As Pope Leo faces SSPX schism, a Minnesota church merges old customs with fidelity
Fr. John Ubel preached at St. Agnes about balancing tradition with fidelity to the Vatican amid Pope Leo XIV's condemnation of the SSPX. The parish, authorized to celebrate the traditional Latin Mass, offers one Latin Mass per weekend alongside English Masses. The SSPX schism, declared by Pope Leo XIV on July 2, prompted the parish to emphasize unity and communion with the Holy See. St. Agnes, founded for German immigrants, remains a diverse community where Latin and English rites coexist peacefully.
3 months ago
The Church of St. Agnes in St. Paul, Minnesota, is showcasing how a parish can honor the traditional Latin Mass while remaining fully loyal to Pope Leo XIV, even as the pope confronts a schism with the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). 1
On July 2, 2026 Pope Leo XIV declared that the SSPX had formally broken from the Catholic Church after it consecrated four bishops without papal approval. The Vatican responded by excommunicating the SSPX bishops and priests and warning the faithful against attending SSPX services. 1
St. Agnes, founded for German‑immigrant families, celebrates one traditional Latin Mass each weekend with the archbishop’s permission, alongside several English‑language and a modern Latin Mass. Pastor Fr. John Ubel emphasizes that “different forms of Latin Mass… peacefully coexist” and that multiple liturgical options reflect inclusion, not competition. 1
The extraordinary form observed at St. Agnes includes longer prayers, the priest facing the altar, Communion on the tongue while kneeling at the rail, and the use of a black biretta and Roman‑style vestments. These customs distinguish it from the ordinary post‑Vatican II Mass. 1
Parishioners such as 15‑year‑old altar boy Peter Draganowski appreciate the added “beauty” of the Latin rite, while longtime members like Nell O’Leary Alt and choir singer Tom Graff value the solemnity and continuity with centuries of tradition. They express sadness over the SSPX split but affirm prayers for church unity. 1
Archbishop Bernard Hebda of St. Paul and Minneapolis welcomed the traditional liturgy, hoping former SSPX attendees will join approved services. Scholar Stephen Cranney notes that only about 510 extraordinary‑form Masses occur weekly in the United States, a small yet vocal segment whose motivations are largely aesthetic and reverential rather than oppositional to Vatican II reforms. 1
Pope Benedict XVI (2007) affirmed the validity of the Latin rite and encouraged its celebration when requested. Pope Francis (2021‑23) imposed stricter controls, requiring diocesan bishops’ approval and limiting parish‑church usage, citing the rite’s potential to fuel division. Pope Leo XIV has signaled openness, recently allowing a U.S. cardinal to celebrate the extraordinary form at St. Peter’s Basilica, a gesture welcomed by traditionalists. 1
Fr. Ubel and his congregation view the coexistence of ordinary and extraordinary Masses as a model for broader church unity, urging Catholics to “maintain full ecclesial communion” with the pope while appreciating diverse liturgical expressions. 1
Investigate Catholic tradition‑unity dynamics amid SSPX schism
Catholic tradition and Catholic unity are not rivals: authentic “living Tradition” grows within the Church’s communion, and it is safeguarded by the magisterium and by unity with the successors of the apostles, especially the Bishop of Rome.
The International Theological Commission (ITC) explains that Tradition is “something living and vital”: it is an ongoing process in which the unity of faith expresses itself amid languages and cultures; it “ceases to be Tradition if it fossilises.”
At the same time, the ITC ties Tradition to the Holy Spirit’s guidance and to the Church’s apostolic continuity: the Spirit keeps the Church faithful to her apostolic origins and enables the secure transmission of the Faith, “prompting the ever-new presentation of the Gospel under the direction of pastors who are successors of the apostles.”
So, Catholic “tradition” is not merely nostalgia for earlier forms; it is the Church’s received and spiritually guided way of living the Gospel.
The Church’s internal unity is also doctrinal: Scripture and Tradition form one deposit of the Word of God, and the authentic interpretation is entrusted “to the living teaching office of the Church alone.”
That same text explicitly rejects the idea that certainty about revealed truths can be drawn “from the holy Scriptures alone,” since the Church draws it also from Apostolic Tradition in its living ecclesial transmission.
Implication for SSPX dynamics: fidelity to Tradition, in Catholic terms, cannot mean an independent interpretive authority outside communion with the Church’s teaching office.
The ITC frames the early Church’s unity in terms of devotion “to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship… to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (Acts 2:42), describing essential elements of the Church’s sacramental life and spirituality as part of Apostolic Tradition.
