rejected

Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.
Read More

Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.

unitedyam

Oklahoma’s Statewide Charter School Board wants to approve religious charter schools, but a ruling from the Oklahoma Supreme Court and efforts by the state attorney general prevent it from doing so.

Read More
Egypt executes convicted killer of Coptic Orthodox priest #Catholic A crime that deeply shocked Egypt’s Coptic community and broader public has reached its legal conclusion after the family of Father Arsanios Wadid confirmed that Egyptian authorities have executed the man convicted of murdering him.The sentence was carried out after all stages of litigation were completed and the defendant had exhausted his available legal appeals, bringing to an end a case that lasted more than four years from the killing to the execution of the final judgment.According to the attorney representing the priest’s family, Egyptian authorities carried out the death sentence, the most severe punishment under the country’s law, after investigators and the courts found the defendant responsible for intentional murder.The execution followed the Egyptian Court of Cassation’s rejection of the defendant’s final appeal and its affirmation of an earlier ruling by the Alexandria Criminal Court, making the sentence final and enforceable.The case dates back to April 7, 2022, when Wadid, a priest of the Coptic Orthodox Church of the Virgin Mary and St. Paul the Apostle in Alexandria’s Karmouz-Moharam Bek district, was participating in a weekly parish gathering at one of the city’s beaches. As participants were boarding buses following the gathering, Wadid, who was wearing clerical attire and helping organize their departure, was attacked from behind and fatally stabbed. Those present restrained the assailant and handed him over to security forces. Wadid was taken to a hospital, where he died from his injuries.Although the legal proceedings initially moved quickly, with the defendant referred to the criminal court within weeks of the killing and sentenced to death by hanging, the ruling was not final at the time and remained pending while the Court of Cassation considered his appeals.In January 2025, the Court of Cassation rejected the defendant’s appeal and upheld the death sentence, making the judgment final. The sentence, however, was not carried out until approximately a year and a half later, making it more than four years from the killing to the execution and leaving a profound mark on the Coptic Orthodox Church and the people of Alexandria.This story was first published by ACI MENA, the Arabic-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Read More

Egypt executes convicted killer of Coptic Orthodox priest #Catholic A crime that deeply shocked Egypt’s Coptic community and broader public has reached its legal conclusion after the family of Father Arsanios Wadid confirmed that Egyptian authorities have executed the man convicted of murdering him.The sentence was carried out after all stages of litigation were completed and the defendant had exhausted his available legal appeals, bringing to an end a case that lasted more than four years from the killing to the execution of the final judgment.According to the attorney representing the priest’s family, Egyptian authorities carried out the death sentence, the most severe punishment under the country’s law, after investigators and the courts found the defendant responsible for intentional murder.The execution followed the Egyptian Court of Cassation’s rejection of the defendant’s final appeal and its affirmation of an earlier ruling by the Alexandria Criminal Court, making the sentence final and enforceable.The case dates back to April 7, 2022, when Wadid, a priest of the Coptic Orthodox Church of the Virgin Mary and St. Paul the Apostle in Alexandria’s Karmouz-Moharam Bek district, was participating in a weekly parish gathering at one of the city’s beaches. As participants were boarding buses following the gathering, Wadid, who was wearing clerical attire and helping organize their departure, was attacked from behind and fatally stabbed. Those present restrained the assailant and handed him over to security forces. Wadid was taken to a hospital, where he died from his injuries.Although the legal proceedings initially moved quickly, with the defendant referred to the criminal court within weeks of the killing and sentenced to death by hanging, the ruling was not final at the time and remained pending while the Court of Cassation considered his appeals.In January 2025, the Court of Cassation rejected the defendant’s appeal and upheld the death sentence, making the judgment final. The sentence, however, was not carried out until approximately a year and a half later, making it more than four years from the killing to the execution and leaving a profound mark on the Coptic Orthodox Church and the people of Alexandria.This story was first published by ACI MENA, the Arabic-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

unitedyam

The family of Father Arsanios Wadid, who was murdered in April 2022, confirmed that the man found guilty of the crime has been put to death.

