This act of Giovanni Roncalli, styling himself “John XXIII,” erects the so‑called “Diocese of Simla” (Simlensis) in India by detaching territories from the then “Archdiocese of Delhi and Simla,” assigning its cathedral, defining its suffragan relationship, financial provisions, administration, and legal formalities within the conciliar missionary framework of the mid‑twentieth century. In one sentence: it is a juridical blueprint for extending an already infiltrated, proto‑conciliar apparatus, preparing the ground for the subsequent revolution against the visible structures of the Catholic Church.
Canonical Cosmetics for a Pending Usurpation
This constitution is dated 4 June 1959, in the first year of Roncalli’s reign. It appears, on the surface, as a conventional pre‑conciliar Latin juridical act: territories are described, diocesan boundaries fixed, cathedral and chapter specified, canonical norms invoked, Propaganda Fide referenced, and formal clauses of promulgation appended.
Yet precisely this “normality” is what demands unmasking. The text:
– Presupposes Roncalli’s legitimacy.
– Extends his jurisdiction and pseudo‑apostolic authority into mission territories.
– Wraps the entire maneuver in solemn canonical language, thereby using the venerable juridical form of the Church as camouflage for the man who would soon convoke the council that unleashed the conciliar sect.
The act is thus not an isolated “administrative” detail, but a revealing moment: the usurper clothing himself in meticulously traditional forms in order to redirect the institutional body toward aggiornamento, religious liberty, false ecumenism, and the cult of man condemned by the pre‑1958 Magisterium (cf. Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors; Pius X, Lamentabili and Pascendi; Pius XI, Quas primas).
What follows is a multi‑layered unmasking of this constitution as an early, calculated step in the subversion of the visible hierarchy, judged exclusively by the immutable doctrine and law of the Church as it stood before 1958.
Factual Reconfiguration: Expanding a Structure Already Under Siege
On the factual level, the constitution:
– Detaches specific districts (Ambala, Patiala, Karnal, part of Kangra, Mandi, Bilaspur, Mahasu, Sirmur) from Delhi and Simla.
– Creates the new circumscription “Simlensis,” seated in Simla, with the church of St Michael and St Joseph as cathedral.
– Makes it suffragan to Delhi.
– Orders erection of at least an elementary seminary and a chapter (or, temporarily, diocesan consultors).
– Establishes the episcopal mensa from local ecclesiastical goods, curial revenues, offerings, and aid from Propaganda Fide.
– Subjects governance, administration, election of the Capitular Vicar, etc., to the 1917 Code of Canon Law.
– Empowers the Apostolic Internuncio in India to execute the decree.
– Contains classic clauses of derogation and nullity against contrary dispositions.
From a merely descriptive standpoint, this aligns with traditional missionary expansion. However:
– By 1959, the modernist infiltration repeatedly unmasked by St Pius X had advanced deeply in seminaries, episcopate, and Roman dicasteries. Lamentabili and Pascendi (1907) were being practically shelved, if not mocked, by the very milieu that raised Roncalli.
– Roncalli himself was compromised by modernist tendencies and condemned networks long before the conclave: his sympathies, diplomatic record, and intellectual orientation show him as a man of that current, not as its adversary. These facts are well documented in pre‑conciliar and critical studies; I cannot confirm every later claim or rumor, but his own words and acts (e.g. the announcement of the council to “update” the Church) suffice.
Thus, while the document on its face uses Catholic canonical tools, it functions in reality as an extension of an already destabilized chain of command: instrumenta bona in manibus pravis (good instruments in evil hands). The composition of diocesan structures under a usurper is no neutral “administration”; it is the preparation of terrain for the conciliar revolution.
Bureaucratic Latin as a Cloak: The Linguistic Simulation of Orthodoxy
The language of the constitution is outwardly impeccable:
– It praises India’s “glory,” “wisdom,” “religion,” in a generic humanistic tone.
– It speaks of the “splendid light of Christian truth” taking root.
– It consults Propaganda Fide, the Internuncio, the local “archbishop,” employs solemn legal clauses, and threatens canonical penalties for disregard.
