Ioannes Roncalli (John XXIII), having already inaugurated the conciliar revolution, here issues an Apostolic Letter in which he proclaims John Bosco heavenly patron of all Spanish “young apprentices” (Jóvenes Aprendices Españoles), emphasizing their technical education and moral guidance amidst modern dangers, and extending to them the liturgical honors proper to a patron. Beneath this apparently pious gesture appears the same poisoned program: the instrumentalization of a 19th‑century saint to baptize a paramasonic, social-humanitarian project that subordinates Catholic youth to the nascent neo-church of the “New Advent” instead of to the immutable reign of Christ the King and His true pre‑1958 Church.
Co-opting Don Bosco: Youth as Raw Material for the Conciliar Revolution
Using a True Saint to Legitimize an Emerging Counter-Church
The text opens with an apparently orthodox concern:
“Peculiare studium singularisque cura… iis sunt impendenda, qui, aetate florentes, artes condiscunt.”
Translation: “Particular attention and special care must be devoted to those, flourishing in age, who are learning trades.”
On the factual level:
– It is true that the Church has always shown special pastoral solicitude for working youth. Saint John Bosco himself incarnated this by founding works aimed at the sanctification of poor boys, forming them into Catholic men, faithful to the Church and to their state in life.
– It is true that in the mid‑20th century, with socialist and Masonic forces expanding, young workers were especially exposed to heresy, unbelief, and moral corruption.
However, this Letter must be located within its real historical and theological context:
– It is promulgated by John XXIII, the first in the line of conciliar usurpers, whose pontificate inaugurated the aggiornamento, the calling of Vatican II, and the practical suspension of the anti‑Masonic, anti-liberal, anti-modernist stance so solemnly defined by the true Popes (Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII).
– It appears in 1960, precisely when the conciliar sect is preparing to replace Catholic social doctrine with “human dignity” rhetoric detached from the exclusive rights of Christ and His Church.
Thus the decisive problem is not that Don Bosco is named patron of youth; the problem is how the Letter instrumentalizes him to bless a new orientation of youth formation: from supernatural militancy under Christ the King to socially integrated, docile subjects of laicized technocratic systems, under the guidance of an infiltrated hierarchy.
A saint canonized before 1958 belongs to the true Church. But his cult can be perverted and co-opted. Here, a Catholic symbol is seized and subtly redeployed as a banner for the Church of the New Advent.
This Letter is not primarily about sanctifying Spanish apprentices; it is about absorbing them into the emerging conciliar narrative, camouflaged by the holy name of Don Bosco.
Reduction of Spiritual Warfare to Moralistic Protectionism
The Letter notes contemporary dangers:
“Quod nostra aetate obtinet maxime, qua tot disseminantur pravae doctrinae, corruptelarum augescunt illecebrae, non pauci ad materiam omnia referunt…”
Translation: “This is especially the case in our age, in which so many false doctrines are spread, the allurements of corruption increase, and many refer everything to matter.”
On the surface, this denunciation echoes Pius XI and Pius XII. Yet the rhetoric is telling:
1. No clear identification of the primary enemy:
– There is no mention of Modernismus, which St. Pius X condemned as the “synthesis of all heresies” (Lamentabili, Pascendi).
– There is no mention of the Masonic secular State whose errors are anathematized in the Syllabus of Errors (Pius IX, 1864), especially propositions 39–55.
– There is no denunciation of socialism, communism, and secret societies in the precise, juridical, anathema-laden language of previous Popes.
2. The dangers are presented in a generic, almost sociological way:
– “False doctrines,” “corruptions,” “materialism” – but without specifying that the deepest and most lethal corruption is within ecclesiastical ranks themselves: the infiltration of Modernism which Pius X unmasked and punished, and which, by 1960, had climbed into the highest offices.
3. Missing is the central doctrinal axis:
– St. Pius X: doctrinal modernism in exegesis, liturgy, dogma.
– Pius XI, Quas Primas: the only remedy for social apostasy is the public and juridical reign of Christ the King; peace is impossible where He does not rule as legislator and judge.
– Pius IX, Syllabus: error has no rights; religious indifferentism, State neutrality, and the separation of Church and State are condemned.
