(LifeSiteNews) — Bishop Robert Mutsaerts, auxiliary bishop of s-Hertogenbosch (Den Bosch) in the Netherlands, weighed in on the controversial decision by the Society of St. Pius X to consecrate bishops on July 1 with or without approval from the Vatican.

In a post published Tuesday, March 10, on his Paarse Pepers blog, Mutsaerts cites canon law while recalling past Vatican dealings with the SSPX to explain why he aligns himself “with Cardinals Müller and Sarah,” who hold that the consecrations would constitute a “schismatic act,” and why he sees Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s position that an excommunication would be “invalid” as “based more on wishful thinking.”

“If the SSPX were to consecrate bishops again without a mandate,” Mutsaerts begins, “canonically it would almost certainly mean automatic excommunication for the consecrating bishops and the new bishops.”

Mutsaerts also explains that the move “could be described by Rome as a schismatic act” but that whether the SSPX as a whole would be declared schismatic depends on their intention toward papal authority, and how explicitly they reject papal authority.

To date, Cardinals Gerhard Müller and Robert Sarah have been the most prominent clerics to express concern over the consecrations.

“Can one who abandons the Chair of Peter still claim to be within the Church of Christ?” Sarah asked in a letter on the subject published in Le Journal du Dimanche on February 22.

“If the Society of St. Pius X is to have a positive impact on Church history, it cannot fight for the true faith from a distance, from the outside, against the Church united with the pope,” Müller similarly argued in a statement last month.

Schneider has pushed back against arguments that excommunication would be incurred by the SSPX for the consecrations.

READ: Bp. Eleganti blasts SSPX ‘schismatic mindset’ as Bp. Schneider says excommunication would be invalid

“I think that, if the excommunication would be applied, it would be in some way not valid because there is no intention to do a schismatic act on the side of the Society of Pius X, and you cannot be punished when you have not the intention to do it, according to the canon law,” Schneider said recently.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former apostolic nuncio to the United States, also issued statements on the matter. His Excellency has been critical of those attacking the SSPX over the planned consecrations.

“Müller, Sarah, and (Cardinal Raymond) Burke effectively constitute a controlled opposition,” His Excellency argued recently. “Their role is to contain the hemorrhage of Catholics caused by the conciliar revolution, deluding the faithful into thinking that it is possible for two opposing entities to coexist within the same institution and under the same hierarchy: the Catholic Church and the conciliar-synodal Church.”

Elsewhere in Mutaerts’ blog post, he drew attention to the manner in which the SSPX has been treated by the Vatican, noting the fact that Pope Francis granted them jurisdiction for confessions and marriages. Taking a more moderate approach to the Society, he emphasized that the most common formulation in official Roman documents is that the SSPX has “not been declared schismatic, is canonically irregular, lacks canonical mission or jurisdiction, but is not fully outside the Church.”

At the same time, Mutsaerts noted that the SSPX “has a parallel hierarchy” and that “they perform ordinations without jurisdiction, and they often ignore local bishops.”

Mutsaerts suggested that a personal prelature similar to that of Opus Dei could be proposed for the Society so that it could remain relatively independent and free from local bishops but remain under the authority of the Pope.

He suggested this as a possible solution while recalling that there are “risks” for Rome if it fails to clarify the SSPX’s standing as this “would imply that bishops can be consecrated without papal mandate without leading to a real schism. That would seriously undermine the primacy of the pope. In this regard, I therefore gladly align myself with Cardinals Müller and Sarah, and consider Bishop Schneider’s position to be based more on wishful thinking than on legitimacy.”

To read Mutsaerts’ original blog post in Dutch, click HERE.