In this coronation homily of 4 November 1958, Angelo Roncalli (John XXIII) addresses the cardinals, bishops, clergy, and faithful, presenting his self-understanding as Roman Pontiff through the image of the Good Shepherd; he distances himself from worldly expectations of a “political” or merely diplomatic pope, insists on pastoral meekness and humility as defining traits, evokes universal missionary concern and unity under one shepherd, and links his ministry to the model of St Charles Borromeo as bishop-reformer. Behind a pious biblical and traditional vocabulary, this discourse inaugurates a conception of the papal office in which sentimental “pastorality” and horizontal human considerations are quietly exalted over the full, juridical, doctrinal, and kingly authority of Christ and His Vicar, thereby opening the door to the conciliar subversion that will soon devastate the visible structures of the Church.

---

The Coronation Homily as Programmatic Manifesto of a New Religion

From Petrine Authority to Sugary Pastorality: A Fatal Shift

Already in this first public programmatic act, Roncalli reveals the principle that will govern the emerging conciliar sect: a strategic dilution of the papal office from divinely constituted monarch and guardian of dogma into a vaguely emotive “Good Shepherd” figure, measured by the expectations, sensitivities, and perceptions of “modern man.”

Key elements:

– He lists various expectations some have of a pope—statesman, diplomat, administrator, intellectual—only to relativize them in favour of a primacy of “pastoral” meekness and affective closeness.
– He heavily leans on the image of the Good Shepherd (John 10), calling Christ the door and asserting that only through the Roman Pontiff can one enter the sheepfold; but this is immediately coated in language of tenderness and affability, detached from the note of sovereign authority and dogmatic intransigence.
– He sets as central motto the words of Christ: “Discite a me, quia mitis sum et humilis corde” (“Learn of Me, for I am meek and humble of heart”), elevating “meekness and humility” as the supreme hermeneutic of his pontificate and instrument of influence even in temporal affairs.

On the surface, this seems orthodox; it uses biblical imagery and evokes a classic spiritual theme. Yet precisely here lies the programmatic deceit. The whole substance of the papal munus, as defined by Vatican I and the constant Magisterium, is silently displaced from its essential function—*custos fidei, judex erroris, monarchia supernaturalis* (guardian of the faith, judge of error, supernatural monarchy)—towards a sentimental and horizontal “pastoral” posture. This is the embryo of the later slogan “pastoral, not doctrinal,” by which the conciliar revolution sought to relativize perennial dogma and moral law.

Pius XI in Quas Primas (1925.12.11) solemnly taught that peace and order are only possible when individuals and states publicly recognize and submit to the social Kingship of Christ, and that the Church demands full liberty and independence as a perfect society, possessing divine right to teach, rule, and sanctify. The coronation homily of Roncalli, while uttered at the very apex of a rite that historically expressed this regal authority, conspicuously refuses to proclaim this royal and judicial aspect in its integral sharpness. Instead of reasserting the rights of Christ the King over nations and law—so gravely attacked in the mid-20th century—he chooses a soft-focus discourse on personal meekness. This shift is not accidental; it is the signal.

Factual Level: Selective Truths in the Service of a New Direction

1. Roncalli correctly recalls:
– The Petrine succession: meeting at the tomb of Peter; succession to his “supreme office.”
– The image of the Good Shepherd as applied analogically to the papal office.
– The missionary dimension: reference to “other sheep… that are not of this fold” (John 10:16).
– The venerable figure of St Charles Borromeo as model bishop, champion of the Council of Trent.

2. Yet these true elements are carefully embedded in a configuration that:

– Avoids any explicit reaffirmation of the condemnations of liberalism, indifferentism, naturalism, and Freemasonry solemnly taught by Gregory XVI, Pius IX (Syllabus), Leo XIII, St Pius X (Lamentabili, Pascendi), Benedict XV, Pius XI, and Pius XII.
– Ignores the documented, mortal danger of Modernism, condemned as “the synthesis of all heresies” by St Pius X, which by 1958 had not disappeared but entrenched itself more deeply in seminaries, universities, and episcopates.
– Reduces impending duties to an interior moral style (meekness/humility) rather than objective, juridical, and dogmatic obligations: to judge, condemn, excommunicate, and extirpate error; to demand from rulers public submission to Christ; to defend the independence and rights of the Church with the intransigence demanded by the Syllabus.