This Letter avoids confronting those condemned systems directly. Instead, it offers a safe, sentimentalized solution: nominate a patron saint and hope that with his protection youth “bring honor to Church and homeland”:
“fore confisi, ut, eo tuente, pueri Hispani… olim in vitae actione Ecclesiae ac patriae adiungant honorem, afferant utilitatem.”
Translation: “confident that, with him protecting, the Spanish boys… may later in their life’s activity add honor and utility to Church and homeland.”
Note the ambiguity:
– “Honor and utility” to “Church and homeland” is presented without reaffirming the doctrinal principle that the homeland itself must be subjected to the social kingship of Christ (Quas Primas), and that the State must profess the Catholic religion and reject religious indifferentism (Syllabus 21, 55, 77–80).
– The youth are configured as useful elements of social and national life, not as militants under the standard of Christ the King, prepared to resist liberal democracy, socialism, false “rights,” and modernist pseudo-clergy.
Thus the supernatural battle for souls is reduced to a naturalistic project of “protecting” youth so that they may be decorous, productive citizens, rather than confessors and soldiers of Christ against the anti-Christian State and the conciliar usurpation.
Linguistic Sanitization: Piety Without Anathema
The linguistic register, though formally Latin, clearly manifests the post-Pius XII shift:
– Soft pastoral tone: “benignitas,” “cura,” “studium,” “pueri,” “honor et utilitas.”
– Absence of juridical condemnation formulae characteristic of integral Magisterium: where previous Popes speak of “condemnamus, reprobamus, damnamus,” here we find only the standard patronage formula without theological combativeness.
Compare:
– Pius IX in the Syllabus and related allocutions uses uncompromising condemnations of liberalism, religious freedom, and Masonic sects, explicitly naming the “synagogue of Satan.”
– St. Pius X in Lamentabili and Pascendi precisely defines and anathematizes modernist propositions.
– Pius XI in Quas Primas identifies laicism and the dethronement of Christ as the root plague, insisting that states and rulers must publicly recognize and obey Christ the King, and that civil legislation must be subject to divine and ecclesiastical law.
In this Letter:
– No doctrinal precision.
– No explicit re-affirmation of the Syllabus, anti-Masonic condemnations, Pascendi, Quas Primas.
– No reminder that the youth’s first duty is to remain in the state of grace, to frequent Confession, to adore Christ in the Most Holy Sacrifice, to reject heresy even unto martyrdom.
This silence is not neutral. Qui tacet consentire videtur (“he who keeps silence seems to consent”) applies when a teaching authority, at a critical historical moment, refrains from confirming truths under attack and adopts vague formulas compatible with liberal democracies and the coming false ecumenism.
The rhetoric of this Letter exemplifies the transition from the language of dogmatic guardianship and anathema to that of sentimental sponsorship and soft humanistic concern—precisely the linguistic mutation that nourished post-conciliar apostasy.
Don Bosco’s Charism Deformed: From Militant Priest to Social Mascot
Authentic pre-1958 Catholic sources on Don Bosco present him as:
– A priest of iron Catholic identity, totally submissive to the Papacy and fighting liberalism, anti-clericalism, and the subversion of youth by secret societies.
– An educator who centered everything on Confession, the Holy Eucharist (the true Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass), Marian devotion, obedience to the Church, and readiness to suffer for the faith.
In this Letter, John Bosco is:
– “iuventutis parens et amicus” – “father and friend of youth” – correct, but selectively emphasized.
– Evoked mainly as a protector of “apprentices and young workers,” aligned with a technical and social category: “Jóvenes Aprendices Españoles.”
The underlying shift:
1. Vertical, supernatural orientation replaced by horizontal, sociological categorization:
– Youth are treated as a demographic segment requiring patronage to integrate well into modern professional life.
– Don Bosco’s priestly role and his radical insistence on sacramental life, anti-liberal militancy, and precise catechesis are muted.
2. The saint is functionalized:
– Instead of calling Spanish youth to resist laicist laws, to reject anti-Christian trade unions, to denounce socialism and Freemasonry, the Letter simply hopes they will bring “honor and utility” to Church and nation.
– This vocabulary is perfectly compatible with a State neutral toward religion and with future post-conciliar collaboration with secularist structures.