It also makes an explicit “Catholic unity” point: in the Tradition of faith, the rule of prayer, belief, and life belong together—lex orandi (prayer) and lex credendi (belief) are not separable from lex vivendi (life).
So when a group’s traditionalism is accompanied by practices that break ecclesial communion, the Church reads that as a rupture in more than discipline; it becomes a rupture in the integrated transmission of faith and worship.
The ITC highlights a key nuance: Vatican II distinguished between Apostolic Tradition and “those traditions that belong to particular periods… or to particular regions and communities” (including religious orders and local churches).
Catholics can legitimately value older liturgical forms as living inheritances of the Church—but the Church still insists that critique and renewal must occur within communion, not by rejecting the Church’s present authority. The ITC states that while “criticism is not appropriate” to Apostolic Tradition itself, traditions must remain “open to critique” so that continual reform can strengthen or correct them through contact with the living faith of all times.
This matters for SSPX discussion because it clarifies how a concern for the old rite can be a legitimate “tradition” question, whereas a claim that the Council or post-conciliar magisterium must be rejected becomes a communion question.
In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI’s Ecclesiae Unitatem describes his intention to encourage resolution of fractures and to heal division; he remitted the excommunication of four bishops illicitly ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre as a step to open “a door to dialogue.”
But Benedict immediately clarifies the central dynamic: “the doctrinal questions obviously remain” and “until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.”
Benedict’s 2009 letter to bishops further explains the distinction between:
This distinction is crucial for “tradition–unity dynamics”: the Church can show mercy to individuals while still insisting that communion depends on doctrinal acceptance sufficient for canonical integration.
Benedict XVI says clearly that the Church’s teaching authority cannot be “frozen in the year 1962,” and he argues that accepting Vatican II means accepting the faith professed across the centuries—one cannot sever the roots of the tree from which it draws life.
He also states that the remaining issues concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium.
So, in the Church’s understanding, a “true tradition” approach must not become a “parallel ecclesiology” (a Church-within-the-Church) where Rome and current magisterium are treated as non-binding.
A later development (May 2026) makes the unity stakes explicit. A statement from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández) reiterates that the SSPX’s announced episcopal ordinations lack the requisite papal mandate, calling the act “a schismatic act” and stating that “formal adherence to the schism constitutes a grave offence against God and entails the excommunication established under Church law.”
The statement also records the Pope’s continuing prayer that those responsible reconsider this “extremely grave decision.”
The Church is thus not merely disputing liturgical preferences; it is treating the situation as a structural rupture of communion—a break in hierarchical unity with the Pope, embodied in the need for papal mandate for episcopal ordination.
An explanatory note dated July 2, 2026 (same Dicastery) states that attempts to bring SSPX adherents to full communion “have proved vain,” and that the recent episcopal consecrations without pontifical mandate—against the Pope’s will—constitute a “delitto di scisma” (delict of schism) and entail canonical consequences for both ministers and laity.
It then states (in its summary points) that:
This is the Church drawing the “tradition–unity” line in concrete ecclesial terms: the Church does not treat the SSPX only as a “parallel liturgical rite”; it treats the continuing acts as a communion-breaking reality with sacramental and canonical implications.
One Catholic scholarly analysis (Martin Rhonheimer) describes an internal logic in which some traditionalists are said to claim that certain conciliar teachings imply apostasy and possibly even heresy, and that such claims could justify schismatic episcopal ordinations.
Even if not every SSPX member holds every such position (the analysis itself distinguishes between groups), it helps illuminate the Church’s own reading: for Rome, the key issue is not merely “the old rite,” but the question of which authority is binding—whether the Council and post-conciliar magisterium are received as authentic teaching in continuity.
The ITC’s insistence that the interpretation of the Word of God—whether from Scripture or from Tradition—is entrusted to the living teaching office “alone” provides the theological “backbone” of the unity claim.
Thus, the “tradition-unity dynamics” in the SSPX schism can be summarized as this tension:
Taken together, the sources support a coherent Catholic framework:
That is the core “tradition–unity dynamics” the Church is defending: a sincere love of tradition must remain a love of the Church in communion, not a channel for breaking communion under the banner of preserving the old.
The Catholic tradition–unity dynamic amid the SSPX schism, as the Church presents it in these documents, is that living continuity in Tradition is guaranteed through communion with the magisterium and the Pope, whereas acts that reject that communion—especially episcopal ordinations without mandate—are treated as schismatic and therefore entail profound canonical and sacramental consequences.