(LifeSiteNews) — The Archdiocese of Maceió in Brazil announced that celebrating or attending the Traditional Latin Mass outside a sole approved location would constitute public schism and incur automatic excommunication.
On February 11, the Archdiocese of Maceió, in the state of Alagoas, Brazil, issued a disciplinary note warning clergy and faithful that any celebration of the TLM outside the single authorized chapel within its jurisdiction would be regarded as a public act of schism, carrying the penalty of latae sententiae (automatic) excommunication.
“In conformity with Canons 751 and 1364 §1 of the current Code of Canon Law, the celebration of the Mass, in the old rite, in another place, will be configured as an act of public schism, which will imply automatic excommunication,” the note states.
The text further clarifies that the permission for this celebration was granted by the Archbishop of Maceió, Carlos Alberto Breis Pereira, OFM, “with the approval of the Holy See.” It adds that the liturgy in question “is not authorized in any other place, whether religious or not, nor within any civil association.”
The disciplinary warning explicitly invokes Canon 751 of the Code of Canon Law, which defines schism as “the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” It also cites Canon 1364 §1, which provides that an apostate, heretic, or schismatic incurs automatic excommunication, without the need for a further declaratory sentence. The note concludes with an expression of hope that the faithful will remain in communion with the Archdiocese of Maceió and with the Apostolic See. It is signed by José Everaldo Rodrigues Filho, judicial vicar of the archdiocese.
READ: Vatican equates Ramadan and Lent in message to Muslims
The disciplinary note appears to have been made public solely through the archdiocese’s official Facebook channel. It does not appear among the published documents on the official website.
Guido Ferro Canale, an Italian lawyer and scholar of canon law, provided comments to LifeSiteNews on the note in question, first of all urging interpretative prudence. In his view, “it seems more like a case of media terrorism,” but – he specifies – it is nonetheless necessary “to correctly understand the nature of the measure.”
Ferro Canale prefaced his remarks by stating that he does not know the concrete context of the archdiocese concerned, nor the circumstances that led to the publication of the note. He does not know, for example, whether there are religious or civil associations celebrating in a clandestine manner, or whether there is an open and serious conflict with the archbishop. In the absence of these elements, the analysis can only be hypothetical.
However, he observes that the act in question would not be “merely declaratory”: if it had a preceptive character, it would constitute a “true penal precept, that is, an injunction to observe the law accompanied by a warning of canonical consequences in the event of violation.”
But would such consequences actually be applicable? “We must proceed cautiously,” the lawyer warns. With regard to schism – he recalls – it is described as a crime “of free form”: there is no exhaustive list of the ways in which refusal of communion or of submission to the Roman Pontiff may be realized. Canon law, he emphasizes, mentions “refusal of submission to the Pope” and “refusal of communion with the members of the Church,” adding a relevant distinction: “Communion is a concept distinct from mere disciplinary obedience.”
From this perspective, participation in an unauthorized celebration does not automatically constitute schism. “It constitutes schism only if accompanied by an explicit refusal of the authority of the Pope or of ecclesial communion,” Ferro Canale explains. “Mere material presence would not be sufficient: what matters is the intention to separate oneself from the communion of the Church. Only in the presence of an obstinate refusal could one hypothesize a canonical crime in the proper sense.” In the absence of objective signs of such refusal, he concludes, “the crime of schism is not configurable.”
The lawyer finally recalls the procedural aspect, often overlooked in public debate. “A general and preventive act – he observes – cannot replace an individual penal measure.” Canonical penalties – in particular excommunications – presuppose the identification of the subjects, a formal charge, and any warnings required by law. “It would not be juridically correct,” he notes, “to issue an indiscriminate decree against an indeterminate category of persons: it would be necessary to identify concrete recipients, notify them of a precept or a warning, and only subsequently, in the event of perseverance, proceed to any sanctions.”
For this reason, a generic and preventive act would have primarily a dissuasive value, but would not amount to a completed penal measure.
READ: Irish bishop says young Catholics yearn for ‘clarity’ and tradition, not synodality
As for a course of action to be adopted by those affected by the order, Ferro Canale observes that anyone who considered himself harmed “could also decide not to attribute particular relevance to the note”; meanwhile, he encouraged the faithful to “report the matter to the competent authorities, for example to the Holy See, should one believe that there has been an improper use of the penal instrument.” In any case, he reiterates, “any assessment remains subject to precise knowledge of the facts,” an element which, at the present time, does not appear to be entirely available.
LifeSiteNews contacted the archdiocese to request clarification about the note and the choice to publish it on a social network rather than on the official archdiocesan website. No response was received before publication.
Since the provision in question concerns a matter of the utmost gravity – namely, schism – and ordinary canonical practice favors channels that ensure stability, accessibility, and documentary traceability, the decision to publish such a disciplinary note on Facebook appears questionable, since such a post can be modified or removed.