Read More
France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros (.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.
Read More

France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros ($1.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.

unitedyam

The vote, ending an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate, came three years after President Emmanuel Macron first opened the question to national debate.

Read More
SSPX Masses an ‘abuse’ of Eucharist: U.S. bishops continue to urge Catholics not to attend #Catholic U.S. bishops continue to instruct Catholics to separate themselves from the schismatic Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) while urging the society’s members to return to full communion with the Catholic Church.The Vatican declared July 2 that six prelates involved in the SSPX’s unauthorized July 1 episcopal consecrations incurred automatic excommunication. Despite repeated warnings, SSPX bishops consecrated four new bishops without a pontifical mandate — an act of open disobedience to the authority of the pope that carries automatic excommunication for the six bishops involved.Lay faithful who formally adhere to SSPX are also considered schismatic and can incur excommunication by continuing to attend SSPX services after the Church’s formal pronouncement of a schism.Various Catholic bishops with SSPX locations in their dioceses are explicitly forbidding Catholics from attending SSPX Masses, instructing them to avoid the now-illicit sacraments and to withdraw their children from SSPX-affiliated schools while also urging frequent attendees and SSPX priests to seek spiritual guidance and return to the Catholic Church.Abuse of the EucharistBishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington, Virginia, instructed Catholics to “avoid participating in the activities of the SSPX.”Burbidge emphasized in a July 8 letter to his flock that “as a result of the SSPXʼs schismatic act, any celebrations of the sacraments of confession and matrimony by the SSPX are invalid, and the administration of other sacraments is illicit.”Bishop John Iffert of Covington, Kentucky, explained what it means for these sacraments to be “illicit.”“This means that the celebrations are not permitted by the law of the Church and the cleric offering the sacrament commits the canonical and moral fault of disobedience in each instance,” Iffert said.“The Masses these priests celebrate are an abuse of the Eucharist, insofar as they make the sacrament of unity into an occasion of division within the Church, and so they should be firmly rejected and avoided by all the Catholic faithful,” Iffert said.“Together with the priests of the diocese, I invite all Catholics who have been attending the SSPX liturgy to practice their faith in one of the parishes, missions, or chapels of the diocese,” Iffert said. “You will find the Catholic Mass and the sacramental life celebrated faithfully and respectfully throughout the Diocese of Covington.”Who is in schism?Burbidge clarified that not all attendees of SSPX are necessarily in schism but must simply return to sacraments and ministries in union with the Church.“I encourage any persons locally who have been attached to the SSPX and who desire the spiritual nourishment of the Church and the extraordinary form of the Mass to become active in any one of the eight locations in our diocese where this is currently possible,” Burbidge said.“Although lay faithful who formally adhere to the SSPX are considered schismatic and excommunicated, this does not apply to lay faithful ‘who do not reject the magisterium of the authority of the Roman pontiff’ and have engaged with the SSPX for solely liturgical or spiritual reasons,” Burbidge said. “Such persons must simply resolve not to continue to participate in future SSPX sacramental worship or pastoral ministries.”“The Holy See, in the spirit of conciliation, has outlined the procedure necessary for SSPX priests and lay faithful to return to Catholic communion,” Burbidge explained.Bishop Manuel de Jesús Rodríguez of Palm Beach, Florida, issued a decree reiterating the Holy See’s excommunication and instructing the faithful to separate from SSPX in any "ecclesiastical ministry” or “diocesan entity.”Rodríguez also provided instructions for any Catholics who wish to leave SSPX “and enter into full communion with the Catholic Church."How SSPX’s schism affects educationThe schismatic acts of SSPX have a trickle-down effect, even affecting the education of children.In Covington, Kentucky, two schools are affiliated with SSPX. Iffert has instructed Catholics to withdraw their children from the schools due to the schismatic nature of the group.“Because Assumption Academy and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Academy are associated with the SSPX, Catholic parents should not enroll their children in these schools,” Iffert said in a letter. “To do so is to entrust the religious formation of children to those who participate in schism against the Roman Catholic Church.”He encouraged parents to reach out to the diocesan Catholic schools office for “appropriate placement in a local Catholic school.”Praying for returnThe bishops prayed for union and for society members to return to the Church.“I pledge to pray for the bishops and priests of the SSPX and for their faithful return to regular order in the Catholic Church,” Iffert said. “I also assure the lay faithful who have been attached to the SSPX of my prayer for their good and for the restoration of unity in the Church.”Burbidge prayed especially for SSPX priests.“To my brother priests in the SSPX, please know of my prayers for you and my heartfelt desire for your return to full communion with the Church,” Burbidge said. “I invite all the faithful to join me in prayer for the end of all division and schism and for the unity of the Church, so that she may better fulfill the divine commission to make disciples of all nations.”“I ask all faithful Catholics to pray for restored unity and order in the Church and in our diocese,” Iffert said. “Please beg the intercession of Pope St. Pius X, that his name may always give glory to God and never be a sign of division in the Eucharistic community that he cherished.”
Read More

