Canon lawyer explains why SSPX consecrations would not be ‘schismatic act’

(LifeSiteNews) — A Spanish priest and canon law scholar has explained in a post on X that the upcoming SSPX episcopal consecrations would entail neither the crime nor the sin of schism.

On February 21, Father Jaime Mercant Simó, a diocesan priest and lecturer at a major theological studies center in Mallorca, Spain, published a post on X in which he addressed questions regarding the episcopal consecrations expected to be carried out in July 2026 by the Society of Saint Pius X.

READ: Bishop Schneider urges Pope Leo XIV: Grant ‘the episcopal consecrations of the SSPX’

“For a perfect schism to occur, there must be a clear intention to carry out a schismatic act and to establish, through the new bishops, a hierarchical jurisdiction parallel to that of the Roman Catholic Church. In this case, neither of these conditions will be met,” the theologian explained.

In a structured format consisting of 23 questions and answers, he set out his position on whether such consecrations would constitute schism, mortal sin, or incur automatic excommunication, arguing that they would not amount to formal schism and would not be mortally sinful, although he acknowledged that they would represent “material disobedience” to Rome.

Simó conceded that the act would amount to disobedience “at least materially, since Rome does not want such consecrations to take place.” However, he maintained that mortal sin would not follow, “because, in this case, the intention of the SSPX leadership, of the consecrating bishops, and of the future bishops appears to be upright.”

Indeed, invoking the “state of necessity,” material disobedience would be justified, Simó argues and, as of today, “no one has any objective grounds to doubt their conscience or their upright intention, which is the good of the souls entrusted to them.”

Addressing the issue of excommunication latae sententiae feared by the Holy See, that is, a penalty that is incurred automatically by the very commission of the act and without the need for a formal process, Simó acknowledged that, “from a canonical perspective,” such a penalty would be considered to apply. Nevertheless, he argued that, in his view, the excommunication “would be null.”

“I believe there are sufficient theological and philosophical‑legal reasons to reach this conclusion, even though I know that many canonists will deny it from a purely legalistic standpoint,” Simó added. “Nevertheless, I think that, while the state of necessity constitutes the fundamental motive, the formal reason for such a penalty to be actually incurred is lacking, since there is no objective intention of formal schism, nor will a parallel jurisdiction be created.”

Referring to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Simó affirmed that the French prelate received a null declaration of excommunication, “since, on the supernatural plane of the Mystical Body, that bishop never ceased to be in communion with the Church.”

The theologian specifies, quoting canon law, that the “essence of ecclesial communion” consists of three essential dimensions: doctrinal, sacramental, and hierarchical. He stated that Lefebvre and, by extension, the SSPX, had not denied any of these elements. Concerning doctrine, he said the society “has never ceased to teach what the Church has always believed.”

Even regarding the Second Vatican Council, SSPX priests and bishops “do not offer a total critique, as is commonly believed, since [the council’s] writings contain elements that belong to the depositum fidei; rather, they approach certain delicate questions with a critical spirit, in areas where theological discussion is legitimate.”

Simó also described the council as pastoral rather than dogmatic in nature, and therefore not exercising the charism of infallibility in defining or condemning doctrines. “However, in the post‑conciliar era, despite this pastoral nature [of the council], some have attempted to turn [its magisterium] into a super‑dogma,” as then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger said in 1988 during a visit to the Chilean bishops.

READ: German activists replace city’s ‘Happy Ramadan’ sign with ‘Blessed Lent’ banner

On sacramental communion, the Spanish theologian stated that the sacraments administered by the SSPX are valid and celebrated according to Traditional rites long used in the Church. Regarding hierarchical communion, he acknowledged that the society’s canonical status is “irregular.” Nonetheless, he argued that the SSPX continues to recognize “the Pope of Rome as supreme pastor of the universal Church. In fact, it also recognizes and respects the jurisdiction of all the bishops of the Catholic world.” As evidence, he pointed to the mention of the Pope and the local bishop in the Canon of the Mass celebrated in SSPX chapels.

Simó concludes by recalling that, although he is not a priest of the society, he is “simply a Catholic” and, as such, he uses a critical spirit, “that is, the good habit of using reason and the judgment of discernment.”

In response to concerns about possible excesses within traditionalist circles, he said: “What worries me far more is the multitude of heterodox, blasphemous, and sacrilegious individuals found everywhere, especially in Germany. I am also troubled by the double standard that seems to exist in the way ecclesiastical authority applies penalties and censures.”

As a possible solution to tensions surrounding the anticipated consecrations, the Spanish theologian suggested that “Rome should formally accept the forthcoming episcopal ordinations” and recognize what he described as the “spiritual fruits of the SSPX apostolate.”