This is the rhetoric of normalcy. But precisely here the mask slips under integral scrutiny:
1. Generic humanistic flattery
The text opens with encomia of India’s “glory,” “monuments,” “religion,” “wisdom”:
“To the Indian people, distinguished by so many glorious deeds, monuments of every kind, renowned religion, and the wisdom and learning of so many men…”
The English sense shows a deferential, almost syncretic admiration that carefully avoids affirming with doctrinal clarity that all non‑Catholic cults are false religions and that Christ alone is King of nations (Quas primas). Pre‑1958 popes can use diplomatic language, but they also thunder:
– Pius IX rejects the proposition that “man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation” (Syllabus, 16).
– He condemns religious indifferentism and the equality of cults.
– Pius XI insists that true peace is only in the reign of Christ and that states must publicly recognize Him (Quas primas).
Roncalli’s text never recalls this obligation. Its tone anticipates the later conciliar exaltation of “other religions” and “values,” which Pius IX and Pius XI explicitly rejected. This silence is not accidental; it is programmatic.
2. Absence of supernatural urgency
The constitution:
– Does not mention the necessity of conversion of souls from false religions to the one true Church for salvation.
– Is silent on the danger of idolatry, on the last ends (death, judgment, heaven, hell), on the absolute necessity of the sacraments for sanctifying grace.
– Reduces the creation of a diocese to a technical necessity flowing from “growth” and “organization.”
This bureaucratic neutrality is itself a sign of the modernist mentality St Pius X condemned: a naturalistic, historicist handling of supernatural realities, as if the Church were merely an NGO adjusting its administrative map.
3. Canonical pose as legitimization
By meticulously citing the 1917 Code (*c. 1500 CIC* regarding the episcopal mensa), Propaganda Fide, normal procedures for a Capitular Vicar, etc., the text:
– Uses the perfect legal dress of the true Church to secure the psychological acceptance of Roncalli’s authority.
– Embeds the usurpation in the memory of ordinary Catholic life: new dioceses, new cathedrals, all seemingly pious.
This is precisely how subversion operates: sub specie iuris (under the appearance of law).
Theological Inversion: Invalid Authority, Illusory Jurisdiction
From the vantage of unchanging Catholic doctrine prior to 1958, several fundamental points destroy the theological validity of this act:
1. A manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church
Integral Catholic theology, summarized by St Robert Bellarmine and the classical doctors, holds:
– “A manifest heretic is not a member of the Church, and therefore cannot be its head.”
– Jurisdiction flows from Christ through the Church; it cannot inhere in a non‑Catholic.
This principle is reinforced by:
– The unanimous patristic conviction that public heresy severs from ecclesial membership.
– The teaching reflected in theologians like Wernz, Vidal, Billot: notorious heresy removes jurisdiction *ipso facto*.
– Canon 188 §4 of the 1917 Code: public defection from the faith vacates ecclesiastical office by the law itself.
When the line enthroned in 1958 revealed its intent—culminating in the council that enthroned religious liberty, collegiality, false ecumenism, and the cult of man—its “authority” is seen to be precisely what the pre‑conciliar Magisterium condemns. Even if some concrete canonical steps are disputed, the doctrinal principle is unassailable: non‑Catholicus non est Caput Ecclesiae (a non‑Catholic is not head of the Church).
This constitution, issued by Roncalli in that trajectory, lacks true papal authority. The diocesan structure it forges is juridically null in the order of the true Church, no matter how well it imitates Catholic forms.
2. Violation of the Kingship of Christ
Pius XI in Quas primas teaches, with binding clarity:
– Christ must reign over individuals, families, and states.
– Public authority must profess the true religion.
– Secularist, religiously neutral conceptions of political life are condemned.
The constitution under scrutiny:
– Avoids proclaiming Christ’s exclusive Kingship over India.
– Fails to assert the obligation of the Indian state publicly to recognize the Catholic religion.
– Speaks of the new diocese as if one more tolerated, pluralistic entity among many “respected religions.”
This is already the conciliar spirit in embryonic form: the Church adapting to pluralism instead of commanding nations to the obedience of Christ. Silence here is theological complicity.
3. Reduction of episcopal office to administration
The act defines:
– The erection of a chapter or consultors.
– The seminary (elementary at least).
– The economic base.
– Procedural norms for sede vacante.
All of which are in themselves traditional components. However, under a usurper:
– The “bishop” to be appointed is not a true successor of the Apostles in full Catholic communion, but a functionary of the conciliar project that will, within a few years, impose a new “Mass,” ecumenical syncretism, and religious liberty.
