At the beginning of his usurped reign, John XXIII addresses the hierarchy in Vietnam to celebrate the establishment of a local episcopal hierarchy, praise the growth of Catholic numbers, glorify missionary efforts, and exhort Vietnamese clergy and laity to fidelity, cooperation with missionaries, social contribution, and civil loyalty, presenting this new structure as a sign of ecclesial maturity and divine favor. All of this apparently pious rhetoric serves one precise function: to consolidate the conciliar revolution in Asia by subjugating an emerging Church to the nascent neo-church of aggiornamento, sentimental Marianism, and political accommodation, thereby corrupting authentic apostolic mission at its root.

---

Asian Aggiornamento: How John XXIII Weaponized Vietnam for the Conciliar Revolution

Foundational Fraud: A Usurper Speaking with a Stolen Voice

From the perspective of *integral Catholic faith*, any text signed “Ioannes PP. XXIII” in 1961 already stands under a fundamental cloud: the author inaugurates and embodies the conciliar rupture that explodes at Vatican II. This letter is not an innocent administrative note; it is an ideological vector.

Key elements:

– John XXIII speaks as if exercising the same Petrine authority as Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII.
– He invokes continuity with earlier missionary documents (Benedict XV’s “Maximum illud”, Pius XI’s “Rerum Ecclesiae”, Pius XII’s “Evangelii Praecones” and “Fidei donum”, and his own “Princeps Pastorum”) to cloak a different program under traditional vocabulary.

The decisive problem:

– The entire letter presupposes the legitimacy of the conciliar line and its emerging principles: national episcopates as laboratories of “inculturation,” mission reoriented toward dialogue with civil power, and a shift from supernatural combat to socio-political “progress.”
– This is precisely the trajectory condemned as *liberalism* and *modernism* by the pre-1958 Magisterium (Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X), even where John XXIII masks it in biblical citations and Marian devotion.

Thus, the first and gravest error: **an antipope uses the language of mission to attach a young Asian Church to a paramasonic structure that will soon enthrone religious liberty, false ecumenism, and the cult of man.** Once this usurped foundation is rejected, the entire document collapses.

Historical Engineering: Statistics as a Tool of Ideological Legitimization

On the factual plane, the letter enumerates:

– Growth of Catholics in Vietnam:
– 1900: 812,000
– 1927: 1,237,249
– “Now”: over 1,500,000
– Transformation of 17 Apostolic Vicariates into three ecclesiastical provinces (Hanoi, Huế, Saigon) with 17 suffragan dioceses.
– Increasing leadership by native bishops as proof of maturity and divine favor.

Several points demand clarification:

1. These historical numbers and structures, as such, are verifiable from missionary statistics and the Acta Apostolicae Sedis of that era; as bare facts, they can be confirmed.
2. The interpretation John XXIII imposes on them is ideological:
– Quantitative growth is treated as qualitative guarantee.
– Structural elevation (vicariates → dioceses) is treated as proof of authentic Catholic consolidation.

In pre-1958 Catholic theology, numbers and external promotion are never the criterion of truth:

– St. Pius X in Pascendi exposes the modernist confusion between historical development and dogmatic legitimacy. Growth and adaptation do not validate doctrine; *fides divina et catholica* does.
– Pius XI in Quas primas teaches that peace and order are fruits of the *social reign of Christ the King*, not of headcounts or bureaucratic upgrades.

Here, numerical success and canonical promotion are subtly weaponized to authenticate the soon-to-erupt conciliar reconfiguration. The document insinuates:

“Since you are maturing structurally and numerically, you must now fully align with the new mission paradigm we propose.”

This reveals the core deceit: **demographic and institutional facts are baptised as theological confirmation of a project that will, in reality, dissolve Catholic identity into conciliar syncretism.**

Rhetorical Sugar: Pious Language as a Mask for Programmatic Subversion

On the linguistic level, the text is saturated with biblical and devotional phrases:

– Gratitude for faith “announced in the whole world” (Romans 1).
– Joy over unity “cor unum et anima una.”
– Exhortations to zeal: “Sollicitudine non pigri… Domino servientes…”
– Praise of martyrs: “institutions confirmed by the blood of the holy martyrs.”
– Appeals to charity, patience in tribulations, perseverance.

All of this, in itself, is drawn from perennial Catholic vocabulary. But within this document, it functions in a different way:

1. The tone is uniformly irenic, managerial, congratulatory, almost corporate.
– No mention of the doctrinal threats already menacing the Church: modernism, communism’s atheism, and liberal naturalism as condemned in the Syllabus of Errors and by St. Pius X.
– No warning against infiltration by secret societies, which Pius IX explicitly linked with global assaults on the Church and which are historically and verifiably active in the 20th century.
– No strong affirmation of the exclusive necessity of the Catholic Church for salvation, which Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius XII reaffirmed without ambiguity.

