The presented constitution, attributed to A A A IOANNES PP. XXIII and dated 21 May 1959, announces the erection of the so‑called Diocese of Ambatondrazaka in Madagascar. It detaches specified territories from the sees of Diégo-Suarez and Tananarive, assigns the new circumscription as suffragan to Tananarive, entrusts it to the Trinitarian Order, regulates the location of the episcopal see, the designation of the cathedral (Sacred Heart of Jesus in Ambatondrazaka), seminary and chapter provisions, financial endowment, canonical administration, and delegates Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, then Apostolic Delegate in French Africa, to implement the decree. It is framed in pious imagery of the Church as a great tree spreading its branches over all nations, and claims supreme, binding authority for this administrative act.

---

The Conciliar Seed in Madagascar: Structural Expansion without Supernatural Foundation

The Illusion of Normalcy on the Eve of Revolution

Already in 1959, under the signature of the first usurper of the conciliar line, this constitution exhibits the decisive traits of that novus ordo mentality which would soon devastate doctrine, worship, and discipline.

Key elements of the text:

– It invokes the Church as a “sublime and fruitful tree” into whose shade all nations may come.
– It appeals to the advice of the cardinals of the Congregation of Propaganda Fide and of Marcel Lefebvre to justify the territorial division.
– It canonically carves territories:
– Ambatondrazaka and Andilamena from De Diego Suarez.
– Moramanga from Tananarive.
– It erects a new “diocese” of Ambatondrazaka:
– Seat in Ambatondrazaka.
– Cathedral church designated: the Church of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
– Entrusted to the Order of the Most Holy Trinity.
– Declared suffragan to the metropolitan see of Tananarive.
– It prescribes:
– At least an elementary seminary.
– Canons or, failing that, diocesan consultors.
– Financial basis from divided goods (per 1917 CIC can. 1500), alms, curial revenue, and Propaganda Fide subsidies.
– Transfer of relevant documents to the new curia.
– It clothes all this in legal solemnity, asserting binding force and penal consequences for disobedience.

On the surface, this appears as a conventional pre‑conciliar administrative act. In reality, read in light of subsequent events and judged by the integral Catholic doctrine defined before 1958, it reveals the underlying spiritual rupture: it uses the venerable canonical and theological language of the Church to consolidate the authority of a man who, by Modernist profession and conciliar agenda, prepares the demolition of that very Church. The entire text is thus suspended over a void of legitimacy, an early bureaucratic face of the coming apostasy.

Factual Level: Canonical Form in the Service of an Illegitimate Authority

From the standpoint of unchanging Catholic teaching:

1. The creation, division, and suppression of dioceses are indeed acts reserved to the Roman Pontiff, exercised for the supernatural end of saving souls (cf. 1917 CIC can. 215-216).
2. Such acts presuppose:
– A true pope, possessing suprema, plena, immediata (supreme, full, immediate) jurisdiction over the whole Church (Vatican I, Pastor aeternus).
– Continuity with the perennial faith and rejection of condemned errors (Pius IX, Syllabus Errorum; St. Pius X, Lamentabili sane exitu, Pascendi).

The text claims:

“suprema Nostra auctoritate haec quae sequuntur decernimus atque iubemus”
(“by Our supreme authority We decree and command the following”).

Yet:

– The one styling himself IOANNES XXIII publicly promoted precisely those tendencies condemned by previous popes:
– Enthusiastic favour for “aggiornamento” and “opening to the modern world,” aligning with proposition 80 condemned in the Syllabus: “The Roman Pontiff can and ought to reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.”
– Initiation of the council that became the engine of doctrinal relativization, religious liberty, and false ecumenism – all diametrically opposed to Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII.
– According to the very traditional doctrine summarized in the provided sources, a manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church nor wield jurisdiction:
– St. Robert Bellarmine: a manifest heretic ceases ipso facto to be pope and loses all jurisdiction.
– The 1917 Code (can. 188.4) provides automatic loss of office by public defection from the faith.
– Pius IV and Paul IV (e.g. Cum ex Apostolatus Officio) reject the possibility of a heretic validly acquiring the papacy.

Thus, the entire constitution rests upon a jurisdictional claim incompatible with the principles of the preceding Magisterium. What is presented as a lawful planting of an ecclesial “tree” in Madagascar is in fact the rooting of the future conciliar sect’s infrastructure in that region. The canonical vocabulary is orthodox; the effective subject wielding it is not. This is the quiet, devastating fraud: orthodox forms employed by a revolutionary will.

Linguistic Level: Pious Ornament Concealing Institutional Self-Referentialism

The rhetoric is superficially Catholic:

– Imagery of the Church as tree (Mt 13:31–32).
– Talk of “refuge of salvation,” “harbour of tranquillity,” “fruits” of evangelization.
– Emphasis on hierarchical order, obedience to the metropolitan, canonical procedures.

