The Latin text issued under the name of John XXIII, titled “Hiroshimaensis,” declares the elevation of the Apostolic Vicariate of Hiroshima (entrusted to the Jesuits) to the rank of a diocese, assigns it as suffragan to Nagasaki, orders the erection of a cathedral at Hiroshima’s church of the Assumption, the creation of a chapter (or diocesan consultors), the establishment of at least a minor seminary, defines the episcopal mensa from existing vicariate goods and Propaganda Fide subsidies, and entrusts execution to the Apostolic Internuncio in Japan, Maximilian von Fürstenberg. In form, it imitates classical Apostolic Constitutions, appeals to the expansion of the faith among pagans, and cloaks itself with canonical solemnity, censuring any resistance.
The Conciliar Capture of Hiroshima: Canonical Cosmetics for a Coming Revolution
From Apostolic Constitution to Programmatic Usurpation
Already the date and signature expose the core problem: this act is promulgated in 1959 by John XXIII, the initiator of the conciliar revolution, whose election and program opened the line of antipopes culminating today in Leo XIV. The text is not an innocent administrative note; it is part of the last pre-conciliar wave by which the soon-to-be “Church of the New Advent” consolidates juridical structures it will then twist to serve Modernism, religious indifferentism, and political syncretism.
The document proclaims in its opening that the authors, by “mysterious counsel of God,” have been made pastors of the universal flock, and rejoices at the spread of the faith in Hiroshima. Yet in reality, this signature is the seal of one who will convoke the robber assembly called “Vatican II,” inaugurate ecumenical betrayal, rehabilitate condemned errors, and pave the way for the paramasonic structure now occupying Rome. The apparent continuity of language is the camouflage: a counterfeit uses real coinage before debasing it.
To unmask the operation, we must measure the text against the integral Catholic doctrine as taught consistently up to Pius XII and, above all, against the clear condemnations of liberalism, religious freedom, Modernism, and masonic influence solemnly issued by Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Pius XI, and Pius XII.
Factual Layer: A Strategic Episcopalization in a Land of Ruins
On the surface, the constitution does four principal things:
– Elevates Hiroshima from apostolic vicariate to diocese with unchanged boundaries.
– Makes it suffragan to the metropolitan see of Nagasaki.
– Establishes:
– Cathedral at the Assumption of Our Lady,
– A cathedral chapter or diocesan consultors,
– At least a minor seminary,
– An episcopal mensa financed by vicariate assets, diocesan curia revenues, alms, and Propaganda Fide subsidies.
– Orders canonical execution by the Internuncio.
Taken in isolation, such measures correspond externally to traditional missionary development: when the faith is stable and clergy sufficiently formed, the Holy See erects dioceses to signify rootedness and responsibility. The problem here is not the canonical schema itself, but the agent and the historical-theological project into which this act is integrated.
Key factual observations and their real significance:
1. The timing (1959):
– Shortly after Roncalli’s election and shortly before the announcement and convocation of “Vatican II.”
– Located at the hinge between integral Catholic order and its public subversion.
– This episcopalization in Japan stands among many parallel acts establishing or reconfiguring dioceses that would later be controlled by bishops formed or co-opted by the conciliar agenda.
2. Geographic-symbolic place: Hiroshima.
– Hiroshima is not simply a city; it is the global symbol of atomic devastation, liberal pacifism, and humanistic rhetoric.
– To erect a diocese there on the eve of the conciliar revolution is to secure a platform that can later be exploited for the neo-church’s “peace, disarmament, dialogue” cult—detached from the Kingship of Christ and from the integral condemnation of the anti-Christian powers that engineered the war and its atrocities.
– Post-1958 “magisterium” will repeatedly instrumentalize Hiroshima and Nagasaki in sentimental pacifist key, not as calls to public penance, condemnation of masonic-democratic warmongering, or return to Christ’s social reign.
3. Reliance on Propaganda Fide mechanisms:
– The constitution roots the new diocesan structures in the Congregation of Propaganda Fide, then still apparently functioning along traditional lines.
