Ioannes Roncalli, styling himself “John XXIII,” here issues an act by which a portion of the Diocese of Berberati in then French Equatorial Africa (regions Bossangoa, Bouca, Batanfago, Paoua) is detached to form a new apostolic prefecture, entrusted to the Capuchin Friars Minor and made suffragan to Bangui. The text clothes this purely administrative measure in solemn formulas of papal authority, obedience, and canonical sanction.
Yet beneath the Latin decorum, this document already manifests the incipient program of the conciliar revolution: using missionary structures to prepare the displacement of the Catholic religion by the coming neo-church, under the banner of bureaucratic expansion, humanitarian rhetoric, and false “pastoral” concern.
Administrative Engineering as Preludium to the Conciliar Subversion
From Catholic Mission to Demographic Cartography
On the factual level the constitution appears simple:
– A territory is split from Berberati.
– A new apostolic prefecture “Bossangoaënsis” is erected.
– Its care is given to the Capuchins.
– Its ordinary is bound to the metropolitan see of Bangui.
– Marcel Lefebvre, then Archbishop of Dakar and Apostolic Delegate, is commissioned to implement the division.
The key phrases:
“ut ubique facilior in dies facultas cunctis detur Dei verbum audiendi et animum virtute ac veritate excolendi”
(“that everywhere a more and more easy possibility be given to all of hearing the word of God and cultivating their souls in virtue and truth”)
This seems orthodox. Pre-1958 Catholic doctrine insists on the missionary mandate: *docete omnes gentes* (“teach all nations,” Matt 28:19-20). Yet the entire text reduces that mandate to an administrative and geographic optimization, devoid of explicit insistence on:
– the necessity of supernatural faith in the one true Church;
– the absolute obligation of baptism for salvation;
– the combat against paganism and Islam as false religions;
– the kingship of Christ over temporal order, as solemnly reaffirmed by Pius XI in *Quas Primas* (1925), where he teaches that peace and order are possible only under the social reign of Christ the King and the public profession of the Catholic faith;
– the exclusion of indifferentism and syncretism, solemnly condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (e.g. propositions 15–18, 55, 77–80).
Instead, the text frames mission as providing a “facilior facultas… audiendi verbum Dei,” in a merely generic sense, without a single hard doctrinal edge. This softening is not accidental; it reveals already the mentality that will soon enthrone *aggiornamento* and religious liberty as pseudo-principles, in defiance of the pre-existing Magisterium.
The act itself is not heretical in its letter. But it is an early specimen of the new style: a Church spoken of as a global administrative service, carving territories and multiplying structures in a way rhetorically disconnected from the integral confession of the Catholic faith, the condemnation of error, and the demand for the social kingship of Christ. This mutilation by omission is the seed of apostasy.
The Rhetorical Veil: Pious Latin Covering Pastoral Naturalism
The linguistic texture of the constitution is revealing:
– Repeated emphasis on “onus populorum universitatis recte dirigendae” – “the burden of rightly directing the peoples of the whole world.”
– Vague insistence on “utilitas” and “commodius” for the local faithful.
– Stock formulas of canonical power and sanctions: anyone opposing the decree acts “prorsus irritum atque inane,” null and void.
What is absent is more decisive than what is present.
In classical pre-conciliar teaching, papal acts establishing missions or dioceses habitually stress:
– the duty to eradicate false worship and superstition;
– the obligation to lead souls from darkness to the one true fold;
– the subjection of civil rulers to Christ and His Church;
– the integral catechesis in defined dogma, sacraments, and moral law;
– warnings against secret societies, liberalism, indifferentism, and modernism, in continuity with Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X.
Here, none of this appears. The vocabulary is sanitized, technocratic, ideologically “neutral” – as if the Church were a benevolent global NGO rearranging administrative districts for better “service delivery.” The constitution is saturated with solemn legalism, yet dogmatically anemic. The supernatural is hinted at in generic phrases, but never sharply articulated against its negation.
This rhetorical strategy is typical of what St. Pius X, in *Pascendi* and in the decree *Lamentabili*, unmasks as the method of the modernists: to retain formulas while emptying them of their polemical, exclusive, and dogmatically binding force. A text that speaks of the “word of God” and “virtue and truth” yet refuses to confess:
– that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation rightly understood;
– that all non-Catholic religions are false;
– that temporal societies are bound to confess the true faith;
is already operating in the orbit of condemned propositions (Syllabus 15–18, 55, 77–80; *Lamentabili* 58–65).