However, several linguistic symptoms betray the reduction of supernatural mission to bureaucratic expansion:

1. Abstract and self-congratulatory tone:
– The text celebrates the “growth” of structures as if extension of diocesan lines, suffragan lists, and parochial grids were itself proof of supernatural vitality.
– There is no concrete reference to:
– Conversion from idolatry and superstition to the one true Catholic faith.
– Destruction of false cults.
– Necessity of baptism for salvation (cf. Mark 16:16).
– Combat against secret societies and Masonic influence so explicitly denounced by pre-1958 popes (cf. Pius IX’s condemnation of sects warring against the Church).

2. Silence about the Most Holy Sacrifice as center:
– The cathedral is mentioned as a juridical seat of episcopal power, not first as the throne of the Eucharistic King where the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary is offered for the salvation of souls.
– No stress on safeguarding the Roman Rite as received, no note of vigilance against liturgical or doctrinal corruption. In 1959, with proto-Modernist liturgical ferment active, this silence is not neutral.

3. Instrumental use of religious vocabulary:
– By invoking edifying metaphors yet never articulating the dogmatic claims of the Church (e.g. extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, the kingship of Christ over nations, condemnation of false religions), the text subtly repurposes Catholic language to sanctify mere institutional management.

This cautious, managerial style is typical of the emerging conciliar mentality: it avoids explicit doctrinal defiance, but flattens supernatural realities into ornamental rhetoric around administrative acts. Verba sonant, res tacetur (“the words resound, the reality is silenced”).

Theological Level: Missing Christ the King, Missing the Supernatural Combat

Measured against firm pre-1958 doctrine, the omissions are more telling than the prescriptions.

1. Absence of the social Kingship of Christ

Pius XI in Quas Primas declares:

– Peace and order are impossible unless individuals and states recognize the reign of Christ.
– The Church must publicly assert Christ’s royal rights against secularism and laicism.

In stark contrast:

– This constitution speaks of territorial reorganization without one word about:
– The duty of Madagascar as a nation (and its authorities) to submit to Christ and His Church.
– The incompatibility of pagan or syncretic practices with the one true religion.
– Evangelization is reduced to the spread of the Church’s “shade” and “fruits” without clearly confessing the absolute necessity of the true faith and of the sacraments for salvation.

This is not accidental. It mirrors precisely that liberal tendency condemned by Pius IX, which:
– Recognizes a practical religious pluralism.
– Fails to affirm that the Catholic Church alone is the true Church (condemned proposition 21 in the Syllabus).

2. Silence on Modernist perils and Masonic subversion

Pius IX and St. Pius X speak with apocalyptic clarity:

– The “synagogue of Satan” and secret societies wage systematic war against the Church.
– Modernism is the “synthesis of all heresies,” corrupting Scripture, dogma, and history.

Yet this constitution, authored under the authority of a promoter of Vatican II:

– Ignores the grave crisis of doctrine and morals already festering in Europe and in missionary institutes.
– Offers no warning against syncretism, naturalism, or communist and Masonic infiltration, though Madagascar and Africa were then a theater of ideological manipulation.
– Treats the whole project as if the Church were doctrinally serene and institutionally sound, when in fact those steering it were preparing precisely the revolution St. Pius X had anathematized.

3. Canonical formalism divorced from dogmatic fidelity

The text anchors its measures in the 1917 Code, especially can. 1500 on division of property. But:

– The authority of the Code itself is derivative from the papal office as defined at Vatican I and presupposes the integrity of faith.
– Once the putative legislator is a man who favours principles previously condemned (e.g. reconciliation with liberalism), the external observance of the Code becomes a hollow legalism.

Leges sine fide legislatore corruunt: laws collapse when the lawgiver repudiates the principles that grounded them.

Symptomatic Level: How the Conciliar Sect Built Its Colonial Infrastructure

This constitution is emblematic of a deeper, more disturbing pattern.

1. Exporting the coming revolution

By multiplying diocesan structures under the sign of IOANNES XXIII and through the machinery of Propaganda Fide:

– The future conciliar sect ensured that when its new doctrines, rites, and ecumenical religion were imposed, a ready-made institutional network in mission territories would submit as a bloc.
– Madagascar thus receives a hierarchy and territorial framework that, after 1962–1965, would be effortlessly absorbed into the Church of the New Advent.

What appears as missionary generosity becomes, in retrospect, logistical preparation for universalizing the coming apostasy.

2. The role of Marcel Lefebvre: a tragic symptom

The constitution explicitly relies on the counsel and cooperation of Marcel Lefebvre:

“petito ante consilio a venerabili Fratre Marcello Lefebvre…”

From an integral Catholic perspective:

– Lefebvre here operates as an instrument in consolidating the authority of IOANNES XXIII, whom integral doctrine marks as a manifest Modernist and therefore devoid of papal authority.
– Later, Lefebvre would posture as resistance to the conciliar revolution while:
– Recognizing the legitimacy of the usurpers.
– Negotiating within the same paramasonic structure.
– Reducing the crisis to liturgical preference: “give us the old Mass, that is enough for us.”
– His presence in this document symbolizes the pseudo-opposition: a “traditional” facade that never questions the root—illegitimate authority—and thus keeps souls within the orbit of the neo-church.