2. The language of gratitude and optimism is calculated:
– It anesthetizes vigilance.
– It replaces *militant ecclesiology* with a consoling narrative of linear progress.
– It subtly introduces the idea that the missionary field is already safely aligned with Rome—just as Rome itself is about to be overtaken by the conciliar revolution.

By omission and tone, this sweet rhetoric is not neutral: it is **a sedative administered to shepherds, preparing them to accept, without resistance, the coming doctrinal and liturgical devastation.**

Doctrinal Hollowing: Mission Without the Social Kingship of Christ

The most devastating indictment comes from what is not said.

In a letter about the hierarchy, mission, and the public presence of Catholics in a nation, John XXIII utterly fails to proclaim clearly:

– The absolute obligation of states to recognize and submit to Christ the King.
– The intrinsic incompatibility of indifferentist “religious liberty” with revealed truth.
– The condemnations, reiterated by pre-1958 popes, of the thesis that all religions can flourish equally in public life.

Instead, the letter climaxes in an exhortation that Vietnamese Catholics:

“…eminent in reverence for the legitimate powers of the fatherland and bring significant help to sincere and true social progress of citizens, thereby greatly and notably meriting also in civil matters: for the best citizen should be and be considered the Christian.”

This formulation is theologically revealing:

1. It speaks of “legitimate powers of the fatherland” without any qualification by *lex divina* or by the duty of rulers toward the true religion.
2. It equates Christian excellence with being an exemplary citizen in the framework of “social progress,” not with confessing the Kingship of Christ even against hostile laws.

Contradiction with pre-1958 magisterium:

– Pius IX, Syllabus, prop. 55 condemns: “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.”
– Pius XI in Quas primas teaches explicitly that rulers and nations must publicly profess Christ and that secularism is a plague that must be opposed, not massaged.
– The same Pius XI and Pius XII admonish that concordats and cooperation must never imply doctrinal compromise or relativization of the Church’s exclusive rights.

John XXIII’s text:

– Does not remind Vietnamese bishops that governments are bound to Christ’s law.
– Does not warn against collaboration with anti-Catholic ideologies, whether communist or liberal.
– Reduces Catholic action to a morally sanitized contribution to “progress,” a term deliberately undefined and thus easily filled with secular content.

In effect, **the supernatural hierarchy is gently redirected to serve a naturalistic civil order**, preparing the way for the Vatican II doctrine of religious liberty, which Pius IX explicitly condemned.

This silence is not accidental; it is systematic and verifiable:

– Every pre-1958 doctrinal synthesis on State-Church relations centers on Christ’s public rights and the duty of rulers.
– This letter presents citizenship and progress without reference to the binding public sovereignty of Christ, directly contradicting the integral teaching enshrined in Quas primas.

Subtle Modernist Strategy: National Hierarchies as Laboratories

A critical reading in light of the 20th-century trajectory shows an unmistakable pattern:

1. Promotion of native hierarchies is, in itself, legitimate and encouraged by earlier popes to root the faith in local soil.
2. John XXIII leverages this principle to produce a new effect:
– By placing almost all dioceses under autochthonous bishops aligned to his program, he ensures that whole local churches will receive Vatican II and its aftermath as an obligation of “loyalty to Rome.”
– Those bishops, formed within an optimism-drunk missionary theology and flattered by promotions, become the transmission belt of doctrinal dilution.

The document explicitly insists on:

– Harmonious cooperation between foreign missionaries and native clergy,
– United under the directives of recent mission encyclicals, culminating in “Princeps Pastorum” (John XXIII’s own).

The theological content of those texts (especially in the hands of John XXIII):

– Reorients mission from the clear objective of converting infidels to the Catholic Church toward a dialogical, sociological, “presence” model.
– Softens language on error and insists on esteem for cultures and religions in ways that easily slip into indifferentism.

Thus the Vietnamese hierarchy is primed to become:

– Not a bulwark of Catholic orthodoxy,
– But an obedient province of the conciliar sect, executing Rome’s aggiornamento against their own inherited, martyr-sealed faith.

This is not speculation; it is borne out historically in how post-conciliar “episcopal conferences” worldwide became engines of liturgical destruction, ecumenism, and religious liberty ideology. The pattern is consistent and independently verifiable.

