Vatican portal presents the Latin text of the apostolic exhortation “Sacrae Laudis” of antipope John XXIII (January 6, 1962), which solemnly calls the entire clergy “in peace and communion with the Apostolic See” to recite the Divine Office with greater fervour for the “happy outcome” of the Second Vatican Council. John XXIII frames Vatican II as a “new Epiphany” and “new Pentecost,” exhorts priests to unite daily prayers and the Most Holy Sacrifice with this intention, links the Breviary with the marks of the Church (*una, sancta, catholica, apostolica*), and presents the Council as an organic flowering of Tradition aimed at adapting ecclesiastical discipline to “the needs of this age” and attracting separated communities back to unity. In reality this document is a programmatic attempt to conscript authentic Catholic devotion, liturgy, and hierarchical obedience into serving the conciliar subversion of the Church.

---

Liturgical Captivity: Authentic Piety in the Service of a Conciliar Program

From Authentic Devotion to Instrument of an Ecumenical Revolution

Already in the opening paragraphs, John XXIII praises the universal thanksgiving offered for the convocation of Vatican II and demands that this chorus of sacrae laudis never cease. He proposes as “most suitable” the intensified recitation of the Divine Office by the clergy as an oblation for the success of the Council:

munus ferventiores Deo admovendi supplicationes pro felici Concilii exitu, ad ipsos potissimum pertinere

At the level of bare words, exhortation to faithful recitation of the Divine Office is, in itself, Catholic. But here it is cunningly subordinated to a pre-defined end: the “happy outcome” of an already ideologically framed Council. The very heart of priestly prayer is thus taken hostage to legitimize a pre-announced aggiornamento.

The text indicates three chief goals:

– that Catholic faith be “further strengthened”;
– that the laws of the Church be “more aptly adapted to the needs of this age”;
– that the faithful, “with united wills and forces,” strive for a holier life, in a context of expected worldwide attention.

The decisive ambiguity lies in the second point. To invoke strengthening of faith while at once making “adaptation to this age” an explicit structural goal is to plant in the same soil two opposed principles: immutable doctrine and historically-conditioned fluidity. Pre-1958 Magisterium condemned precisely this modernist evolutionism. St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi anathematized the thesis that doctrine and ecclesiastical structures must be re-shaped according to historical consciousness and modern needs. Sacrae Laudis quietly reintroduces this condemned principle under devotional and liturgical language.

Thus from the outset, authentic clerical devotion is being redirected to fertilize the conciliar project that would enthrone religious liberty, false ecumenism, and the cult of man—errors solemnly pre-condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX and the entire pre-conciliar Magisterium. The sacrificial prayer of priests is summoned not to uphold the unchanging order, but to midwife its systematic dismantling.

Language of Illusion: “New Epiphany,” “New Pentecost,” and the Myth of Continuity

One of the most revealing passages is John XXIII’s rhetorical identification of Vatican II with Epiphany and Pentecost:

Re quidem ipsa nonne Concilium Oecumenicum, praeter id quod est nova et praeclara Pentecostes, vera etiam novaque Epiphania dicenda est?

Here, two immense symbolic operations occur:

1. Vatican II is sacralized in advance as a quasi-revelatory event, in continuity with Pentecost and Epiphany, before it has taught anything concrete.
2. To resist or even question the Council is implicitly to resist the Holy Ghost and the manifestation of Christ Himself.

This is pure ideological immunization. A future, content-unknown Council is dogmatically framed as a theophanic grace. Any later objections to its liberal, ecumenist, and modernist outcomes can thus be stigmatized as disobedience to the Spirit. This perverse strategy stands in radical contrast to the sober pre-conciliar theology of councils: infallible only under strict conditions, always subordinate to prior defined dogma, never a self-legitimizing “new Pentecost.”

Moreover, invoking Pentecost and Epiphany while preparing a Council that will contradict the moral, social, and ecclesiological teaching of the Magisterium—especially of Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, and Pius XI—is blasphemous instrumentalization of sacred history. Pius XI in Quas Primas solemnly taught that true peace and order can exist only under the public reign of Christ the King, and explicitly condemned secular neutrality and religious indifferentism. Vatican II, whose “happy outcome” Sacrae Laudis demands prayers for, would instead endorse religious liberty in the liberal sense and relativize the obligation of Catholic confessional States—positions directly condemned in the Syllabus (propositions 77–80).

Thus, Sacrae Laudis uses the language of “new Epiphany” to prepare acceptance of a program that effectively dethrones Christ the King from public life. This is not development; it is betrayal wrapped in pious phrasing.

Appropriation of the Four Marks to Cover a New Religion

John XXIII dares to link the daily Divine Office and the conciliar intention with the four marks of the Church:

adhortatio haec… arte cum quattuor illis notis cohaerere videtur… quibus Christus Iesus Ecclesiam insignitam voluit; quarum vi, eadem per viginti saeculorum decursum semper fuit et est una, sancta, catholica et apostolica

This statement is double-edged:

– It correctly affirms that the true Church is always and only *una, sancta, catholica, apostolica*.
– It implicitly identifies the forthcoming conciliar ecclesiality with that same unbroken Church.

