This brief Latin allocution of John XXIII, addressed to the preparatory Commission for the Apostolate of the Laity during the lead-up to the so-called Vatican II, reacts to bloody events in Algeria with expressions of sorrow, an appeal to prayer, and a desire for peace “founded on justice and charity,” especially by imploring rulers to establish a true and stable peace; yet beneath its pious phrases, it epitomizes the naturalistic, horizontal, and politically opportunistic spirit that would soon enthrone the conciliar revolution against the Kingship of Christ.
Sentimental Pacifism as Preludium to Conciliar Subversion
John XXIII’s intervention of July 6, 1961 appears, on its surface, modest: he laments bloodshed in Algeria, recalls a previous visit, speaks of Eucharistic sacrifice, cites Isaias, and exhorts the faithful – gathered as representatives of the laity’s apostolate – to unite their prayers for peace among nations, “firmed by justice and charity.”
However, when examined ex toto theologicorum et historicorum contextu (from the full theological and historical context) of pre-1958 Catholic doctrine, this speech is not innocent. It is a compact specimen of the new orientation that rejects the integral social reign of Christ, dilutes supernatural faith into generic humanitarianism, and prepares the way for that paramasonic construct later known as the “Church of the New Advent.”
Already here, the future conciliar playwright reveals his method:
– devotional language without doctrinal precision;
– invocation of Christ without confession of His exclusive Kingship over states;
– appeals to “all men” as one family without calling them into the one true Church;
– silence on sin, conversion, judgment, and the necessity of the *Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary* as propitiation.
This is not Catholic peace: it is the embryo of conciliar pacifism.
Naturalistic Reduction of Peace: From Christ the King to Generic Human Unity
A key line of the allocution can be rendered as follows:
“May God grant that all men, redeemed by the precious Blood of Christ and gathered into, as it were, one family, may continually grow together in fraternal bonds; may He enlighten the leaders and rulers of peoples by His grace, that they may establish true, secure, and stable peace: that peace, we say, which is contained and strengthened by justice and charity.”
At first glance, this sounds orthodox. Yet, measured by the magisterium of the pre-1958 Church, its omissions are decisive and damning.
1. Pius XI in Quas primas teaches unambiguously that:
– Peace can exist only where Christ reigns socially and politically.
– States must publicly recognize and obey Christ the King and His Church.
– The calamities of nations flow from the refusal to acknowledge His reign.
In substance: pax Christi in regno Christi (“the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ”). There is no Catholic doctrine of peace detached from the visible submission of rulers and laws to Christ and His Church.
2. John XXIII:
– does not recall the duty of nations to subject their constitutions, laws, and public life to the true religion;
– does not invoke the rights of the Church over public order, education, and moral law, as reaffirmed by Pius IX’s Syllabus (esp. against religious indifferentism and separation of Church and State);
– speaks of peace as if achievable through a balanced coexistence of political forces, as long as “justice and charity” – undefined, deracinated – are invoked.
Thus, the speech subtly shifts from supernatural Catholic order to a peace concept acceptable to pluralistic, laicized regimes. This is precisely the “modern civilization” condemned by Pius IX and Pius X: man-centered, religiously neutral, allergic to the exclusive claims of the true Church.
By avoiding the explicit assertion that:
– there is no true peace apart from Catholic truth;
– public rejection of Christ’s Kingship is a crime that calls down chastisement;
this allocution habituates clergy and laity to a “peace” that is no longer the fruit of the Cross and submission to the one Church, but a horizontal, diplomatic equilibrium.
Such a silence is not accidental. It is programmatic.
Selective Piety and the Manipulation of the Eucharistic Sacrifice
John XXIII notes that, upon hearing of the Algerian bloodshed, he prayed repeatedly and offered the Eucharistic Host, imploring Christ as Princeps pacis. The words are outwardly devout. Yet:
– There is no mention of the propitiatory character of the Most Holy Sacrifice for sins, personal and social.
– There is no call to penance, reparation, conversion from false religions, or abandonment of revolutionary, anti-Christian ideologies.
– The Eucharistic language is employed as a rhetorical fragrance poured over a fundamentally naturalistic project: stabilizing political peace without restoring Catholic order.