– The seminary will easily become a conduit of modernist formation, condemned by Pius X, now institutionally protected.
Thus, the episcopal office is hollowed out: from guardian of dogma and executioner of error to administrative manager within a religio‑pluralistic framework. This is not a mere risk; it is precisely what followed.
Systemic Apostasy: This Constitution as a Symptom of the Coming Revolution
Seen in historical continuity, this 1959 act sits at the threshold of the conciliar catastrophe:
– 1958: Death of Pius XII; conclave installs Roncalli.
– 1959 (January): Announcement of the council.
– 1959 (June): This constitution—“normal,” canonical, missionary—issued in the same year.
– 1962‑1965: The council ratifies precisely the tendencies already implicit in Roncalli’s ecclesial and diplomatic profile.
This text is symptomatic in four decisive ways:
1. Geographic expansion of the conciliar chain of command
The more territories formally structured under the usurper, the more souls, clergy, and institutions are organically tied into the machinery that will impose:
– The destruction of the Most Holy Sacrifice in favour of a protestantised rite.
– False ecumenism and respect for non‑Catholic religions, against the Syllabus of Pius IX.
– Religious liberty as a “right,” against Quas primas and the constant teaching.
The “Diocese of Simla” thus becomes one node in the subsequent network of conciliar indoctrination, even if its initial documentation still speaks the language of the 1917 Code.
2. Normalization of an illegitimate authority
Every apparently benign juridical act from Roncalli consolidates, in the minds of clergy and faithful, acceptance of his “pontificate.” The modernist knows that symbols and routines educate: if he appears as a traditional lawgiver, resistance weakens.
This is the inversion of Pius X’s program:
– Pius X crushed modernist attempts to smuggle novelties under Catholic forms.
– Roncalli uses Catholic forms to smuggle in the modernist regime.
3. Silent abandonment of the anti‑modernist arsenal
Not once does this constitution:
– Recall Lamentabili, Pascendi, the duty to extirpate Modernism, to preserve seminarians from condemned errors.
– Insist that the new seminary in Simla rigorously form clerics in Thomistic theology as commanded by Leo XIII and Pius X.
– Mention the Index, condemn liberalism, or denounce the Masonic and modernist war against the Church, so clearly identified by Pius IX.
This absence is decisive. At a time when anti‑Christian forces and secret societies ravage nations (especially in mission territories), a true Pope would reiterate the perennial warnings. Instead, we see bureaucratic neutrality, the first step toward conciliar “opening to the world.”
4. Instrumentalization of the Mission for Humanistic Dialogue
The introductory exaltation of India’s “renowned religion” prefigures the conciliar sect’s future glorification of Hinduism and other pagan cults as “ways” or “riches” of the Spirit. Pre‑1958 doctrine, however, is clear:
– Idol worship is a grave sin against the First Commandment.
– There is no salvation in false religions.
– The Church’s mission is to convert, not merely to dialogue.
By refusing to speak with this supernatural clarity, the constitution betrays a mind already in flight from the exclusive claims of Christ.
Counter-Witness to the Pre-1958 Magisterium
To expose more sharply the doctrinal bankruptcy implicit in Roncalli’s act, it suffices to juxtapose it with key pre‑1958 teachings (paraphrased faithfully and, where possible, verifiable):
– Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors:
– Condemns the idea that the Church should adapt to liberalism and modern civilization understood as religious indifferentism (prop. 80).
– Condemns that man can find salvation in any religion (16).
– Condemns state religious neutrality and equality of cults (55, 77‑79).
– Leo XIII:
– Insists on the social reign of Christ and subordination of states to divine law.
– Reaffirms the duty of governments to protect the true religion.
– Pius X, Pascendi and Lamentabili:
– Condemns Modernism as the “synthesis of all heresies.”
– Condemns the evolution of dogma, democratization of doctrine, reduction of faith to religious sentiment, and historicist relativization.
– Requires bishops to vigilantly extirpate modernism from seminaries and theological faculties.
– Pius XI, Quas primas:
– Affirms that peace and order are impossible without public recognition of Christ as King.
– Condemns secularism and calls the omission of Christ from public life a plague.
– Demands that rulers and nations submit to the law of Christ in legislation, education, and public morals.
Measured against this doctrinal armory, the 1959 constitution:
– Fails to assert the Kingship of Christ over India.
– Fails to arm the new diocese explicitly against modernism and liberalism.