3. The homily is delivered at a moment when:
– Secular atheistic regimes persecute the Church.
– Masonic and socialist forces, clearly denounced by Pius IX and Leo XIII, infiltrate political and cultural structures.
– The doctrinal assault of ecumenism, biblical relativism, and liturgical subversion is already at work.

A coronation address faithful to integral Catholic doctrine would have:
– Proclaimed the rights of God and Christ the King over all nations (Quas Primas).
– Reasserted the Syllabus’ rejection of religious indifferentism, separation of Church and state, false liberties, and the usurping authority of the state over education, marriage, and ecclesiastical appointments.
– Reaffirmed Lamentabili and Pascendi, warning that all attempts to evolve, democratize, or historicize dogma are accursed.
– Announced an implacable campaign against Modernism and Freemasonry as enemies of Christ and His Church.

Roncalli does none of this. The omissions are more eloquent than his phrases.

Linguistic Level: The Soft Vocabulary of Coming Apostasy

The rhetoric of this homily is an exquisite instrument of transition. Its key features betray the incipient mentality of the conciliar sect:

1. Ambiguity and Elasticity:
– He says there are many who imagine different “types” of pope (diplomat, administrator, etc.) and gently corrects them. However, he does not anchor the papal identity clearly in the dogmatic definition of Vatican I (Pastor Aeternus), which presents the Roman Pontiff as possessing supreme, full, immediate, and universal jurisdiction, and infallibility when defining doctrines of faith and morals.
– Instead of precise juridical and doctrinal language, he opts for a humanistic description of pastoral attitude.

2. Sentimental Pastorality:
– Constant emphasis on sweetness, comfort, tenderness, tears, consolation.
– The Good Shepherd is presented above all as someone “loving and weeping” with his brethren.
– The stress on being “mitis et humilis” is isolated from Christ’s simultaneous and inseparable attributes: legislator, judge, king, scourge of the temple, condemner of Pharisees and false teachers.

Such one-sided presentation is, in this context, a rhetorical weapon. It prepares a concept of pope and Church where:
– Condemnation of error appears “un-evangelical” or contrary to meekness.
– Anathema, excommunication, juridical precision, and doctrinal clarity are de facto delegitimized by appeal to sentiment.
– “Dialogue” and “understanding” will replace the apostolic command: “He that believeth not shall be condemned” and “If any one preach a gospel contrary… let him be anathema.”

3. Horizontalism in Disguise:
– When he invites the faithful to pray that the pope may grow in meekness and humility, he links such virtues to “very great benefits” also “in human relationships… social and earthly matters.” This subtly shifts Christian virtues from supernatural end (salvation of souls) towards temporal harmonization.
– The result is a naturalistic moralism cloaked in pious language, a preparation for the post-1958 cult of man, which will explode in the speeches and actions of his successors in the conciliar structures.

The language is orthodox in words, heterodox in emphasis, poisonous in trajectory. *Verba catholica, mens modernistica* (Catholic words, modernist mind).

Theological Level: Contradiction with Pre-1958 Magisterium

Measured rigorously against the unchangeable Catholic doctrine prior to 1958, this homily reveals core deviations and dangerous silences.

1. Papal Office as Monarchia and Judicium

– Vatican I (1870) defined that the Roman Pontiff has:
– Supreme and full power of jurisdiction over the universal Church.
– The duty to guard, expound, and defend the deposit of faith; to judge controversies of faith; to condemn errors.
– Pius IX’s Syllabus explicitly condemns the proposition that popes and councils have erred in matters of faith and morals, and the idea that their power is merely administrative or subject to civil power.
– St Pius X in Pascendi and Lamentabili commands the use of ecclesiastical authority against Modernists, insisting the hierarchy repress their doctrines.

Roncalli’s homily:
– Downplays the juridical and magisterial rigor of the papal office.
– Does not mention the duty to condemn and to wield spiritual authority against heresy.
– Reduces the core to “pastoral” sweetness.

This is not a simple incompleteness due to genre; it is a programmatic minimization. A coronation homily is precisely where a pontiff should publicly affirm his doctrinal and juridical mandate. Its absence is theological symptom, not accidental omission.