Theological Hollowing-Out: A Mission Without Confessional Edges
From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, several theological deficiencies and symptoms emerge.
1. Implicit religious relativization by omission
The constitution never once:
– affirms explicitly that Bossangoa’s inhabitants must be converted to the Catholic Church as the only ark of salvation;
– recalls that pagan and animist cults are idolatry, and that syncretism is mortal sin;
– subordinates civil authorities and cultures to the rights of Christ the King and His Church.
Instead, it speaks bureaucratically of serving “those dwelling in French Equatorial Africa,” as if the Church’s role were simply to “assist” populations rather than subdue nations to Christ. This is precisely the logic that Pius XI condemns in *Quas Primas*, where he identifies laicism and the exclusion of Christ from public life as the root of modern calamities, and demands public, juridical recognition of His Kingship.
A missionary jurisdiction built on such attenuated language becomes the perfect incubator for post-conciliar indifferentism and “inculturation,” where the supernatural claim of the Church will be bartered away in exchange for humanistic “dialogue” and development projects.
2. Silent betrayal of anti-liberal doctrine
Pius IX in the Syllabus unequivocally condemns:
– the idea that man is free to embrace any religion he chooses (15);
– that salvation is attainable in any religion (16);
– that civil and ecclesiastical power are to be separated (55);
– that the Pope must reconcile with “progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (80).
This apostolic constitution, drafted in the very decade that will culminate in the conciliar apostasy, is already marked by a refusal to confess these anti-liberal theses explicitly in a missionary context that absolutely demanded them. Instead of asserting the Church’s innate right to rule in spiritual and, indirectly, temporal matters in these lands, the text speaks as if its only concern were “facilitating hearing of the word.”
In missionary law and praxis prior to the mid-20th century, the erection of prefectures was part of a clearly confessional project: implanting the Catholic Church as the visible, exclusive institution of salvation, forming Catholic elites, and influencing legislation. Roncalli’s language is the first mist of that fog which will later become the full darkness of Dignitatis Humanae and ecumenical delirium. The omission speaks guilt.
3. Subtle desacralization of ecclesiastical authority
The document is filled with emphatic assertions of papal jurisdiction and canonical nullity clauses:
“Has vero Litteras nunc et in posterum efficaces esse et fore volumus… Quapropter si quis, quavis praeditus auctoritate… contra egerit ac Nos ediximus, id prorsus irritum atque inane haberi iubemus.”
(“We will and decree that these letters be effective now and forever… Therefore if anyone, invested with any authority whatsoever… acts against what we have decreed, we order that it be held absolutely null and void.”)
In themselves such formulas are traditional. But in the mouth of a man who inaugurates the line of usurpers subverting the papal office, they become an ironic caricature: limitless legal self-assertion coupled with doctrinal abdication. *Potestas* remains in rhetoric; *fides* is evacuated in practice. This inversion is characteristic of a paramasonic structure: sacral formulas used to sanctify purely organizational maneuvers, preparing an ecclesial “shell” that can survive the doctrinal implosion of the 1960s by relying on juridical inertia and sentimental obedience.
The authentic papal Magisterium, as Pius IX and St. Pius X insist, exercises authority precisely to guard, define, and defend immutable dogma against error. Here, authority is deployed maximally for an act that is doctrinally minimal. Such disproportion is a sign of a new theology of power: jurisdictional activism without supernatural content.
Marcel Lefebvre and the Anatomy of Controlled Opposition
A key symptom: the central operational figure in the constitution is Marcel Lefebvre, explicitly named and commissioned to carry out the territorial reorganization.
Roncalli orders:
“Quae Nostra decreta volumus ut venerabilis Frater Marcellus Lefebvre… ad effectum deducat, cui omnes ad haec agenda potestates facimus…”
(“We will that our decrees be carried into effect by our venerable Brother Marcel Lefebvre… to whom we grant all the powers necessary for this purpose…”)
From the standpoint of integral Catholic theology, several points must be underscored:
– Lefebvre, later figurehead of those pretending to be traditional Catholics, is here fully integrated in the machinery of the conciliar prelude.
