On October 11, 1959, John XXIII delivered a festive allocution at the Pontifical North American College in Rome, marking the centenary of the seminary. He extols the College’s history, praises the hierarchy and faithful of the United States, emphasizes institutional growth, academic and technical progress, and charitable initiatives, and presents the College as a model of “loyal collaboration” between hierarchy and people under “God’s Providence.” He highlights Roman formation as a unifying ecclesial center and closes by announcing procedural advancement in the cause of Elizabeth Seton, all in a tone of congratulatory optimism and civic-religious harmony. From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, this speech is an early and eloquent manifesto of the conciliar revolution: naturalistic, sentimental, ecclesiologically hollow, and oriented toward a Church reconciled with liberal America rather than subjected to the social Kingship of Christ.
Laudatio of Liberal Catholicism: An Early Manifesto of Conciliar Mentality
Substitution of Supernatural Gravity with Institutional Self-Congratulation
At the factual level, the allocution appears “harmless”: a jubilee speech, historical reminiscences, courteous praise, and paternal encouragement. Precisely here lies its most insidious character.
Key elements:
– Praise for:
– The centenary of the College and its splendid new building.
– The “flourishing condition of the Church” in the United States.
– “Loyal collaboration between zealous Bishops and pastors, and a devoted people.”
– The charitable generosity of American Catholics.
– The role of Roman formation in strengthening unity and identity.
– Silence regarding:
– The absolute necessity of the *state of grace*.
– The horror of mortal sin and the danger of eternal damnation.
– The unique necessity of the *Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary* for salvation.
– The exclusive truth of the Catholic faith and the error of all sects (condemned clearly by Pius IX in the *Syllabus*).
– The intrinsic conflict between liberal, religiously indifferent states and the rights of Christ the King (Pius XI, *Quas Primas*).
This omission is not accidental rhetoric; it reveals a deliberate shift of axis. The center of gravity is removed from *Christus Rex et Lex* and relocated to:
– Institutional durability.
– External expansion.
– Academic prestige.
– Social respectability.
– Integration into a liberal-democratic framework.
The allocution glorifies an American Catholicism that thrives within a constitutional system explicitly divorced from the confessional state, without the slightest doctrinal warning that this political-religious arrangement is condemned by the constant Magisterium before 1958. Pius IX explicitly rejects the thesis that “the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (*Syllabus*, prop. 55, condemned). Pius XI solemnly teaches that the denial of Christ’s public reign is the root of modern social ruin (*Quas Primas*). Yet John XXIII offers unqualified admiration for precisely this model.
This is not paternal indulgence; it is betrayal by omission. *Qui tacet consentire videtur* (he who is silent appears to consent). The silence about the incompatibility between integral Catholic teaching and liberal pluralism functions here as a practical repudiation of pre-1958 doctrine under a veneer of pious phraseology.
Language as a Veil for Modernist Naturalism
The linguistic texture of the allocution is a decisive sign of doctrinal corruption.
1. Sentimental and horizontal vocabulary
The Latin and English parts abound in emotive, sociable, and diplomatic formulas:
– “magna esse amoris vim, qua Apostolica Sedes Nationem prosequitur vestram” – an emphasis on affection toward a nation, rather than zeal for its submission to Christ’s social Kingship.
– “vigorous faith of Our American children”,
– “splendid example of what loyal collaboration… can achieve”,
– “devotion to the cause of charity.”
All of this is presented with no doctrinal edge, no distinction between natural philanthropy and supernatural charity rooted in the true faith and the sacramental order. The text glides into a naturalistic admiration of activism and institutional success—exactly the mentality stigmatized by St. Pius X in *Pascendi*, where the Church is reduced to a sociological force whose “vitality” becomes its apologetic.
2. Evasive euphemisms for a condemned political-religious framework
When John XXIII speaks of:
– “the flourishing condition of the Church in your great country, despite its youthfulness”, as a sign of “loyal collaboration”,
he effectively canonizes a model in which:
– The State is religiously neutral.
