There’s a lot of confusion surrounding the SSPX-related excommunications from last week, and I think a lot of the confusion (on both sides) stems from a misunderstanding of what an automatic excommunication is.

When the Church says that a certain act brings about a “latae sententiae” (i.e., automatic) excommunication, what she is saying is that the act is so serious that, if the proper conditions exist, then the person is excommunicated automatically by the act itself. There’s no need, in other words, for a bishop or pope to make a declaration.

However, it’s important to note the clause “if the proper conditions exist.” A person can commit an act that incurs automatic excommunication and, in fact, not be excommunicated. For example, a 14-year-old girl who gets an abortion is not excommunicated because she is under the age of 16, and canon law says automatic penalties do not apply for those under 16.

Likewise, if someone is physically forced to take an action, that act does not incur automatic excommunication even if it otherwise would.

This, by the way, is the core of the argument from the SSPX that its priests and lay faithful are not excommunicated: they believe that the conditions do not exist for automatic excommunication due to a “state of necessity.” One can either agree or disagree with this interpretation (I disagree with it and obviously so does the pope), but it’s a valid line of canonical argumentation nonetheless.

Understanding this reality also helps one understand last week’s DDF declarations announcing the excommunications and how to be reconciled. Cardinal Fernandez declared that the six bishops did in fact incur excommunication by their actions (this was the actual decree), but he then went on to explain (in the accompanying explanatory note) that the actions of SSPX priests and certain of their faithful incur automatic excommunications…if the proper conditions exist.

He specifically didn’t say they were all in fact definitively excommunicated, but they may be. So, if any of the priests or faithful want to leave the SSPX or stop celebrating/attending Society Masses, they need to approach the competent authority (their bishop) to determine if the excommunication did occur and, if so, what they need to do to have it lifted.

Here’s an example that fleshes it out: Say there’s a family with three children under the age of 12 who have attended the Society exclusively for years. The dad has been “all-in” for the Society, but the mom simply goes along with her husband but didn’t herself support the consecrations.

Now they decide to approach their local bishop to be reconciled. In this case, the three kids were not automatically excommunicated (they are under 16), the dad likely was, and the mom probably was not. But it’s up to their bishop to sort this out properly. A Vatican document alone doesn’t handle that specific situation, nor does it try to.

What this family can’t do is just assume they are fine and not bother to contact their local bishop. It’s not up to an individual to determine if his acts incurred canonical penalties or not; it’s up to the proper authority, i.e., the bishop, to do so.

I’ve seen some pundits try to claim that the DDF documents messed up how they excommunicated the priests and laity and thus can’t be enforced. But it seems to me that these pundits are claiming the documents are saying more than they are actually saying. Fernandez didn’t attempt to excommunicate them; he simply laid out that their actions are actions that incur automatic excommunication, which, as we’ve seen, isn’t always automatic.

As I’ve said before, this whole situation is a mess and we should pray and fast for a reconciliation. But let’s not add to the confusion by misunderstanding what the Vatican has said, and what it has not said.