– His later stance accepts the legitimacy of Roncalli and his successors, while lamenting abuses. This constitution shows him cooperating docilely with that very authority to implement the missionary model that will be harnessed by the conciliar sect.
– His own notoriously problematic episcopal lineage (with Liénart) and his theological strategy (“give us the old Mass, that is enough for us”) confirm a reduction of resistance to liturgical aesthetics and partial discipline, without a radical doctrinal and juridical break with the usurpers.
Thus, the presence of Lefebvre in this text is emblematic: early on, the system shapes the future pseudo-opposition that will keep many souls attached to the neo-church by offering them a “traditional” décor under the authority (explicit or implicit) of the conciliar structure. The Bossangoa erection is not just about one African territory; it is a microcosm of the controlled dialectic between overt modernism and those pretending to be traditional Catholics.
Missionary Structures as Laboratories of the Neo-Church
On the symptomatic level, this constitution illustrates how the conciliar project weaponized missionary territories.
1. Delegating to religious congregations in a transitional phase
Entrusting the prefecture to the Capuchins appears “traditional,” but in the 1950s many communities had already internalized modernist tendencies:
– embrace of development ideology;
– softening of doctrinal preaching;
– early experiments in liturgical and pastoral innovation.
By multiplying jurisdictions dependent on Rome yet staffed by already liberalizing institutes, Roncalli prepares the perfect network for the swift implementation of the post-1958 program: liturgical revolution, ecumenism, political activism, and anthropocentrism. The African faithful thus become unwitting subjects in a grand ecclesial experiment, where the name “Catholic mission” masks the gradual substitution of the true religion by the Church of the New Advent.
2. Geographic fragmentation without supernatural consolidation
The division of dioceses can be legitimate when driven by:
– growth of Catholic population;
– need for closer pastoral governance;
– strengthening of episcopal authority in defense of doctrine.
Here, however, there is strikingly no mention of the concrete state of the faith, the dangers threatened by paganism, Islam, Protestantism, Freemasonry, or the liberal state—although Pius IX and Leo XIII had denounced precisely such forces globally. There is no call to:
– enforce doctrinal discipline;
– eradicate superstition;
– form clergy solid in Thomistic doctrine and anti-modernist vows.
Administrative fragmentation without doctrinal consolidation yields structurally weak local churches ready to be dissolved into the neo-church once the revolution is launched. Bossangoaënsis thus becomes a typical “laboratory prefecture” of post-1958 conciliarism.
The Silence that Condemns: No Anti-Modernist Safeguards
Most damning is the complete silence about modernism, despite St. Pius X’s recent and still-binding condemnations:
– The oath against modernism had been imposed.
– *Lamentabili* and *Pascendi* had exposed the tactics of those who would transform dogma into mutable religious experience.
– The Church had identified secret societies as instruments of the “synagogue of Satan” attacking her foundations (as recalled in the Syllabus text provided).
In a context where:
– colonial and post-colonial elites were heavily penetrated by Freemasonry;
– religious congregations were contaminated by liberal theology;
– international agencies were promoting laicism and syncretism;
a truly Catholic apostolic constitution erecting a new missionary jurisdiction should have:
– reaffirmed explicitly the anti-modernist stance;
– demanded strict Thomistic formation and doctrinal orthodoxy;
– warned against naturalistic humanitarianism and political subservience;
– insisted on the public rights of Christ the King over nascent African polities.
Instead, the text functions as if modernism did not exist; as if the only concern were more efficient territory management. Such deliberate blindness is itself complicity. *Qui tacet consentire videtur* (he who is silent is seen to consent). The omission of anti-modernist safeguards in 1959, in such a strategic text, is not neutral; it is a signal that the leadership intends to lift, in practice, the anti-modernist barricades and open the way to the conciliar flood.
Jurisdictional Inflation and the Cult of Institutional Obedience
Another notable feature is the heavy insistence on:
– the irrevocable character of the decree;
– the nullity of all contrary acts;
– the obligation to obey under pain of canonical penalties.
