Letter 1341 published 11 March 2026
DR. JAIME MERCANT
AND THE SSPX CONSECRATIONS
A DOSSIER ON THE ANNOUNCED CONSECRATIONS
OF THE SOCIETY OF SAINT PIUS X
We intend to publish, as we have already done with the interview given by Don Davide Pagliarani, the Superior General of the SSPX, the documents related to the matter triggered by the announcement of episcopal consecrations at Ecône on July 3, 2026. These documents may interest our readers.
Here we publish the position taken by Mossèn (equivalent of Monsignor) Jaime Mercant Simó, a priest of the Diocese of Majorca in Spain, a doctor of Thomistic philosophy from the Abat Oliba CEU University (Barcelona), a doctor in law and social sciences, a graduate in theology, director of the Diocesan Library of Majorca, and professor at the Center for Theological Studies of Majorca, at UNED, Abat Oliba CEU University, and at the Catholic Institute of Toulouse. He is also a member of the International Thomas Aquinas Society.
This philosopher and theologian is known as a specialist in Karl Rahner. He has published Los Fundamentos filosóficos de la teología trascendental de Karl Rahner (Rome, Leonardo da Vinci, 2017), La Metafísica del conocimiento de Karl Rahner: Análisis de « Espíritu en el mundo » (Girona, Documenta Universitaria, 2018), and La Genesi della destructio metaphysicae di Karl Rahner a partire dalle sue fonti (Rome, Leonardo da Vinci, 2019). He is the author of numerous articles, including “Les principes fondamentaux de la pensée de Johan Baptist Metz: de l’anthropocentrisme chrétien à la théologie politique” (Revue thomiste, 2021, fasc. 2 and 3).
Jaime Mercant Simó, with a rare intellectual freedom in the ecclesiastical world, publicly shared his opinion on the "Saint Pius X matter" through the following text (https://x.com/JaimeMercant/status/2025301962779193542), which significantly relativizes the severity of the penalties that may affect the SSPX bishops after the consecrations of July 3, 2026. He calls on Rome to "show benevolence and formally accept the consecration of these future bishops, while recognizing the spiritual fruits of the SSPX apostolate."
Several of my readers have asked me about the upcoming episcopal consecrations of the Society of Saint Pius X. Here is my position, expressed pedagogically in the form of questions and answers:
1. Will the Lefebvrists commit a mortal sin with these episcopal consecrations?
— No, absolutely not.
2. Isn’t this a schismatic act?
— No, formally, it is not.
3. Why isn’t it formally a schismatic act?
— Because for there to be a “perfect schism,” there must be a clear intention to commit a schismatic act and establish, with the new bishops, a hierarchical jurisdiction parallel to that which exists in the Roman Catholic Church. However, in this case, neither of these things will happen.
4. Could it at least be an act of disobedience?
— Yes, indeed, it is, at least materially, since Rome does not wish for these consecrations to take place.
5. So do they sin mortally by disobedience?
— No, because, in this case, the intention of the SSPX authority, the consecrators, and the future consecrated bishops seems to be righteous. They invoke the “state of necessity,” which would justify “material disobedience.” In this regard, we have no objective reasons to doubt their conscience or their righteous intention, which is the salvation of souls entrusted to them.
6. But the latae sententiae excommunication, meaning automatic and immediate, will occur, right?
— Canonically, yes; but, in my humble opinion, this excommunication would be null. I believe there are sufficient theological and legal-philosophical reasons to conclude this, even though I know many canonists will contradict me with a purely legalistic view. However, I think that, in addition to the fundamental reason of “the state of necessity,” the “formal reason” for applying this penalty is lacking, since there is no objective intention of formal schism or the creation of a parallel jurisdiction, I repeat.
7. Did Archbishop Lefebvre receive the penalty of excommunication?
— Yes, as these bishops will probably receive it; but his excommunication was also null because, on the supernatural level of the Mystical Body, this bishop has never ceased to be in communion with the Church.
8. What do you mean by that?
— The essence of communion is threefold: doctrinal, sacramental, and hierarchical. Therefore, I believe that Archbishop Lefebvre and, by extension, the SSPX, have not denied any of these three “essential dimensions” of ecclesial communion.
9. Is the SSPX in doctrinal communion?
— Of course, it has never ceased teaching what the Church has always believed.
10. But don’t the Lefebvrists constantly challenge the documents of the Second Vatican Council?
— They do not reject the entire Council wholesale, as is commonly believed, since these texts contain elements of the depositum fidei. However, they approach, with a critical spirit, certain “delicate” issues, for which theological discussion is legitimate.
11. How can you say such a thing?
— I can say it because the very “nature” of the Council allows it.
12. What do you mean by that?
— I mean that Vatican II was a “pastoral” council, not dogmatic; therefore, it did not benefit from the charism of infallibility, since at no time was there any intention to define or condemn anything infallibly; this was the express decision of the majority of the Council Fathers. However, in the post-conciliar period, despite this “pastoral nature,” some tried to transform this council into a “superdogma.”
13. “Superdogma”? Isn’t that disrespectful? Why use Lefebvrist rhetoric?
— I am actually using the exact words of Joseph Ratzinger, who, during a visit to the bishops of Chile (1988), used these same terms.
14. Moreover, is it true that the SSPX is in sacramental communion?
— Its sacraments are not only valid but celebrated according to the traditional rites that the Church has used since time immemorial.
15. But it is obvious that the SSPX is not in hierarchical communion, right?
— Although, canonically, its “institutional situation” is irregular and imperfect, the Society never ceases to recognize the Pope of Rome as the supreme pastor of the universal Church. In fact, it also recognizes and respects the jurisdiction of all bishops in the Catholic world.
16. Give me a proof of what you’re saying.
— At every SSPX Mass, without exception, the priests name the Pope and the local bishop in the canon of the Mass.
17. Isn’t that a very weak argument?
— Absolutely not. The most formal and public manifestation of hierarchical recognition is precisely in the Holy Mass, concretely in the canon.
18. Are you a Lefebvrist or a pro-Lefebvrist?
— Neither, sir; I am independent. I am simply Catholic and, as such, I have a critical mind, which means I have the good habit of using reason and discernment.
19. Yet, it seems that you agree with the SSPX on everything?
— No, I do not. On certain attitudes and issues, I disagree, but these, in my opinion, are secondary and accidental. On “the essential,” I agree 100% with the Society, and therefore, I will not contribute to its unjust and disproportionate “demonization.”
20. Can you tell me what the essential is?
— The “essential” is its “Catholicity.” Period.
21. But aren’t you worried about the “tendency” of the Lefebvrists?
— I am more concerned about the multitude of heretics, blasphemers, and sacrilegious individuals found everywhere, especially in Germany. I am also concerned about the double standard that seems to exist in the application of penalties and censures by the ecclesiastical authority.
22. What solution do you see to the current Lefebvrist problem?
— First of all, I think Rome should show benevolence and formally accept the consecration of these future bishops, while recognizing the spiritual fruits of the SSPX apostolate. I believe that this would be a true gesture of mercy and intelligence; these two things are not incompatible.
23. Aren’t you afraid of being criticized for these opinions?
— No, because I am a priest of the Catholic Church, not the pastor of a sect; and therefore, with respect, I can and must exercise, in my life of faith, the true freedom of the children of God.
Dr. Jaime Mercant Simó
