Dated 4 July 1961, this Latin letter of John XXIII appoints Richard James Cushing as papal legate to the National Eucharistic Congress in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia. It praises Bishop Aloisio Rodríguez Pardo, extols Bolivian Eucharistic devotion, entrusts Cushing with representing the “pope,” proposes the motto “Omnes unum sumus in Christo” (We are all one in Christ), and links Eucharistic worship with unity, charity, social justice, and concern for the poor and indigenous. It culminates in an Apostolic Blessing as an encouragement to Eucharistic piety and fraternal concord.
From the perspective of integral Catholic doctrine, this seemingly pious text already manifests the conciliatory, horizontal, and diplomatically modernist program of John XXIII: instrumentalizing the Most Holy Eucharist for an irenic, naturalistic, pre-conciliar soft launch of the conciliar sect’s cult of man.
Eucharistic Rhetoric in the Service of an Emerging Counter-Church
Person and Context: John XXIII as Architect of the Coming Revolution
Because this is an official act of John XXIII, issued from the occupied Vatican palaces and later incorporated into the conciliar magisterial complex, it must be judged in light of the objective rupture he inaugurates.
– John XXIII convoked Vatican II, deliberately opening the way to what St. Pius X had condemned as *Modernismus, omnium haeresum collectus* (*Pascendi Dominici gregis*, 1907; confirmed with excommunication for its opponents’ errors in the decree Lamentabili sane exitu, as recalled in the provided file).
– His programmatic term “aggiornamento” corresponds exactly to the condemned thesis that doctrine and the Church must adapt to “modern civilization” (cf. Pius IX, Syllabus Errorum, prop. 80: **“The Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization”** is condemned).
– This letter belongs chronologically and thematically to the pre-conciliar conditioning: sentimental Eucharistic vocabulary, a superficial orthodoxy on sacrifice and Real Presence, while silently undermining the integral demands of the social Kingship of Christ and doctrinal militancy as proclaimed by Pius XI in Quas Primas and by Pius IX in the Syllabus.
Therefore, the issue is not whether each isolated line sounds “devout,” but how this text functions as part of a program: piety without militancy, Eucharist without dogmatic intransigence, charity without conversion, unity without truth. This is the method by which the conciliar sect replaced the Catholic Church in public consciousness.
Factual Level: What the Letter Says and What It Carefully Avoids
1. The letter:
– Commends Aloisio Rodríguez Pardo for zeal in organizing the Eucharistic Congress.
– Recognizes Bolivia’s devotion to the Blessed Sacrament.
– Appoints Cushing as legate, praising his generosity toward Bolivian needs.
– Celebrates the chosen theme: “Omnes unum sumus in Christo.”
– Affirms:
“Quid efficientius, quid validius et firmius, ut fideles cum Christo, mystici Corporis capite, cohaereant, quam sacrosanctae Eucharistiae sacramenti devotus usus et cultus?”
(“What is more effective, more powerful and firmer, for the faithful to be united with Christ, the Head of the Mystical Body, than devoted use and worship of the Most Holy Eucharist?”)
– Cites St. Augustine on the Eucharist transforming the communicant into Christ.
– Connects the congress with growth in theological virtues and social charity.
– Highlights the poor and indigenous (“Indi”) and exhorts to social justice.
– Grants the Apostolic Blessing.
2. What is never said:
– No call for the integral Catholicization of society, no proclamation that states must recognize and submit to Christ the King, as solemnly taught by Pius XI: *“Peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ”* and that rulers sin gravely if they refuse public homage to Him (Quas Primas).
– No insistence on the unique, exclusive claim of the Catholic Church as the only ark of salvation against condemned indifferentism (Syllabus 15–18, 21).
– No denunciation of Freemasonry, socialism, secularism, liberalism, all of which Pius IX explicitly identified as instruments of the “synagogue of Satan” attacking the Church (cf. the concluding parts of the Syllabus text in the file).
– No note that Eucharistic Communion demands the *state of grace*, right faith, and submission to the true Magisterium; silence here opens the door to Eucharistic profanation and a merely sociological notion of “unity.”
– No mention of original sin, judgment, hell, necessity of penance, the danger of sacrilege, or of the objective reign of supernatural grace; instead, the stress falls on “mutua benevolentia,” fraternal relations, and social improvement.
