Luce Collustrans is a brief Latin text in which antipope John XXIII, invoking the authority of his usurped office, proclaims the Blessed Virgin Mary under the title “de Izamal” as the principal heavenly patroness of the Archdiocese of Yucatán, confirming and crowning an already existing local Marian devotion with liturgical privileges and juridical force. It dresses this act in apparently pious language, but in reality it functions as a devotional anesthetic that helps consolidate the illegitimate conciliar regime while offering no call to conversion, no defense of the rights of Christ the King, and no stand against the nascent apostasy that John XXIII himself was engineering.
Marian Ornament Draped Over the Machinery of Revolution
The text is outwardly modest: a formal act granting patronage, recalling Pius XII’s permission to crown the image of Our Lady of Izamal, linking the decree to:
– the “praiseworthy and fruitful” cultus of Our Lady in Izamal,
– the 400th anniversary of the erection of the Yucatán diocese,
– the so‑called “Marian Year” observed throughout Mexico.
John XXIII (already inaugurating the conciliar betrayal) claims, certa scientia ac matura deliberatione (“with certain knowledge and mature deliberation”), to establish perpetually the Blessed Virgin Mary “de Izamal” as principal patroness of the archdiocese, granting the liturgical honours of a chief patron and surrounding the decree with the usual canonical formulae of perpetuity and nullification of contrary acts.
In isolation, such elements would resemble numerous pre‑1958 acts of the true popes. But context, language, and omissions reveal something else: a cleverly “Catholic-looking” gesture instrumentalized to legitimize an authority already severed from integral doctrine, to cloak Modernist subversion under Marian perfume.
Factual Plane: A Pious Shell Around a Usurped Jurisdiction
1. The act presupposes the legitimacy of John XXIII’s authority.
– By 1960 he had:
– Announced the Second Vatican Council, the engine of the conciliar sect.
– Embarked on an ostentatious “aggiornamento,” that is, practical repudiation of the integral anti-liberal doctrine solemnly reaffirmed by Pius IX’s Syllabus and Pius X.
– From the perspective of unchanging Catholic theology, a manifest favorer and promoter of condemned errors cannot be regarded as holding the Petrine office. The principles reiterated in the provided Defense of Sedevacantism file reflect the constant teaching: *a manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church whose faith he destroys*. Bellarmine, the classical doctrine on manifest heresy, and Canon 188.4 (1917) converge against the conciliar usurpers.
Therefore, the entire juridical edifice of this “letter” is void ipso iure: a non-pope cannot validly legislate for the Church, define principal patrons, or bind dioceses. The text exposes itself by functioning as a pseudo-pontifical act that assumes the one thing it cannot prove: the Catholicity of John XXIII.
2. The decree cultivates Marian devotion while remaining strategically silent on the concrete doctrinal and moral crisis consuming Mexico and Yucatán.
– 1960 Mexico: decades of ferocious persecution of the Church, secularist, masonic elites, systematic profanation of Christ’s rights in society.
– Authentic Catholic teaching (Quas Primas, Syllabus) requires:
– Public proclamation of the social Kingship of Christ.
– Condemnation of laicism, indifferentism, religious liberty errors.
– Here we find none of this. Only a decorative patronage formula. No call to resist anti-Christian laws. No summons to defend the Most Holy Sacrifice. No word on confession, sanctifying grace, avoidance of sin, or last ends.
A Marian act divorced from Christ’s public rights and from the war against liberal apostasy is not harmless; it is the sugar coating of treason.
3. The appeal to a “Marian Year” in Mexico within a conciliar trajectory.
– A genuinely Catholic Marian Year should:
– Lead to deeper submission to the perennial Magisterium.
– Arm the faithful against Modernism and liberalism.
– Under John XXIII, it becomes a sentimental background for the coming Council and for a new irenic posture toward the world which Pius IX and Pius X had explicitly condemned. The reference signals alignment with a program: use Marian imagery to piously narcotize resistance while programming revolution.
In short: factually, we have a juridically styled ceremonial act deployed by an anti-authority, calculated to appear continuous with pre-1958 practice while actually embedding Marian devotion into the conciliar narrative.
Saccharine Latin as a Symptom: Linguistic and Rhetorical Poisoning
The text’s Latin is superficially traditional, but its rhetoric betrays a functional modernist mentality.
1. Overly aesthetic Marian exaltations without doctrinal edge
It begins by calling Our Lady “luce collustrans superna saeculum caliginosum” (“enlightening with heavenly light a darkened age”), “gloria generis humani,” “free of every stain,” “Mother of all,” etc., phrases that, taken alone, are orthodox. Yet:
– Her light is not explicitly connected to the duty of nations to submit to Christ’s law.
– Her patronage is not tied to conversion from liberalism, Freemasonry, or anti-clerical persecution.
