This brief Latin letter of John XXIII to Cardinal Giuseppe Pizzardo praises the initiative of the Pontifical Roman Theological Academy to commemorate the nineteen centuries since Saint Paul sent the Epistle to the Romans, extols Romans as privileged recipients of this “treasure,” invites deeper theological study of Romans, and encourages moral fruits summed up in humility and charity, concluding with a so‑called Apostolic Blessing.

---

In reality, this apparently pious text is an early, concentrated manifesto of the conciliar mentality: aesthetic veneration without doctrinal militancy, selective use of Scripture to underwrite an irenic, naturalistic, and sentimentalist “Catholicism” preparing the way for the conciliar sect.

Pauline Gold Emptied: A Harmless Commemoration for a Harmless Religion

Historical and Theological Neutralisation of the Epistle to the Romans

At the factual level, the letter:

– Applauds a solemn celebration of the 19th centenary of Romans.
– Cites Chrysostom to call Pauline letters “mines and fountains of the Spirit.”
– Declares Romans a “summary” of Pauline doctrine, “foundation” of theology, “luminous beacon” for salvation history.
– Emphasizes that Romans should spur both theologians and faithful to deeper understanding and moral life, especially humility and fraternal charity.

None of these affirmations is, in itself, objectionable when read in continuity with the perennial Magisterium. The perfidy lies in what is systematically excluded and how Paul is instrumentalized.

From the perspective of integral Catholic doctrine:

– Romans is not merely a literary jewel; it is a dogmatic demolition of paganism, Judaism that rejects Christ, and every form of naturalism. Paul condemns idolatry, false worship, impurity, and rebellion against the natural and divine law (Romans 1–2), proclaims justification by faith and grace in the context of the true Church and sacraments, and asserts the public Lordship of Christ.
– Pius XI in Quas primas teaches that peace and order are only possible under the social reign of Christ the King, that states must publicly recognise His law, and that laicism is a plague. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans is among the primary scriptural foundations of this doctrine (e.g. Romans 13 properly understood within Christ’s Kingship).

Yet in this letter:

– There is no mention of the exclusive necessity of the Catholic Church for salvation.
– There is no mention of idolatry, of the condemnation of false religions, of divine wrath, of judgment, of hell, of the supernatural character of grace.
– There is no reaffirmation of the dogmatic authority of Romans against the liberal errors condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus Errorum.
– There is no link between Romans and the perennial anti-modernist stance of the Church as defined by Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi dominici gregis.

This omission is not accidental. It is the precise method of conciliar post‑Catholicism: elevate Scripture and Tradition rhetorically while silently removing their dogmatic edge and disciplinary consequences. The result is an antiseptic Pauline cult, safe for religious liberty, ecumenism, and the cult of man that would soon be enthroned.

The Soft Language of a Coming Revolution

The linguistic and rhetorical profile of the letter reveals the program.

Key traits:

– Saccharine praise: Romans is described in lofty aesthetic terms—“magnitudo oraculorum,” “metalla,” “fontes,” “micantissimus pharus”—without drawing any of its anathemas.
– Discreet historic allusion: the letter notes that “unexpected and grave events” in the previous year (1958) delayed the celebration. No word about chastisements, no reading of history under the lens of divine justice, in stark contrast to pre‑1958 Popes who interpret political upheavals in relation to sin, revolution, and Freemasonic machination (as Pius IX and Leo XIII repeatedly insist, see e.g. Humanum genus and the closing condemnations reproduced in the Syllabus file: the “synagogue of Satan” of secret societies at war with the Church).
– Moral reductionism: the only specific virtues highlighted from Romans are those of Romans 12:15–16:

“Gaudere cum gaudentibus, fiere cum flentibus, idipsum invicem sentientes, non alta sapientes, sed humilibus consentientes.”

This selection, while true, is strategically incomplete. Romans also commands doctrinal discernment, separation from those causing dissensions contrary to the doctrine received (Romans 16:17), condemnation of impure passions and unnatural vice (Romans 1:24–27), and subjection to authority as an order of God, which previous Popes connect to the Kingship of Christ and the rights of the Church, not democratic relativism.
– Amorphous exhortations: the letter speaks vaguely of “wisdom and charity,” of “doctrina ex alto hausta,” but carefully avoids precise doctrinal markers that distinguish Catholic faith from liberalism, indifferentism, and Modernism.

In classical Catholic style, a papal text treating Romans on such an occasion would:

– Proclaim the Epistle’s dogmatic authority against Protestant errors on justification.
– Invoke its severe judgments against paganism and immorality to denounce contemporary public sins and apostasies.
– Bind the celebration to the necessity of full adherence to the Magisterium, the condemnation of heresy, and obedience to the See of Peter as defined at Vatican I.

