The Catholic News Agency portal (January 7, 2026) reports on a memorandum by Fr. Louis-Marie de Blignières proposing a personal apostolic administration for adherents of the Traditional Latin Mass ahead of an extraordinary consistory convened by “Pope” Leo XIV. The article frames this as a solution to tensions following the 2021 motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, which restricted the pre-conciliar liturgy. De Blignières – founder of the Fraternity of St. Vincent Ferrier and participant in “St.” John Paul II’s post-1988 negotiations with Lefebvrians – suggests a non-territorial jurisdiction modeled on military ordinariates, claiming it would provide “stability, peace, and unity” while maintaining diocesan ties. The proposal has drawn mixed reactions from figures like Fr. Matthieu Raffray (Institute of the Good Shepherd) and Fr. Pierre Amar, revealing ongoing fractures within the conciliar sect’s liturgical landscape.
Canonical Facade for Apostate Liturgical Revolution
The proposal’s fatal flaw lies in its acceptance of the fundamental illegitimacy of the post-conciliar liturgical reform. By seeking accommodation within the structures of the conciliar sect, de Blignières implicitly validates the very revolution he pretends to resist. As Pius XII warned in Mediator Dei (1947): “The temerity and daring of those who introduce novel liturgical practices… or call for the revival of obsolete rites out of harmony with prevailing laws and rubrics, deserve severe reproof” (§59). The 1962 Missal itself constitutes an early stage of liturgical deformation – the Ordo Recitandi of 1965 and 1969 Novus Ordo being its logical culmination. To treat this transitional rite as sacrosanct demonstrates theological incoherence.
“The creation of dedicated ecclesiastical jurisdictions would move matters forward toward stability, peace, and unity.”
This statement betrays a naturalistic mindset foreign to Catholic ecclesiology. True unity flows from submission to immutable doctrine (John 17:17-21), not bureaucratic restructuring. The First Vatican Council dogmatized that the Church’s unity is “founded on the successor of Peter… against which the gates of hell shall not prevail” (Pastor Aeternus, Ch.3). By contrast, this proposal treats the counterfeit church of Vatican II as possessing legitimate jurisdiction – a contradiction of sedevacantist principles grounded in Bellarmine’s De Romano Pontifice (II.30): “A manifest heretic automatically ceases to be pope and head of the Church.”
Lefebvrian Contradictions Institutionalized
De Blignières’ appeal to the Campos apostolic administration (established 2002) reveals the bankruptcy of the Ecclesia Dei position. These structures function as pressure valves to neutralize resistance to the conciliar revolution. As Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre warned before his tragic 1988 compromise: “They want to bring us back to Rome to make us accept the Council… It’s a trap”</i (Sermon, June 1987). The memorandum’s reference to "full communion with the Catholic hierarchy" constitutes deliberate blindness to the apostate nature of the post-conciliar episcopate, whose holy orders are doubtful at best following Paul VI’s invalid ordinal.
“For more than 60 years, this group has continued to exist and to grow, but it lacks the support of a juridical framework adapted to its legitimate needs.”
Herein lies the fatal concession: recognition of the neo-modernist sect’s authority to grant or withhold “juridical frameworks.” True Catholic tradition requires no permission from usurpers. The Church’s lex orandi was fixed for all time by Pius V’s Quo Primum (1570), which declared: “This Missal is to be adhered to… in perpetuity… nor shall bishops… be forced to accept any other.” No subsequent pope – let alone antipopes – could lawfully suppress this rite, as Pius XII confirmed: “The sacred liturgy is intimately bound up with the truths of the Faith… therefore it must conform to decrees of the Catholic Faith” (Mediator Dei §47).
Symptomatic Silence on Doctrinal Apostasy
The article’s exclusive focus on liturgical mechanics while ignoring doctrinal deviations epitomizes the conciliar sect’s dogmatic indifferentism. Nowhere does de Blignières mention the heresies necessitating separation: religious liberty (contra Quanta Cura), ecumenism (contra Mortalium Animos), or collegiality (contra Pastor Aeternus). This aligns with the modernist tactic condemned by St. Pius X: “They make a clean sweep of all theological philosophy… replacing it by religious sentiment” (Pascendi §13).
The proposal’s framing as a pastoral solution (“clarity and continuity”) ignores the ontological reality that the conciliar sect lacks valid sacraments. As the Holy Office decreed under Pius XII: “If the rite is changed to express a new sacramental intention… the sacrament is invalid” (Decree, December 8, 1947). Since Paul VI’s Ordo Missae fundamentally altered the sacrificial intention – as Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci demonstrated – even diocesan TLM celebrations under conciliar bishops operate in a sacramental wasteland.
Historical Amnesia and Revolutionary Folly
The memorandum’s reference to “60 years” of traditionalist growth deliberately obscures the criminal suppression of Catholic liturgy initiated by the conciliar antipopes. John XXIII’s illegal introduction of St. Joseph into the Canon (1962) breached the Council of Trent’s anathema against altering received traditions (Session XXII, Canon 9). Paul VI’s Missale Romanum (1969) constituted formal apostasy by abolishing the propitiatory sacrifice – fulfilling Pius V’s warning against rites “contrary to the ancient canon of the Fathers” (Quo Primum).
“Fr. Pierre Amar… warned that it could ‘isolate traditionalists within a structure, where contact and interaction are a source of enrichment for everyone.’”
This modernist trope of “enrichment through diversity” directly contradicts Pius XI’s condemnation of false ecumenism: “The Apostolic See cannot approve of conferences which gather together indiscriminately… those who reject the teaching of Christ” (Mortalium Animos §8). The cited “Fr.” Amar – a Versailles diocesan cleric – embodies the conciliar priesthood’s degeneration into sociological functionaries rather than alter Christus.
The article’s concluding reference to “ecclesial communion” constitutes linguistic subterfuge. True communion requires unity in faith (1 Cor 1:10), not merely juridical submission to apostate authorities. As St. Augustine taught: “Unity is only preserved by the bond of peace until we all come to the unity of faith” (Ep. 48). By treating the counterfeit church as a legitimate hierarchy, this proposal accelerates the “great apostasy” foretold in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.
Source:
Ahead of consistory, priest urges new canonical structure to resolve Latin Mass standoff (catholicnewsagency.com)
Date: 07.01.2026