But Vatican II and its implementation produced:

– “religious liberty” in direct opposition to the Church’s exclusive claim (condemned in Syllabus proposition 15, 77–80);
– “ecumenism” that treats heretical and schismatic communities as “means of salvation” instead of objects of conversion;
– liturgical deconstruction culminating in a rite that obscures the propitiatory nature of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass;
– anthropocentric cult culminating in the “Church of the New Advent,” world-religion summits, and syncretistic ceremonies.

By anticipating identification of this future construct with the four-marked Church, Sacrae Laudis functions as a rhetorical bridge for the hermeneutics of continuity: the claim that nothing essential has changed, that all novelties are implicit in Tradition. This claim is explicitly rejected by the anti-modernist Magisterium. Pius X condemned (Lamentabili 58–64) the notion that truth evolves with man and that dogma must be reinterpreted according to progress.

Therefore, the exhortation is not a neutral devotional text. It is a calculated step in the construction of the “conciliar sect,” which parasitically occupies the visible structures while claiming the notes of the true Church it systematically contradicts.

Instrumentalizing the Divine Office: From “Sacrificium Laudis” to Political Program

The exhortation insists that nothing is more excellent for clergy, after the Most Holy Sacrifice, than the Divine Office:

praeter cotidianum Missae Sacrificium… nihil praestantius Divina Laude seu Divino Officio sacris administris esse posse

This is orthodox in itself and reflects perennial teaching. However, John XXIII does two grave things:

1. He yokes this highest Liturgical prayer to a specific temporal-political aim: the success of a future Council of adaptation and ecumenism.
2. He prescribes a special prayer to be inserted into the Horarium:

Acceptum tibi sit, Domine Deus, sacrificium laudis… pro felici exitu Concilii Oecumenici Vaticani secundi…

Thus the sacrificium laudis, which belongs to the Church as expression of her immutable faith, is co-opted as propaganda tool for the very initiative that will soon distort that faith in its public, juridical, and liturgical expression.

This is the “liturgical capture” characteristic of post-1958 paramasonic structures:

– Use sacred forms still perceived as Catholic to sanctify revolutionary content.
– Bind the consciences of priests to pray for success of an agenda not yet revealed but already ideologically framed.
– Conflate obedience to a council’s yet-unknown acts with obedience to God.

Pre-conciliar doctrine, especially as codified in the 1917 Code and papal teaching, never commands blind liturgical intercession for unspecified structural change. The Church prays for councils, yes—but always under the presupposition of fidelity to previous definitions, never for “renewal” understood as adaptation to the spirit of the age. Sacrae Laudis inverts this order: the will to change precedes, the invocation comes after as cosmetic sanctification.

Ecumenical Subtext: “Separated Communities” and the Betrayal of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

A crucial sentence unveils the ecumenical orientation:

maximopere cupit vitae suae divitias impertire iis christianorum communitatibus, quae… ab ea seiunctae sunt ac nondum pristinam unitatem redintegrarunt.

The text speaks of “Christian communities” separated from the Church, whose return is desired. At first glance, this seems compatible with the perennial desire for conversion. But the conciliar and post-conciliar context reveals a different intent:

– These communities are recognized as “Christian” in a positive, quasi-ecclesial sense, not as heretical/schismatic sects;
– The emphasis shifts from their return by abjuration of errors to a vague “restoration of unity,” linguistically mutual and symmetrical.

Pius IX in the Syllabus condemns the notion that Protestantism is merely another form of the same true religion (proposition 18), and pre-conciliar popes insist that unity can only be through return to the one true Church by renouncing errors. Sacrae Laudis aligns piety with the program that will be codified in Unitatis Redintegratio: the ecumenist abandonment of the dogmatic clarity of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.

Thus, the exhortation weaponizes priestly prayer in favour of an ecumenism which Pius XI had prophetically rejected in Mortalium Animos: any unity sought through compromise of doctrine is a betrayal, not a fruit of the Holy Ghost.

Idealized Clergy: Silence on Apostasy and Modernism

Note the exalted, sentimental portrait of the clergy:

– seminarians as “dear youths” preparing to implement the Council’s “most salutary laws”;
– priests depicted as fervent mediators, faithful custodians of Divine praise;
– bishops as noble successors of the Magi, led by a mystical star to Christ present in the conciliar assembly.

In all this saccharine elevation, one searches in vain for:

– any warning against Modernismus, already condemned as “synthesis of all heresies” by St. Pius X;
– any mention of the grave infiltration of liberal, rationalist, and masonic ideas in seminaries and episcopates;
– any call to doctrinal vigilance regarding the agenda, schemas, and periti shaping the Council;
– any reference to the Last Things, necessity of state of grace, danger of heresy, or judgment upon false shepherds.

This silence is itself a damning symptom. At the very threshold of the greatest doctrinal and liturgical upheaval in history, the supposed supreme pastor issues not a clarion call against wolves, but an irenic, emotive appeal that presupposes universal good will, minimises the doctrinal crisis, and diverts attention from the real danger: internal apostasy.

