This Latin text, issued in 1959 by John XXIII under the title “CONSTITUTIO APOSTOLICA KIMBERLEYENSIS ET ALIARUM (BECHUANALANDENSIS),” rearranges ecclesiastical boundaries in Southern Africa: by detaching territories from the dioceses of Kimberley and Bulawayo and from the Apostolic Vicariate of Windhoek (entrusted respectively to Oblates of Mary Immaculate and Mariannhill missionaries), it erects a new Apostolic Prefecture of Bechuanaland, assigned to the Passionist Congregation, and vests its Ordinary with the usual canonical rights and duties; all is clothed in solemn legal formulas guaranteeing its binding force.

---

In reality this apparently technical act, signed at the dawn of the conciliar usurpation, manifests the juridical self-consciousness of a structure that will soon replace the visible Church with a paramasonic parody, instrumentalizing missionary language to prepare the conciliar revolution in Africa.

Territorial Engineering as Prologue to Revolution

The document, in substance, does four things:

– It invokes the advice of the Cardinals of “Propaganda Fide” and the delegated representative in Southern Africa.
– It detaches portions of territory in the Bechuanaland protectorate from three existing jurisdictions.
– It erects the Apostolic Prefecture of Bechuanaland, entrusting it to the Passionists.
– It clothes all of this in stringent clauses of canonical efficacy, nullifying contrary dispositions and threatening penalties against resistance.

At first glance, one might consider it a routine, even laudable, act of pastoral prudence: *missio ad gentes* served by more precise structures. Yet examined from the vantage point of the integral Catholic doctrine fixed before 1958, and read in light of the subsequent conciliar cataclysm, this constitution reveals itself as a juridical brick in the edifice of the coming *ecclesia nova*, a sign of a mentality already infected with the principles condemned by Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X and Pius XI.

Factual Level: The Silent Shift from Missionary Zeal to Institutional Technocracy

The text pretends to root the decision in the extension of the Kingdom of Christ, but strikingly, it is almost entirely bureaucratic.

Key elements:

– Reference to the expansion of “christianae rei” (the Christian cause) and suitability for propagation of the faith.
– Detailed listing of religious congregations administrating the former and new territories.
– Emphasis on canonical form: decrees, delegations, authentic copies, threats of canonical penalties.

What is almost completely absent:

– No explicit confession of the necessity of conversion of souls to the one true Catholic faith as the only way of salvation.
– No mention of the obligation to extirpate paganism, false religions, Freemasonry, or syncretistic practices from the protectorate.
– No reminder of the social kingship of Christ over Bechuanaland and its civil authority, as taught clearly by Pius XI in *Quas Primas* (Christ’s reign must be publicly recognized by states; without this, true and lasting peace is impossible).
– No insistence that missionaries guard against the errors of religious indifferentism, naturalism, and liberalism condemned in the *Syllabus of Errors* (Pius IX condemns the notion that “every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” and that all religions are paths to salvation).

The text thereby reduces the missionary act to institutional rearrangement. The visible content is canonical cartography; the supernatural end – *salus animarum per fidem unicam, per gratiam, per sacramenta vere Catholica* – is cloaked in generic language, functionally displaced by administrative self-reference.

This is not a mere stylistic accident. On the eve of the council, the emerging conciliar sect learned to speak of “mission” in demographic and organizational terms, while draining it of the absolute claims of the true Church. The constitution exemplifies that shift.

Linguistic Level: Diplomatic Abstraction and the Eclipse of Supernatural Truth

The rhetoric is formally “traditional” Latin, but the decisive feature is its abstraction and self-enclosure.

1. Excessive self-referentiality:

The document strongly asserts its own authority:
“Has vero Litteras nunc et in posterum efficaces esse et fore volumus…”, with elaborate clauses annulling all contrary provisions and threatening canonical penalties.

This hypertrophy of juridical form, without proportional doctrinal content, betrays an incipient positivism: authority is asserted procedurally rather than as the organ of immutable truth. By contrast, pre-1958 pontifical acts of genuine Catholic mind typically yoke juridical decisions explicitly to doctrinal principles—the rights of the Church against the State, the obligation to suppress heresy, the supernatural end of souls.

2. Minimal, vaguely invoked missionary motive:

There is one brief, general justification: the Cardinals judged it “optimum christianaeque rei dilatandae opportunum” that a new jurisdiction be created. No specification of:

– What errors plague the territory.
– What pagan superstitions must be eradicated.
– What Masonic or secular influences (already denounced by Pius IX and Leo XIII) threaten the flock.

Silence about enemies of the faith in mission lands is already a betrayal. The popes who issued the *Syllabus* and anti-Masonic condemnations named the adversaries; here we see a bloodless language that prepares coexistence.

3. Ritualized threats detached from dogmatic substance:

The text concludes that whoever opposes these disciplinary decisions will incur penalties for disobeying the “orders of the Supreme Pontiffs.”