SSPX Masses an ‘abuse’ of Eucharist: U.S. bishops continue to urge Catholics not to attend #Catholic U.S. bishops continue to instruct Catholics to separate themselves from the schismatic Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) while urging the society’s members to return to full communion with the Catholic Church.The Vatican declared July 2 that six prelates involved in the SSPX’s unauthorized July 1 episcopal consecrations incurred automatic excommunication. Despite repeated warnings, SSPX bishops consecrated four new bishops without a pontifical mandate — an act of open disobedience to the authority of the pope that carries automatic excommunication for the six bishops involved.Lay faithful who formally adhere to SSPX are also considered schismatic and can incur excommunication by continuing to attend SSPX services after the Church’s formal pronouncement of a schism.Various Catholic bishops with SSPX locations in their dioceses are explicitly forbidding Catholics from attending SSPX Masses, instructing them to avoid the now-illicit sacraments and to withdraw their children from SSPX-affiliated schools while also urging frequent attendees and SSPX priests to seek spiritual guidance and return to the Catholic Church.Abuse of the EucharistBishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington, Virginia, instructed Catholics to “avoid participating in the activities of the SSPX.”Burbidge emphasized in a July 8 letter to his flock that “as a result of the SSPXʼs schismatic act, any celebrations of the sacraments of confession and matrimony by the SSPX are invalid, and the administration of other sacraments is illicit.”Bishop John Iffert of Covington, Kentucky, explained what it means for these sacraments to be “illicit.”“This means that the celebrations are not permitted by the law of the Church and the cleric offering the sacrament commits the canonical and moral fault of disobedience in each instance,” Iffert said.“The Masses these priests celebrate are an abuse of the Eucharist, insofar as they make the sacrament of unity into an occasion of division within the Church, and so they should be firmly rejected and avoided by all the Catholic faithful,” Iffert said.“Together with the priests of the diocese, I invite all Catholics who have been attending the SSPX liturgy to practice their faith in one of the parishes, missions, or chapels of the diocese,” Iffert said. “You will find the Catholic Mass and the sacramental life celebrated faithfully and respectfully throughout the Diocese of Covington.”Who is in schism?Burbidge clarified that not all attendees of SSPX are necessarily in schism but must simply return to sacraments and ministries in union with the Church.“I encourage any persons locally who have been attached to the SSPX and who desire the spiritual nourishment of the Church and the extraordinary form of the Mass to become active in any one of the eight locations in our diocese where this is currently possible,” Burbidge said.“Although lay faithful who formally adhere to the SSPX are considered schismatic and excommunicated, this does not apply to lay faithful ‘who do not reject the magisterium of the authority of the Roman pontiff’ and have engaged with the SSPX for solely liturgical or spiritual reasons,” Burbidge said. “Such persons must simply resolve not to continue to participate in future SSPX sacramental worship or pastoral ministries.”“The Holy See, in the spirit of conciliation, has outlined the procedure necessary for SSPX priests and lay faithful to return to Catholic communion,” Burbidge explained.Bishop Manuel de Jesús Rodríguez of Palm Beach, Florida, issued a decree reiterating the Holy See’s excommunication and instructing the faithful to separate from SSPX in any "ecclesiastical ministry” or “diocesan entity.”Rodríguez also provided instructions for any Catholics who wish to leave SSPX “and enter into full communion with the Catholic Church."How SSPX’s schism affects educationThe schismatic acts of SSPX have a trickle-down effect, even affecting the education of children.In Covington, Kentucky, two schools are affiliated with SSPX. Iffert has instructed Catholics to withdraw their children from the schools due to the schismatic nature of the group.“Because Assumption Academy and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Academy are associated with the SSPX, Catholic parents should not enroll their children in these schools,” Iffert said in a letter. “To do so is to entrust the religious formation of children to those who participate in schism against the Roman Catholic Church.”He encouraged parents to reach out to the diocesan Catholic schools office for “appropriate placement in a local Catholic school.”Praying for returnThe bishops prayed for union and for society members to return to the Church.“I pledge to pray for the bishops and priests of the SSPX and for their faithful return to regular order in the Catholic Church,” Iffert said. “I also assure the lay faithful who have been attached to the SSPX of my prayer for their good and for the restoration of unity in the Church.”Burbidge prayed especially for SSPX priests.“To my brother priests in the SSPX, please know of my prayers for you and my heartfelt desire for your return to full communion with the Church,” Burbidge said. “I invite all the faithful to join me in prayer for the end of all division and schism and for the unity of the Church, so that she may better fulfill the divine commission to make disciples of all nations.”“I ask all faithful Catholics to pray for restored unity and order in the Church and in our diocese,” Iffert said. “Please beg the intercession of Pope St. Pius X, that his name may always give glory to God and never be a sign of division in the Eucharistic community that he cherished.”