2. Silence on the Social Kingship of Christ

Pius XI in Quas Primas teaches:
– Christ must reign not only over individuals but over families and states.
– States have the duty to publicly honour and obey Christ and His Church.
– Separation of Church and State as a principle is condemned.
– Liberalism, laicism, and religious indifferentism are denounced as sources of societal ruin.

Roncalli:
– At the very throne from which Christ’s Kingship over nations should be proclaimed, does not reiterate these truths.
– Reduces potential political and social impact to the pope’s personal gentleness influencing human relations.

This omission anticipates the later betrayal in Dignitatis Humanae and the ecumenical-subjectivist apostasy of the conciliar sect. The coronation speech is the first movement of that symphony of surrender.

3. Ignoring the War Against Modernism

St Pius X’s Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi (1907) condemned:
– The evolution of dogma.
– Reduction of revelation to experience.
– Historical relativization of dogma.
– Subjection of Scripture and Magisterium to so-called “scientific criticism.”

He imposed an anti-modernist oath, recognizing Modernism as pervasive, hidden, and subversive.

By 1958:
– Those condemned tendencies are resurging, particularly in biblical institutes, seminaries, and among theologians who will become leaders of the coming council.

Roncalli:
– Says nothing about defending the flock from these wolves.
– Uses the figure of the Good Shepherd but empties it of its essential dimension: to “keep away the wolf” by doctrinal severity and disciplinary sanctions.

A Good Shepherd who will not name wolves, condemn their errors, nor drive them out is not the image of Christ, but a counterfeit shepherd preparing an “ovile” for another spirit.

Symptomatic Level: The Homily as Birth Certificate of the Conciliar Sect

From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, this homily is a prophetic symptom. Its content, tone, and omissions prefigure the essential marks of the subsequent conciliar religion:

1. From Objective Truth to Pastoral Subjectivism

– Objective, defined dogma is not denied verbally; it is transfused into a rhetoric where “pastoral” attitude relativizes doctrinal clarity.
– This anticipates the future claim: “We have not changed doctrine; only the pastoral approach.” In reality, the pastoral key is used as Trojan horse to empty doctrine of binding force.

2. From Church as Perfect Society to Church as Emotional Community

Pre-1958 doctrine:
– The Church is a *societas perfecta*, with divine constitution, juridical structure, and coercive authority.
– She legislates, judges, imposes penalties, and demands submission.

Roncalli’s homily:
– Presents above all a community gathered around a humble and gentle figure, consoled by his tears, inspired by his meekness.
– Juridical language, rights of the Church, condemnations of error, are absent.

This anthropology of the Church as primarily emotional family rather than juridical and doctrinal society is the root of:
– Synodalist democratization.
– False ecumenism (Church as one community among others).
– Moral relativism disguised as “accompaniment.”

3. The Manipulation of Tradition

He invokes:
– The tomb of Peter.
– The Gospel of John.
– St Charles Borromeo, great Tridentine reformer and model of episcopal holiness.

But their meaning is inverted.

– The Good Shepherd is used not to justify doctrinal intransigence, but to soften it.
– St Charles, who enforced Tridentine discipline, reformed clergy, imposed strict seminarian formation, fought abuses, and defended Catholic doctrine against Protestantism, is rhetorically annexed to a program tending towards irenic ecumenism and doctrinal laxity.

This is the method of Modernism condemned by St Pius X: retain words, alter meanings. Use Catholic symbols as décor for a new religion.

The Central Peril: Omission of the Supernatural End and the Gravity of Error

Most devastating is what is not said.

– No mention of:
– The Four Last Things: death, judgment, heaven, hell.
– The necessity of remaining in the state of grace.
– The danger of heresy, apostasy, and mortal sin.
– The absolute obligation to belong to the one true Church for salvation (understood according to Catholic doctrine, not relativized).
– The intrinsic evil of false religions.

– Instead:
– Emphasis on consolations amidst earthly anxieties.
– Confidence that mere cultivation of meekness and humility in the pope will bring great benefits, including social.

This silence is not neutral. When God’s absolute rights, the horror of sin, and the necessity of true faith are not proclaimed by the one who assumes Peter’s seat, the vacuum is filled by:
– Naturalistic humanitarianism.
– Religious relativism.
– A practical denial of the dogma that outside the Church there is no salvation, as infallibly taught by the Magisterium.