This silence is not accidental. It is a calculated omission, consistent with the modernist tactic condemned by St. Pius X: external respect for formulas, while transforming their sense and disarming their supernatural force. The Most Holy Sacrifice is invoked, but its doctrinal and juridical consequences for public and private life are evacuated.
Linguistic Level: Diplomatic Piety and Humanitarian Sentimentalism
The vocabulary is almost entirely affirmative, soft, laudatory:
– Repeated praise of local hierarchy and people: “laude dignum,” “summa diligentia,” “minime dubitamus quin … salutares fructus progignat.”
– Self-congratulatory optimism: no strong warnings, no struggle, no enemies of the faith named, no call to combat pervasive errors.
– The Eucharist is described in beautiful but selectively chosen images: nourishment, unity, virtues, charity, peace.
At the rhetorical heart stands the congress motto interpreted as harmonizing unity:
“Gaudium spemque bonam Nobis profecto comparavit id, quod in Eucharistico Conventu proponi et enucleari statutum est: Omnes unum sumus in Christo.”
The phrase is orthodox if understood as unity in the one true faith, under the one true Church, by supernatural charity rooted in the same dogma and sacraments. But in John XXIII’s broader program, it prefigures the conciliar misuse of John 17—unity detached from full conversion to Catholic truth; unity as affective and social cohesion, rather than dogmatic and juridical submission to Christ’s Kingdom in and through His Church.
Note also the treatment of “social justice” and the poor:
– The text notes those who suffer material poverty, especially the indigenous, and wishes that “their condition improve in all respects.”
– These desires are legitimate in themselves, but they are framed in predominantly humanitarian terms—”social justice,” “mutua benevolentia”—not as the fruit of the restoration of Christ’s public reign and the subordination of civil law to divine law, as pre-1958 magisterium insisted (cf. Quas Primas; Syllabus 39–42, 55–56).
The language of supernatural militancy is replaced by diplomatic benevolence. It is exactly the mild, irenic, bureaucratically devout style that prepares the later cult of “dialogue” and “human rights” against which the integral Catholic magisterium had consistently warned.
Theological Level: Truths Half-Spoken and Turned into Instruments of Modernism
We must dissect the core theological elements invoked:
1. Eucharist as Sacrifice and Sacrament
The letter says:
– The Church, through the Eucharistic sacrifice, offers herself with Christ to the Father.
– Through the sacrament, the faithful receive the virtues that shine in the Savior.
These statements, taken alone, can harmonize with traditional doctrine (e.g., Council of Trent, Session XXII on the propitiatory Sacrifice). However:
– There is no explicit mention of the propitiatory character *for sins* of the living and the dead.
– No warning against unworthy reception (*Trent*, Session XIII, can. 11: those conscious of mortal sin must not receive without confession).
– No distinction between Catholics in a state of grace and those estranged by error or sin.
– The Eucharist is reduced, in effect, to a sacrament of generic unity and moral elevation, available as a spiritual engine for national harmony and socio-economic concern.
This instrumentalization of the Eucharist for vague unity is the embryo of the later conciliar profanations: interreligious “adoration,” concelebrations with heretics, and the reduction of the Most Holy Sacrifice to an assembly-meal.
2. Unity in Christ Detached from Integral Profession of Faith
The motto “Omnes unum sumus in Christo” is used without:
– Confessing that unity in Christ is only in the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no true unity nor salvation (cf. the constant doctrine summarized before 1958, against Syllabus 15–18).
– Recalling that *communicatio in sacris* with heretics and schismatics is forbidden (traditional canon law; doctrine against indifferentism).
– Affirming that any Eucharistic congress must be a public proclamation of Christ’s Kingship over the nation, with explicit rejection of religious liberalism, freemasonry, and false cults.
By silencing these truths, the phrase becomes a proto-ecumenical slogan. It prefigures the later heretical stance that “all the baptized” or even all men are somehow already one in Christ, regardless of adherence to dogma, thereby dissolving the visible, juridical boundaries of the Church.
3. Social Justice Without Christ the King’s Public Rights
The letter urges that the congress promote:
“mutuae benevolentiae studium inter Bolivianos accrescat”
(“a zeal for mutual benevolence among Bolivians may grow”).
And that it arouse concern for:
“socialis iustitiae studium”
(“the pursuit of social justice”).
Yet:
– No call that civil legislation conform to divine and natural law (condemned error: prop. 56–57 of the Syllabus).
– No assertion of the perennial principle: *lex humana* must be subordinated to *lex divina*; states must recognize and protect the Catholic Church.