3. The saint’s legacy is detached from the anti-modernist Magisterium:
– Don Bosco lived under and obeyed Popes who condemned liberalism and modern errors.
– By 1960, the conciliar organizers seek to present him not as a warrior against those condemned systems, but as a harmless emblem of youth work and educational optimism.
Thus Don Bosco is slowly transformed from a soldier of the Counter-Revolution into a banner-boy for the conciliar sect’s “pastoral” integration of youth into a Masonicized society.
Canonical Formulas Weaponized to Consolidate a Usurped Authority
The Letter employs traditional canonical language:
“certa scientia ac matura deliberatione Nostra, deque Apostolicae potestatis plenitudine…”
Translation: “with certain knowledge and mature deliberation of Ours, and from the fullness of Apostolic power…”
and concludes:
“praesentes Litteras firmas, validas atque efficaces iugiter exstare ac permanere…”
Translation: “these Letters to be firm, valid and efficacious, and to remain so always…”
This formula, intrinsically Catholic when issuing from a true Pope, here becomes the juridical mask of the nascent counter-church:
– The “plenitudo potestatis” claimed by John XXIII is invoked not to defend the Syllabus, not to reaffirm Pascendi, not to anathematize new errors, but to deepen the appearance of continuity while silently detaching practical governance from the anti-modernist line.
– The act is small in content but large in function: every such Letter normalizes acceptance of the usurper as if he were a legitimate successor of Pius XII. The faithful are habituated to receive his legislative acts, his saints, his pastoral visions, without seeing that the doctrinal foundations are being undermined.
From an integral Catholic standpoint:
– A usurper cannot validly exercise the “plenitude of Apostolic power.”
– His acts serve not the Mystical Body of Christ, but a parallel structure—the conciliar sect—that later will enthrone religious liberty, false ecumenism, collegiality, the new “mass,” and the cult of man.
This patronage decree, although externally traditional, is part of the psychological and canonical conditioning by which the faithful were led to accept the authority of those who would soon betray the entire anti-modernist Magisterium.
Convergence with Condemned Liberal-Catholicism
Let us confront the underlying spirit of this Letter with pre‑1958 doctrine:
1. On the relation Church–State and youth formation:
– Syllabus 45–48, 55 condemn the idea that education should be under civil power independent of the Church, and that State and Church be separated.
– Quas Primas teaches that all public life, laws, and institutions must submit to Christ the King.
Yet the Letter:
– Speaks of cooperation with “civilium potestatum vota” (the wishes of civil authorities) in the petition.
– Presents no warning that civil power, especially in liberal regimes, is often imbued with Masonic principles condemned by the Popes.
– Suggests harmony rather than tension between neo-liberal structures and Catholic youth formation.
2. On modern errors and secret societies:
– The Syllabus and subsequent acts explicitly unmask Masonic, liberal, and laicist sects as engines of apostasy.
– They insist on a militant stand, not a vague “concern.”
The Letter:
– Reduces the threat to imprecise “pravae doctrinae” and “corruptelae,” a language malleable enough to be turned, in the coming council, against those who cling to integral doctrine.
– Adopts a rhetoric that allows conciliar “dialogue” with the very systems previously condemned.
3. On doctrinal clarity:
– St. Pius X, in Lamentabili and Pascendi, condemns the idea that dogma evolves and that the Magisterium must adapt to historical consciousness.
– Pius XII (Humani Generis) warns against a “new theology” subversive of defined dogma.
This Letter:
– Is devoid of doctrinal substance; it avoids reaffirming the anti-modernist measures, thus implicitly aligning with the milieu that was preparing to neutralize them in the council.
In sum, the Letter reflects the liberal‑Catholic tendency long condemned: using orthodox forms and saintly names while emptying them of their doctrinal militancy, thereby smoothing the way for Modernism’s triumph.
Silence on Sacraments, Grace, and Eternal Judgment: The Gravest Omission
The most damning feature is what is not said.
Given the theme—youth exposed to corruption—the integral Catholic response must:
– Call them to live in the state of grace.
– Urge frequent Confession and Holy Communion in the context of the true Most Holy Sacrifice.
