The presented apostolic constitution, issued by antipope John XXIII in 1959, announces the detachment of territories from the Archdiocese of Veracruz and the Diocese of Tehuantepec in Mexico in order to create a new diocese of San Andrés Tuxtla, defines its boundaries, appoints its metropolitan (Veracruz), regulates the erection of a seminary and a future cathedral chapter, and lays down canonical-administrative norms for implementation, all under the pretense of pastoral utility and more efficient governance of souls. In reality, this seemingly technical decree manifests the juridical self-assertion and incipient ecclesiological mutation of the coming conciliar sect, dressing future apostasy in the solemn style of pre-conciliar law in order to occupy Catholic structures from within.

---

The Pseudo-Apostolic Cartography of a Coming Usurpation

This constitution must be read not sentimentally as a neutral act of pastoral care, but in its historical, theological, and spiritual context: May 23, 1959, less than a year after the usurper John XXIII seized the Roman See and already moving toward the convocation of the so-called Second Vatican Council. The document claims for him the traditional style and prerogatives of the Roman Pontiff while silently redirecting them to another religion, another ecclesiology, another cult.

Here the method of the future *conciliar sect* becomes visible: maintain the external canonical machinery, the language of *servus servorum Dei*, the appeal to the “good of souls,” the solemn threats against disobedience—while preparing the overthrow of that very order which authentic Popes, Councils, and anti-modernist magisterium defended.

The gravity lies not only in what is done (a territorial reconfiguration) but in who does it, in whose name, and toward which latent agenda. *Persona iuridica* divorced from *fides integra* becomes an instrument of usurpation.

Factual Level: Administrative Neutrality as a Mask

At the surface, the text appears as a standard pre-1958 style constitution:

“…novam dioecesim condimus, Sancti Andreae de Taxtla appellandam…”

It:

– Enumerates municipalities transferred from Veracruz and Tehuantepec.
– Defines the new diocesan borders (Gulf of Mexico, neighboring dioceses, etc.).
– Establishes San Andrés Tuxtla as the episcopal see, raising its church of St. Andrew the Apostle to cathedral rank.
– Subordinates the new diocese as suffragan to Veracruz.
– Orders erection of at least an elementary seminary; directs advanced students to the Pontifical Latin American College in Rome.
– Provides for a future cathedral chapter; temporarily diocesan consultors in its place.
– Regulates revenues for the episcopal mensa; confirms application of universal canon law for governance and sede vacante.
– Orders transfer of archives and threatens canonical penalties against resistance.

Taken in isolation, each provision imitates the routine, legitimate care for ecclesiastical circumscriptions found throughout authentic pontifical acts. Similar acts were used by true Popes to respond to demographic growth, mission needs, or political change.

The deception is precisely here: **nothing in the text explicitly proclaims error**, yet the entire act rests on a false premise—that Angelo Roncalli is Roman Pontiff and that the apparatus he is quietly reconfiguring will continue to serve the same *fides quae semper, ubique et ab omnibus tradita est* (*the faith handed down always, everywhere and by all*). History has since shown the opposite.

Lingustic Level: Orthodox Form in the Service of Heterodox Intent

The rhetoric is calculated:

– Repeated appeals to *“maiori christianorum communitatis commodo”* (greater good of the Christian community) and *“animorum bonum”* (good of souls).
– Juridical phrases of plenary papal authority: *“de summa et apostolica Nostra potestate”*, *“Nostra haec mandata”*, *“poenas… Summorum Pontificum iussa non fecerint”*.
– Threats of nullity against any who resist: “id prorsus irritum atque inane haberi iubemus”.

All this reproduces the traditional papal legislative idiom in order to secure docility and recognition. Yet by 1959 Roncalli was already preparing the council which would enthrone religious liberty, false ecumenism, collegial dismantling of papal monarchy, and the cult of man—positions explicitly and solemnly condemned by the true Magisterium:

– Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors condemns the separation of Church and State, the equalization of religions, and the reconciliation of the Papacy with liberalism (Syllabus, prop. 55, 77–80).
– St. Pius X, in *Lamentabili sane exitu* and *Pascendi*, exposes precisely the modernist technique of preserving formulas while subverting meaning; dogma in appearance, evolutionism in substance.
– Pius XI in *Quas Primas* teaches that peace and order depend on the public reign of Christ the King, not on democratic-humanist “rights” or interreligious co-existence.