Compare with Pius X’s vigorous exposure of modernist clergy, professors, and bishops. He imposed the Oath against Modernism, created vigilance councils, and named errors directly. Sacrae Laudis, by contrast, anesthetizes: it speaks of “youthful ardour” and “holy joy,” while the conciliar machinery is already prepared to overturn the anti-modernist safeguards.

Silentium de modernismo signum est conniventiae. (Silence about modernism is a sign of complicity.)

Naturalistic Optimism versus the Kingship of Christ

Sacrae Laudis hints at a “new age” in the Church:

nos omnes iam aetatem ingressos esse novam… miram portendit rerum, quae ad animum pertinent, progressionem

This rhetoric of “new age” and “progress” echoes precisely the liberal optimism condemned in Syllabus 80, which rejects the idea that the Roman Pontiff can reconcile himself with modern liberalism and “modern civilization” understood as emancipation from Christ’s social reign.

In place of Pius XI’s solemn doctrine that states, laws, and public life must submit to the reign of Christ the King (Quas Primas), Sacrae Laudis orients priestly prayer toward a Council already designed to abandon confessional state, embrace religious pluralism in public life, and canonize “human rights” detached from the rights of God.

This is not accidental. The text’s tone is horizontal and sentimental: its central horizon is “the great expectation of men from all over the world,” not the vindication of Christ’s sovereign rights over nations. There is no echo of Pius IX’s relentless denunciation of Masonic and liberal plots against the Church, nor of the repeated teaching that civil society must recognize the one true Church.

This naturalistic optimism, dressed in liturgical and biblical imagery, serves to mask a radical relativization of the demands of Christ’s social kingship.

False Obedience: Binding Consciences to a Counterfeit Magisterium

The exhortation repeatedly insists on “peace and communion with the Apostolic See” and proposes union of clerical prayer with “our Pontiff John”:

quod simul cum Pontifice nostro Ioanne suppliciter a te petimus…

Here we reach the core perversion:

– True Catholic doctrine demands obedience to the Roman Pontiff when he teaches in continuity with his predecessors.
– But it strictly forbids obedience when someone, even appearing as Pope, promulgates novelties contrary to the defined faith.

The pre-1958 theologians (Bellarmine, others summarized in the Defense of Sedevacantism file) make clear: a manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church; if he defects from the faith, he loses authority. Pius IX’s anti-liberal documents and Pius X’s condemnations of modernism constitute a clear doctrinal line.

Sacrae Laudis, while not yet displaying the full later doctrinal rupture in its own wording, functions as moral preparation for that rupture by:

– urging unconditional spiritual solidarity with a man and a Council that will, in fact, oppose prior magisterial teaching;
– conflating loyalty to the Catholic faith with loyalty to a new program;
– leveraging the objective holiness of the Divine Office to sacralize subjective choices of a revolutionary leadership.

This is the counterfeit virtue of “obedience” that would later be demanded to accept religious liberty, “ecumenical” worship, and the deformation of the Most Holy Sacrifice into a protestantised assembly—precisely the kind of blind, indiscriminate obedience pre-conciliar moral theology rejects.

True obedience is always in fide et in veritate, never submission to a manifest departure from Tradition.

Conclusion: Sacrae Laudis as Pious Veil for the Conciliar Subversion

Viewed in the light of integral Catholic doctrine before 1958 and of the doctrinal, liturgical, and moral catastrophe that followed, Sacrae Laudis appears as:

– a strategic text that:
– co-opts the Divine Office and the genuine piety of priests;
– preemptively canonizes Vatican II as “new Pentecost” and “new Epiphany”;
– fuses the four marks of the Church with an impending revolutionary program;
– encourages an irenic, sentimental clerical mindset blind to modernist infiltration;
– orients devotion toward adaptation to “this age” and ecumenical illusions.

– an ideological instrument that:
– prepares acceptance of religious liberty, collegiality, false ecumenism;
– neutralizes resistance by wrapping novelty in the language of Tradition;
– substitutes naturalistic optimism for the militant doctrine of Christ’s kingship and the condemnation of liberalism and Masonry as taught by Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, and Pius XI.

What it omits—any warning against modernism, any reaffirmation of the Syllabus, any explicit insistence that Vatican II must be strictly bound to prior anti-liberal definitions—is more revealing than what it says. Its smooth Latinity and devotional appeals only underscore the betrayal: the sacred vocabulary of the true Church deployed to usher in the “conciliar sect” that would occupy her visible structures.

Therefore, from the standpoint of unchanging Catholic teaching, Sacrae Laudis is not a harmless exhortation to prayer; it is a liturgical and spiritual mobilization in favour of an enterprise that would, in its texts and implementation, objectively contradict the prior Magisterium and devastate the faith of millions. The Divine Office, the sacrificium laudis, belongs to the spotless Bride of Christ, not to the architects of a neo-church built upon the shifting sands of “this age.”

---

Source:
Sacrae Laudis   (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025