In this Latin letter, John XXIII responds to a collective message of the German hierarchy (Frings, Wendel, Döpfner and others) after their Fulda meeting. He congratulates them on pastoral initiatives, praises devotion to the Holy Tunic of Trier, exalts the planned Munich International Eucharistic Congress, commends aid to Catholics in the “Diaspora,” encourages outreach to non-Catholics, and links all this to his announced “ecumenical council,” expressing hope that its decisions will benefit individuals and nations and foster unity. Behind a façade of piety and benign courtesies, this text reveals the operative program of a new religion: the soft launch of the conciliar revolution, masking doctrinal relativization and ecclesiological subversion under sentimental devotions, bureaucratic optimism, and ecumenical rhetoric.
The Sentimental Manifesto of a New Religion
From Roman Pontificate to Public Relations Office
On the factual plane, this letter is brief, but it is architectonic. It stands at the threshold of the so‑called “Second Vatican Council” and displays, in nuce, the principles by which John XXIII began to dissolve the visible bastions of integral Catholic faith.
Key elements in the text (translations from the Latin original):
– John XXIII rejoices over the German bishops’ letter, calling their news consoling and praising their joint reflection at Fulda by the relics of St Boniface.
– He praises the exposition of the Holy Tunic in Trier as an occasion for pious crowds and as a sign to venerate Christ the King’s passion and the “unity of the Church” symbolized by the seamless garment.
– He exalts the upcoming Munich International Eucharistic Congress, confidently predicting “great fruits” and liturgical splendour.
– He presents the Eucharist as sacrament and symbol of unity in a way that anticipates its exploitation for ecumenical inclusion.
– He hails the announced “Oecumenica Synodus” (the council) and states:
“…deeply fixed in Our soul is the hope that the Ecumenical Synod will in more than one way and effectively be profitable to the whole world.”
He prays that prejudices be overcome so that what is decreed may aid not only individuals but nations in being re‑ordered according to “the most health-giving law of Christ.”
– He commends social and charitable works, especially in “Diaspora” regions; praises small Catholic communities surrounded by non-Catholics; lauds their churches, schools, and priests; and encourages them to be examples so that those “far away” may desire Catholic communion.
– He applauds efforts to approach those “who have left or do not know the legitimate fold of Christ,” and explicitly praises those who, with books, articles, sermons, and conversations, show the “august face” of the Catholic religion to the separated.
– He specially extols religious orders and congregations that labour in such apostolic and “missionary” efforts among non-Catholics.
– He ends invoking the Blessed Virgin, Marian shrines in Germany, and quoting Jude 20–21 as an exhortation to build upon their “most holy faith.”
At first glance: orthodox vocabulary, Marian references, Eucharistic piety, missionary-sounding phrases. But precisely here the deception lies. The letter’s omissions, tone, and subtext expose its true function: the spiritual disarmament of the once-Catholic hierarchy in preparation for the conciliar project, the *abominatio in loco sancto* (abomination in the holy place).
Programmatic Naturalism Hidden Behind Devotional Ornaments
What is striking is not what John XXIII says piously, but what he never says where Catholic doctrine demands precision and militancy.
1. There is not a single clear affirmation that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation (*extra Ecclesiam nulla salus*), defined by the Fourth Lateran Council and reiterated by Florence and countless pre-1958 magisterial acts.
2. There is no call to combat error, condemn heresies, or warn those outside the Church of the danger of damnation.
3. There is no mention of the duty of states to recognize and submit to the social reign of Christ the King, solemnly taught by Pius XI in Quas primas, who declared that peace is impossible without the public acceptance of Christ’s Kingship.
4. There is no denunciation of Freemasonry, laicism, Socialism, Communism, Liberalism, or Modernism, explicitly condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus Errorum and by St Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi.
5. There is no insistence on the immutability of dogma, the inerrancy of Scripture, the necessity of the Most Holy Sacrifice, the state of grace, or the Four Last Things.
Instead, there is a soothing humanitarianism: emphasis on pilgrimages, congresses, organization, charitable structures, harmonious cooperation, “dialogue” with separated brethren. It is the language of a religious NGO chieftain, not the successor of Pius IX, Leo XIII, St Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII.
This silence is not accidental. As St Pius X warned, Modernists are recognized not only by what they affirm, but by what they systematically omit: the sharp edges of dogma, the supernatural absolutes, the condemnations that protect the flock. Here, silence about the supernatural demands of the faith and about the enemies of the Church becomes the gravest accusation.
Preparing the German Episcopate for Capitulation
The German bishops addressed are not random names; they are architects and instruments of the coming revolution: Frings, Wendel, Döpfner, and others who would soon be celebrated as progressive heroes of the council. John XXIII’s letter is a paternal embrace, an ideological green light.
Observe the structure:
– He anchors their unity meeting at Fulda under the patronage of St Boniface, apostle of Germany and martyr for papal authority and Catholic exclusivity.
– He then empties Boniface’s example of militant doctrinal content. No word on his destruction of pagan temples, his fight against heresy, his submission to Roman discipline. Instead, the letter turns Boniface into a bland emblem of national and ecclesial concord.