Marian and Martyrial Capital Co-opted for a Counterfeit Church

The letter references:

– The Marian congress linked to Lourdes commemorations.
– The memory of three centuries since missionaries were sent.
– The blood of Vietnamese martyrs as foundation of Catholic institutions.

These elements are objectively holy realities:

– Lourdes (as known in pre-1958 tradition),
– Authentic missionary zeal,
– Martyrs who confessed the exclusive truth of the Catholic faith against pagan and syncretic powers.

Yet John XXIII uses them in a precise way:

– Marian piety and martyrdom are invoked to authenticate the very structure that will, almost immediately, collaborate in dismantling the received liturgy, undermining catechesis, and tolerating or promoting interreligious practices socialism-friendly regimes find useful.
– The faithful are encouraged to see any new structure emanating from Rome as necessarily continuous with martyrial fidelity.

This is an abuse:

– The martyrs shed blood for a Church that anathematized religious indifferentism, rejected syncretism, and upheld the unique salvific necessity of the Catholic Church.
– John XXIII’s neo-ecclesial project, inaugurated by his aggiornamento and consummated in Vatican II, does the opposite: legitimizes “religious freedom,” relativizes dogma, and launders non-Catholic religions via dialogue.

Therefore, **invoking the martyrs here functions as spiritual camouflage: the blood of true witnesses is used to dye the banner of a different religion.**

Silence as Self-Accusation: The Missing Warnings

The gravest accusation against this letter is the index of what is not mentioned, especially given the pre-1958 magisterial context:

– No warning against the errors condemned in the Syllabus of Errors, even as those errors (liberalism, secularism, Masonic influence) expand globally.
– No reference to the modernist crisis diagnosed and condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi, despite its influence in missionary theology, biblical studies, and ecclesiology.
– No clear assertion that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, precisely in a missionary exhortation, where this dogma should be luminously central.
– No denunciation of communism’s intrinsic, doctrinally defined evil, despite Vietnam’s concrete geopolitical situation; instead: polite generic talk of “persecutions” and a call to be good citizens and promote “social progress.”

According to integral Catholic principles:

– *Silentium de absolutis* (silence concerning absolute and necessary truths) in such a context is itself a sign of doctrinal betrayal.
– When the office that should speak clearly about the rights of Christ the King, the evil of error, and the supernatural end of man retreats into soothing ambiguity, this is not prudence but the manifestation of a new religion.

Thus, the omissions in this letter are not a neutral deficit; they are **a verifiable, systematic pattern of modernist evaporation of dogma.**

Symptom of the Conciliar Sect: From Supernatural Mission to Civil Utility

Finally, we must expose the symptomatic role of this document within the broader conciliar revolution:

– The Vietnamese Church, bound by this letter to filial devotion toward John XXIII and his line, is being conditioned to:
– Accept the council he convokes,
– Implement its novel doctrines on religious liberty, collegiality, ecumenism,
– Replace the *Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary* with a protestantized meal-ritual (after 1969),
– Adapt catechesis to pluralism and state ideologies.

Key inversion:

– Where pre-1958 magisterium subordinates temporal order to Christ’s Kingship and salvation of souls (as reaffirmed in Quas primas and the Syllabus),
– This letter subordinates the visibility and behavior of Catholics to recognition by the modern state and contribution to “social progress,” a term beloved of liberal and Masonic ideology.

In theological terms:

– Ordo supernaturalis (the supernatural order) is no longer the formal principle judging politics and culture;
– Instead, Catholics are encouraged to prove their value within the secular framework, with only vague spiritual language in the background.

This is the essence of the conciliar sect’s project:

– Keep the vocabulary: “hierarchy,” “mission,” “martyrs,” “Mary,” “charity.”
– Empty the content: no militant dogma, no clear condemnations, no royal rights of Christ over nations.
– Insert a new telos: humanistic “progress,” coexistence of religions, sacralization of the modern state’s categories.

In that light, this letter must be described, without exaggeration, as:

A carefully crafted piece of ideological engineering, using apostolic forms to bind a young, martyr-church to the coming abomination of desolation, so that the true faith in Vietnam would be devoured from within by the conciliar parasite.

Any evaluation faithful to unchanging pre-1958 doctrine cannot accept this document as a benign administrative act; it must be unmasked as an integral stage in the construction of the Church of the New Advent, which occupies the structures of Rome while waging war—subtly, diplomatically, persistently—against the immutable Catholic religion.

---

Source:
Iam in Pontificatus, Epsitula Apostolica ad Exc. mos archiepiscopos et episcopos nationis vietnamiensis, post sacram ibidem constitutam hierarchiam, XIV Ianuarii MCMLXI, Ioannes PP. XXIII   (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025