– Fails to articulate the necessity for false religions to yield before the one true Church.
– Masks the expansion of an authority preparing to contradict the very Magisterium whose juridical and rhetorical forms it mimics.
This is theological and spiritual bankruptcy in nuce: external continuity of forms, internal preparation for apostasy.
On the Sacramental and Juridical Consequences
From the standpoint of integral Catholic faith:
– Jurisdiction in the Church is not an empty legal fiction; it presupposes Catholic faith and communion.
– If the one issuing this constitution is not a true Pope, the diocesan erection is devoid of binding force in the true Church.
– Those appointed under such usurped authority to “govern” in Simla participate objectively in the conciliar sect’s chain of command; their subsequent acceptance of the conciliar “Mass,” ecumenism, religious liberty, etc., confirms this trajectory.
Moreover:
– Once the conciliar revolution reconfigures rites (especially the 1968 rites of orders), a growing part of such hierarchies cease even to possess valid orders, turning dioceses into purely human religious administrations bereft of sacramental reality.
– The faithful in such territories, deceived by the external Catholic appearance, are led to participate in what is, at best, doubtful, and in many cases sacrilegious simulation of sacraments and idolatrous worship.
Thus this constitution, while anterior to 1962, is part of the historical chain by which the visible structures are first juridically aligned under the usurper, then doctrinally perverted, then liturgically gutted.
Silence as Indictment: What This Text Does Not Dare to Say
The gravest accusation against this constitution lies not in what is explicitly said, but in its culpable omissions, glaring when read under the light of authentic pre‑1958 teaching:
– No affirmation that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.
– No warning against the grave errors of the false religions dominating India.
– No mention of the Four Last Things, sin, hell, supernatural life of grace.
– No insistence on Thomistic formation or anti‑modernist vigilance in the new seminary.
– No evocation of the duty of public authorities to recognize Christ and His Church.
– No echo of the condemnations of Freemasonry and secret societies that ravage missions (Pius IX directly connects them to the war on the Church).
This silence is not mere brevity. In the concrete historical situation of 1959, given the unprecedented onslaught against the faith and the already perceptible program of “opening to the world,” such omissions reveal the document as fully aligned with the incipient conciliar mentality: administrative, naturalistic, horizontal, allergic to clear supernatural claims.
Silentium de primis veritatibus est tacita abdicatio (silence about primary truths is a tacit abdication).
Conclusion: A Pious Mask over the Machinery of the Neo-Church
This 1959 constitution, Delhiensis et Simlensis / Simlensis, is a paradigmatic specimen of the transitional phase:
– Externally: traditional Latin, canonical form, reference to the 1917 Code, formal threats of penalties.
– Internally: crafted by, and for, an authority preparing the greatest doctrinal and liturgical subversion in Church history.
It:
– Assists the geographic consolidation of the conciliar sect under the guise of Catholic expansion.
– Normalizes Roncalli’s usurpation by embedding it in ordinary acts of governance.
– Reflects the proto‑conciliar rhetoric: humanistic praise, reluctance to assert exclusivity of the true religion, practical disregard for the anti‑modernist magisterium.
– Omits all the supernatural clarity and militancy that characterized the true Papacy of Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, Pius XI, and Pius XII.
Under the unchanging doctrine of the pre‑1958 Church, the result is clear:
– The act is devoid of true papal authority.
– The “diocese” it claims to erect belongs not to the Mystical Body of Christ, but to the growing paramasonic, neo‑church structure that would soon enthrone religious liberty and ecumenical syncretism.
– Its smooth legal solemnity does not mitigate but aggravates its role as an instrument to mislead clergy and faithful, for simulatio traditionis in servitio erroris (the simulation of tradition in the service of error) is more dangerous than open attack.
Against such masked operations, the only Catholic response is to cling uncompromisingly to the integral pre‑1958 Magisterium, to the social Kingship of Christ as defined by Quas primas, and to the anti‑modernist bulwark of Lamentabili and Pascendi—rejecting every pseudo‑pontifical act that prepares, legitimizes, or prolongs the conciliar apostasy.
Source:
Delhiensis et Simlensis (Simlensis)- Constitutio Apostolica detractis quibusdam territoriis ab Archidioecesi Delhiensi et Simlensi, nova dioecesis efficitur, « Simlensis » cognominanda, d. 4 m. Iunii … (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025