– Yet nowhere are the *divine* rights of Christ the King clearly invoked as the foundation of these dispositions.
– This reveals a juridicism that treats ecclesiastical authority as an autonomous legislative machine. Under integral doctrine, *potestas* is ordered to *veritas*: law without explicit doctrinal anchor degenerates into voluntarism.

This blasé, bureaucratic tone is symptomatic: an ecclesiastical leadership habituating itself to operate as an international administration, not as the militant Church (*Ecclesia militans*) engaged in dogmatic combat and conquest of souls for the one true fold.

Theological Level: Ominous Omissions and Conciliar Seed-Errors

Measured against pre-1958 magisterium, the most damning element is what the constitution does not say. *Quod tacet, clamat* (what it is silent about, cries out).

1. No affirmation of exclusivity of the Catholic Church.

Pius IX, in the *Syllabus*, condemns the idea that man may find salvation in any religion (propositions 15–18). Authentic missionary decrees presuppose and often restate this dogma: the missions exist to rescue pagans and heretics from darkness and incorporate them into the one Ark.

This text never explicitly:

– Affirms that the inhabitants of Bechuanaland must abandon their errors and idols.
– Insists that “there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved” except that of Christ (Acts 4:12), and no other Church than His one Mystical Body.

By 1959, within the apparatus that will generate the council, such silence announces what will soon become explicit: a relativizing of the Church’s unique salvific necessity in the name of “dialogue” and “development.”

2. No allusion to the Social Kingship of Christ.

Pius XI in *Quas Primas* teaches that Christ’s Kingship is to be publicly recognized by nations; laws and institutions must submit to His law. The new prefecture concerns a “protectorate.” Yet:

– There is no call that its civil structures recognize Christ the King.
– No demand that Catholic principles shape law, education, marriage, public morals.
– No echo of the constant doctrine that the State cannot be religiously neutral (condemned explicitly in proposition 55 of the *Syllabus*: separation of Church and State).

This omission is not neutral. It aligns with the liberal thesis later canonized in the conciliar sect: the false “right” of religious liberty, the refusal to impose the true religion socially, the cult of human dignity detached from submission to Christ.

3. Blindness to Freemasonic and naturalistic subversion.

Pius IX rightly denounced Masonic sects as the *synagoga Satanae* organizing war against the Church; Leo XIII in *Humanum Genus* exposes their program of secularism and naturalism. The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw precisely in colonial and post-colonial Africa the advance of Masonic liberalism and interconfessional humanitarianism.

Yet this constitution:

– Does not warn missionaries against secret societies, Protestant infiltration, syncretism, or naturalistic NGOs.
– Does not echo the papal instructions that Catholic structures must be a counter-society, not a mere adjunct to imperial administration.

The complacent silence prepares the later collaboration of the conciliar sect with Masonic and globalist agendas under the pretext of “development,” “human rights,” and “inculturation.”

4. Instrumentalization of religious orders for an emerging neo-church.

The document distributes continents among religious congregations like departments of an international corporation. On its face this reflects a longstanding practice; yet the timing and mentality are revealing:

– The Passionists and Oblates are treated principally as administrative agencies.
– No exhortation that they guard the integrity of doctrine against Modernism, already condemned by St. Pius X in *Pascendi* and *Lamentabili sane*.
– No reminder that those who undermine these condemnations fall under excommunication, as St. Pius X declared when renewing *Lamentabili*.

This is the same apparatus that, within a few years, will welcome and promote the very modernists whom St. Pius X anathematized, transforming missionary institutes into vectors of liberation theology, false inculturation, and ecumenical confusion.

Symptomatic Level: How a “Minor” Constitution Reveals Systemic Apostasy

From the perspective of integral Catholic faith (once, not more), this document is not condemned chiefly for what it positively asserts—territorial reorganization is in itself morally indifferent and could be just—but for what it manifests:

1. Self-confident exercise of authority by the initiator of the conciliar revolution.

The text bears the seal of John XXIII, whose election inaugurates the line of usurpers that will preside over the destruction of Catholic worship, doctrine, and discipline. Here we already see:

– A serene assumption that his legislative acts define the concrete form of the Church in mission lands.
– A canonical maximalism: categorical threats against anyone who “dares” to resist the enacted norms.

Once this juridical mechanism is hijacked by a paramasonic structure, such language becomes blasphemous: a usurping power threatens penalties in the name of Christ while preparing to mutilate His Sacrifice and relativize His doctrine.

2. Transition from supernatural militancy to geo-ecclesiastical management.

Authentic Catholic missionary law rests upon:

– The necessity of faith and baptism.
– The duty to uproot idolatry.
– The obligation to avoid any recognition of false cults.

Here, “mission” is handled in the categories of:

– Appropriateness for “propagation of the faith” as an administrative prudence.
– Efficient distribution between religious corporations.

This reflects a naturalistic, sociological view of the Church’s expansion, compatible with later propaganda that praises “inculturation,” “respect for traditional religions,” and “dialogue” with witchdoctors and shamans, rather than their conversion.