unitedyam

More U.S. bishops are instructing Catholics to avoid attending Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) events in light of the recent excommunications of SSPX leadership.

Read More
Netanyahu claims unnamed Lebanese Christian villages sought annexation #Catholic Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said unidentified Lebanese Christian villages asked Israel to annex them.“Christian villages in Lebanon, some of them have actually asked to be annexed to Israel, because we protect them against the Hezbollah, Hezbollah fanatics who want to kill them, and we do the same things with Christians everywhere,” Netanyahu said during an appearance on Fox News’ show “The Sunday Briefing” on July 5.“It’s ridiculous that [Netanyahu] would say such a thing,” said Alberto Fernández, a former U.S. ambassador and contributor to EWTN News on Middle East topics. “It’s something that only makes sense within the context of him trying to look good to his own Israeli audience. Within the context of Lebanon, it’s ridiculous.”Fernández noted Netanyahu’s claims have been repeatedly denied in the Arab and Lebanese press. Lebanese officials have rejected Netanyahu’s claims, including senior members of the Kataeb party, and Hanna al-Amil, the mayor of Rmeich, a Christian village in southern Lebanon, according to several Arab news outlets.“We canʼt forget that itʼs Hezbollah that keeps plunging Lebanon into war with Israel,” he said. “And one thing that Christian villagers do not want is, they may not want to be part of Israel.”They donʼt want to be at war with Israel either, Fernández said.“They want peace. They want to be left alone. They want to be able to live their lives and their villages and farm their land and be left alone,” he said.
Read More

Netanyahu claims unnamed Lebanese Christian villages sought annexation #Catholic Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said unidentified Lebanese Christian villages asked Israel to annex them.“Christian villages in Lebanon, some of them have actually asked to be annexed to Israel, because we protect them against the Hezbollah, Hezbollah fanatics who want to kill them, and we do the same things with Christians everywhere,” Netanyahu said during an appearance on Fox News’ show “The Sunday Briefing” on July 5.“It’s ridiculous that [Netanyahu] would say such a thing,” said Alberto Fernández, a former U.S. ambassador and contributor to EWTN News on Middle East topics. “It’s something that only makes sense within the context of him trying to look good to his own Israeli audience. Within the context of Lebanon, it’s ridiculous.”Fernández noted Netanyahu’s claims have been repeatedly denied in the Arab and Lebanese press. Lebanese officials have rejected Netanyahu’s claims, including senior members of the Kataeb party, and Hanna al-Amil, the mayor of Rmeich, a Christian village in southern Lebanon, according to several Arab news outlets.“We canʼt forget that itʼs Hezbollah that keeps plunging Lebanon into war with Israel,” he said. “And one thing that Christian villagers do not want is, they may not want to be part of Israel.”They donʼt want to be at war with Israel either, Fernández said.“They want peace. They want to be left alone. They want to be able to live their lives and their villages and farm their land and be left alone,” he said.

