FSSPX Writes Leo XIV, Defines “Minimum” for Communion with Rome
On 14 May, Fr Davide Pagliarani, the Superior of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, wrote to Pope Leo XIV. The open letter was issued less than 24 hours after Cardinal Tucho Fernández threatened excommunication.
The Priestly Fraternity laments to have spent over 50 years alerting the Holy See to doctrinal and moral errors, yet these concerns have not received a satisfactory response; instead, Rome is considering canonical sanctions.
Fr Pagliarani does not address the issue of episcopal consecration or a papal mandate for it.
Instead, he published a 'Declaration of Faith', stating that it represents “the minimum indispensable to be in communion with the Church, and to truly call ourselves Catholics and, consequently, your sons”.
The declaration presents itself as being loyal to the Pope. It repeatedly addresses Leo XIV reverence, using titles such as 'Most Holy Father' and 'Your Holiness'.
The FSSPX asks Leo XIV to be “instructed and confirmed” in the Declaration of Faith.
The text notes that there is only one true religion founded by Jesus Christ; that salvation comes only through the Church; and that everyone — including Jews, Muslims, atheists, pagans and other Christians — is called to convert to Catholicism.
The Pope is described as the Vicar of Christ and the supreme authority in the Church. However, the text stresses that popes cannot create new doctrine, but must preserve and faithfully expound the Deposit of the Faith handed down from the apostles.
Holy Mass is called the true sacrifice that perpetuates Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. The text rejects any reduction of the Mass to a mere commemoration, meal, sacred assembly or celebration without sacrifice, expiation or propitiation.
Regarding moral teaching, the text condemns homosexual acts as sinful and states that same-sex couples cannot be blessed by Church officials. It also warns against receiving Communion while in a state of sin.
The synodal sect possesses a counterfeit Peter—a false Peter without Christ. —who wages war against Christ and the Church. It is apostate, schismatic, and heretical. It is a place where the Gates of Hell reign—gates which the Church Fathers have identified as heresy and the vices of sexual impurity. Indeed, within the synodal sect, sodomy reigns supreme (as evidenced by *Fiducia Supplicans*—which equates to sodomy and adultery/cohabitation—and *Amoris Laetitia*, which promotes Eucharistic sacrilege against Christ for the benefit of sodomites and adulterers). The synodal sect lacks the four marks of the Catholic Church. It is not *Apostolic*, for it lacks true apostolic succession and seeks a form of governance that is not hierarchical, but rather horizontal. It is not *One*, for it promotes the false gods of false religions and denies the Most Holy Trinity through the heresy of religious indifferentism. It is not *Catholic*, but rather *Synodal*; its adherents explicitly reject Catholicity, with each individual aspiring to act as a "head" without having received Holy Orders. It is not *Hierarchical*, but *Marxist* in nature; women seek to govern priests and place themselves on an equal footing with the false Pope, while every episcopal conference functions as an autonomous, apostate body that does whatever it pleases in defiance of Christ’s Gospel and sound Catholic doctrine. The apostate, pro-sodomite German bishops—who are already in schism—remain united to this synodal sect. Finally, it is not *Holy*; on the contrary, it promotes fornication in open rebellion against the Will of God and His Natural Law. Instead of holiness, it fosters sexual immorality and sacrilege—acts of rebellion against God and against the work of the Holy Spirit. Bergoglio himself has stated that his "communion" of saints includes blasphemers, heretics, schismatics, apostates, and the like. Furthermore, Prevost promotes as "saints" certain priests who refused to evangelize indigenous peoples—such as a depraved, "Red" nudist priest who allowed indigenous children to touch his genitals. The synodal sect is not Roman; for, through *Traditionis Custodes*, the Traditional Roman Church is being persecuted—there exists a rupture between the Church of Always and this synodal sect. They no longer even possess the fabricated excuse of the "hermeneutic of continuity" to attempt to interpret Vatican II in accordance with Tradition, rather than creating a new post-conciliar church. Indeed, these two impostors—squatters and gay activists—are a telling pair: one of them, Bergoglio, lived in a hotel managed by sodomites, while the other, gay activist Robert Prevost, lives with other men—and who knows what a depraved man does who approves of and "blesses" relations contrary to nature, which are abhorred by God. Therefore, this synodal sect—by trampling upon the Blood of Christ, the sole Redeemer—leads not to Salvation, but to eternal condemnation. The apostates Bergoglio and Prevost—both possessing a heretical, Marxist, pro-gay, and Masonic past that disqualifies them as legitimate candidates for the papacy—have served as two false popes, elected by two false conclaves. One such false conclave took place without Pope Benedict having truly renounced the papacy, relying instead on the unbiblical, counterfeit figure of a "retired" or "emeritus" pope. Pope Benedict retained the Ring of the Fisherman and continued to function as a retired pope, imparting apostolic blessings and dressing as a pope. And the explanation offered by "God" Bergoglio was that the Germans—being so "creative"—had invented that loophole: the figure of the *emeritus* pope. In other words, a false church holding false keys. And, given the absence of apostolic succession, all of Bergoglio’s acts are invalid—as are the "cardinals" he appointed, such as Tucho, Cobo, Prevost, and others. The invalid conclave of 2025—comprising apostates, sodomites, schismatics, and heretics—elected Bergoglio’s successor: that is to say, another false pope, an Antichrist. I could go on, for the list of evidences demonstrating the nullity of these two impostors is a long one.
