In this Latin act dated 8 July 1959, Giovanni Roncalli (John XXIII), in his first year as claimant to the papacy, issues the apostolic letter “Essendiae in urbe,” designating the Blessed Virgin Mary under the titles “Mother of Good Counsel” and “Our Golden Lady” (“Goldene Madonna”) as the principal heavenly patroness of the diocese of Essen. The text praises the industrious modern city, recalls the ancient Marian shrine and its governance by an abbess, and, invoking “apostolic” authority, formally confirms Mary under these invocations as Patroness with the usual liturgical privileges attached to a diocesan principal patron. From the perspective of integral Catholic doctrine, this apparently pious act is in reality an early and revealing seal of usurpation: a sentimental liturgical gesture used to cloak the illegitimacy of Roncalli’s authority and to insert the revolutionary conciliar sect into a historically Catholic sanctuary.
Subtly Political Marianism as the Signature of a Usurper
The text of Essendiae in urbe is brief, but every line is saturated with assumptions that betray the paramasonic, post-1958 project.
Roncalli presents himself as Roman Pontiff and speaks in the solemn tone of Catholic acts: “ad perpetuam rei memoriam… certa scientia… de Apostolicae potestatis plenitudine… praecipuam Patronam confirmamus ac constituimus”. Yet the decisive fact—measured against pre-1958 doctrine and canonical theology—is that a public, manifest modernist cannot validly hold the Petrine office.
The principles are clear and remain untouched by any subsequent usurpation:
– Manifestus haereticus ipso facto caret iurisdictione (a manifest heretic by the fact itself is deprived of jurisdiction). This is reiterated by St. Robert Bellarmine, echoing the Fathers: the head cannot be outside the Body; a manifest heretic is outside; therefore he cannot be Pope.
– The 1917 Code, can. 188.4, teaches that a cleric who publicly defects from the faith loses his office by tacit resignation ipso facto, “without any declaration.”
– Catholic theology (as summarized by pre-conciliar authors and confirmed by papal teaching) affirms that the Apostolic See cannot be held by one who professes or promotes condemned errors; to attribute supreme teaching authority to a man openly aligned with condemned doctrines is to destroy the indefectibility of the Church, which is impossible.
Roncalli’s broader record (before and especially after 1958) is inseparable from:
– The rehabilitation of modernist tendencies solemnly condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi.
– The deliberate preparation of a “pastoral council” that would enthrone religious liberty, false ecumenism, and the cult of human dignity against the Syllabus of Pius IX and against the kingship of Christ defined by Pius XI in Quas primas.
– A programmatic relativization of dogma under the guise of “aggiornamento,” in direct continuity with the errors anathematized as the “synthesis of all heresies.”
Thus this letter’s solemn formulae are objectively void of papal authority. Its key function is not Marian devotion but the consolidation of an illegitimate jurisdictional claim over the faithful of Essen: an act of occupation draped in liturgical gold.
Instrumentalizing a Historic Shrine: Political Capture of Essen
At the factual level, the document narrates:
In the bustling city of Essen, where many trades are plied for gain and labor is very vigorous, the Blessed Mother of God has a venerable and noble ancient seat, as it were to call her sons away from the press of business to the duties and sweetness of religion and to raise their souls to immortal and eternal things.
This is rhetorical truth mixed with strategic manipulation.
– Essen’s “ancient noble seat” of Marian devotion arose in a thoroughly Catholic epoch, under an abbess, with authentic sacramental life, orthodox doctrine, and submission to the true Roman Pontiffs.
– The “Golden Madonna” stands within a sanctuary whose theological identity was forged centuries before modernism, before the liberal state cult, before the paramasonic post-war reconstruction of Europe.
Roncalli’s act superimposes the newborn “diocese of Essen” (created by Pius XII in his late pontificate) with its now-occupied structures and new hierarchy directly onto this sanctuary. He then proclaims himself the one who, “with certain knowledge” and from the “plenitude of apostolic power,” confirms Mary as patroness “of the whole diocese.”
Thus:
– What had been a Marian heart of a truly Catholic polity is co-opted and placed under the banner of a nascent neo-church.
– The Marian title becomes an administrative emblem for a jurisdiction that, within a few years, will be thoroughly integrated into the conciliar revolution.
– The genuine historical continuity of Marian piety is inverted: not the Essen shrine Catholicizing Roncalli, but Roncalli absorbing the shrine to legitimate his false “pontificate.”
This is the same technique repeatedly deployed by the conciliar sect: occupy Catholic places, feasts, titles, then surround them with a new theology that hollows their content while trading on their emotional capital.