– There is no explicit reaffirmation of her role in crushing heresies, despite tradition celebrating her as omnes haereses sola interemisti (“you alone have destroyed all heresies”).
The language is devotional but declawed—a Marianism without militancy, suited to a Church of “dialogue” rather than the Church militant.
2. Juridical solemnity masking spiritual vacuity
The text uses classic formulae:
– certa scientia ac matura deliberatione
– deque Apostolicae potestatis plenitudine
– “perpetuum in modum… principalem apud Deum Patronam constituimus ac declaramus”
– A strong nullification clause for any acts “contrary” to this decree.
This is the façade of continuity: the grammatical shell of authentic papal acts has been retained, but the doctrinal content—defense of the faith, condemnation of errors, clear moral directives—is wholly absent. The rhetorical excess lies not in heresy stated, but in what theologians would call *omissio culpabilis* (culpable omission): a failure to speak where grave duty obliges speech.
3. Dissonance between soaring phrases and historical reality
To praise “praiseworthy and fruitful” cult in a land violently secularized and infiltrated by Masonic influence, without one word of denunciation, is a distortion.
– Authentic popes, when confirming patronages in persecuted lands, frequently:
– Encouraged the faithful to stand firm against anti-Christian regimes.
– Recalled the rights of the Church and Christ’s Kingship.
– John XXIII’s silence is eloquent: no conflict, no condemnation, only integration of Marian devotion into a pacified, worldly order.
The rhetorical strategy: employ luminous imagery while never allowing those rays to expose the enemies of Christ.
Theological Dimension: Marian Patronage Detached from the Kingship of Christ
Here the rupture with pre‑1958 Catholic doctrine becomes unmistakable, not in explicit statements inside this short act, but in its theological function within the conciliar revolution.
1. Christ the King: silenced where He must be proclaimed
Pius XI in *Quas Primas* teaches that:
– True peace and order are only possible under the public reign of Christ the King.
– States and rulers must publicly recognise and obey Him.
– Secularism and religious indifferentism are the “plague” destroying society.
In a region historically ravaged by laicist regimes, an authentic pontiff, when invoking the Virgin as patroness, would:
– Call Yucatán and Mexico to submit civil law to the law of Christ.
– Condemn the false principles of separation of Church and State condemned by Pius IX (Syllabus, prop. 55).
– Remind both rulers and people that Marian patronage is inseparable from fidelity to Catholic dogma and morals.
John XXIII does none of this. The Virgin is invoked as a kind of celestial emblem of regional identity and generic piety, not as the powerful Queen leading her subjects under the sceptre of her Divine Son in public and political life. This is a subtle betrayal: an implicit acceptance of secularism.
2. Patronage without conversion: a dead letter before God
The text never mentions:
– Repentance from sin.
– The state of grace.
– The sacraments as necessary means of salvation.
– The last things (death, judgment, hell, heaven).
– The necessity of confessing the Catholic faith against errors.
In Catholic theology, to declare a heavenly patron is not magic; it presupposes and demands fidelity to the integral faith and corresponding life. A structure that has already turned toward Modernism invoking Our Lady as patroness is like Israel painting pious slogans while worshipping Baal.
3. Instrumentalizing Our Lady for the conciliar project
Within the total pattern of John XXIII’s reign:
– Marian language is used to appear orthodox while:
– Neutralizing anti-liberal teaching.
– Preparing a council that would enshrine religious liberty and false ecumenism.
– Shifting from *Ecclesia militans* to an NGO of “dialogue” and “human fraternity.”
Our Lady of Izamal is thus drafted, without her consent, into service of the *conciliar sect*. This is blasphemous in effect, even if unspoken: her glorious name is set as a seal on a counterfeit edifice.
Here applies the principle: *abusus non tollit usum* (abuse does not take away right use), but abuse does damn those who commit it. The conciliar regime wraps itself in Marian titles to mislead simple faithful, as if to say: “See, nothing has changed,” while changing everything.
Systemic Symptom: How This Decree Manifests the Conciliar Apostasy
This brief letter, read through the lens of integral Catholic faith, is a distilled sign of the larger disease.
1. Devotionalism replacing doctrinal militancy
Pre‑1958 Magisterium is relentlessly doctrinal and anti-error:
– Pius IX: Syllabus condemning liberalism, indifferentism, separation of Church and State, naturalism, Masonic errors.
– Leo XIII: encyclicals on Freemasonry, Christian constitution of states, social kingship.
– Pius X: *Lamentabili sane* and *Pascendi* crushing Modernism as the “synthesis of all heresies.”
– Pius XI: *Quas Primas* on Christ the King against laicism.
In that tradition, Marian acts are weapons: the Rosary, the Immaculate Conception, Fatima (correctly understood or, in our context, critically filtered) were placed against liberalism, communism, modernism.
Here we see the opposite pattern:
– No heresy named.
– No enemy condemned.