3. The juridical absolutism that will later enforce sacrilege.

The constitution insists that:

…si quis, quavis praeditus auctoritate, sive sciens sive insciens contra egerit ac Nos ediximus, id prorsus irritum atque inane haberi iubemus.

(“If anyone, of any authority whatsoever, knowingly or unknowingly acts contrary to what We have decreed, we order that it be held completely null and void.”)

Such language, legitimate in the mouth of a true Pope defending divine law, becomes spiritually toxic when a structure poised to betray doctrine deploys it:

– The same juridical absolutism will be redeployed to impose the liturgical revolution (the profanation of the Most Holy Sacrifice), religious liberty, ecumenism with heretics and infidels, “interreligious prayer,” and the cult of man.
– Those who resist will be portrayed as disobedient to “pontifical” decrees, inverting the principle *obsequium erga Pontificem propter fidem, non contra fidem* (obedience to the Pontiff is for the sake of faith, not against faith).

This constitution is an example of how the conciliar sect inherits and twists the robust canonical forms built in healthier ages, turning them into instruments of systematic subversion.

Contrast with Pre-1958 Doctrine: What a Catholic Missionary Constitution Should Say

To expose fully the spiritual bankruptcy of the mentality enriching this text, consider what is missing that integral Catholic doctrine demands.

1. It should echo the principle that:

– *Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus* (outside the Church there is no salvation) – understood in the solemn, dogmatic sense taught by the Fathers, Trent, Vatican I, and repeated by pre-1958 Popes.
– Missions exist so that idolaters, infidels, heretics may abandon false worship and submit to the authority of Christ in His Church.

Instead, we have a hygienic redistribution of territory, as if lines on a map, not the eternal destiny of souls, were foremost.

2. It should demand that:

– All teaching in the new prefecture conform strictly to the condemnations of Rationalism, Indifferentism, Modernism, Liberalism (*Syllabus*, *Lamentabili*, *Pascendi*).
– Seminaries and catechesis there rigorously exclude the evolutionary, historicist, “pastoral” relativization of dogma.

Instead, there is total silence, just as the forces of Modernism are consolidating in the very Roman dicasteries issuing this text.

3. It should insist that:

– Christ’s kingship be publicly recognized; civil authorities must not adopt religious neutrality.
– Masonic associations and syncretistic movements be denounced and barred.

Instead, the text functions comfortably within the liberal-colonial order, preparing the later smooth cooperation of the conciliar sect with “pluralist” and Masonic frameworks in African states.

4. It should express pastoral care in unmistakably supernatural terms:

– Calling missionaries to sanctity, penance, Eucharistic reparation, doctrinal preaching of the Four Last Things, and defense of marriage and morals.

Instead, it is a notarial instrument. The sacred appears only as a background décor for legal formulas.

From Bechuanaland to the “New Advent”: The Logic of Apostasy

One might object: is it not excessive to read so much into a brief territorial constitution? No, if we understand how revolutions proceed:

– They rarely begin with explicit doctrinal manifestos.
– They first habituate institutions to think in terms of structures, regions, commissions, and “adaptation,” while cooling the doctrinal and supernatural vocabulary.
– They replace the *militia Christi* with NGOs in cassocks.

This document:

– Presents missionary governance as technocratic optimization.
– Acclimatizes clergy and religious to absolute submission to new central directives, regardless of doctrinal vigilance.
– Operates under the name and seal of the man who will convoke the council that enthrones religious liberty, ecumenism, and anthropocentrism.

Thus, it is a modest but clear specimen of the pre-conciliar stage of the conciliar sect: externally draped in the juridical and linguistic forms of the true Church, internally aligned with a naturalistic, diplomatic, non-combative ecclesiology, whose maturation will be the abomination of desolation enthroned in Rome.

Conclusion: The Only Legitimate Criterion – Immutable Tradition

Judged according to immutable Catholic teaching:

– The mere creation of a new apostolic prefecture is not in itself an evil; the Church has always reconfigured her missionary territories.
– However, when such acts emerge from and feed into a system already predisposed to Modernism, and when they are marked by systematic silence regarding the exclusive claims of Christ and His Church, they participate in a larger program of deformation.

Integral Catholic faith requires:

– That every structural act be transparently ordered to the open confession of the unique salvific role of the Catholic Church and the public rights of Christ the King.
– That authority be exercised not as positivistic will to power, but as humble instrument of the deposit of faith, especially in lands prey to paganism and liberalism.
– That missionary policy wage war against Masonic, syncretistic, and modernist currents, rather than dissolving into their diplomatic grammar.

This constitution, by its omissions, by its bureaucratic self-assertion, and by its place in the trajectory of the conciliar revolution, stands as a small but telling monument to an ecclesiastical leadership already ceasing to think as the Church of Christ and beginning to act as the administration of a neo-church, in which geography and governance survive while doctrine and worship are progressively betrayed.

---

Source:
Kimberleyensis et aliarum – Constitutio Apostolica a Dioecesibus Kimberleyensi et Bulauaiensi, atque a vicariatu apostolico Vindhoekensi, quibusdam detractis territoriis, nova conditur Praefectura Apo…   (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025