The SSPX recently announced its intent to consecrate more bishops, even apart from “papal” [sic] approval. This has invited a wave of additional scrutiny. God willing, as a result, more eyes will be opened to the truth in the process.
Society leadership is at great pains to make the naïve believe that the putrid organization presently in occupation of the Vatican, under the headship of “Leo XIV,” is the Catholic Church, established by Christ for our salvation.
Why would they take such an indefensible stance? In a word: Branding. In this episode of the akaCatholic Podcast, we’ll discuss what that means and why it matters.
[An article that serves as a transcript (albeit not word for word) is available below the video.]
TRANSCRIPT
On February 2, 2026, Fr. Davide Pagliarani was interviewed by FSSPX.News. In other words, this was an in-house project, one that not only provided the Superior General with an opportunity to discuss current events, it also serves as something of a marketing piece designed to promote SSPX brand awareness.
To be clear, I’m not suggesting that its value is therefore limited, in fact, on the contrary. There are no “off the cuff” remarks being made here, rather, the Superior General’s comments are well-prepared, and they represent a thoroughly reliable snapshot of the Society’s vision and understanding of its position in the “traditional Catholic” marketplace.
In this post, we will take a closer look at some of the most relevant of the Superior General’s comments.
Fr. Pagliarani began by making yet another attempt to connect the timing of his public announcement of the Society’s intent to consecrate new bishops with the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin.
While the Superior General’s personal devotion to Our Lady, as well as that of the Society as a whole, is evidently quite sincere, Fr. Pagliarani’s efforts in this case come off as contrived. It therefore seems reasonable to wonder (and I do) if this narrative is, more than anything else, an attempt to elicit a favorable emotional response from those who might otherwise take a critical view of the Society and its plan to consecrate bishops apart from papal [sic] approval.
Whatever the motivation may be, I find the Marian twist strange and entirely unconvincing.
Moving on, the Superior General stressed once more his (and the Society’s) communion with Leo, saying:
This is not a decision we could make without concretely expressing our recognition of the authority of the Holy Father.
But wait.
In his sermon for the Feast of the Purification, Fr. Pagliarani harshly criticized the recent DDF “Doctrinal Note on Some Marian Titles,” wherein it is said that “it is always inappropriate to use the title ‘Co-redemptrix’ to define Mary’s cooperation.” [Emphasis in original text on the Unholy See website.]
No less than four times in that sermon, Fr. Pagliarani said that this affront to Our Lady is “inadmissible.” As an indication of just how much he believes is at stake in this instance, the Superior General asked rhetorically, “Can we deceive souls in this way?”
At this, let’s be clear: The “Doctrinal Note” in question wasn’t published by a Dicastery gone rogue, rather, it was promulgated with the approval of “Leo XIV.”
NB: This means that despite Leo’s hand in deceiving souls and denigrating the Blessed Virgin, Fr. Pagliarani is still moved to insist that he is the “Holy Father” whose authority he, and the Society, eagerly recognize. In other words, he behaves as if he is free to toss about the title of “Holy Father,” referring to his papal “authority,” as if these things are just empty words to which the Church has never attached serious implication.
The Society of St. Pius X behaved likewise during the Bergoglian reign of terror, speaking as if the pope on his own, or the Roman Congregations with the approval of the supposed Roman Pontiff, serve to deceive the faithful – a proposition that finds widespread support in Protestantism, but has exactly no basis in either Catholic ecclesiology or the Church’s teaching on the papacy.
About Bergoglio’s legacy and the current so-called “pontificate” of Leo XIV, Fr. Pagliarani stated:
An explicit determination to preserve the line of Pope Francis as an irreversible trajectory for the entire Church is discernible.
At this, I am compelled to repeat what I have stated, and substantiated, many times: The Bergoglian trajectory is nothing other than the Council’s trajectory. They are one and the same. This is an important point, one that we will consider more closely momentarily.
Fr. Pagliarani went on to provide details concerning his unrequited advances toward Leo, which were submitted in the form of letters addressed to the so-called “Holy Father.”
This proposal, given the very particular circumstances in which the Society finds itself, consists concretely in asking that the Holy See agree to allow us to continue our work—temporarily, in our exceptional situation—for the good of the souls who turn to us. We promised the Pope to devote all our energy to the safeguarding of Tradition, and to make of our faithful true sons of the Church. It seems to me that such a proposal is both realistic and reasonable, and that it could, in itself, be approved by the Holy Father.
