The Latin text labeled as an apostolic constitution “TUDENSIS” (9 March 1959) attributed to John XXIII concerns an apparently minor administrative act: it combines the historical title of the Diocese of Tui (Tudensis) with “Vigo” (Vicensis) and elevates the church of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Vigo to the rank of co-cathedral, granting the diocesan ordinary the cumulative title “Tudensis-Vicensis” and regulating canonical execution. Beneath the innocuous canonical verbiage, however, stands the signature and self-assertion of the first usurper of the conciliar revolution, sealing in juridical form the transition of visible structures into the hands of an emerging neo-church which will shortly enthrone the cult of man against the reign of Christ the King.
Administrative Cosmetic Surgery as Prelude to Revolt against Christ the King
This short juridical text must be read not sentimentally, but in its precise chronology, logic, and theology.
– Date: 9 March 1959 – less than three months after the election of John XXIII and shortly after his announcement (25 January 1959) of the Council that will become the engine of post-conciliar apostasy.
– Object: a territorial-title adjustment and creation of a co-cathedral in Spain, executed “in conformity” with the 1953 Concordat.
– Form: solemn, solemnly sealed, invoking “the will of the Divine Majesty,” “Our supreme apostolic authority,” threats of penalties, absolute obedience, etc.
At first glance: nothing but canonical housekeeping. In reality: the exact style of the pre-conciliar papal chancellery is being used as a vehicle by a man who will soon subvert the very substance that form was erected to defend. The text is therefore a revealing micro-sample of a deeper corruption: the apparatus of the Church still intact, her theology and juridical grammar still in place, but placed into the hands of a man preparing to mobilize it against the very doctrinal edifice it served before 1958.
Factual Level: A Harmless Decree Masking a Changing Authority
Factual content of the constitution:
– It appeals to the image of the diligent farmer tending the Lord’s field, applying it to the author’s own role.
– It cites the Apostolic Nuncio Hildebrand Antoniutti, who, invoking the 1953 Concordat with Spain, petitions:
– that the Diocese of Tui receive the joined title “Tudensis-Vicensis”;
– that the church of B. Maria Virgo in Vigo be raised to a concatedral status.
– The author:
– consults the diocesan bishop José López Ortiz;
– decrees:
– the union of titles for see and bishop “in perpetuum”;
– the elevation of the Vigo church to concatedral with canonical privileges;
– the faculty for the “Tudensis-Vicensis” ordinary to reside and perform pontifical functions in Vigo;
– juridical execution entrusted to the Nuncio.
On the level of bare fact, nothing here is novel: the pre-1958 papacy legitimately carried out similar acts to adapt ecclesiastical circumscriptions for the good of souls. Yet to stop there would be naivety unworthy of Catholic intelligence. The decisive question is not whether creating a co-cathedral is possible; it plainly is. The question is: in whose hands is this authority being exercised, and toward which ecclesiological project is it already being oriented?
From the perspective of unchanging Catholic doctrine, several points emerge:
1. The text leverages fully the pre-conciliar canonical form and solemn sanction while emanating from John XXIII – the very figure who will convoke a council that enthrones ideas directly condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors and by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi. The juridical shell is Catholic; the directing will is preparing to betray it.
2. The continuity of administrative practice is used to build psychological trust:
– The faithful and clergy see familiar forms, solemn phrases, canonical exactness.
– This habitual obedience softens resistance when the same signature later introduces aggiornamento, false ecumenism, religious liberty, and the cult of man.
3. Thus, the factual harmlessness of the specific measure is precisely its danger: it trains acquiescence to a new authority whose doctrinal intentions are about to diverge radically from the prior magisterium.
Lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief) has its juridical correlate: forms of authority accustom souls to certain obediences. When those forms are seized by a project hostile to the prior faith, each “neutral” act becomes a brick in the edifice of usurpation.
Linguistic Level: Traditional Rhetoric as Camouflage for Approaching Revolution
The text’s language imitates the high classical chancellery style:
– Calling the author servus servorum Dei.
– Evoking Christ’s parable: the Church as the Lord’s field (*Io. 15,1* alluded).