Roncalli’s language thus functions as liturgical vestment laid over a different body. The text is not yet doctrinally explicit; it is jurisprudentially parasitic. The malignity is veiled, but real: an antipope uses the fully Catholic juridical register to consolidate control of diocesan structures that will shortly serve as distribution channels for the conciliar revolution.

Linguistically, this is *captatio fiduciae*—an attempt to capture the trust due to true Pastors and transfer it to a counterfeit authority. The document’s otherwise impeccable Latinity becomes part of the camouflage of apostasy.

Theological Level: Authority Without Faith Is No Authority

The central theological issue is simple and absolute: **no man lacking the Catholic faith, no manifest heretic, can be head of the Church or validly exercise papal jurisdiction**.

The integral Catholic doctrine, codified before 1958 and restated by the theologians cited in the provided sources, is unequivocal:

– St. Robert Bellarmine: a manifest heretic is not a member of the Church and cannot be Pope; he falls from office *ipso facto* and can be judged (paraphrased from *De Romano Pontifice*).
– Wernz-Vidal, Billot, and others: notorious public heresy severs jurisdiction without need of a prior condemnatory sentence—as confirmed historically in the case of Nestorius.
– Canon 188.4 (1917 Code): public defection from the faith effects tacit resignation “by the law itself.”
– Paul IV, *Cum ex Apostolatus Officio*: any elevation to the papacy of one who had deviated from the faith is “null, void, and without effect,” even if accepted by all.

When a man such as Roncalli—previously under serious doctrinal suspicion, steeped in ecumenist and modernist tendencies, rehabilitated contrary to the spirit of *Pascendi*—assumes the office and immediately directs the Church toward the “council” that will enshrine propositions condemned by the Syllabus and by St. Pius X, the only theologically coherent conclusion from integral Catholic doctrine is: he lacks papal authority; acts issuing from his usurpation have no binding force before God.

Therefore this constitution, whatever its exterior conformity to canonical style, is the act of a private person or of a sectarian usurper, not of the Vicar of Christ.

Several consequences follow:

1. All appeals within the text to “Our supreme and apostolic authority” are objectively false. They assert a power the author does not possess.
2. The threat of penalties against those “who would not obey the commands of the Supreme Pontiffs” is internally perverse: the usurper cloaks himself with the very obedience owed to true Popes who had condemned precisely the kind of modernist revolution he was about to unleash.
3. The new diocese is erected as a canonical shell inside what will become the **Church of the New Advent**, structurally destined to propagate the errors of Vatican II and the neo-liturgical cult.

Here lies the theological abyss: authority is invoked to build administrative channels for the future diffusion of heresy; jurisdictional acts become the logistical preparation for apostasy.

Symptomatic Level: A Laboratory of Conciliar Control

Viewed symptomatically, the text anticipates key mechanics of the conciliar system.

1. Centralization for a New Agenda

The meticulous jurisdictional geometry reveals a confident central government:

– Territories are carved *from above*; the faithful receive a new ordinary whose future formation and mandates will flow from the soon-to-be-subverted Roman center.
– The document explicitly binds the new diocese into the existing metropolitan structure (Veracruz), ensuring a tight chain of command.

This is traditional in form, but within a few years that same centralized nexus will impose:
– the anti-liturgical “Novus Ordo” rite,
– doctrinal relativism through false ecumenism,
– religious liberty condemned by Pius IX,
– collegial diminution of true papal monarchy.

Thus the 1959 act is like calmly drawing the wiring diagram of a building whose control room will shortly be handed to enemies of Christ the King.

2. Seminary as Engine of Ideological Reprogramming

The constitution orders:

“Curet sacer huius novae Ecclesiae Praesul ut Seminarium saltem elementarium struat…”

and directs the most promising students to Rome, to the Pontifical Latin American College.