Sentimental Devotion Masking Juridical Usurpation
On the linguistic level, Essendiae in urbe is revealing.
The text is drenched in pious, soft language:
– “clement and sweet Mother”
– “duties and sweetness of religion”
– “to raise minds to immortal and eternal things”
Yet several decisive elements are missing:
– No mention of sin, repentance, or the *necessity* of the state of grace.
– No reference to the Most Holy Sacrifice as propitiatory, nor to Eucharistic reparation—central in authentic Marian devotion.
– No allusion to the Social Reign of Christ expounded with iron clarity in Quas primas, although the industrial context of Essen cries out precisely for that doctrinal proclamation against secularism.
– No call to resist liberal and Masonic forces repeatedly unmasked by Pius IX in the Syllabus and by Leo XIII.
This is not accidental silence; it is method.
Authentic pre-1958 magisterial language, especially in the face of industrial modernity, insists:
– Christ is King not only of individuals, but of societies and states (Pius XI, Quas primas).
– The state must publicly recognize and obey Christ’s law; religious indifferentism and liberal “rights” against truth are condemned (Pius IX, Syllabus, esp. 15–18, 55, 77–80).
– Secret societies and Masonic undertakings are denounced as the organized “synagogue of Satan,” the architects of the assault on Church and family.
Roncalli’s text, by contrast:
– Mentions a mercantile, industrious city, yet omits any condemnation of the capitalistic idolatry, Masonic ideologies, or social apostasy that ravage such centers.
– Speaks of Mary as gentle Mother, but silences her role as terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata (terrible as an army set in battle array) in the war against heresy, apostasy, and revolution.
– Fabricates an apparently harmonious synthesis: industrious modernity peacefully embraced by a non-confrontational Marian veneer.
This sugary rhetoric serves to anesthetize vigilance. It is precisely the naturalistic “religionized humanism” that integral Catholic doctrine rejects:
– *Lex orandi, lex credendi* (the law of prayer is the law of belief): to sweeten Marian devotion while omitting the hard doctrines about error, judgment, and Christ’s kingship is to deform belief.
Therefore this letter is the liturgical-polished mask of a political and theological coup.
Theological Vacuum: Patronage Without Kingship, Sanctity Without Combat
On the theological level, several contradictions and omissions become striking.
1. Invocation of Mary, Rejection of Her Son’s Public Rights
Mary is invoked as “Mother of Good Counsel” and “Our Golden Lady,” but there is no word about:
– her mediation oriented to the absolute authority of Christ over nations;
– her role in defending the faithful against systematic modernist corruption;
– the duty of pastors to enforce Catholic truth and discipline under her patronage.
In pre-1958 teaching, Marian patronage is never separated from the rights of Christ the King and from the teaching authority of the Church that condemns error. Pius XI states unambiguously that peace cannot come until individuals and states submit to the reign of Christ; he denounces secularism as a “plague” that must be countered liturgically and doctrinally.
Essendiae in urbe is silent. The industrial city is praised; Mary’s sweetness is exalted; the new diocesan structure is ornamented. But the rebellion of modern states, the heresies of liberalism, the Masonic war on the Church are not mentioned once.
This is not a neutral omission. It is a theological falsification: Marian devotion without militancy, without dogmatic edge, without the Cross.
2. No Warning Against Modernist “Sacraments”
By 1959, the anti-church operators are already preparing the destruction of the Roman rite and the creation of new rites and “ordinations” that will, in short order, cripple sacramental validity.
Yet in this act:
– There is no call to the faithful of Essen to cling firmly to the authentic Roman liturgy as the unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary.
– No admonition to discern between true priests and those who will serve a coming modernist cult.
– No hint that Marian patronage demands doctrinal and liturgical fidelity as a condition for her protection.
Instead, the modernist usurper speaks as if every structural innovation he authorizes is automatically Catholic, and Marian veneration can be invoked to bless it.
In reality:
– Patronage declarations by a non-pope confer no supernatural guarantee.
– To attach the name of the Mother of God to structures that will soon propagate religious liberty, ecumenism, and liturgical sacrilege is to abuse her name as a shield for apostasy.
3. Absence of Any Anti-Modernist Note
Integral Catholic magisterial acts, especially from Pius IX to Pius XII, are deeply conscious of the doctrinal battle:
– Pius IX’s Syllabus condemns rationalism, indifferentism, liberalism, the separation of Church and state, and the reconciliation of the papacy with “modern civilization.”
– St. Pius X in Lamentabili and Pascendi anathematizes the notion that dogmas evolve, that authority arises from below, that faith is a mere sentiment, that Scripture is subject to “critical” subversion.