– Speaking of “fructius laetiores sanctitatis et bonorum operum” (ever more joyful fruits of holiness and good works).
– Emphasizing:
– “divini Numinis voluntate”
– “de Nostra summa et apostolica auctoritate”
– threats of penalties for non-compliance.
This rhetoric, once the organic expression of true papal solicitude, functions here as a linguistic mask. The same pen which here solemnly organizes diocesan titles will soon:
– summon an ecumenical assembly whose programmatic orientation contradicts the anti-liberal, anti-modernist stance of:
– Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors (e.g. condemnations of religious indifferentism, separation of Church and state, exaltation of “progress” and “modern civilization” as autonomous);
– St. Pius X, Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi (condemning the evolution of dogma, historicist relativism, the subordination of doctrine to “modern thought”).
Thus we see the first hallmark of the coming conciliar sect:
– Aesthetic continuity: the external solemnity of language;
– Substantial rupture: the person and program behind that language moving toward doctrines and practices explicitly condemned by prior magisterium.
The bureaucratic and gently paternal tone is especially insidious:
– It speaks of prudence, order, pastoral convenience.
– It avoids any mention of:
– *state of grace*;
– need for the *Most Holy Sacrifice* as propitiation;
– the duty of public recognition of Christ the King, so forcefully taught in Quas Primas:
– Pius XI insists peace and order are impossible where the social reign of Christ is denied.
– Instead, the decree foregrounds institutional and geographical adjustment as if these were self-evident goods, detached from explicit reaffirmation of the supernatural end.
Such silence is not accidental. Even in a technical act, a true Roman Pontiff, immersed in the integral faith, breathes the supernatural ethos; here, the text is marked by a managerial clericalism tending already toward what will become the conciliar technocracy of dioceses, conferences, and “pastoral” structures without dogmatic backbone.
Theological Level: Apparent Orthodoxy Instrumentalised against Pre-1958 Doctrine
From the integral Catholic perspective, we must judge acts not only by their literal content but by their place within the economy of doctrine, discipline, and authority.
Key theological issues:
1. Invocation of Apostolic Authority by a Manifestly Modernist Agenda-Setter
– St. Robert Bellarmine, approved by the pre-1958 magisterium, affirms that a manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church; a non-Christian cannot be its head because he is not a member.
– The very soon doctrinal and practical tendencies of John XXIII:
– programmatic opening to “the modern world”;
– renunciation of the Church’s full polemical stance against liberal, masonic, and modernist errors;
– preparation of a council whose texts enable precisely what Pius IX and St. Pius X condemn;
are incompatible with the office of guardian of the deposit of faith.
When such a man signs a text in which he demands absolute obedience under threat of penalties (“qui… spreverit… poenas… subiturus”), the Catholic conscience must ask: obedience to what and to whom? To lawful authority guarding Tradition, or to a usurped authority preparing its destruction?
2. Supernatural End Replaced by Administrative Pastoralism
– The document uses agricultural imagery to speak of “fruits of holiness and good works,” yet:
– it does not mention:
– the need to preserve intact the true faith;
– the centrality of the *Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary*;
– the kingship of Christ over Spain, solemnly affirmed by prior popes;
– the threats of modernist infiltration and masonic subversion repeatedly denounced by Pius IX.
– In isolation, a minor act need not repeat all theology; but in this context, the omission is symptomatic:
– The Church’s supernatural mission is silently presupposed, then gradually displaced by pastoral-administrative rhetoric.
– This is the beginning of that practical naturalism and institutionalism where diocesan restructuring, co-cathedrals, and “pastoral convenience” become ends in themselves.
3. Appeal to Concordat and State Arrangements as Neutral Technicality
– The act explicitly references the 1953 Concordat with Spain, presenting its procedures as obvious framework.
– Pre-1958 doctrine (Quas Primas, the Syllabus) insists:
– the Church is a *perfect society* with innate, not state-conceded, rights;
– state agreements must serve the reign of Christ and the freedom of the Church, not bind her to secular agendas.