– False religions enjoy legal parity.
– The Catholic Church is tolerated as one confession among many.
Pius IX condemned as an error the notion that “every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (*Syllabus*, prop. 15, condemned), and that the equal civil liberty of all cults is harmless to faith and morals (prop. 79, condemned). John XXIII, instead of reiterating this, praises the system that enshrines those very principles, couching it in the language of “Providence” and “cooperation.”
3. Rhetorical inflation hiding doctrinal vacuity
The speech repeatedly magnifies:
– buildings,
– commemorations,
– centennial symbolism,
– the “paternal benevolence” of occupants of the Roman See,
while never once articulating:
– the necessity of doctrinal militancy,
– the obligation of states and peoples to recognize Christ as King publicly,
– the grave peril of indifferentism and secularism in the American context.
The tone is that of a diplomatic gala address, not the voice of the Vicar of Christ warning future priests of *error, heresy, persecution, Masonry, Modernism, Communism, liberalism,* or the corruption of doctrine. This contrast with the precise condemnations in *Lamentabili sane exitu* and *Pascendi* is brutal. There, error is named, anathematized, and bound to eternal consequences; here, modern liberal Catholicism is tacitly blessed and congratulated.
Refusal to Affirm the Social Kingship of Christ
The gravest theological defect is the glaring absence of *Christus Rex* as defined and demanded by the pre-1958 Magisterium.
From Pius XI in *Quas Primas*:
– Peace and order can only be secured where individuals and states recognize and submit to the reign of Christ.
– Public apostasy—laws and constitutions ignoring Christ’s authority—is denounced as the root of modern catastrophe.
– Rulers and nations are bound to publicly acknowledge and honour Christ the King in legislation, administration, and public life.
In stark contrast, John XXIII:
– Celebrates the “flourishing” of the Church within a regime founded precisely on the separation of Church and State, without calling that arrangement intrinsically disordered.
– Offers only vague invocations of “Divine Providence” to justify a situation formally condemned as erroneous.
– Reduces Rome’s role to a sentimental and cultural center, rather than the juridical and doctrinal authority to which nations are bound.
This is not a minor omission. It is an operative denial of the dogmatically rooted doctrine that Christ must reign socially, not only privately. It aligns with the later conciliar cult of “religious freedom” and “dialogue,” which Pius IX branded as mortal errors.
The allocution thus prepares—in language and silences—the path toward the inversion of *Quas Primas* that will characterize the conciliar sect: the shift from demanding the submission of nations to praising their liberal frameworks as “providential” environments in which the “Church” can “flourish.”
Glorification of Americanism and the Seed of Doctrinal Relativization
The speech bears the unmistakable traits of the once-condemned Americanism: the exaltation of practicality, activism, accommodation to modern liberty, and the soft-pedaling of specifically Catholic claims.
Characteristic elements:
1. Praise of charitable activism without doctrinal conditioning
John XXIII applauds American generosity and social works:
– “unselfish devotion to the cause of charity”,
– “in innumerable initiatives, you assist the needy throughout the world as ‘cheerful givers’.”
But charity torn from the confession of the integral Catholic faith and from submission to Christ the King degenerates into humanitarianism. Pius IX and St. Pius X warn that naturalistic philanthropy, separated from truth, becomes a mask for apostasy. Here, there is no warning, only applause.
2. No condemnation of pluralism and indifferentism
In a nation where:
– Protestantism, sects, and unbelief are publicly legitimized;
– Catholic dogma is placed on the same civil footing as heresy;
John XXIII speaks only of “flourishing,” “loyal collaboration,” and “Providence,” never of the objectively sinful structure of a state that refuses to recognize the true religion. This contradicts the unambiguous pre-1958 doctrinal line and subtly introduces an ecclesiology in which coexistence with error is normal, even exemplary.