The pre-1958 magisterium – especially codified in the condemnations of Modernism in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi – rejects precisely this use of religious language to sanctify shifting historical “processes” and “developments” divorced from immutable dogma. Modernism:
– clothes immanentist projects in Catholic vocabulary;
– empties sacramental and doctrinal terms of their objective content;
– subordinates faith to the evolving “consciousness” of humanity.
Here we see the pattern: Eucharistic terminology deployed without asserting the unique mediation of the Catholic Church, without confronting Islam, Freemasonry, or revolutionary terrorism, without naming Christ’s social Kingship as non-negotiable. The Sacrifice is invoked, but not as the judicial center of history demanding the submission of all nations.
This silence is already complicity.
Linguistic Softness: Bureaucratic Mercy Without the Sword of Truth
The tone of the allocution is revealing:
– sentimental (“paternal charity,” “inexpressible sadness”);
– diplomatic (concern for “peoples,” “leaders and rulers”);
– antiseptic: devoid of words like “heresy,” “Islam,” “Freemasonry,” “revolutionary sects,” or “enemies of the Church.”
Such rhetoric is not that of Pius IX, Pius X, or Pius XI, who:
– clearly named and anathematized socialism, liberalism, secret societies, and religious indifferentism as works of the “synagogue of Satan”;
– unmasked the systematic Masonic war against the Church and Christendom;
– declared that civil laws contrary to divine and ecclesiastical rights are null.
John XXIII’s allocution stands in sharp contrast:
– bloodshed is lamented, but its ideological and anti-Catholic roots are left unspoken;
– the persecuted rights of the true Church in colonized or decolonizing lands are not asserted;
– the culpability of false religions and secular ideologies is carefully avoided.
This is the language of a man preparing to appease the world, not to judge it by the Cross. The vocabulary of supernatural militancy is replaced by the parlance of international committees. Instead of the thundering *anathema sit*, we encounter therapeutic condolences.
Qui tacet consentire videtur (he who is silent is seen to consent). In omitting the doctrinal and polemical precision demanded by previous popes, John XXIII normalizes a discourse where truth is hidden beneath “universal fraternity.”
Doctrinal Silence as Symptom of the Conciliar Program
Measured by the integral Catholic doctrine (as codified up to Pius XII inclusive), the allocution’s gravest feature is what it does not say.
Notably absent are:
– Any affirmation that only the Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ, outside of which there is no salvation as taught always and everywhere.
– Any reminder that rulers must legislate according to divine and natural law, subject to the judgment of the Church, as insisted upon in the Syllabus of Errors.
– Any doctrinal warning that religions and ideologies rejecting Christ are objectively false and, when governing societies, bring war and dissolution.
– Any reference to the duty of Catholics in political authority to profess publicly and exclusively the Catholic faith, and to refuse legitimacy to false cults.
Instead, we find a bland invocation that “all men, redeemed by the precious Blood of Christ,” may live as one family. But objectively:
– Not all men are united to the fruits of the Redemption, which must be applied through supernatural faith and the sacraments in the one Church.
– To speak as if all are simply “redeemed” and therefore already bound in one family, without distinguishing between the state of grace and the state of deadly sin, is to blur the dogma of the necessity of the Church and conversion.
Such language anticipates the later conciliar and post-conciliar slogans about “the human family,” “universal brotherhood,” and “dialogue between religions” – slogans repeatedly condemned in substance by the pre-conciliar magisterium whenever they imply religious relativism or deny the rights of Christ the King over societies.
This allocution thereby functions as a micro-manifesto of the conciliar sect:
– Affirm what offends no one;
– suppress what divides truth from error;
– preserve Catholic words while amputating their dogmatic spine.
From Apostolate of the Laity to Democratized Neo-Church
The context is crucial: John XXIII is addressing those gathered for the Commission on the Apostolate of the Laity in preparation for Vatican II. Here one perceives another layer of subversion.
Legitimate Catholic teaching on the laity:
– affirms their participation in the apostolate under hierarchical authority;
– subordinates all lay initiatives strictly to the doctrines and disciplines defined by the magisterium;
– forbids any democratizing reimagining of the Church as a mass movement of “the people of God” judging doctrine.