– These channels, once infiltrated, become an efficient means to spread the conciliar program under a traditional legal framework.
4. Transfer to “indigenous clergy”:
– On its face, encouraging native clergy is legitimate and often necessary.
– But in this context it foreshadows the conciliar exploitation of “inculturation” and national hierarchies as laboratories for doctrinal dilution, interreligious syncretism, and effective subordination of the Church to secular states and globalist agendas—directly contrary to the teaching of *Quas Primas* and the *Syllabus of Errors*.
Hence, factually, we are looking at a canonical “shell” whose content would soon be repurposed. The very normality of the structure is the camouflage that allows the later antichurch to claim apparent continuity: *simulatio iuris ad usurpationem fidei* (a simulation of law for the usurpation of faith).
Linguistic Level: Traditional Cadence Employed as Anesthetic
Textually, the constitution uses familiar Leonine and Pian formulae:
– Appeals to *arcano Dei consilio* (the hidden counsel of God).
– Speaks of joy at the growth of the faith among those who “served vain gods.”
– Employs solemn canonical language: “statuimus et iubemus,” derogation clauses, threats of canonical penalties.
This rhetoric is deliberately conservative. It is designed to:
– Assure missionaries and faithful that nothing essential is changing.
– Maintain the illusion that those now in office are legitimate successors of Pius XII, guardians of the same deposit.
Yet this is precisely the linguistic method characteristic of Modernism condemned by St. Pius X in *Pascendi* and codified in *Lamentabili sane exitu*:
– Modernismus subdole loquitur: Modernism speaks in a double register, retaining traditional phraseology while pouring new meaning into the words.
– The use of unimpeachably Catholic formulas by one who will soon convoke the revolution is itself a grave symptom: a paramasonic tactic of habituating the faithful to the signature and “authority” of the future subverter.
The contrast with genuine pre-1958 papal texts is telling:
– Pius XI in *Quas Primas* speaks directly, explicitly, of the Social Kingship of Christ, condemns laicism and the dethronement of Christ from public life, and demands that states publicly acknowledge His reign.
– Pius IX in the *Syllabus* names, numbers, and anathematizes the liberal and rationalist propositions without euphemism.
In “Hiroshimaensis,” there is:
– No explicit insistence on the exclusive rights of the Catholic Church over Japanese society.
– No reaffirmation of the condemnation of religious indifferentism rampant in post-war Japan under U.S. occupation.
– No warning against Freemasonry and the liberal-democratic order that orchestrated both the war and the new constitution of Japan, built on religious freedom and the expulsion of Christ the King from law.
Instead, we get well-formed canonical prose about diocesan structures—silence where the trumpet should sound. This silence is itself eloquent.
Theological Layer: Silence on Christ’s Social Reign as Subversion
Measured against integral Catholic doctrine, the gravest problem of this constitution is not what it affirms (juridical elevation), but what it omits in a context demanding forthright supernatural clarity.
1. No proclamation of Christ’s public rights over Japan.
– Pius XI teaches that lasting peace and order are impossible until individuals and states publicly recognize the reign of Christ the King and submit their laws to His commandments (*Quas Primas*).
– Pius IX, in the *Syllabus*, condemns the thesis that:
– “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (prop. 15).
– “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation” (prop. 16).
– “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (prop. 55).
Japan, reconstituted after 1945, was founded explicitly on such condemned principles.
Yet this constitution:
– Fails to proclaim that Shinto, Buddhism, and every non-Catholic cult in Japan are false religions that cannot save and must be abandoned.
– Fails to demand from public authority legal and social recognition of the true Church.
– Fails to warn the faithful against the liberal-religious pluralism imposed by masonic and protestant powers.
The creation of a diocese in Hiroshima without the explicit assertion of Christ’s Social Kingship marks a subtle yet real doctrinal descent: the Church appears as one actor among many in a pluralistic order, not as the unique, divinely constituted *societas perfecta* with rights superior to the state. This is the seed of “Dignitatis Humanae” already present in practice.