unitedyam

Alberto Fernández, a former U.S. ambassador and contributor to EWTN News, said the prime minister’s claim “only makes sense within the context of him trying to look good to his own Israeli audience.”

Read More
SSPX rejects Vatican’s excommunication, calls it ‘objectively’ unjust and invalid #Catholic The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), whose members are known as “Lefebvrians,” rejected the recent excommunications decreed by the Vatican after consecrating four bishops without papal authorization on July 1 and asserted that the sanctions imposed are “objectively unjust and invalid.”In a letter addressed to Pope Leo XIV, released on July 3, Father Davide Pagliarani, superior general of the SSPX, justified the episcopal consecrations that prompted the Vatican’s decree declaring the group to be in schism as “an extreme measure to save souls, amid the doctrinal and moral confusion in which the Church finds itself.”“We in no way intend to replace the Church, and our sole purpose is to remain faithful to her,” wrote Pagliarani, who leads the group founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who died in 1991.The group founded by Lefebvre aims to preserve the traditional liturgy as it existed prior to the reforms implemented after the Second Vatican Council while maintaining its opposition to aspects of the council’s teachings on ecumenism, religious freedom, and collegiality.Lefebvre was excommunicated in 1988 after ordaining, without the permission of Pope John Paul II, four bishops: Alfonso de Galarreta of Spain, Bernard Fellay of Switzerland, Richard Williamson of England, and Bernard Tissier de Mallerais of France.Amid attempts to build bridges of dialogue with the SSPX, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications in 2009 against the four bishops consecrated by Lefebvre.Tissier de Mallerais and Williamson died in 2024 and 2025, respectively. Galarreta and Fellay, on the other hand, participated in the recent consecration of four new bishops on July 1, for which they were excommunicated once again.‘We had asked for bread’Using as the central theme of his argument the passage from the Gospel according to St. Luke (11:11–13), in which Jesus reminds his disciples that “if you, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him,” Pagliarani asserted that “we had asked for bread — that is, a little understanding in the face of a sincere case of conscience, a gesture of fatherly compassion.”“Unfortunately, we have received a stone,” he continued, noting that, instead of “fish” — that is, “the possibility of temporarily obtaining the necessary means to continue forming good priests … unfortunately, we have received a snake.”“We had asked for an egg, promising to return it as soon as possible,” he added. He affirmed that “the holy tradition we preserve in our souls belongs to the Church, our Mother” but “unfortunately, we have received a scorpion.”The superior of the SSPX assured Leo XIV that the society does not accept the Vatican’s sanctions “in a spirit of bitterness or rebellion” but rather feel encouraged “to love the holy Church even more and to attend to her needs more than ever with all our strength.”“We are certain that one day you yourself or one of your successors will wish to embrace the program of St. Pius X: ‘To restore all things in Christ,’” he said, noting that “on that day, the Holy Father will discover, with great joy and deep consolation, authentically Catholic souls — souls whose bond with the Church was never founded on the shifting sands of ambiguous dialogue but on the rock of Peter’s faith.”‘Turn back!’: Leo XIV’s plea the SSPX ignoredIn his letter, Pagliarani makes no mention of the Catholic Church’s repeated calls for dialogue, which date back to the pontificate of St. John Paul II with the creation of the Ecclesia Dei Commission and which reached one of their highest points in Benedict XVI’s decision to lift the excommunications of the four bishops consecrated by Lefebvre.Pope Francis also reached out to the SSPX with decisions such as allowing sacramental confessions with its priests to be valid and lawful during the Jubilee of Mercy in 2016 — a decision he later extended beyond that year.Pagliarani also did not address Pope Leo XIV’s direct plea to the Society of St. Pius X, asking the group not to commit “a schismatic act.”“In this spirit, and filled with Christian affection, I implore and ask you with all my heart: Turn back!” the Holy Father wrote to them on June 30.“I urge you to carefully consider the spiritual good of the faithful, because the schismatic act you would carry out would deprive them of the lawful — and in some cases, even valid — reception of the sacraments that they love and seek for their own sanctification,” the pope stated.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Read More

