The text of the Decree of Excommunication and the Explanatory Note issued on July 2, 2026 by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith is published on Rorate Caeli's site (and doubtless elsewhere as well).
Today Rorate published a canonical analysis of this decree by the Canon of Shaftsbury, who concluded that this decree, at canon law, accomplished no excommunications. He points out that a dicastery, by itself, has no authority to pronounce excommunication. A papal grant to do so must be issued, and no such grant was cited in the decree. He also states that the excommunication pronounced upon the SSPX clergy in general did not follow proper due process. Excommunication is not a saber that prelates may rattle in their sabers at will. Proper procedures exist to ensure that excommunications cannot be tossed hither and yon in some willy-nilly manner.
Relevant canons are canon 1387, canon 1364, canon 751, canon 1720, canon 1341.
On the July 3rd episode of the Prayerful Posse, Father Gerald Muray, a canon lawyer, offered his thoughts on the two documents. It is clear that the six bishops are excommunicated. Causing confusion is the phrase "adhering to the schism". What does that portend for the 700+ priests of the SSPX and the laity who attend the SSPX?
The decree itself stated that the bishops were excommunicated, but said nothing of the priests or laity. It is the explanatory note that broached that topic. However, explanatory notes cannot add to decrees. Moreover, only acts can be actionable, not attitudes or mindsets. It would seem, therefore, that the phrase "adhering to schism" is quite irrelevant and meaningless when it comes to the incurring of excommunication.
As for the declaration that confessions and marriages officiated by SSPX priests now being illicit, recall that it was Pope Francis who declared that SSPX priests could hear confessions and witness marriages. Since that permission was granted by a pope, a dicastery hasn't the authority to revoke that permission. Such revocation would have to come from Pope Leo.
The Prayerful Posse video is below. After the discussion about the SSPX situation, they broached a true scandal that occurred last month in England, where a "Mass of thanksgiving" was celebrated for two sodomites and their sinful relationship. Some bishops were in attendance and the main celebrant was Father Timothy Radcliffe,. Now where did that name before? I won't elaborate on that too much. Suffice it to say that I don't expect to hear any scuttlebutt about them, or the priest, suffering any kind of canonical penalties for that sacrilege.
Father Murray called this "a very deficient canonical proceeding". He is not the only one to make that observation. But wait a minute! Isn't Pope Leo XIV himself a canonical lawyer? Yes, he is! So how could he let these gaffes slip by? Or..did the Vatican deliberately let a flawed proceeding be issued? Could it be that they knew they had no real grounds to excommunicate the entire SSPX, and were simply trying to pull a bluff?