– This constitution’s docile reliance on concordatarian formalities foreshadows a new attitude:
– the Church’s visible leadership accommodating itself to political frameworks that will soon demand religious liberty and pluralism, precisely those errors condemned by Pius IX.
The text is not yet heretical in wording; its bankruptcy lies in its function as part of a system whereby an authority preparing to overturn doctrine uses impeccably Catholic forms to accustom the faithful to submission. Forma catholica, mens alia: Catholic form, alien mind.
Symptomatic Level: A Case Study in the Birth of the Conciliar Sect
This brief constitution reveals several structural features of the emerging “Church of the New Advent”:
1. Continuity of Machinery, Displacement of Faith
– The Roman chancery, the Nunciature, the Consistorial Congregation, signatures of cardinals, the solemn prohibitions against altering papal documents – all remain.
– These instruments, designed to protect orthodoxy, will soon:
– promulgate texts admitting religious liberty in principle;
– elevate religious indifferentists and evolutionists of dogma as “saints”;
– impose a fabricated rite that obscures the propitiatory nature of the Sacrifice.
– The present text is a small cog: training clergy and laity to accept without discernment any act stamped with such seals.
2. Elevation of Structures without Defense against Modernism
– The act strengthens an episcopal see externally (adding title, co-cathedral, privileges).
– Yet there is no concern about:
– ensuring the catechetical purity of that diocese;
– defending it against liberal, masonic, and modernist infiltration condemned by Pius IX and St. Pius X;
– binding the new co-cathedral to explicit public witness to Christ the King in a militantly secularising Spain.
– The logic becomes: if structures are tidy, “pastoral care” is achieved. This is the essence of bureaucratic modernism: organization without orthodoxy.
3. Absolute Claims of Obedience Pressed into Service of Future Betrayal
The constitution threatens penalties for those who “despise” or refuse execution of its content. In isolation, this is simply just: lawful hierarchical acts bind. However, in the wider context:
– The identical rhetoric of absolute binding force will be invoked, post-1959, to:
– demand acceptance of a council riddled with ambiguities and openings to condemned errors;
– accept a new rite and neo-ecclesiology that contradict the immemorial theology of the Mass and the Church.
– Thus a minor document trains consciences: “whoever resists whatever comes from this source is guilty”. It prepares the inversion:
– fidelity to Tradition will be branded disobedience;
– obedience to usurpers will be presented as Catholic fidelity.
But as St. Pius X made clear when condemning Modernism, and as Pius IX taught against liberal absolutization of state or people, *obedience is bounded by the deposit of faith*. No one may bind the Church to what contradicts prior definitions, for the magisterium is not a creative laboratory, but a faithful guardian.
Reduction of Christ’s Kingship to a Decorative Invocation
Pius XI in Quas Primas teaches with adamant clarity:
– Peace and order are possible only under the social kingship of Christ.
– States, rulers, laws, education must publicly and juridically submit to Christ and His Church.
– Secularism and laicism are a “plague” and a public apostasy.
In this 1959 constitution:
– Christ is invoked generically at the beginning through the agricultural image.
– Nowhere is there:
– reminder of the obligation of Spain as a historically Catholic nation to uphold the social reign of Christ;
– warning against liberal erosion or masonic conspiracy denounced by prior popes;
– binding of the new co-cathedral to explicit manifestations of the doctrine of Christ the King against modern ideologies.
This silence is damning. The Church’s pre-1958 magisterium would not treat the political and religious battle as neutral background. Here, in the eve of the conciliar upheaval, we see the new style:
– sacred language;
– sacramental and hierarchical framework;
– but no militant affirmation of Christ’s public rights, no clear denunciation of the enemies systematically exposed by Pius IX and St. Pius X.
The supernatural is veiled in general piety, while practical decisions take their bearings from concordats, arrangements, and “pastoral” convenience. This ethos will blossom at and after the Council into:
– “religious liberty” as a supposed right to public error;
– ecumenism that erases the dogma of the one Church;
– dialogue with secular states that no longer even nominally recognize Christ.
The tiny text thus stands as a prelude: the kingship of Christ is reduced to decorative preface; the kingship of the conciliar humanist project will follow.