I find the phrase “the safeguarding of Tradition” curious in light of Traditionis Custodes – a Latin phrase meaning “Guardians of Tradition.” Does Fr. Pagliarani really imagine that Leo’s thoroughly corrupt understanding of “Tradition” is such that he will find the Society’s promise realistic, reasonable, and worthy of approval?
What I’m getting at here is that Fr. Pagliarani isn’t being the least bit genuine. It is patently obvious that actual Catholic Tradition bears no resemblance to that of the conciliar church and its current CEO. So, why not just plainly say so? The reason: Branding.
One also notices that Fr. Pagliarani is asking the Unholy See for permission “to continue temporarily in our exceptional situation.”
Until when, one wonders?
Presumably Fr. Pagliarani means until such time as Leo and the counterfeit church that he leads decide to abandon their errors and convert to the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic faith, but he lacks the integrity, the forthrightness, and frankly, the honesty to say so plainly.
In any case, one reasonably wonders why he’s seeking permission from these non-Catholic charlatans in the first place. The answer once again: Branding.
Fr. Pagliarani promised Leo to make of the SSPX faithful true sons of the Church. What a pious promise! How could Leo refuse?
Bear in mind, however, that Fr. Pagliarani makes this promise knowing full well that the “Church” as understood by Leo – that is, the church over which he reigns – just spit in Our Lady’s eye (with Leo’s approval); it holds the Second Vatican Council as sacrosanct; it insists that the Novus Ordo is the unique lex orandi of said church, and it’s a church that never tires of reassuring the Jews that they are in an enduring covenant with Almighty God apart from Christ.
But wait, there’s more…
This is the same church that worships the god of Islam along with the Muslims, believes that religious liberty is a non-negotiable human right, and insists that the Holy Ghost uses the heretic communities as “means of salvation.”
If one is honest (and the leadership of the SSPX gives little indication of being so), it must be admitted that this not only describes Leo’s church, it obviously also describes Pagliarani’s “Church” too. After all, this is the church to which the Society turns for approval.
One must ask yet again, why? Why does the SSPX seek the blessing of a man and a church that exists to undermine the true faith in these, and many more, ways?
The answer once more: Branding.
As for the safeguarding of tradition? Please…
Where in Catholic tradition was it ever taught that the faithful must be on guard against the pope and the Church lest they find themselves deceived? Come to think of it, where in tradition has it ever been said that the Church is even able to err in faith and morals? At all?
In point of fact, a cursory review of the Church’s ecclesiology reveals that the exact opposite is true, and the men who lead the SSPX damn well know it.
About “the Church” as the SSPX conceives of it, Fr. Pagliarani said:
The Second Vatican Council remains more than ever the compass guiding today’s churchmen, and they are unlikely to change course in the near future.
Note the sleight of hand (to be kind):
Fr. Pagliarani is suggesting that the real “Church” somehow moves in a certain direction apart from “the churchmen” who occupy the positions of authority therein, first and foremost, the Roman Pontiff.
In truth, the Catholic Church is guided by the Holy Ghost whose assistance is never lacking, and yet, by the will of Christ, the direction that she takes is intimately bound to the work that is carried out by churchmen. In other words, don’t fall for the “institutional Church” or the “Church in her humanity” garbage. [Follow the link provided to learn more about Catholic tradition on this topic.]
Furthermore, if Leo truly is the Holy Roman Pontiff, and the church over which he rules is actually the Catholic Church, and this church is dedicated to implementing the Second Vatican Council – all of which the SSPX has long asserted – then why would it be at all problematic in the least that the Council is being treated as a compass by today’s churchmen?
The answer is entirely obvious: Fr. Pagliarani sees this as a problem because he realizes that the Council and its poisonous decrees are not Catholic, he recognizes that they endanger souls, i.e., he knows very well that Vatican II errs in matters of faith and morals, something the Catholic Church simply cannot do, as we will discuss in more detail shortly.
In 1976, Archbishop Lefebvre had this to say about Vatican Council II:
We believe we can say, by following closely the internal and external critique of Vatican II, ie., by analyzing the texts and studying what leads to it and what flows from it, that, turning its back to Tradition and breaking with the Church of the past, it is a schismatic council. The tree is judged by its fruits.