SSPX rejects Vatican’s excommunication, calls it ‘objectively’ unjust and invalid #Catholic The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), whose members are known as “Lefebvrians,” rejected the recent excommunications decreed by the Vatican after consecrating four bishops without papal authorization on July 1 and asserted that the sanctions imposed are “objectively unjust and invalid.”In a letter addressed to Pope Leo XIV, released on July 3, Father Davide Pagliarani, superior general of the SSPX, justified the episcopal consecrations that prompted the Vatican’s decree declaring the group to be in schism as “an extreme measure to save souls, amid the doctrinal and moral confusion in which the Church finds itself.”“We in no way intend to replace the Church, and our sole purpose is to remain faithful to her,” wrote Pagliarani, who leads the group founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who died in 1991.The group founded by Lefebvre aims to preserve the traditional liturgy as it existed prior to the reforms implemented after the Second Vatican Council while maintaining its opposition to aspects of the council’s teachings on ecumenism, religious freedom, and collegiality.Lefebvre was excommunicated in 1988 after ordaining, without the permission of Pope John Paul II, four bishops: Alfonso de Galarreta of Spain, Bernard Fellay of Switzerland, Richard Williamson of England, and Bernard Tissier de Mallerais of France.Amid attempts to build bridges of dialogue with the SSPX, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications in 2009 against the four bishops consecrated by Lefebvre.Tissier de Mallerais and Williamson died in 2024 and 2025, respectively. Galarreta and Fellay, on the other hand, participated in the recent consecration of four new bishops on July 1, for which they were excommunicated once again.‘We had asked for bread’Using as the central theme of his argument the passage from the Gospel according to St. Luke (11:11–13), in which Jesus reminds his disciples that “if you, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him,” Pagliarani asserted that “we had asked for bread — that is, a little understanding in the face of a sincere case of conscience, a gesture of fatherly compassion.”“Unfortunately, we have received a stone,” he continued, noting that, instead of “fish” — that is, “the possibility of temporarily obtaining the necessary means to continue forming good priests … unfortunately, we have received a snake.”“We had asked for an egg, promising to return it as soon as possible,” he added. He affirmed that “the holy tradition we preserve in our souls belongs to the Church, our Mother” but “unfortunately, we have received a scorpion.”The superior of the SSPX assured Leo XIV that the society does not accept the Vatican’s sanctions “in a spirit of bitterness or rebellion” but rather feel encouraged “to love the holy Church even more and to attend to her needs more than ever with all our strength.”“We are certain that one day you yourself or one of your successors will wish to embrace the program of St. Pius X: ‘To restore all things in Christ,’” he said, noting that “on that day, the Holy Father will discover, with great joy and deep consolation, authentically Catholic souls — souls whose bond with the Church was never founded on the shifting sands of ambiguous dialogue but on the rock of Peter’s faith.”‘Turn back!’: Leo XIV’s plea the SSPX ignoredIn his letter, Pagliarani makes no mention of the Catholic Church’s repeated calls for dialogue, which date back to the pontificate of St. John Paul II with the creation of the Ecclesia Dei Commission and which reached one of their highest points in Benedict XVI’s decision to lift the excommunications of the four bishops consecrated by Lefebvre.Pope Francis also reached out to the SSPX with decisions such as allowing sacramental confessions with its priests to be valid and lawful during the Jubilee of Mercy in 2016 — a decision he later extended beyond that year.Pagliarani also did not address Pope Leo XIV’s direct plea to the Society of St. Pius X, asking the group not to commit “a schismatic act.”“In this spirit, and filled with Christian affection, I implore and ask you with all my heart: Turn back!” the Holy Father wrote to them on June 30.“I urge you to carefully consider the spiritual good of the faithful, because the schismatic act you would carry out would deprive them of the lawful — and in some cases, even valid — reception of the sacraments that they love and seek for their own sanctification,” the pope stated.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

unitedyam

In a letter addressed to Pope Leo XIV, released on July 3, Father Davide Pagliarani, superior general of the SSPX, justified the episcopal consecrations that prompted the Vatican’s decree.