Here we have instead gentle, bureaucratic courtesy, a neutral academic tone, and a moralism compatible with the very currents condemned by the pre‑conciliar Magisterium. Lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief): here, the “law” proposed is denatured; therefore the belief it expresses is likewise.

Deliberate Silence on Dogma: The Gravest Indictment

The most damning feature of this letter is its silence on the very points where Romans is most uncompromising and where the 20th-century crisis was most acute.

1. Silence on the exclusivity of the Catholic Church

– Romans proclaims the obedience of faith (1:5), the confession of Christ’s Lordship (10:9‑10), and the necessity of preaching the true Gospel.
– Pius IX in the Syllabus condemns the proposition that man can find salvation in any religion; he also condemns the idea that Protestantism is “another form of the same true Christian religion.”
– Pius XI in Mortalium animos condemns the idea of pan‑Christian cooperation that relativises the one true Church.

This letter:

– Does not reaffirm that the Epistle to the Romans speaks to and from the one visible Church of Christ, outside of which there is no salvation.
– Leaves the exaltation of Romans floating above concrete dogmatic boundaries, ready to be recycled into the future ecumenical vocabulary of the conciliar sect.

2. Silence on condemnation of error and heresy

By 1959, Modernism, condemned as “the synthesis of all heresies” by Pius X, had entrenched itself in seminaries, universities, and “pastoral” praxis. A letter addressed to the head of the body responsible for seminaries and universities, on the threshold of a council, recalling Romans—the Epistle that anathematises false worship and corrupt morals—would be the ideal moment to:

– Reiterate the binding force of Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi.
– Warn against the rationalist-exegetical deviations that Pius X had condemned (e.g., denial of inspiration, historicising dogma, relativising miracles and resurrection).

Instead:

– Not a word.
– Instead of arming theologians with anti-modernist weapons, the letter gently “invites” them to deepen and adapt the Epistle “to the understanding of the faithful,” a formulation perfectly compatible with modernist historicism where doctrine is reshaped according to “the signs of the times.”

3. Silence on public kingship of Christ and the falsehood of laicism

Pius XI in Quas primas directly links the disasters of the world to the rejection of Christ’s reign:

– He teaches that there will be no lasting peace until individuals and states submit to Christ the King.
– He condemns the secularist “plague” that separates Church and State and equates true religion with false.

Romans, when correctly interpreted, undergirds this doctrine: civil authority is from God and must be measured by His law (Romans 13), and idolatry incurs wrath (Romans 1).

John XXIII’s letter:

– Fails to call nations, especially Italy and those forming the “new Europe,” to the social submission to Christ and His Church.
– Avoids confronting the liberal, masonic structures dominating public life, about which Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius XI spoke with uncompromising clarity, as documented explicitly in the Syllabus and related texts, which expose secret societies as the “synagogue of Satan” and instruments of a worldwide war against the Church.

Such omissions are not pastoral prudence; they are dogmatic abdication.

Romans Recast as Proto-Conciliar Handbook

Beyond omissions, the letter positively orients Romans toward the conciliar revolution.

1. Universal moral-humanistic tone

The selection of Romans 12:15–16 as emblematic:

– Emphasizes empathy, tears with those who weep, joy with those who rejoice, humility, non‑elitism.
– When isolated from Paul’s insistence on doctrine, discipline, sacrament, and authority, it becomes a biblical warrant for the horizontalism and “pastoral” emotivism of the Church of the New Advent: dialogue, accompaniment, sentimental “mercy” without conversion.

This anticipates the post‑1958 cult of man:

– The epistle that shatters human pride is used to promote a religion that flatters humanity, neutralising sin language and divine judgment.

2. Academic commemoration without anti-modernist safeguards

John XXIII urges the Pontifical Academy to deeper study. But:

– Pius X had already taught that the Magisterium has the right and duty to judge biblical studies and condemn errors; he rejected the idea that exegesis can stand above dogma.
– The decree Lamentabili explicitly condemns propositions that treat Scripture as any other human document, that relativise inspiration, or that subject dogma to historical criticism.

By invoking scholarly commemoration without reasserting these norms:

– The letter implicitly rehabilitates that “new theology” already condemned by pre‑1958 authority.
– It creates a protected academic space in which Modernist exegesis could be presented as deepening “Pauline theology” and preparing the way for the doctrinal novelties of the upcoming pseudo-council.