In 1996, Fr. Pagliarani’s predecessor as Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, declared:
This ‘pastoral’ Council is neither pastoral nor does it come from the Catholic Church: it doesn’t feed men and Christians with the evangelical and Apostolic truth, and moreover, never has the Church spoken thus. We cannot listen to this voice because it is not the voice of the Spirit of Christ. The voice of Christ, our Shepherd, we know; this voice we ignore.
Given all that has since transpired, in light of so much rotten fruit, why isn’t the Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X consistently, plainly, and publicly insisting that the Second Vatican Council and its teachings simply cannot be the product of the one true Church of Christ, and that any so-called church that is devoted to its implementation, a church that is committed to following the Council’s trajectory, simply cannot be the Catholic Church?
You know the answer: Branding.
The more one applies basic Catholic common sense and rudimentary logic to the positions held by the SSPX, or any other Resist-the-Pope enterprise, the more indefensible, self-serving, and contradictory their fundamental beliefs are revealed to be.
Fr. Pagliarani framed the upcoming episcopal consecrations as a necessity for the good of souls, and a response to an objective state of serious necessity.
In the February 2nd Communique announcing the Society’s intentions, Fr. Pagliarani is quoted as having said:
The Fraternity [of St. Pius X] does not first seek its own survival.
Sorry. Not buying it. All indications are that the Society’s own survival, and seeing to it that its footprint in the Trad marketplace continues to grow, is priority #1. There are no close seconds.
Oh, but they are dedicated to forming traditional priests, and teaching the flock according to the true faith!
Actually, no, they are not.
Sure, they teach and uphold some traditional doctrines, but their business model (and that’s exactly what it is) does not allow for the true faith to be taught in its fullness without compromise. For example:
They cannot, and in fact do not, teach their faithful that the divine gifts that flow from the Cross of Christ through the Church prevent her from ever teaching false doctrine. (cf Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, 31)
Nor do they teach their faithful that the Church – the one true Holy Roman Catholic Church – cannot err in faith or morals since it is guided by the Holy Ghost, and any so-called “church” that does – like the one that has been in occupation of the Vatican for over sixty years – is guided by the Spirit of the Devil. (cf Catechism of the Council of Trent)
Likewise, the SSPX must avoid reassuring their faithful that the ordinary magisterium – that is, the preaching and teaching of the popes and those bishops in union with him – is the proximate rule of faith, and what’s more, it is always safe given that the Church’s teaching office is infallible in safeguarding and presenting Christ’s doctrine. (See Msgr. G. Van Noort, Christ’s Church: Dogmatic Theology II, 1957)
The reason they cannot teach these truths in their fullness, without any compromise whatsoever such as the Church has always understood them, is because their entire business model is designed to thrive only to the extent to which the SSPX successfully convinces naive persons that the “Catholic Church” often errs in faith and morals and, thus, the ordinary magisterium is not safe.
This thoroughly Protestant notion is the Society’s hook, i.e., it’s their value proposition to would-be members.
You see, if the conciliar enterprise in Rome is the Catholic Church, and if this Catholic Church cannot be trusted to hand on the true faith, well, then, those who wish to adhere to the true faith must find a place of refuge, a society with traditional bishops and priests who are dedicated to the true Mass and the sacraments and so forth.
And this is why, Mr. and Mrs. Faithful, you and your family need the Society of St. Pius X!
In his sermon for the Feast of the Purification, Fr. Pagliarani insisted, protesting just a bit too much:
And we serve the Church by preaching the faith and telling the truth to souls, not by telling fables to souls.
I beg your pardon… The vile notion that the Church and the pope deceive souls, teach them dangerous errors, and have abandoned the true faith, is most certainly a fable, it’s a Protestant fable, and it also happens to be the lifeblood of the SSPX.
Is it possible that Fr. Pagliarani and the other leaders of the SSPX are really so ignorant of Catholic tradition that they genuinely, albeit mistakenly, believe that the conciliar enterprise and its CEO in white are actually Catholic? Are they really so flummoxed as to think that the Holy Roman Pontiff and the one true Church of Christ are sources of doctrinal poison, dispensed by the Roman Congregations, in Papal Encyclicals, and even via ecumenical councils?
Jesus Christ knows their hearts and minds, and He will judge them as He will judge us all. That said, one need not ignore the obvious, and only a fool would insist that these men just don’t know any better.
Half-a-century ago, Archbishop Lefebvre could see that the conciliar church is not what it claims to be. He said:
How could it be more clear?! From now on it is the conciliar church one must obey and be faithful to, and not to the Catholic Church. This is precisely our problem. We are suspended a divinis by the conciliar church, of which we do not want to be a part. This conciliar church is a schismatic church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church of all time.