– Warn about mortal sin: impurity, blasphemy, unbelief, socialism, naturalism.
– Remind of the reality of hell, judgment, heaven; call to Marian devotion; recall the necessity of submission to the perennial Magisterium.
– Explicitly link their salvation to adherence to the one true Church and rejection of errors condemned by the Syllabus, Pascendi, etc.
Instead, the Letter:
– Speaks in general of “religionis pietatisque rationes,” yet without naming concrete sacramental and doctrinal obligations.
– Does not mention the Holy Sacrifice, Confession, the Rosary, or any of the spiritual disciplines central to Don Bosco’s method.
– Does not exhort to doctrinal formation in the anti-modernist sense.
– Says nothing about eternal punishment, even as it laments moral dangers.
This silence is not accidental; it is programmatic:
Ubi deest mentionis de gratia et iudicio, ibi intrat naturalismus.
(“Where mention of grace and judgment is lacking, there naturalism enters.”)
By refusing to speak explicitly of the sacramental and eschatological stakes, the Letter trains youth to think of their religious identity as a gentle moral and cultural aid to becoming respectable workers, not as the narrow path leading away from the world, the flesh, the devil, and—yes—the conciliar apostasy.
Symptomatic of the Conciliar Sect’s Strategy toward Youth
This small Apostolic Letter anticipates the strategy that the Church of the New Advent will later implement on a global scale:
1. Capture youth through emotive piety:
– Patron saints, youth meetings, slogans about “hope,” “joy,” and “human dignity.”
– Minimal doctrinal clarity; no anathemas; no reference to the Syllabus, Pascendi, Quas Primas.
2. Integrate them into secular systems:
– Youth are guided to become efficient participants in democratic, pluralistic, religiously neutral societies.
– The radical claims of Christ the King over law, education, and public worship are obscured.
3. Replace militant Catholic identity with nebulous “Christian values”:
– Charity without dogma.
– Morality without supernatural grace.
– Community without the visible, exclusive, hierarchical, anti-liberal Church.
4. Use saints as brand logos:
– Don Bosco, later others, are recast as smiling endorsers of the neo-church’s youth policies, stripped of their anti-liberal edge.
This Letter to the Jóvenes Aprendices Españoles is one brick in that edifice. It is subtle, externally devout, but its omissions and rhetoric line up perfectly with the subsequent explosion of post-conciliar “pastoral” documents in which:
– Religious liberty is enthroned.
– False ecumenism with heretics and schismatics is normalized.
– The authentic Mass is replaced by a manufactured rite coherent with human-centered worship.
– Modernist theology relativizes all dogma.
Therefore, seen from the vantage of unchanging Catholic teaching before 1958, this Apostolic Letter is a small but precise symptom of a deeper betrayal: the attempt to keep the appearance of Tradition while diverting youth away from the integral, anti-modernist, sacramental, and doctrinally absolute Catholic faith toward the conciliar sect’s naturalistic humanitarianism.
Conclusion: Reclaiming Don Bosco for the Integral Catholic Faith
The solution is not to reject Don Bosco, but to tear him away from the instrumentalization performed by John XXIII and his successors:
– Don Bosco belongs to the unchanging Church that:
– Rejects Modernism, liberalism, religious indifferentism, and the cult of man (Pius IX, St. Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII).
– Proclaims the kingship of Christ over nations (Quas Primas).
– Condemns Masonic and socialist infiltration.
– Teaches the immutable necessity of living in the state of grace, confessing sins, assisting at the true Holy Sacrifice, and defending the faith against all novelties.
For Spanish and all Catholic youth:
– The true patronage of Don Bosco is realised only where his spirit is lived integrally:
– Precise catechism faithful to pre‑1958 Magisterium.
– Rejection of conciliar novelties, the neo-church, its sacrilegious rites, and its humanistic ideology.
– Formation for martyrdom rather than adaptation.
– Militant devotion to Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of individuals and societies, and filial submission to the authentic Roman Catholic faith, the same “yesterday, today, and forever.”
Against the synthetic piety of this Letter, one must proclaim with the pre‑conciliar Popes: youth do not need integration into the conciliar sect; they need liberation from it, under the true protection of saints who never consented to Modernism.
Source:
Peculiare studium (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025