3. Seminarians formed to admire, not to convert, liberal society
The emphasis on Roman formation is emptied of its traditional content (formation of militants for the conversion of individuals and nations) and redirected toward:
– appreciation of Roman culture,
– a vague “sense of the Church,”
– efficient priestly service within the given socio-political order.
They are not told:
– that they must work, as priests, for the subjection of their nation to Christ’s law;
– that the American constitutional order is doctrinally defective and must be judged by the rights of God and His Church.
Instead, they are trained—through this rhetoric—to become compliant officials in a pluralistic order, precisely the “pastors” suitable for the conciliar sect that will enthrone religious liberty and ecumenism as new “values.”
Omission of the True Enemies: Modernism, Masonry, and Internal Apostasy
The allocution is delivered in 1959—decades after:
– Pius IX’s exposure of Masonic and liberal conspiracies.
– Leo XIII’s encyclicals against Freemasonry and naturalism.
– St. Pius X’s systematic demolition of Modernism in *Pascendi* and *Lamentabili*.
– Repeated papal warnings against the “enemies within” and the infiltration of the Church.
And yet:
– Not a single word is spoken about the doctrinal crisis.
– Not a single warning against Modernism, despite its condemnation as the “synthesis of all heresies.”
– Not a single reference to the danger of Masonic or liberal influence on seminaries, universities, or clergy.
– Not a single admonition that the glory of buildings and numbers is meaningless if doctrine is poisoned.
This silence is, theologically, an indictment.
Pius X ordered vigilance and combat; John XXIII chooses smiles and congratulations. Where the true Magisterium unmasks the “synagogue of Satan” (Pius IX), the conciliar precursor uses the same civilization, the same liberal framework, as a pretext for rhetorical praise.
Such refusal to name and fight Modernism—already condemned—and to remind the future clergy of this obligation, is not a neutral choice of emphasis. It is an abandonment of papal duty, and a prelude to the systemic doctrinal surrender that will follow.
Instrumentalization of Canonization Processes to Flatter a National Narrative
At the end, John XXIII presents, as a consoling “news item,” progress in the cause of Elizabeth Seton:
– This is framed as a gesture to please the visiting American hierarchy and people.
– The saint-making process is invoked as a diplomatic gift, part of national-religious flattery.
This approach is symptomatic:
– The process of recognizing sanctity is here rhetorically aligned with national pride and political considerations, instead of being held up strictly as discernment of heroic virtue and orthodoxy.
– It prepares the transformation of “canonizations” into instruments of ideology and propaganda for the conciliar sect, detached from traditional theological criteria and used to legitimize new orientations.
By tying the progress of a cause explicitly to the political moment of a centenary celebration and to the collective “joy” of a nation, the allocution symbolically subordinates the discernment of sanctity to human diplomacy. This is precisely how, later, the paramasonic structure occupying the Vatican will turn pseudo-canonizations into seals on its doctrinal deviations.
From Roman Center of Truth to Emotional Symbol of Unity
The allocution rightly recalls:
– the Roman primacy,
– the presence of Peter and Paul,
– the continuity of Roman ecclesial tradition.
However, even this is subtly redefined.
1. Rome as cultural-ecclesial “heart,” not as juridical and dogmatic sovereign
The text emphasizes:
– the beauty of the city,
– the inspiration of martyrs,
– the “sense of the Church” nurtured by living near Peter’s tomb.
But it does not underline:
– the obligation of absolute doctrinal submission to the Roman Magisterium as defined before 1958;
– the condemnation of those errors—liberal, rationalist, modernist—that dominate the modern West;
– the non-negotiable character of dogma and the duty to resist every innovation contrary to Tradition.
Rome is made into a poetic and affective center, a symbol of unity and heritage, instead of the juridical and dogmatic tribunal that judges nations, universities, and seminaries. The sentimentalization of Roman primacy is a strategic step toward emptying it of doctrinal content, preparing its capture by a conciliar apparatus that will use the “Roman” brand to impose errors globally.