The Ambatondrazaka act thereby exposes how {those pretending to be traditional Catholics} already functioned, prior to the council, inside the emerging apparatus, lending it credibility while being themselves shaped by its premises.

3. Institutional self-preservation over salvation of souls

The constitution is meticulous about:

– Territorial boundaries.
– Episcopal revenues.
– Proper archival transfer.
– Legal authenticity of copies.
– Penal clauses against those despising these decrees.

But where is:

– Admonition to preach repentance, destroy idols, combat superstition?
– Exhortation to form priests in Thomistic doctrine, loyal to anti-Modernist teaching and the Oath against Modernism?
– Command to defend the faithful from liberal and syncretic errors?

This is the inversion characteristic of the conciliar sect:

– The machinery of governance is guarded with solemn threats.
– The deposit of faith, which previous popes defended with fire and anathema, is left unmentioned, silently offered to the mercy of the very modernist currents then cresting in Rome.

The Abuse of Papal Style to Legitimize Apostasy

Particularly grave is the closing juridical apparatus:

“Has vero Litteras nunc et in posterum efficaces esse et fore volumus…”
(“We will and decree that these Letters be effective now and in the future…”)

“si quis… contra egerit ac Nos ediximus, id prorsus irritum atque inane haberi iubemus”
(“if anyone acts against what We have decreed, we order it to be held completely null and void”).

“Quae Nostra decreta in universum si quis vel spreverit vel quoquo modo detrectaverit, sciat se poenas esse subiturum iis iure statutas, qui Summorum Pontificum iussa non fecerint.”
(“Whoever despises or in any way rejects Our decrees, let him know that he will incur the penalties established by law for those who do not obey the commands of the Supreme Pontiffs.”)

Here, the usurper arrogates:

– The style and sanction proper to true Roman Pontiffs defending dogma and morals.
– The threat of canonical penalties to bind consciences to his own authority.

But integral doctrine teaches:

– Obedience is due only within the order established by Christ.
– When a claimant to the papacy undermines the faith, his acts cannot bind in conscience, and resistance to his errors is duty, not disobedience.
– The authority of genuine papal documents rests not on mere stylistic form, but on the objective identity between the teaching and the perennial deposit.

Thus the solemn threats in this constitution are void against those who, adhering to the pre-1958 Magisterium, recognize in IOANNES XXIII not a successor of Pius XII, but the inaugurator of a parallel hierarchy.

Non est potestas nisi a Deo (Rom 13:1) – but no man can claim divine authority while preparing to subvert what God has already definitively taught through His Church.

Madagascar’s Faithful Delivered to the Neo-Church

Seen in its full context, this act:

– Locks the Catholics of Ambatondrazaka into a structure that:
– Accepts without question the legitimacy of IOANNES XXIII, and therefore of the council he called.
– Will, within a decade, be submitted to the new liturgy, new catechism, and new ecumenical “mission.”
– Pre-conditions clergy and laity to equate loyalty to the local hierarchy and to Rome—whatever it teaches—with fidelity to Christ.

But the pre-1958 Magisterium had already:

– Condemned the pluralist and liberal theses later enshrined by the conciliar structures.
– Warned against the deceit of those who, under Catholic name and institutions, propagate doctrines that dissolve dogma and empty Revelation.

The faithful of Ambatondrazaka are thus not truly given a diocese of the Catholic Church but annexed into the growing paramasonic structure that will publicly manifest itself after 1965. The constitution is the title deed of that annexation.

Conclusion: An Administrative Mask for the Coming Abomination

This constitution must be read not as an innocuous page of missionary logistics, but as an early and revealing moment in the construction of the conciliar sect’s global skeleton:

– It borrows flawless canonical form and traditional language.
– It omits any robust confession of the unique salvific necessity of the Catholic Church and the absolute Kingship of Christ.
– It refuses to confront Modernism, liberalism, and the war of secret societies, despite clear warnings from Pius IX and St. Pius X.
– It relies on the collaboration of figures who later exemplify pseudo-resistance, ensuring that even opposition remains within the orbit of the new system.
– It weaponizes the threat of papal penalties to compel obedience to an authority already ideologically aligned with condemned doctrines.

Against such acts, the only integrally Catholic response is lucid rejection of their alleged binding force and a return to the doctrinal clarity of the pre-1958 Magisterium. Structures like the “Diocese of Ambatondrazaka” stand as monuments, not of authentic evangelization, but of how the abomination of desolation began to occupy Catholic names, buildings, and titles, preparing to enthrone another gospel in the very places once consecrated to the true God.

---

Source:
De Diego Suarez – Tananarivensis (Ambatondrazakaënsis) – Constitutio Apostolica ab Ecclesiis De Diego Suarez et Tananarivensi quaedam territoria detraituntur, quibus nova quaedam efficitur dioecesis, …   (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025