fraternity and on the faithful attached to it. Let us pray that the grace of unity prevails over the logic of rupture. Full reconciliation with Rome remains possible; it requires, on both sides, humility and truth.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Burke a raison sur la lettre, mais la crise dans l’Église n’a pas disparu, elle a changé de forme. Est-ce que ça ne suffit pas pour parler d’urgence ?
Le droit canon, c'est bien, mais quand des fidèles se retrouvent sans évêque depuis des années, la miséricorde ne devrait-elle pas passer avant ?
C’est bien beau les règles, mais quand on voit l’état de nos paroisses, on se demande si Rome mesure vraiment l’urgence.
L’état de nécessité, c’est bien joli, mais concrètement, comment on le mesure ? Dans ma paroisse, on a l’impression d’être livrés à nous-mêmes.
Le droit c'est une chose, mais franchement, est-ce qu'on vit vraiment la même Église qu'en 88 ? Moi je trouve que ça a empiré.
Clair, oui, mais ça me laisse perplexe : est-ce qu’on peut vraiment trancher comme ça sur la nécessité, sans tenir compte de la détresse des fidèles ?
FSSPX : Léon XIV lance un dernier appel avant le 1er juillet