The Syllabus explicitly condemns:
– The idea that man may find the way of salvation in any religion (proposition 16).
– The notion that the state should be separated from the Church (55).
– The reconciliation of the papacy with modern liberalism and so-called progress (80).

Roncalli’s tone and omissions prepare precisely such a “reconciliation.” The coronation becomes not the enthronement of the defender of the Syllabus, but the first act of its eclipse within the visible structures later occupied by the conciliar sect.

The Misused Image of the Gate: Exclusivity Without Consequences

Roncalli states (accurately in words) that Christ is the gate and that:
“Hoc in Iesu Christi ovile, nonnisi Summo Pontifice ductore, quisquam ingredi potest; et homines tum solummodo, cum ei coniunguntur, tuto possunt salvi fieri, quandoquidem Romanus Pontifex Vicarius est Christi, eiusque in terris personam gerit.”

“Into this sheepfold of Jesus Christ no one can enter except under the guidance of the Supreme Pontiff; and men only then can be safely saved when they are united with him, since the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ, and bears His person on earth.”

This sentence, isolated, is doctrinally sound in the traditional sense. But:

– It is uttered by a man whose subsequent acts and policies (convoking a council oriented towards aggiornamento, promoting ecumenical openness, rehabilitating condemned theologians) will dissolve, in practice, the exclusivity he here verbally affirms.
– There is no coherent threat: no assertion that those who reject papal authority or Catholic dogma incur condemnation or separation from salvation.
– Thus the gate-image is used without its corresponding teeth: an exclusivity proclaimed rhetorically but destined to be undermined by the program he inaugurates.

This is typical of modernist strategy condemned by St Pius X: affirm and empty.

St Charles Borromeo: Tradition Appropriated Against Itself

Roncalli solemnly aligns his coronation with the feast of St Charles and underlines:
– His role in implementing the Council of Trent.
– His example as “teacher of bishops.”

Yet:
– St Charles is the icon of uncompromising doctrinal, moral, and disciplinary renewal in direct opposition to Protestantism and laxity.
– A truly Borromean successor would have:
– Reaffirmed the Tridentine decrees against Protestant errors and all attacks on the Mass, sacraments, and discipline.
– Fought the infiltration of liberalism and Modernism with ruthless clarity.
– Defended the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and Latin liturgy against any deforming experiment.

Instead, this homily is the threshold to a process leading within a few years to:
– The conciliar revolution.
– The fabrication of a new rite that attacks the propitiatory, sacrificial, priestly theology of the Mass.
– The unrestrained spread of Modernist theology that Trent and St Charles would have abhorred.

To invoke St Charles as patron while preparing conditions that will overturn his work is a profound symbolic perversion.

Conclusion: An Apparently Pious Beginning of Systemic Betrayal

From the standpoint of unchanging Catholic doctrine before 1958, this coronation homily:

– Uses Catholic language, Scripture, and the memory of saints.
– Asserts in words certain orthodox points (Petrine succession, Christ as Shepherd, papal role as gate).
– Yet is gravely deficient where a true Pontiff must be clearest:
– No ringing affirmation of the Syllabus and the Social Kingship of Christ.
– No resolute declaration of war against Modernism and liberalism.
– No strong reiteration of the condemnations of false religions and indifferentism.
– No insistence on the supernatural end: salvation of souls, avoidance of hell, adherence to dogma.
– No proclamation of the Church’s rights as perfect society, independent of the state.

Instead, it gently enthrones:
– A subjective, emotive “pastoral” ethos.
– A language that neutralizes the Church’s condemnatory and judicial function.
– A style that will be used to justify the conciliar ideology: ecumenism, religious liberty, democratization, evolution of doctrine, and the cult of man.

Lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief). The coronation homily is part of the highest “lex orandi” of the papal inauguration. When this prayerful proclamation becomes ambiguous, sugary, and silent about the most crucial battles of the time, it signals an alteration of belief in germinal form.

Such a beginning, judged by the luminous doctrines of Pius IX, Leo XIII, St Pius X, Pius XI, and Pius XII, is not a harmless stylistic nuance; it is the subtle inauguration of a counter-mission. Under the guise of the Good Shepherd, the future conciliar structure begins to dismantle the fortress of integral Catholic faith and prepare the flock for dispersion.

---

Source:
Homilia in die coronationis fabita, d. 4 m. Novembris a. 1958, Ioannes PP. XXIII   (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025