Vatican City - The confrontation between the Holy See and the Priestly Fraternity of St Pius X (FSSPX) has entered a further phase of hardening. After the meeting held in Rome on 12 February 2026 between the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, and the Fraternity’s Superior General, Father Davide Pagliarani, the Dicastery issued a communiqué setting out the substance, method and conditions of the process. Today, 19 February 2026, the reply arrived in a letter signed by Pagliarani and members of the Fraternity’s leadership: Rome’s proposal is endorsed in form, then contested and effectively neutralised in substance.
The meeting at the DDF
In the Vatican communiqué, the meeting was described as “cordial and sincere”, held “with the approval of the Holy Father Leo XIV”. Fernández, after clarifying certain points contained in letters sent by the Fraternity “particularly in the years 2017–2019”, put forward a path of specifically theological dialogue, with a “very precise methodology”, on questions that have not yet received “sufficient clarification”. The themes listed include the debate on divine will and the plurality of religions, the distinction between an act of faith and “religious submission of intellect and will”, and the differing degrees of assent required by the texts of the Second Vatican Council and their interpretation. The Prefect also proposed revisiting a series of issues the FSSPX had set out in its letter of 17 January 2019.
The Holy See’s declared aim was explicit: to identify, “within the disputed themes”, the minimum necessary elements for full communion with the Catholic Church and, from there, to arrive at “outlining a canonical statute for the Fraternity”, with further aspects still to be examined. The Dicastery then warned against any new episcopal ordinationscarried out without a pontifical mandate. The communiqué reiterated that such a choice would entail “a decisive rupture of ecclesial communion (schism)” and spoke of “serious consequences” for the Fraternity as a whole, citing doctrinal and juridical references (including can. 331 CIC and Pastor aeternus, as well as John Paul II’s Ecclesia Dei). From there, the condition was set out: the very possibility of dialogue “presupposes that the Fraternity suspends the decision regarding the announced episcopal ordinations”.
The Fraternity’s reply
The letter, dated 18 February 2026, made public today and presented this morning to the Holy Father Leo XIV by Cardinal Fernández, opens in courteous tones and thanks the Dicastery for publishing the account of the meeting, judged useful in ensuring “transparency” in communication. Pagliarani says he welcomes the opening to a doctrinal discussion and claims to have proposed it “exactly seven years ago”, recalling that at the time - according to him - the Dicastery gave the opposite indication: the idea of a doctrinal agreement with the FSSPX was deemed “impossible”. The Superior General then states that he cannot accept the “perspective and aims” with which the Dicastery now proposes resuming the dialogue, and he also rejects any “postponement” of the date of 1 July. In practical terms, the Fraternity refuses the framework that ties theological discussion to the request to halt the move towards new episcopal consecrations. Pagliarani insists that a doctrinal agreement - especially on orientations developed after Vatican II - would remain out of reach; he stresses that the conciliar texts “cannot be corrected” and that the liturgical reformcannot be called into question; he challenges a dialogue conducted under the public pressure of sanctions and repeated references to schism and “serious consequences”. He further argues that establishing the criteria for belonging to the Church and the content necessary for communion is not a matter for “common discernment”, because it belongs to the Magisterium. In closing, he appeals to a path of “charity” and asks to continue the Fraternity’s sacramental apostolate, presenting the need for consecrations as a “concrete short-term” requirement for the survival of the “Tradition” the Fraternity claims to safeguard.
In terms of facts, the reply from Menzingen amounts to a refusal of the Dicastery’s condition: the request to suspend the announced episcopal ordinations is sidestepped and, in substance, rejected. The script was predictable. The FSSPX continues to act as though its internal agenda were the measure of ecclesial communion, showing an attachment to its own fixations far more solid than any willingness to offer a real, verifiable obedience to the Church and her legal order. The offer from Rome to identify a possible canonical configuration appears of little interest: accepting it would mean returning to the ordinary life of the Catholic Church and relinquishing the centrality they currently claim. Remaining on the margins, by contrast, allows them to be treated as distinctive and to keep occupying the stage.
The next move now lies with the Holy See. The communiqué had already indicated that, in the event of a “positive response”, “steps, stages and procedures” would be defined. Today’s letter instead shifts the exchange onto a track of open confrontation. Should the Fraternity proceed with consecrations without a mandate, the Dicastery has already put in writing the ecclesial qualification of the act and its consequences. Once again, dialogue is invoked and hollowed out, while the clash edges closer to a breaking point.
Fr.C.V.
Silere non possum