2. Absence of militant supernatural focus.
An authentic Catholic foundation document, in such a symbolic city, would:
– Call to public penance for sins—of nations, rulers, false ideologies.
– Recall the Four Last Things, the reality of hell, judgment, and the necessity of being in the state of grace.
– Demand holiness of clergy and faithful, fidelity to doctrine, rejection of all compromise.
Instead, the constitution is content with administrative measures and bland encouragement that clergy “extend the frontiers of Christian affairs as far as possible,” without defining those “frontiers” in clear doctrinal and sacramental terms. The supernatural is assumed, not proclaimed; in an age of universal apostasy, such omission is culpable.
3. The weaponized ambiguity of “indigenous clergy.”
While pre-conciliar teaching certainly supports a solid native clergy, the post-1958 context reveals how this was to be co-opted:
– “Inculturation” becomes the pretext for diluting doctrine, adapting liturgy to pagan customs, and weaving syncretic patterns—contrary to the immutable nature of the sacraments and dogma condemned by *Lamentabili* (e.g., propositions 52–55 about the evolution of the Church’s structure and dogma).
– The constitution’s trust in “indigenous clergy” is not the problem per se; the problem is that under an antipope and a conciliar apparatus, such clergy are systematically formed in Modernism and set at the service of the neo-church.
Thus the theological bankruptcy: the text offers juridical scaffolding for a structure that, once occupied by Modernists, becomes an instrument against the Kingship of Christ.
Symptomatic Layer: A Prototype of the Conciliar Strategy
This constitution is symptomatic of a larger strategy by the conciliar sect:
1. Preserve the external canonical form.
– Maintain dioceses, cathedrals, titles, chapters, and apparat.
– Use the language of tradition to anesthetize instincts of the faithful.
2. Insert different principles into the living practice.
– Bishops and clergy increasingly accept religious liberty, ecumenism, and the cult of man.
– The sacramental rites will soon be radically deformed (1968–69), rendering orders doubtful and “Masses” corrupted, while diocesan structures continue to operate as though nothing had changed.
3. Exploit highly symbolic locations.
– Hiroshima and Nagasaki, instead of being fortresses of the Social Kingship of Christ, become centers of:
– Pacifist humanism without explicit subordination to Catholic doctrine.
– Interreligious gestures, “nuclear disarmament” rhetoric, and universalist appeals that quietly sideline the necessity of conversion to the one true Church.
– Such use of symbolism corresponds exactly to what Pius IX denounced: the masonic sects, “synagogue of Satan,” using states and social movements to war against the Church.
“Hiroshimaensis” thus functions as an early tessera in the mosaic of a paramasonic takeover: a legitimate category of act (erection of dioceses) wielded by an illegitimate authority to build the institutional skeleton which the abomination of desolation would later inhabit.
The Abuse of Canonical Threats under an Illicit Authority
The constitution concludes with standard clauses:
– Declaring all contrary dispositions null and void.
– Threatening penalties on those who would despise or hinder its execution.
Under a true Pope, such clauses bind in conscience. Under a manifestly deviating antipope, they are part of the deception:
– They are designed to force bishops and clergy, who still believe they are dealing with a Catholic Pontiff, into formal obedience to a man whose subsequent acts reveal public rupture with prior magisterium.
– The appearance of juridical continuity becomes a tool for securing universal submission when the real program is unveiled at the council.
Integral Catholic doctrine, as summarized in the sources provided:
– Recognizes that a manifest heretic cannot hold papal office: *non potest esse caput qui non est membrum* (he who is not a member cannot be head). This is the principle invoked by Bellarmine and classical canonists reflected in the 1917 Code.
– Affirms that public defection from the faith results in loss or nullity of office (e.g., Canon 188.4), and *Cum ex Apostolatus Officio* underscores the nullity of election for one who has fallen into heresy.