– Only a juridical bestowal of patronage, as if the Church were not in crisis but in peaceful continuity.
This is precisely the modernist tactic condemned by Pius X: preserve forms, empty content. Maintain Marian crowns, abolish Christ’s crown in society.
2. Acceptance of religiously neutral public order
By its silence, the document tacitly harmonizes Marian devotion with an order in which:
– Christ is not King of the state.
– The Catholic Church does not claim exclusive public rights.
– “Pluralism” and laicism are treated as normal.
This contradicts Quas Primas and the Syllabus, which anathematize such a view. The Virgin is reduced to a cultural symbol compatible with secular constitutions. That is not Catholicism; it is religious romanticism enslaved to liberalism.
3. Pseudo-authority over a mutilated liturgy and false sacraments
Although issued in Latin and speaking of “liturgical privileges,” this act stands at the threshold of the devastation:
– Within a decade, the conciliar sect, under successors of John XXIII, would:
– Fabricate a new rite of “Mass” that obscures the propitiatory sacrifice.
– Introduce invalid or at least gravely doubtful rites of episcopal “consecration” (1968).
– Spread communion-in-the-hand, lay “ministries,” sacrileges, and practical denial of the Real Presence.
Patronage privileges granted under an usurped authority over what rapidly became a counterfeit cult are thus exposed as juridical theatre. The “neo-church” invokes Our Lady while trampling the Most Holy Sacrifice. This is not merely incoherence; it is a mark of the *abominatio desolationis* (abomination of desolation).
4. Integration of authentic devotions into the neo-church matrix
The letter’s function is also to co-opt an existing popular Marian devotion into the conciliar framework:
– Tie Our Lady of Izamal officially to the conciliar hierarchy.
– Ensure that whenever the faithful invoke her as patroness, they psychologically associate that invocation with the authority of John XXIII and his successors.
– Thus, the structures occupying the Vatican wrap themselves in venerable devotions to reinforce their counterfeit credibility.
This is the same pattern seen with other devotions and shrines co-opted post‑1958: genuine piety is not purified but subordinated to a paramasonic, ecumenical, anthropocentric project.
Sins of Omission: What This Text Dares Not Say
From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, the gravest accusations against Luce Collustrans are what it omits at the very moment when they were most required.
1. No mention of:
– The obligation of rulers and legislators in Yucatán and Mexico to acknowledge the Catholic religion as the only true religion (against Syllabus prop. 77–80).
– The social reign of Christ the King, which Quas Primas insists must be restored or else peace cannot come.
– The intrinsic evil of laicism, secular education, anti-clerical persecution.
– The necessity of avoiding heretical sects, condemned associations, Freemasonry.
2. No exhortation to:
– Confession, penance, reparation.
– Defense of the Most Holy Sacrifice against profanation.
– Combat modernist errors, which Pius X called the synthesis of all heresies.
– Pray for vocations to the true priesthood and support of authentic Catholic schools.
3. No doctrinal clarity on:
– The unique mediatorship of Christ.
– The subordination of Marian devotion to dogmatic fidelity.
– The impossibility of “dialogue” with false religions as equals.
This silence is not neutral. In an age of apostasy, silence on the core truths is complicity. The sugary tone of this letter, when weighed against the encyclicals of Pius IX, Pius X, and Pius XI, stands condemned precisely because it refuses to wage war where war is commanded.
The Verdict: An Empty Gesture Masking a Counterfeit Ecclesial Order
Measured against unchanging Catholic doctrine (pre‑1958), Luce Collustrans is theologically and spiritually bankrupt for several converging reasons:
– It proceeds from an antipope whose teachings and actions align with condemned modernist, liberal, and ecumenical tendencies.
– It uses Marian devotion to create an illusion of continuity, while strategically omitting any integral affirmation of the social Kingship of Christ and the exclusivity of the Catholic Church.
– It refuses to confront the secularist, Masonic, and modernist forces ravaging Mexico, thus neutralizing Our Lady’s patronage into a sentimental ornament.
– It assumes authority over liturgical and spiritual life that the conciliar sect, lacking the Catholic faith, does not in fact possess.
– It exemplifies the conciliar strategy: retain liturgical Latin and Marian language as stage props while shifting the Church’s orientation toward man, “dialogue,” and religious pluralism.
True Catholic devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, especially under venerable local titles such as Our Lady of Izamal, must be torn away from the grip of the neo-church and reinserted into the only context in which it has meaning: unconditional fidelity to the perennial Magisterium, rejection of Modernism, and militant submission to the universal kingship of Jesus Christ.
Any act that attempts to harness Our Lady’s name in service of a counterfeit church and an anti-Christic world order is not pious; it is sacrilegious exploitation. Luce Collustrans, beneath its polished Latin and delicate phrases, is one more stone in the construction of that edifice of illusion.
Source:
Luce collustrans (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025