In the neo-church which would emerge from Vatican II:
– “laity” becomes a political body, often mobilized against hierarchical tradition;
– subjective experience, activism, and “engagement with the world” are prioritized over doctrinal formation and sacramental life;
– structures arise in which those pretending to be traditional Catholics, charismatics, bureaucrats, and revolutionaries coexist in an eclectic, self-referential organism no longer strictly subject to perennial magisterium.
John XXIII, with his carefully non-doctrinal words, flatters those present as solemn bearers of lay responsibility, without reminding them:
– that their apostolate consists primarily in defending and restoring the social sovereignty of Christ and His Church;
– that any “peace” or “justice” work cut loose from conversion to the true faith is a snare.
The silence prepares precisely that democratic, horizontal, and ultimately anti-Catholic “general participation” which Pius X, in Lamentabili and Pascendi, had anticipated and condemned as Modernist ecclesiology.
Fruit of the Same Root: Conciliar Pacifism and the Reign of Antichristian Secularism
Seen symptomatically, this allocution is a small but pure expression of the conciliar sect’s program:
– Replace the kingship of Christ with “peace among nations” as the highest practical value.
– Replace clear denunciation of errors with neutral technocratic concern.
– Replace the supernatural end (salvation of souls, defense of true doctrine) with natural ends (absence of conflict, diplomatic harmony, sociological “unity”).
The Syllabus of Errors explicitly rejects:
– the separation of Church and State;
– the idea that civil authority can remain religiously neutral;
– the thesis that freedom for all cults and opinions benefits society.
Yet John XXIII speaks as if peace were a neutral object attainable without the subordination of states to the Catholic Church. By refusing to remind rulers of their obligation toward Christ and His Church, he objectively encourages the false conviction that:
– a purely temporal and pluralistic peace is legitimate and sufficient;
– the Church’s role is to bless such efforts, not judge and command them.
This “peace” is the counterfeit tranquility of a world marching toward the enthronement of secular, Masonic, and syncretic power – that “paramasonic structure” which would quickly occupy the Vatican and transform it into the visible headquarters of post-conciliar apostasy.
Condemnation in Light of Pre-1958 Catholic Doctrine
Measured rigorously by unchanging Catholic teaching, this allocution must be rejected on the following grounds:
1. It instrumentalizes Catholic language to promote a concept of peace detached from the explicit social Kingship of Christ and the exclusive rights of the Catholic Church.
2. It refuses to name or condemn the ideologies, sects, and false religions which wage war against Christ and His Church, thereby offering a tacit complicity that contradicts the duty of the Roman Pontiff as universal guardian of truth and justice.
3. It suggests, by its humanitarian rhetoric, an implicit solidarity of all men as one “family” without the indispensable condition of supernatural faith and incorporation into the Church, thereby obscuring the dogma of “no salvation outside the Church.”
4. It prepares the theological atmosphere of Vatican II: naturalistic, dialogical, apologizing to the world instead of commanding it; exalting human fraternity over the divine rights of Christ the King.
Such an orientation stands under the doctrinal censures outlined in:
– Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi, which condemn the transformation of dogma into vague religious sentiment and evolving consciousness;
– the Syllabus of Pius IX, which anathematizes religious indifferentism, the separation thesis, and the exaltation of liberal “progress”;
– Quas primas, which defines the necessity of the public reign of Christ for true peace.
Therefore, the Catholic faithful, bound to the perennial magisterium, must see in this allocution not a benign pious reflection, but a programmatic sign: the man hailed as “John XXIII” inaugurates by such texts the dismantling of the visible Catholic order and the installation of a conciliar, pacifist, naturalistic pseudo-church.
In the face of this, the duty is clear:
– to adhere without compromise to the doctrine of Christ the King expounded by the true popes;
– to reject the modernist rhetoric that subordinates supernatural truth to worldly diplomacy;
– to remember that peace without conversion is illusion, and that any so-called ecclesial voice that blesses such illusion betrays the mandate received from Christ: to teach all nations, to baptize them, and to command them to observe all that He has taught.
Pax Christi regnet, vel nulla sit pax. (Let the peace of Christ reign, or let there be no peace.)
Source:
(die 6 m. Iulii, A.D. MCMLXI) (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025