Yet the subject matter is a minor territorial adjustment. The disproportion reveals a degenerate understanding of authority:
– maximalist juridical self-assertion in indifferent matters;
– minimal or no use of authority to condemn real doctrinal threats.
Authentic papal power, as exercised by saints and defenders of the faith, is spent above all on defining truth, condemning error, and safeguarding the sacraments. Here, the only vigorous language is reserved for enforcing cartographic lines. Such inversion prepares the terrible post-1958 phenomenon whereby:
– the conciliar sect will use “obedience” to impose heretical liturgy, false ecumenism, and religious liberty;
– while refusing to use authority to defend the integral faith.
The Bossangoa act is a micro-prefiguration of this abuse: submission demanded absolutely, for content that is theologically emptied and politically conformist.
Public Kingship of Christ Ignored: Naturalistic Vocabulary Triumphant
Pre-1958 doctrine, especially in *Quas Primas*, insists:
– Christ must reign over individuals, families, and states;
– laws, institutions, education must submit to His law;
– secularism and laicism are grave apostasies.
In a missionary context like Bossangoa:
– emerging nations and local rulers should be called to acknowledge Christ publicly;
– ecclesiastical jurisdictions must be tools for the social impregnation of Catholic order.
This constitution never references:
– Christ as King of societies;
– the duty of nations to profess the Catholic faith;
– the obligation to shape civil law according to Catholic morality.
Instead, it speaks the soft naturalistic language of “directing peoples” and giving them “opportunity” to hear the word. It is the prelude to the cult of “human rights,” “development,” and “dialogue” that will characterize post-conciliar missionary discourse. God’s sovereign rights are muted; man’s perceived needs tacitly prioritized. Such silence is direct disobedience to the prior Magisterium.
The Conciliar Sect in Embryo: Why This Text Matters
Some might object: the constitution contains no explicit doctrinal error; it is “merely administrative”; to treat it as symptomatic would be excessive. But in Catholic theology, especially as sharpened by St. Pius X:
– Modernism operates less by frontal denials than by re-interpretations, omissions, and shifts of emphasis.
– The corruption of faith begins when ecclesiastical acts no longer breathe the explicit, exclusive supernaturalism and dogmatic clarity of tradition.
In this text we see:
– An ethos in which missionary work is framed functionally, not confessionally.
– A papal voice that magnifies its legal force yet refuses to proclaim unpopular truths.
– A strategic use of missionary territories as experimental fields for a milder, “pastoral” vocabulary.
This is how a paramasonic structure supplants the true Church:
– Preserve juridical shells and solemn styles.
– Gradually empty them of anti-liberal, anti-modernist content.
– Entrust execution to men and congregations already inclined to compromise.
– Use “obedience” to enforce structural changes that later will facilitate doctrinal revolution.
Bossangoaënsis is a small stone in that edifice – but a stone cut precisely to fit the future abomination of desolation.
Conclusion: Integral Faith versus Bureaucratic Apostasy
Measured against immutable Catholic doctrine prior to 1958, this constitution stands condemned not for what it asserts, but for what it studiously refuses to assert:
– No clear confession of the Catholic Church as the only ark of salvation.
– No explicit repudiation of false religions and secret sects in a mission field where they dominate.
– No proclamation of the social kingship of Christ and the duties of temporal power toward the Church.
– No reaffirmation of anti-modernist principles at a time when modernism was poised to capture the visible structures.
Instead, we are given polished Latin legalese that treats the Church as a planetary administration, rearranging outposts while its guardians sleep—or rather, collaborate.
An act truly proceeding from the Roman Pontiff, Successor of Peter, would have exploited such an occasion to strike once more with luminous clarity:
– that Christ is King of Bossangoa, of her souls and her laws;
– that the Catholic faith, whole and unchanging, must be taught and imposed by persuasion and authority;
– that modern errors—liberalism, indifferentism, naturalism—are mortal poisons, especially for young churches.
Here, that trumpet is muted. And a muted trumpet on the walls of Zion is not an accident; it is treason.
Source:
Berberatensi (Bossangoaënsis) A Berberatensi Dioecesi, in Africa Aequatoriali Gallica, quoddam distrahitur territorium, ex quo Nova Conditur Apostolica Praefectura, « Bossangoaënsis » appellanda, die … (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025