My passage from the SSPX to sedevacantism –
suffering for the truth
Reasons for my entry into and my exit from the SSPX
By Eric Jacqmin, priest of the Catholic Church
Before my dismissal on 15 August 2015, I had spent twenty-six years in the SSPX, during which I exercised various offices in different countries, and I devoted myself without counting the cost and with the sincere intention of serving God, the Church and souls. I was completely unaware that I was in error regarding the situation of the Supreme See, and that I was ignorant of the infidelity, and even a certain perversity, of my superiors.
Of course, before entering this congregation, I had reflected on which doctrine or opinion was the true one: sedevacantism or the position of the SSPX – “accept the popes after 1964 and resist”.
The argument of His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that I found in my research was then the following: a formal heretic is outside the Church, but a material heretic is not. To be formal, the heretic must have been admonished twice by his superiors and persevere in his error. Since the popes have no superiors, they cannot be properly admonished; therefore, even after having publicly expressed a heresy, they can never become formal heretics. Consequently, they can never be considered or placed outside the Church. And to consider a true pope as an antipope is schismatic, something to be avoided as one avoids hell.
In 2015, having been appointed chaplain to the Carmelite convent of Quiévrain, I had more time to study. I found in the Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique articles which demonstrate that, according to the Tradition of the Church, indeed “the Supreme See is judged by no one”, but that there is this exception: “unless it is established that he has deviated from the faith”.
I searched further and found that this doctrine is common in the Church. No one had ever spoken to me about it in the SSPX.
I decided to consult the Teaching Church, that is, the bishops of the SSPX. There were three of them in 2015:
1) At the beginning of July, Bishop Tissier de Mallerais came to visit the Carmelite convent and took his meals with me. I shared my findings with him. He replied that I was right, that Vatican II is heretical, that Paul VI was a heretic and therefore not pope until his death (the sedevacantist position). But he assured me that he would not speak about it, nor would the other superiors, because otherwise the SSPX would lose too many faithful and priests who would not want to follow. He warned me that I had no right to speak about it to the faithful nor to the other priests.
2) I then telephoned Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the SSPX at the time, to ask him what was happening. He told me personally, in July 2015, that I was authorised to be a sedevacantist in private and to celebrate the “non una cum” Mass, on condition that: I speak to no one about it and especially not publicly, and that I mention the name of “Francis” in the public prayer (as during the Benediction of the Most Holy Sacrament or in the solemn prayers of Good Friday), with the following mental restriction: “Francis, pope (as people think)”.
He told me that the errors of Vatican II are not heresies and therefore not serious enough to consider a pope as having fallen. But he admitted that if a pope utters a public heresy, he would lose his papacy.
Some time later, Bishop Fellay signed a letter of accusation of heresies addressed to the “pope”. The “Filial Correction” (September 2017), signed by 250 theologians, priests and traditionalist academics, did indeed accuse “Pope” Francis of having supported and propagated seven heretical propositions, notably in his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia concerning the family and the sacraments. Bishop Fellay was the most prominent signatory of this initiative.
Bishop Fellay never proclaimed that Francis was therefore a heretic and an antipope. Illogical behaviour on the part of the Superior General.
3) Bishop de Galarreta had visited the Carmelite convent a few weeks later, in that same month of July 2015, and he complained that the negotiations and theological discussions between the SSPX and Rome were blocked on the following point: the theologians of the SSPX had proved that Vatican II is contrary to Tradition and therefore heretical, but the theologians of Rome replied: “We are the living magisterium, therefore we decide how Tradition must be understood, and we declare that Vatican II is in accord with Tradition, and vice versa.”
I replied to Bishop de Galarreta that there was a way out: namely that, if the healthy part of the Church establishes that Rome has deviated from the faith, we can declare that the pope is outside the Church. Bishop de Galarreta asked me for my sources. I printed them all and handed them to him, and Bishop de Galarreta later thanked me, saying that it was very interesting.
The sisters of the Carmelite convent realised after a certain time that I no longer said the prayers for the “pope” at the Benediction of the Most Holy Sacrament as usual, but that I changed them to another formula. They threatened to put me out. They consulted Bishop de Galarreta, but he told them: “Let him do it.”
4) Later, before dismissing me for these “two causes of sedevacantism and criticism of superiors”, Bishop Fellay had also said to me: “You need the SSPX more than you think.” Yes, I was sixty-three years old, without savings, without a wealthy family, with only a handful of faithful willing to follow me. I had no unemployment benefit nor pension. I had only the Gospel, which says: “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.” I therefore placed my trust in Jesus more than in this unworthy bishop and… I have never lacked anything. Apparently this is something that Bishop Fellay had not foreseen.
Saint John of the Cross, Doctor of the Church and the greatest mystical author of all time, warned with gravity that when one no longer dares to say to superiors what ought to be said, out of weakness, pusillanimity or fear of displeasing them, one must consider the Order as gravely ill, even weep for it as lost. According to the testimony of Fr. Élisée des Martyrs, he said: “Si no osaren decir lo que conviene… tengan la Orden por perdida.” — “If one does not dare to say what ought to be said… let one hold the Order as lost.” This saying reminds us that true religious life requires not only obedience, but also respectful frankness and the courage of truth, and that superiors must receive just remarks and take appropriate measures.
Source: testimony of Fr. Eliseo de los Mártires, “Dictámenes” on Saint John of the Cross, traditionally cited as Dictamen 13, Spanish.
5) The Mother Superior of the Carmelite convent of Quiévrain, for which I served as chaplain, reprimanded and threatened me in mid-August 2015: “We pray that you may die before committing a mortal sin by becoming a sedevacantist.” She refused to listen to my arguments and even threatened me that, during the sermon, she would have all the sisters sing the Creed very loudly if I dared to say anything to the faithful, to prevent it from being heard. I abandoned the sermon so as not to make war during the Mass, which I considered a sacrilege. I spoke with the faithful separately on occasion.
She added later, before I left: “We had already prayed for another priest who was about to fall into mortal sin, and he died.”
… I am still alive at seventy-three years of age and in good health. I had forgotten to reply to her: “Pray for the same grace for yourself.”
6) Other members of the Fraternity below standard…
Archbishop Lefebvre admitted at the time that 15 percent of traditional faithful are sedevacantists. And Bishop Fellay told me that several priests in the SSPX have accepted the “mental restriction”. Indeed, I know a priest of the SSPX who secretly celebrates the non una cum Mass, but who does not have the courage to leave the SSPX. Others have said to me: “We think like you, but we do not take it so seriously.” I do not understand how priests can be so lax.
I can attest to all this under oath if necessary. Of course, I refused to act in that way, because it would be a mortal sin to deceive the faithful on such an important matter, and it would be lying in the face of God Himself during the Holy Liturgy. To accept an antipope as pope is schismatic. Then one would have to tell the faithful that one hour of fasting is sufficient to receive Communion (according to Paul VI after his heresy) instead of the three hours prescribed by Pius XII, as well as to change the fasting and abstinence on the prescribed days. All this is grave matter; therefore I would have plunged the faithful and myself into mortal sins by obeying my superiors.
Obedience stops at sin, all the more so at mortal sins, of course.
O my God, grant us the courage always to seek Your will and rather to die than to betray Your truth.
Our Lady, guardian of the faith, save us.