– Pius XI and Pius XII constantly expose communism, secularism, and Freemasonry as mortal enemies of Christ and His Church.
Roncalli’s letter, issued at the very threshold of his conciliarized program, is devoid of any such combativeness. It is serene, administrative, and sentimental. This tone is itself the signal:
– A Marianism that refuses to name and condemn enemies is not Catholic Marianism.
– A jurisdiction that speaks of immortal goods yet hides the concrete doctrinal and moral obligations has already surrendered to naturalism.
Symptom of the Conciliar Revolution: Marian Cloak Over the Abomination
From a symptomatic perspective, Essendiae in urbe is a textbook example of the conciliar method:
1. Canonical Formalism as Tool of Revolution
The letter is meticulously clothed in canonical formulae:
– “We decree, establish, declare… notwithstanding anything to the contrary.”
– Assertion of full apostolic power, perpetual validity, nullity of any contrary act.
This is juridical absolutism employed by one who is simultaneously preparing to relativize every dogma, every prior condemnation, every exclusive claim of the Catholic Church.
It amounts to:
– demanding submission in devotional and disciplinary details,
– while planning to dissolve substantive Catholic teaching into a new, humanitarian religion.
2. Co-opting Authentic Piety
The choice of the “Golden Madonna” is no accident:
– It is a beloved image in the Ruhr region, connected to centuries of Catholic life.
– To name Mary under this local title as diocesan patroness is emotionally powerful and wins instant acceptance from the simple faithful.
Precisely for that reason, the neo-church seizes it:
– Once Marian symbolism is bound to the newly configured conciliar structures, resistance to those structures appears as resistance to Mary herself.
– The faithful are psychologically predisposed to think: “This diocese, this bishop, this ‘pope’ honors Our Lady; therefore they must be Catholic.”
Thus the betrayal is mediated through true devotions emptied of doctrinal content and reattached to a foreign body.
3. Silence as Theological Strategy
The gravest accusation is silence.
In a context where:
– liberal democracies,
– Masonic forces,
– Protestant and schismatic “ecumenism,”
– and theological modernism
are openly advancing, this act:
– never invokes the Syllabus;
– never echoes Pius X’s denunciations;
– never reaffirms the exclusive claims of the Catholic Church against false religions;
– never warns against secularism’s capture of laws, education, and public life.
In light of pre-1958 teaching, such systematic omission is not pastoral prudence; it is complicity.
Qui tacet consentire videtur (he who is silent is seen to consent). Here, silence functions as a doctrinal betrayal: the usurper uses Marian words to cover his refusal to speak the hard truths defined by his predecessors.
Mary’s Name Abused to Legitimize the Conciliar Sect
It must be stated clearly:
– Marian patronage is real and powerful only within the bosom of the true Church, united to the perennial doctrine and valid sacraments of the Roman See.
– When an antipope, emerging from the very tendencies condemned as modernist, presumes to legislate Marian patronages, he is not augmenting Our Lady’s honor, but attempting to steal her mantle to clothe his own usurpation.
In Essendiae in urbe:
– The Blessed Virgin is presented as consoling mother; yet her rights as Queen in the service of Christ the King’s social reign are not asserted.
– No warning is given that loyalty to her implies rejection of doctrinal novelties, ecumenical relativism, democratization of authority, and the cult of man.
– No indication is made that true Marian devotion demands adherence to the very anti-modernist doctrines Roncalli and his successors will proceed to undermine in practice.
Therefore:
– The document is theologically bankrupt: it offers no substantive teaching beyond a bureaucratic designation.
– Spiritually, it is poisonous: it initiates the pattern wherein the conciliar sect hides its apostasy behind Marian and “traditional” symbols.
The integral Catholic response must be:
– to honor Our Lady of Good Counsel and the Golden Madonna precisely by refusing to let her be conscripted into the neo-church.
– to adhere to the pre-1958 magisterium that unites Marian devotion to the full, hard doctrine of Christ the King, the exclusivity of the Catholic Church, and the unchanging sacramental and moral order.
– to expose as invalid and usurped such acts of “patronage” when they proceed from manifestly modernist anti-popes and serve to consolidate the abomination of desolation within occupied sanctuaries.
Non licet tibi (it is not permitted to you): these solemn words apply, not to Mary’s true titles, but to the illegitimate hand that dares to sign them while plotting the revolution against her Son’s Church.
Source:
Essendiae in urbe, Litterae Apostolicae Beata Maria Virgo, nomine Boni Consilii Matris et « Dominae Nostrae Aureae », seu vulgo « Goldene Madonna », Invocata, in Praecipuam Caelestem Patronam Totius D… (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025