– No condemnation of secularist regimes or Masonic influence, despite Pius IX’s repeated unmasking of these sects as primary agents of persecution and apostasy.
Thus “social justice” is detached from the non-negotiable demand that nations submit to Christ’s law. It morphs into an abstract humanitarianism—fertile soil for the cult of man solemnized later by the conciliar sect.
4. Reduction of the Papal Office to Moral Encouragement
The letter exhibits a conception of the papacy predominantly as:
– Granter of blessings,
– Distributor of encouragement,
– Diplomatic figure of unity,
– Patron of philanthropy.
Missing is the true papal mission as defined by earlier magisterium: to guard doctrine, condemn heresy, defend the rights of the Church, and impose, if necessary, canonical sanctions on error, on governments, and on false religions.
This shrinkage of the papal role from dogmatic judge to benevolent moderator anticipates the post-1958 usurpers’ conduct: refusing to condemn error, praising false religions, and dissolving the juridical clarity of the Church into an amorphous “people of God.”
Symptomatic Level: A Pre-Conciliar Icon of the Conciliar Sect’s Spirit
This letter is a small but revealing piece of the pattern that leads from:
– Pius IX, Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII: clear condemnation of liberalism, modernism, false ecumenism, defense of the public rights of Christ the King, strict discipline of sacraments and doctrine.
to
– John XXIII and successors: optimistic silence on condemned errors; sentimental and horizontal phrasing; Eucharistic language without doctrinal edge; social preoccupations untethered from the Kingship of Christ; the replacement of supernatural militancy with diplomatic benevolence.
Key symptomatic deformations manifested here:
1. Substitution of Supernatural Combat with Natural Harmony
Instead of calling Bolivians to wage war against modernist apostasy, pagan syncretism, Freemasonry, and socialism, John XXIII:
– Praises everyone,
– Encourages mutual benevolence,
– Speaks of the Eucharist as a gentle bond for national unity and social improvement.
This is not the voice of the successors of Pius IX and St. Pius X who unmasked the “synagogue of Satan” and anathematized modern errors; it is the voice of a paramasonic diplomacy preparing the Church of the New Advent.
2. Instrumentalizing the Eucharist for a Horizontal Project
Though the text uses orthodox formulas about the Eucharist, functionally it converts the Eucharist into:
– A tool for “all being one” in a sociological sense,
– A source of generic ethical virtues and philanthropy,
– A symbol for human fraternity.
This is the same reduction that later enabled:
– Liturgical revolution,
– Interfaith “adorations,”
– The dissolution of belief in the propitiatory Sacrifice and in the necessity of right faith for fruitful Communion.
3. Diplomatic Praise of a Hierarchy Being Prepared for Apostasy
Richard Cushing—named legate and effusively praised here—later personifies the American strand of the conciliar sect: religious liberty, ecumenical collaboration, betrayal of the exclusive claims of Christ and His Church. This letter anticipates such figures as natural representatives of the new orientation.
By glorifying such prelates without doctrinal caveats, John XXIII normalizes the profile of the future “bishops” of the neo-church: men of philanthropy, politics, media, and natural virtue, not guardians of dogma.
4. Silence on the True Enemies: Modernism and Internal Apostasy
The integral Catholic magisterium understood:
– The primary danger is within: modernists, liberal Catholics, clandestine networks opposed to the Church (cf. Pius X’s Pascendi; Pius IX on Masonic sects in the text provided).
This letter:
– Ignores modernism entirely.
– Ignores the doctrinal crisis already evident.
– Ignores the anti-Christian, Masonic powers in Latin America.
Instead, it limits itself to social benevolence and pious generalities. Such silence is complicity; qui tacet consentire videtur (“he who is silent is seen to consent”).
Contrasting with Pre-1958 Magisterium: Doctrinal Weapons Against This Soft Apostasy
1. Public Reign of Christ the King (Pius XI, Quas Primas, 1925)
Pius XI declares:
– Peace requires the recognition of the reign of Christ in private and public life.
– States and rulers must give public veneration and obedience to Christ.
– Secularism and laicism are a plague; civil laws must conform to divine law.
– The feast of Christ the King was instituted precisely to condemn liberal apostasy.
Measured by this standard, John XXIII’s letter is deficient:
– No assertion that Bolivia, as a nation, must recognize Christ the King officially.
– No condemnation of the secularist errors ravaging states.