Abuse of Threatened Penalties: When Usurped Authority Intimidates the Faithful
The conclusion of the constitution is striking:
– It asserts:
– future and present validity;
– derogation of all contrary norms;
– prohibition to tear or corrupt the document;
– full legal force to authenticated copies;
– penalties for those who would despise or resist these decrees.
Such formulae were, in the hands of true Roman Pontiffs, noble guarantors of juridical security. In the hands of the first antipope of the conciliar sequence:
– They become a rehearsal of spiritual blackmail:
– “Whoever resists is guilty.”
– Later extended: “Whoever criticizes the Council, the new rites, the ecumenical openness, resists the ‘Spirit’ and the ‘Pope’.”
From the integral Catholic standpoint:
– Authority is real only when exercised within the limits set by Christ and the deposit of faith.
– A document that in se merely structures a diocese could be obeyed if proceeding from a legitimate pope.
– However, once it is historically evident that the signer:
– promotes or prepares a revolution incompatible with prior doctrine;
– uses his claim to the papacy to shield modernist agendas;
he falls under the theological principle that a manifest heretic cannot hold the office. His decrees lack the divine guarantee; their threats cannot bind consciences against the prior magisterium.
Thus, even this small text, read in light of later deeds, illustrates the inversion:
– The usurper clothes himself with all signs of papal majesty to consolidate control over structures;
– those structures are then used to persecute fidelity to the faith of all ages.
Integral Catholic Response: Reject the Modernist Usurpation, Preserve the Substance
What, then, is the right attitude toward such a document from the standpoint of integral pre-1958 Catholic doctrine?
1. Distinguish the legitimate object from the illegitimate authority:
– In itself, uniting titles or erecting a co-cathedral is a morally indifferent or potentially salutary administrative action.
– Such acts, however, have no supernatural guarantee when promulgated by one who inaugurates a doctrinal revolution.
2. Refuse the psychological manipulation:
– Do not be deceived by the beauty of Latin or solemn formulas.
– Recognize in them the technique by which the neo-church seized continuity of appearance to introduce rupture of substance.
3. Measure everything against the unchanging magisterium:
– Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors: condemn liberalism, religious indifferentism, subordination of the Church to the state, cult of “progress.”
– St. Pius X, Lamentabili and Pascendi: condemn evolution of dogma, historicism, democratization of doctrine, subjectivist exegesis.
– Pius XI, Quas Primas: demand public reign of Christ the King over nations.
Any authority that orients the Church in the opposite direction—by council, discipline, liturgy, or pastoral rhetoric—reveals itself as alien to the office established by Christ.
4. Maintain the true notion of obedience:
– Oboedientia non est caecitas, sed fidei custodia (obedience is not blindness, but the guardianship of faith).
– The faithful are bound to obey true pastors insofar as they transmit what they themselves received.
– They are not bound—and indeed are forbidden—to follow those who, under color of office, undermine the deposit.
5. Recognize the structural lesson:
– The conciliar sect did not appear ex nihilo in 1965; it was prepared by steps:
– first seizure of the papal name by John XXIII;
– use of legitimate canonical forms to stabilize his position;
– then deployment of that position to convoke a council and launch reforms contrary to prior doctrine.
– This 1959 constitution is one such preparatory step: technically acceptable content, but strategically reinforcing the usurper’s claim and habituating the world-wide hierarchy to obey him unquestioningly.
In conclusion, the document “TUDENSIS,” read through the lens of the integral Catholic faith, is not primarily about Vigo or a co-cathedral. It is an x-ray of how the conciliar usurpation advanced: by wrapping itself in the venerable robe of apostolic constitutions, while already marching toward the betrayal of Christ the King, the denial of the Church’s exclusive rights, and the enthronement of the naturalistic, ecumenical, masonic project so clearly condemned by the authentic Magisterium before 1958.
Source:
Tudensis (Vicensis) – Constitutio Apostolica Tudensi Ecclesiae titulus ac denominatio « Vicensis » iungitur; Templum B. Mariae Virg. in civitate Vigo ad Gradum concathedralis educitur, d. 9 m. Martii … (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025