2. The praise of stable expansion with no warning against false security
John XXIII celebrates:
– the multiplication of dioceses,
– the increase of institutions,
– the growth of schools and universities,
– the flourishing of religious institutes and prayer.
But pre-1958 Popes constantly warned that external prosperity is nothing if doctrine is corrupted. Where is the reminder that:
– heresy can spread inside structures;
– seminaries can be infected with Modernism;
– numbers and buildings cannot guarantee fidelity?
Absent. Instead, American institutional growth is taken as self-authenticating proof of health. This reveals a naturalistic criterion: success, respectability, and expansion = “God’s blessing.” Exactly the logic of liberal and Masonic philanthropy, alien to the supernatural discernment required by the Church.
Preparatory Text for the Church of the New Advent
Symptomatically, this allocution anticipates the essential features of the later conciliar sect:
– Replacement of clear condemnations with diplomatic optimism.
– Praise of liberal democracies and religiously neutral states as “providential.”
– Reduction of Rome to a sentimental, unifying symbol rather than dogmatic judge.
– Instrumentalization of national sentiment and canonizations for political-ecclesial ends.
– Celebration of institutional and charitable activism without insistence on the absolute rights of Christ the King and the necessity of public profession of the only true faith.
– Silence about Modernism, despite its prior solemn condemnation, and neglect of the duty to guard seminaries from its poison.
The line that Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, and Pius XI draw with crystalline clarity—between the Kingdom of Christ and the revolution of 1789, between the Church and liberal naturalism—is here blurred, politely and festively. The future priests are not called to overthrow the idols of liberalism by preaching the exclusive and public Kingship of Christ, as commanded by *Quas Primas*, but to integrate smoothly into the American arrangement, as “loyal collaborators” in a religiously pluralistic society.
The theological bankruptcy lies precisely in this: what the true Church condemned as a system of legalized apostasy is now praised as the flourishing environment of Catholic life—without calling it to conversion.
Call to Return to the Pre-1958 Magisterium as Sole Criterion
Measured against the unchanging Catholic doctrine before 1958:
– The allocution’s omissions are not neutral, but doctrinally charged.
– Its vocabulary is imbued with liberal and naturalistic presuppositions.
– Its praise for a religiously neutral state contradicts the prior Magisterium that demands the social reign of Christ.
– Its silence on Modernism and internal enemies betrays the mandate given by St. Pius X to tirelessly unmask and extirpate them.
The Church cannot be redefined as a harmonious partner of pluralistic democracies and worldly humanitarianism. *Non est regnum Dei convivium cum erroribus, sed triumphus veritatis super mendacium* (the Kingdom of God is not a banquet with errors, but the triumph of truth over falsehood). A speech that transforms the Roman See into the patron of liberal Catholicism, congratulating structures that rest on principles condemned by the *Syllabus* and contradicted by *Quas Primas*, exposes itself as an early document of the emerging *Church of the New Advent*.
What is required is the exact opposite of this allocution’s spirit:
– An unambiguous reaffirmation that only the integral Catholic faith saves.
– A solemn rejection of liberal religious freedom and separation of Church and State as incompatible with Christ’s Kingship.
– A radical cleansing of seminaries from Modernism, naturalism, and democratic ecclesiology.
– A return to the doctrinal intransigence of Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, and Pius XI as the norm by which all texts, past and present, must be judged.
Anything less becomes complicity in that “public apostasy” which Pius XI warned must be condemned and corrected, not crowned with jubilees, architecture, and diplomatic applause.
Source:
In Pontificio Collegio Foederatarum Americae Septemtrionalis Civitatum in Urbe habita, centum impleto annorum spatio, ex quo sacrum idem Ephebeum conditum est, 11 Octobris a. 1959, Ioannes PP. XXIII (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025