– The Eucharistic Congress is not presented as a political-theological proclamation of Christ’s rights, but as a devotional-ethical event for unity and social justice.
2. Condemnation of Liberalism and Modern Civilization (Pius IX, Syllabus Errorum, 1864)
The Syllabus condemns:
– Religious indifferentism (15–18),
– State supremacy over the Church (19–21, 39–42, 54–55),
– Separation of Church and state (55),
– Liberal-progressivist illusions (77–80).
John XXIII’s text:
– Neither recalls these condemnations,
– Nor frames “social justice” in opposition to liberalism and socialism,
– Nor demands Catholic political order.
Instead, it harmonizes easily with the very liberal order condemned by Pius IX, by avoiding any clash with its principles.
3. Condemnation of Modernist Method (Lamentabili, Pascendi)
St. Pius X exposes the modernists’ strategy:
– Preserve words, change meanings.
– Emphasize experience and practical effects over doctrinal content.
– Transform dogma and sacraments into expressions of community consciousness and ethical impetus.
John XXIII’s letter:
– Speaks of Eucharist; practically emphasizes unity, fraternity, social justice.
– Avoids hard doctrinal definitions and canonical implications.
– Treats the congress more as a national spiritual-ethical rally than as a fortress of dogmatic intransigence.
This is structurally modernist: pious language used as a vehicle for a new orientation.
On Authority and the Invalidity of the Conciliar Counter-Magisterium
From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, supported by the authorities cited in the Defense of Sedevacantism file:
– A manifest heretic or one who publicly promotes condemned novelties cannot be head of the Church (St. Robert Bellarmine, *De Romano Pontifice*; John of St. Thomas; Billot).
– Canon 188.4 (1917 Code) states that public defection from the faith vacates ecclesiastical office by tacit resignation.
– Paul IV’s *Cum ex Apostolatus Officio* affirms that the election of one who has deviated from the faith is null.
John XXIII’s entire pontificate, culminating in Vatican II and its aftermath, must be read in this light. This letter, gently preparing acceptance of the modernist program, is not a harmless devotional note; it is part of the usurpation: using the papal facade to guide clergy and faithful toward a new, conciliatory religion.
Therefore:
– Its “Apostolic Benediction” does not carry the authority of Peter, but of a man objectively pioneering the system of errors solemnly proscribed by prior popes.
– Its Eucharistic congress is not in itself evil as an event, but is co-opted into a strategy wherein authentic devotion is used to anesthetize resistance and habituate souls to modernist leadership and language.
Consequences: From Santa Cruz Congress to the Abomination of Desolation
The trajectory from this letter to the present structures occupying the Vatican is linear:
– First: gentle language, selective orthodoxy, silence on condemned errors, stress on unity and social justice.
– Then: Vatican II’s documents on religious freedom, ecumenism, collegiality, all explicitly and implicitly incompatible with Pius IX, Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII.
– Then: liturgical revolution, the neo-rite that attacks the theology of the propitiatory Sacrifice and Real Presence.
– Then: interreligious syncretism, cult of man, globalist social gospel.
This 1961 text is a snapshot of the transition: still cloaked in Latin and sacral forms, but already re-orienting Eucharistic devotion away from the confession of Christ’s exclusive Kingship and toward a humanistic, national, and dialogical fraternity.
Conclusion: Unmasking the Pious Veneer
Seen by the light of unchanging pre-1958 Catholic doctrine, the letter Laetum allatum:
– Uses noble words about the Eucharist while strategically omitting their doctrinal and political consequences.
– Translates Eucharistic worship into an instrument for horizontal unity, humanitarian concern, and the softening of confessional boundaries.
– Embodies the methodology of the conciliar sect: maintain traditional vocabulary, drain it of integral content, and redirect piety to support a paramasonic, anthropocentric reconfiguration of the Church.
True fidelity to Our Lord present in the Most Holy Sacrament, true charity for the poor and indigenous, and true unity “in Christ” require the exact opposite of this diplomatic modernist sweetness: they require the public affirmation of Christ the King over nations, the condemnation of liberal and Masonic systems, adherence to dogma without compromise, and separation from the neo-church’s usurpers whose texts—such as this—prepare and ornament the great apostasy.
Source:
Ad Richardum Iacobum tit. S. Susannae S. R. E. Presbyterum Cardinalem Cushing, Archiepiscopum Bostoniensem, quem Legatum mittit ad Eucharisticum Conventum in urbe Sanctae Crucis de Sierra ex universa … (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025