Before 1958, such provisions meant immersion in Thomistic doctrine, anti-modernist discipline, and Roman orthodoxy. After Roncalli and his successors, those institutions mutate into laboratories of aggiornamento, historical criticism, liturgical invention, and democratic ecclesiology.

So the command is double-edged:

– In Catholic understanding: ensure formation in the true faith.
– In historical reality under the conciliar usurpers: ensure systematic replacement of integral Catholic faith with pseudo-theology approved by the **paramasonic structure** that will publish the new catechism, the new “mass,” the new “ecumenism.”

What appears as zeal for priestly formation becomes, under false authority, a mechanism of mass corruption. *Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu* (good arises from an integral cause; evil from any defect). The defect here is radical: the system is commandeered by enemies of the faith.

3. Use of Traditional Threats to Enforce Future Non-Traditionalism

The text concludes with vigorous insistence:

“Has vero Litteras nunc et in posterum efficaces esse et fore volumus…”

“Qui… spreverit vel quoquo modo detrectaverit, sciat se poenas esse subiturum…”

This is classic papal legal solemnity. But in context it trains consciences to submit blindly to the man on the Roman throne, precisely at the historical moment when that throne is occupied by an architect of the coming doctrinal revolution.

The faithful were thus disarmed: obedience habits were reinforced in 1959 in order to be exploited in 1962–1965 and beyond, when the same voice would promote “dialogue with error,” esteem for heretical sects, and the dilution of the unique claims of the Catholic Church—all condemned by pre-1958 Magisterium.

The constitution is therefore symptomatic of a more general strategy: **seize the grammar of Catholic obedience to impose non-Catholic content.** This is the essence of the conciliar deception.

Contrast with Pre-1958 Magisterium: Ecclesiastical Order Exists for the Kingship of Christ

Authentic acts of delimiting dioceses are never ends in themselves. They are instruments ordered to:

– the integrity of doctrine,
– the worthy offering of the *Most Holy Sacrifice*,
– the sanctification of souls in the state of grace,
– the public reign of Christ the King in society.

Pius XI in *Quas Primas* teaches that men and nations must recognize Christ’s royal dominion and that only under His law will true peace and right order flourish. Ecclesiastical circumscriptions are to be organs of this royal order, not neutral “religious administration units” inside a pluralist state.

Pius IX in the Syllabus vigorously condemns the liberal-secularist thesis that the Church must adapt herself to “modern civilization” and accept separation from the State, indifferentism, and the leveling of religions.

St. Pius X in *Lamentabili sane exitu* and *Pascendi* unmasked precisely the doctrines that later, under Roncalli and his line of usurpers, were cautiously rehabilitated: evolution of dogma, reduction of revelation to experience, subjugation of doctrine to historical criticism, democratization of authority.

This constitution never mentions:

– the duty of civil authorities in those Mexican territories to honor Christ the King and recognize the rights of the Church;
– the obligation to combat Freemasonry, socialism, and laicism which ravaged Mexico in the 19th and early 20th century;
– the absolute necessity of guarding seminaries against modernist infiltration;
– the primacy of safeguarding the integrity of faith over any civil or pastoral “efficiency.”

Silence here is not accidental. **Where a true Pope in 1959—fully aware of Mexico’s masonic and revolutionary persecutions—would have forcefully recalled the rights of the Church and the Kingship of Christ, Roncalli limits himself to bureaucratic cartography.**

This is a quiet naturalization of ecclesiastical government:

– Church as efficiently partitioned religious organization.
– Bishops as administrators of territories, not militant defenders of the deposit of faith.
– Seminaries as bureaucratically regulated institutions, not fortresses against heresy.

The omission of supernatural and confessional language, where it would have been both natural and urgent, exposes the underlying mentality: **a horizontal, state-compatible, pacified Church**, ready for integration into the coming liberal-ecumenical order. The later explosion of post-conciliar errors is already prefigured by this sanitized, diplomatic tone.

Delegation and Obedience: Instrumentalizing Pre-Conciliar Canon Law

The constitution entrusts execution to the Apostolic Delegate, gives him faculty to subdelegate, and demands strict observance under pain of canonical sanctions. In authentic ecclesiology, such structure serves the unity of faith and discipline under a true Pope.