SSPX took on the name ST Pius X why ? One reason Pius X oath against modernism was a antidote to modern heresies . St Paul warned us about wolves disguised as shepherds teaching false doctrines St Pius X was a modern St Paul Hold onto Tradition I handed down to you. ST Paul pray for us
15.05.2026 With Vatican Council II rational Fr.Davide Pagliarani returns to traditional faith, morals, ecumenism, religious dialogue, collegiality, mission and religious liberty since the Council is traditional. The Declaration of the Faith by Fr.Davide Pagliarani, the Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), was based upon Tradition. He must now announce that LG 8, 14 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to theoretical and not physically visible cases in 2026.This is common sense. It is something obvious said a former prior of the SSPX at Albano, Italy, Don Aldo Rossi. LG 8, 14, 16 are not explicit exceptions in the present times, for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Council of Florence 1442, which did not mention any exceptions. This announcement by the SSPX will get Vatican Council II, ‘out of the way’, some 60-plus years, too late. Presently, Pope Leo, Cardinal Fernandez and Fr. Davide Pagliarani, interpret LG 8, 14,16 etc as being ‘visible exceptions’ for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, of the Fourth Lateran Council. So the Athanasius Creed and the ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Roman Missal are made obsolete. The Syllabus of Errors no more had any value for Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. This is what I was told by the Sri Lankan, cardinal Malcolm Ranjit, when he was the head of Propaganda Fide, in Rome, many years back. Fr. Davide Pagliarani rejects the liberal conclusion of Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally, which Cardinal Fernandez accepts. He uses it to justify the ‘liberal reforms’. With LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc invisible- which is common sense, Cardinal Fernandez cannot cite exceptions, in Vatican Council II, for EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Roman Missal, which are no more obsolete. The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX is no more obsolete. Ad Gentes 7 is aligned with the dogma EENS and an ecumenism of return of the Syllabus, while LG 14 and 16 are not explicit exceptions. The Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q, 27Q) is no more obsolete. Ad Gentes 7 is aligned with 24 Q and 27 Q and there are no explicit exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II, for this old catechism. Cardinal Walter Kasper can no more say that if Vatican Council II could change the ecclesiology of the Church, then the Eucharist could be given to the divorced and re-married and so with the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, they reject Tradition. Vatican Council II rational (LG 16 invisible) does not allow the ecclesiology to be changed. Vatican Council II, rational is the SSPX’s strong point. It puts Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez in public schism. With Vatican Council II interpreted rationally (LG 8, 14, 16 are hypothetical ), he cannot excommunicate the SSPX for not accepting Vatican Council II. It is Fernandez who has to accept Vatican Council II, since, morally, the Council can only be interpreted rationally.The SSPX has a right to canonical recognition. It is the religious communities which do not affirm Magisterial Documents interpreted rationally, who are in schism. If the liberal-left do not affirm Vatican Council II they are in schism. It is obligatory for Pope Leo to affirm Vatican Council II, which is a Magisterial Document in harmony with the Magisterium over the centuries. Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and so ethically, is the Magisterium for us today when a pope or cardinal errs. When the pope, affirms Vatican Council II rationally and the liberal cardinals do not do so, then they are in manifest schism. This is an impediment to offering Holy Mass. The SSPX must affirm Vatican Council II. Insist on it! Cardinal Fernandez is unable to affirm Vatican Council II, rational and neither Tradition (EENS etc). Canonically, this is public schism. Cardinal Fernandez, chooses to be a public heretic and schismatic. There is no denial from him. He cannot issue a Declaration of Faith. He does not have the Faith. Doctrinally, put him in a corner against the wall, with Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church interpreted rationally, in harmony with the ecclesiocentric Roman Missal of the Latin Mass. It is the New Missal based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally which has to be updated. The lex orandi over the centuries was based upon th dogma EENS interpreted rationally, traditionally and honestly. With Vatican Council II rational we return to traditional faith and morals, ecumenism, inter-religious dialogue, collegiality, religious liberty and mission. The Council, itself, is traditional. - Liomel Andrades With Vatican Council II rational Fr.Davide …
Robert Prevost mocks the priesthood instituted by Christ. "YOUR GRACE" Pope Leo XIII’s 1896, Apostolicae Curae: Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void” Professio fidei: “Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church”
...“the minimum indispensable to be in communion with the Church, and to truly call ourselves Catholics and, consequently, your sons." Wow! There you have it. He admits openly they are currently "NEITHER Catholic nor sons of the Pope." The Vatican's formal excommunication will only formalize current realities.