Read More
Vatican formally notifies SSPX bishops of excommunication #Catholic One day after the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) consecrated four bishops without the permission of Pope Leo XIV, the Vatican issued a decree declaring the excommunication of all bishops involved in the ceremony.Published on July 2 by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, the decree specified that the consecrating bishops, Bishops Alfonso de Galarreta and Bernard Fellay, as well as the four bishops consecrated, Bishops Pascal Schreiber, Michael Goldade, Michel Poinsinet de Sivry, and Marc Hanappier, have incurred excommunication latae sententiae for performing the consecrations. These excommunications, according to canon law, can only be removed by the pope.The decree also warned Catholic clergy and lay faithful not to adhere to the SSPX’s “schism,” under penalty of automatic excommunication.The decree, in an explanatory note, lamented that doctrinal discussions between the Holy See and the SSPX, since the time of St. Paul VI, have not resulted in the society’s full communion with the Holy See. The Vatican stated on May 13 that the consecrations would be a schismatic act, resulting in automatic excommunication for the consecrating bishops and those consecrated. The Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, later called the SSPX’s act “schismatic”.Pope Leo XIV even issued a final appeal to the society not to proceed with these consecrations.“In this spirit, and filled with Christian affection, I plead with you and ask you with all my heart: Please turn back,” Leo wrote in his letter.In 1988, after Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the SSPX, consecrated bishops without a papal mandate, the Vatican responded two days later, notifying him and the consecrated bishops of their automatic excommunication.The SSPX exclusively celebrates the Traditional Latin Mass and has rejected certain teachings and reforms of the Second Vatican Council, particularly regarding religious freedom and the Church’s approach to other faiths.
Read More

Vatican formally notifies SSPX bishops of excommunication #Catholic One day after the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) consecrated four bishops without the permission of Pope Leo XIV, the Vatican issued a decree declaring the excommunication of all bishops involved in the ceremony.Published on July 2 by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, the decree specified that the consecrating bishops, Bishops Alfonso de Galarreta and Bernard Fellay, as well as the four bishops consecrated, Bishops Pascal Schreiber, Michael Goldade, Michel Poinsinet de Sivry, and Marc Hanappier, have incurred excommunication latae sententiae for performing the consecrations. These excommunications, according to canon law, can only be removed by the pope.The decree also warned Catholic clergy and lay faithful not to adhere to the SSPX’s “schism,” under penalty of automatic excommunication.The decree, in an explanatory note, lamented that doctrinal discussions between the Holy See and the SSPX, since the time of St. Paul VI, have not resulted in the society’s full communion with the Holy See. The Vatican stated on May 13 that the consecrations would be a schismatic act, resulting in automatic excommunication for the consecrating bishops and those consecrated. The Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, later called the SSPX’s act “schismatic”.Pope Leo XIV even issued a final appeal to the society not to proceed with these consecrations.“In this spirit, and filled with Christian affection, I plead with you and ask you with all my heart: Please turn back,” Leo wrote in his letter.In 1988, after Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the SSPX, consecrated bishops without a papal mandate, the Vatican responded two days later, notifying him and the consecrated bishops of their automatic excommunication.The SSPX exclusively celebrates the Traditional Latin Mass and has rejected certain teachings and reforms of the Second Vatican Council, particularly regarding religious freedom and the Church’s approach to other faiths.

unitedyam

Because the traditionalist group consecrated bishops without papal approval, the Vatican issued a decree on July 2 declaring those bishops and their consecrators automatically excommunicated.

Read More