Once John XXIII’s conciliar and ecumenical agenda manifests as a program of doctrinal subversion, his acts stand not as papal magisterium but as decisions of an intruding authority. “Hiroshimaensis” must be read in that light: juridically crafted, but part of a line whose later fruits prove its root.
Contrast with the Pre-1958 Magisterium: The Missing Notes
To expose fully the spiritual emptiness behind the polished phrases, compare what is present in the constitution with what pre-1958 doctrine would require:
– Pius XI in *Quas Primas*:
– Insists that rulers and nations must publicly honor Christ the King.
– Condemns secularization, laicism, and the relegation of religion to private life.
– Explicitly binds public law to divine law.
In Hiroshima, an epicenter of world attention, the constitution:
– Does not command public veneration of Christ by civil authority.
– Does not denounce the false principle of religious freedom that governs post-war Japan.
– Does not recall that any state order which ignores the Kingship of Christ stands under judgment.
– Pius IX in the *Syllabus*:
– Condemns the idea that the teaching of the Church is hostile to society (prop. 40), and that the state may arrogate authority over schools, marriage, ecclesiastical property, and the Church’s rights.
Yet this constitution:
– Says nothing about the intrinsic rights of the Church over education, marriage, and public morality in Japan.
– Accepts, by silence, co-existence within a constitution and social order openly shaped by condemned principles.
Silence in such a context is not neutral. It is a dereliction of the prophetic and royal office of the Church and thus an early capitulation to the liberal order the neo-church would soon embrace. The external canonical form cannot conceal the inner absence of forthright Catholic doctrine.
The Post-Conciliar Harvest: Hiroshima as Neo-Church Showcase
The later history of the conciliar sect in Japan—though beyond the date of this specific document—confirms the diagnosis:
– Bishops formed in, or loyal to, the conciliar revolution preside over:
– Liturgical abuses and the spread of the invalid, protestantized rite.
– Ecumenical and interreligious events with Buddhists, Shintoists, and others.
– Pacifist declarations without binding reference to Christ’s Kingship and the condemnation of false religions.
All this takes place within diocesan frameworks solemnly erected in documents like “Hiroshimaensis.” This shows the duplicity of the strategy:
– Build dioceses with traditional phrases.
– Fill them with pastors loyal to a new religion.
– Use historical acts to claim “continuity,” while their practical application serves apostasy.
Therefore the constitution, viewed in the full light of subsequent revelation of intentions, is spiritually bankrupt:
– Not because diocesan structures are evil in themselves, but because they are consciously instrumentalized by an usurping line that opposes the integral magisterium of the Church.
– Not because missionary work in Japan is illegitimate, but because it is perverted from its purpose: conversion of souls to the one true Church and subjection of societies to the reign of Christ.
Conclusion: The Only Authentic Path for Hiroshima and Japan
From the perspective of unchanging Catholic doctrine:
– Any authentic Catholic presence in Hiroshima must:
– Proclaim that salvation is found only in the Catholic Church.
– Demand the abandonment of all false religions.
– Call for public submission of laws and institutions to Christ the King.
– Guard the sacraments in their traditional rites, valid orders, and propitiatory character of the Most Holy Sacrifice.
The constitution “Hiroshimaensis,” bearing the signature of John XXIII, fails to do this and functions instead as one more brick in the architecture of the conciliar sect. Its canonical solemnity, unaccompanied by an unequivocal assertion of Christ’s social and doctrinal rights, reveals itself as a mask: juridical respectability at the service of a coming, systemic negation.
In Hiroshima, where the world contemplates human devastation, the true Church must speak of sin, judgment, and the Kingship of Christ, not merely perfect its bureaucratic map. Wherever the neo-church occupies structures, the faithful attached to the integral Catholic faith must discern that behind impeccably Latin formulas there often stands not Peter, but a program that substitutes man for God and peace of this world for the reign of Christ.
Source:
Hiroshimaënsis (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025