True, the Archbishop – buon’anima! – struggled to make sense of the relationship between the true Church and the conciliar church, and some of his observations (see HERE) were highly questionable. In his defense, however, Archbishop Lefebvre was very close to the fire; things were not nearly as obvious as they are now.
As for us, looking on fifty years later with the perspective that comes from having witnessed the conciliar church’s numerous heresies, blasphemies, errors, and acts of outright apostasy, and lo and behold, the situation is more clear, more so now than ever:
The conciliar church simply cannot be the Catholic Church of all time. If alive today, I have little doubt that Archbishop Lefebvre would be shouting this truth from the rooftops, warning everyone and anyone with ears to hear.
Does Fr. Pagliarani and the rest of the SSPX leadership team have the integrity to publicly do the same?
Evidently not. In fact, they are at great pains to make the naïve believe the baldfaced lie that the putrid organization presently in occupation of the Vatican, under the headship of “Leo XIV,” is the Catholic Church established by Christ for our salvation.
Speaking now to those clerics and lay faithful of the SSPX who can see just how twisted the Society’s position on the Church and the papacy truly are:
Does coming to grips with the realization that neither the conciliar church nor Leo XIV are actually Catholic invite some difficult questions? Sure.
Are we able to answer each and every one of them with perfect certitude? No, we are not, but in no way does this justify denying what is perfectly well known by all worthy of the name Catholic:
The preaching and teaching of the Holy Father and the bishops in union with him, most especially when they teach in an ecumenical council, cannot endanger the souls of the faithful, much less lead them straight to Hell.
There’s absolutely nothing controversial about the statement above. It’s basic Catholic ecclesiology, the reason why we refer to the Church as a Holy Mother.
Dear SSPX clerics and faithful, I challenge you: Are you willing to profess the basic statement of faith above, plainly and publicly, accepting the unavoidable conclusions that result therefrom, no matter how uncomfortable they may be?
In the entire history of the Roman Catholic Church, there hasn’t been even one pope, not even one faithful bishop or priest, or even one moderately well-formed layperson over the age of reason, who would hesitate for even a moment to publicly make such a declaration of faith. Will you?
So, why is it that SSPX leadership is reluctant to do so?
Repeat after me: Branding.
It seems that SSPX leadership is loathe to profess the perfectly orthodox statement above, applying it to the present situation, and following wherever it may lead, because doing so would necessarily invite their flock (and their clerics) to conclude that they have been duped for many years. They will realize that they’ve been sold a deliberately truncated version of Catholic tradition – in their chapels, at their conferences, in their seminaries – one crafted to make the Society’s value proposition appear more Catholic, and thus more attractive, than it is actually is.
In other words, their eyes would be open to the bitter realization that the SSPX business model, which rests on perpetuating the myth that the “Church” and the “Pope” are in fact dangerous sources of doctrinal poison, is built on lies by omission.
My sense, like it or not, is that the leadership of the SSPX, fallen as they are just like the rest of us, have convinced themselves that it is prudent to downplay, distort, or even ignore certain traditional Catholic doctrines in order to fill their pews, their confessionals, their schools, and let us not overlook, their coffers.
This, they tell themselves, is a genuine service to the true Church, because once in the SSPX fold, the flock will have true priests, who offer the true Mass, conferring the true sacraments, etc.
Certain that they are utterly indispensable in this moment of crisis, one can easily imagine the Society’s leaders asking themselves, with no small amount of self-satisfaction: If not for us, who will feed them?
As Fr. Pagliarani told his friendly interlocutor:
The number of souls who have turned to us in this way has grown steadily over the years, and has even increased significantly over the past decade. Ignoring their needs and abandoning them would mean betraying them … In this critical context, our bishops are getting older, and with the continuous growth of the apostolate, they are no longer enough to respond to the requests of the faithful around the world.
In other words: We need more bishops in order to meet consumer demand, even if that demand is ginned up thanks to our betrayal of Holy Mother Church and the Office of Peter, denigrating them with wild accusations of teaching grave errors that endanger the souls of the faithful.
My sincere hope is that this period of negotiation between the SSPX and the minions of Satan in Rome opens the eyes and the hearts of the sincere to the fullness of Catholic truth, including the uncomfortable parts.