3. Rome flattered as “exemplar” while being prepared for betrayal

The letter flatters the Romans as those to whom Phoebe brought the Epistle as an inestimable treasure, implying a special vocation:

– “Ut … fides … Romae in exemplum virenti gratia reflorescat.”

But:

– The true Roman vocation, confirmed by Vatican I, is to be the unshakable rock of doctrinal certainty: ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia.
– The “flourishing” envisioned here is not explicitly linked to guarding the deposit of faith against innovation; instead, it is a vague spiritual renewal easily redirected toward aggiornamento, ecumenical opening, and softening of dogmatic boundaries.

The rhetorical result: Rome is praised into apostasy. A Pauline anniversary becomes a psychological preparation for replacing the granite of Trent and Vatican I with the elastic verbiage of the conciliar sect.

Symptom of Systemic Apostasy: From Pauline Anathemas to Conciliar Compliments

Examined as a sign within the wider crisis, this letter exhibits all the symptoms of post‑1958 disintegration:

1. From anathema to amnesia

– Pre‑1958 Popes use Pauline texts to draw sharp lines: true vs. false religion, Church vs. sects, orthodoxy vs. heresy.
– Here we see instead a cultivated amnesia: Romans praised but declawed, reduced to “foundational” yet not wielded as actual foundation for dogmatic and disciplinary judgments.

2. From supernatural faith to naturalistic moralism

– Authentic doctrine: *fides ex auditu* (faith from hearing), and what is heard is divine revelation mediated by the infallible Church; salvation is supernatural, through grace and sacraments within the one Church.
– In this letter, the stress falls on intelligibility, adaptation to the faithful, human virtues of empathy and humility, and generic “wisdom and charity” without explicit anchoring in grace, sacraments, or dogmatic submission. It is compatible with seeing Christianity as a noble ethical movement rather than a supernatural Ark outside of which is death.

This naturalistic drift is precisely what Pius IX and Pius X condemn: placing human reason and sentiment at the centre, treating revelation as a support to “human progress,” and emptying dogma into moral slogans.

3. From magisterial vigilance to “benign neglect”

Addressed to the Prefect over seminaries and universities, this text:

– Should have been a thunderous reminder of the binding force of anti-modernist norms and censures.
– Instead, it offers only encouragement and a “blessing,” completely ignoring the ongoing infiltration of errors repeatedly denounced by the pre‑conciliar Magisterium.

Thus, the letter is not an isolated spiritual note; it is part of a pattern of deliberate non‑intervention, allowing modernist infection to metastasize under a thin layer of pious language.

The Abuse of Saint Paul: Ornament of a New Religion

Saint Paul, as Doctor of the Gentiles, is invoked here as authority and ornament, but:

– His insistence on the obedience of faith, on separation from false teachers, and on the exclusive mediation of Christ and His Church is never drawn out.
– The very Epistle that demolishes paganism and condemns homosexuality and impurity with terrifying clarity (Romans 1:18‑32), is presented without the slightest echo of those truths—though the public sins of nations in 1959 already cried to heaven.

Such selective invocation is itself a perversion: it transforms the Apostle of anathema into a mascot for the future false ecumenism and religious liberty condemned by the constant Magisterium before being enthroned at the pseudo‑council.

To recall Pius XI’s firm principle, paraphrased from Quas primas: peace and order come only from the acceptance of Christ’s Kingship and the submission of public life to His law; laicist systems and indifferentist doctrines are cursed sources of chaos. Any use of Romans that fails to reaffirm this—and rather prepares its repudiation—is a betrayal.

Conclusion: A Brief Letter as a Programmatic Emptying of the Deposit

Taken in itself, the letter is short, smooth, apparently orthodox. But judged by the immutable standard of Catholic doctrine:

– Its omissions regarding dogma, error, judgment, and the rights of Christ the King are intolerable.
– Its tone and rhetoric exemplify the conciliar method: exalt Tradition verbally, evacuate its binding force, accommodate the spirit of the world.
– Its academic and moralistic framing of Romans serves as an antechamber for Modernist exegesis and for the naturalistic, humanistic deformation of the Gospel.

Thus, this document stands as an early sign of the systemic apostasy that would soon erect a paramasonic neo‑church on the ruins of visible Catholic structures, using the names of Paul, Rome, and “Apostolic Blessing” to crown a religion that Saint Paul himself anathematised.

---

Source:
Existimationi Nostrae – Ad Iosephum S. R. E. Card. Pizzardo, Episcopum Albanensem et S. Consilii Seminariis Studiorumque Universitatibus praepositi praefectum, undevicesimo revoluto saeculo, ex quo S….   (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025