Here, however, several corruption lines intersect:

– The use of lawful canonical machinery to reconfigure the map in anticipation of a council that will itself subvert canonical tradition and doctrine.
– The training of local clergy and faithful to obey, without doctrinal discernment, whatever descends from Rome, even when Rome will, within a few years, promote positions incompatible with Quas Primas, the Syllabus, *Lamentabili*, *Pascendi*, and the 1917 Code.

This is not mere hindsight. The anti-modernist Magisterium explicitly warned about this technique of infiltration:

– St. Pius X denounced modernists as operating “within” the Church, in offices, seminaries, and chancelleries, using ecclesiastical authority to disseminate their ideas while feigning external obedience.

In that light, this constitution is a textbook case: **an authoritative-seeming act of a modernist-leaning usurper, impeccably framed, deploying canonical obedience to secure practical control over another portion of the flock, which will later be starved of the true faith.**

Exposure of Spiritual Bankruptcy: What This Text Reveals by Its Silences

Measured against integral Catholic doctrine, the constitution’s most damning features are:

1. Absence of Christ the King from a Territorial Act

A new diocese is, theologically, a new throne of Christ’s royal law, a new center from which the *Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary* is offered, from which the rights of God and His Church are asserted against secularism. In a land scarred by violently anti-Catholic regimes, one would expect at least a clear reaffirmation of the supernatural mission.

Instead: pure institutionalism.

2. No Warning Against Modernism

1959 stands between *Pascendi* (1907) and the conciliar explosion. The Holy Office’s condemnations remained in force. A truly Catholic constitution, especially one concerned with seminaries, would echo St. Pius X’s command to expel modernists from formation and ensure Thomistic orthodoxy.

Instead: nothing. Silent complicity.

3. No Assertion of Exclusive Catholicity

Pius IX and Pius XI insist that only the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ and that states and peoples must recognize this. The constitution is content with the internally administrative aspect, as if the Church existed as one religious body among others, drawing invisible lines on a pluralist map. This anticipates Vatican II’s ambiguous ecclesiology and its abandonment of the claim that “the Catholic religion must be the only religion of the State” (Syllabus, prop. 77 condemned).

4. Threats of Sanctions Without Defense of Truth

The text is fierce toward anyone who would ignore its legal decrees, but entirely mild toward those doctrinal, masonic, liberal, and modernist forces that devour the Church. This inversion—strictness toward technical jurisdiction, softness or silence toward heresy and secularism—is itself a sign of spiritual decadence.

Conclusion: A Canonical Shell for the Conciliar Parasite

From the perspective of unchanging Catholic doctrine prior to 1958, this apostolic constitution is:

– Void of authority in its claim to proceed from the Roman Pontiff, since issued by an antipope.
– Theologically defective by omission, naturalizing ecclesiastical governance and ignoring the rights of Christ the King and the anti-modernist mandates of previous true Popes.
– Symptomatically revealing: it harnesses traditional canonical forms to consolidate infrastructure that will be used by the conciliar revolution—bishops, seminaries, diocesan structures integrated into the future *neo-church*.
– Spiritually bankrupt: it treats the flock as an object of efficient administration rather than as souls to be armed against liberalism, Freemasonry, and modernist apostasy.

The faithful who desire to remain Catholic must therefore:

– Recognize that jurisdiction divorced from integral faith is not legitimate authority but usurpation.
– Measure every structural and juridical act by the pre-1958 Magisterium: if it leads, directly or indirectly, to acceptance of condemned doctrines (religious liberty, false ecumenism, evolution of dogma, cult of man), it cannot bind in conscience.
– Understand that the true Church, indefectible, persists not in the conciliar sect that inherited these external shells, but where the full, unchanged doctrine, sacraments, and worship of the ages are maintained under valid hierarchy faithful to the perennial Magisterium.

In this light, the 1959 erection of San Andrés Tuxtla is not a triumph of pastoral solicitude, but an early cartographic operation of the *abomination of desolation*—one more brick in the edifice by which the structures occupying the Vatican prepared to subjugate an ever larger portion of the flock to the coming conciliar imposture.

---

Source:
Verae Crucis -Tehuantepecensis (S. Andreae De Tuxtla)   (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025