– He connects this to the Holy Tunic exhibition and the Eucharistic Congress: mass events, crowds, symbols of unity — all perfectly suited to a spectacle Church, while omitting hard dogmatic teaching.
– He moves directly from such pious grandstanding to praising their enthusiasm for the “Oecumenica Synodus,” which he presents as a gift for the whole world.
Thus the rhetorical strategy: wrap an unprecedented “council” — whose true agenda is the demolition of the anti-liberal, anti-modernist fortress built by the pre-1958 magisterium — in incense, processions, and emotionally charged devotions. The German hierarchy are being groomed to trade Boniface’s sword for John XXIII’s handshake.
Perversion of “Unity”: From Conversion to Convergence
John XXIII speaks incessantly of “unity”: the Holy Tunic as symbol; the Eucharist as sign and engine of unity; the desire that separated brethren develop a stronger longing for unity; outreach to “other sheep.”
But what is missing?
– There is no clear statement that “unity” means a return of heretics and schismatics to the one true Church by abjuration of error and unconditional acceptance of all defined dogmas.
– There is no insistence, as Pius IX did against indifferentism, that it is an error to claim that any religion chosen by reason suffices for salvation or that Protestantism is simply another form of the same true religion.
– There is no reaffirmation, as the Syllabus does, that the Catholic Church alone is the true Church, and that all national or independent churches are condemned.
Instead, he praises those who show to non-Catholics the “august face of the Catholic religion” through books, talks, etc., with a language that anticipates the conciliar ecumenical program: present Catholicism attractively, “dialogue,” avoid polemics, omit condemnations, soften claims.
This is the mutation: *unitas* no longer as juridical and dogmatic unity in the one Church, but as a vague spiritual convergence. This shift is the root of the post-conciliar ecumenism which contradicts the integral magisterium. Pius IX explicitly condemned the notion that “good hope” should be entertained for all outside the Church as if they could remain there; Pius XI condemned pan-Christianity and “united fronts” in Mortalium animos. John XXIII’s text moves precisely in the opposite direction, under smile and blessing.
The Ecumenical Council as Trojan Horse
The passage on the “Oecumenica Synodus” is central:
He expresses a deep hope that the council will profit the entire world; begs for heavenly grace that human wills may be bent; asks that prejudices be overcome so that what is decided may help both individuals and nations “to be reformed” by the “health-giving law of Christ.”
On the surface, this might sound orthodox. But several elements betray the Modernist logic:
– The council is presented as an event for “the whole world,” a pastoral mega-spectacle whose primary horizon is horizontal, global utility — rather than as a defensive and offensive doctrinal instrument against concrete heresies.
– The key obstacle is framed as “praeiudicatae opiniones” — prejudices — in a way that conveniently includes doctrinal “rigidities” opposing the modernization he seeks.
– There is no word that the council’s task is to repeat, defend, or sharpen the prior anti-modernist teachings. Instead, the diffuse optimism and world-orientation anticipates the very “opening to the world” condemned in substance by previous Popes as Liberalism.
The letter thus functions as a preface to the deception later marketed as “hermeneutic of continuity”: in fact, it announces a praxis that will, in the name of pastorality and “openness,” neutralize the binding condemnations of Pius IX and St Pius X. And this corresponds exactly to the Modernist method condemned in Lamentabili: dogma is not formally denied; it is bypassed, drowned in new emphases, relativized by practice.
Charity Without Truth: The Comfortable Social Gospel
The praise for charitable works, especially in the “Diaspora,” reveals another integral feature of the emergent neo‑church: social activism as substitute for integral doctrine.
John XXIII commends:
– assistance to Catholics and non-Catholics alike;
– construction of churches and chapels;
– efforts to ensure Mass attendance and Catholic instruction for children;
– the zeal of priests, religious, and faithful in scattered communities.
All these, in themselves, are good on a natural level. But again, the essential is missing:
– No call to denounce the false sects dominating those regions;
– No exhortation to preach the necessity of conversion to the one true Church under pain of losing one’s soul;
– No reminder that all charity divorced from truth becomes naturalistic philanthropy.
Pre-1958 magisterium is explicit: Pius IX, Leo XIII, St Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII constantly connect social action with doctrinal clarity and warfare against error. Here, charity is celebrated in itself, as if its supernatural character did not depend on confessing the full Catholic faith. This is the sentimentalist humanitarianism that will later culminate in the cult of “human rights,” “dignity,” and “dialogue” preached by the conciliar sect, precisely contrary to the Syllabus’ condemnation of Liberal notions of liberty, equality of religions, and separation of Church and State.
Language as Smoke: Devout Vocabulary, Modernist Intent
On the linguistic level, the letter is a masterpiece of Modernist camouflage. It uses classical Latin and traditional formulas, but empties them by context and omission.
Notable traits:
– Excessive flattery: German bishops receive unqualified praise; no admonition for theological confusion, liturgical abuses, or flirtation with Modernism, which were already germinating vigorously.
– Evasive generalities: “health-giving law of Christ,” “august face of the Catholic religion,” “prejudices,” “benefit for the world” — all nebulous phrases fitting every liberal agenda.
– Hyper-optimistic tone: no sense of crisis, no awareness of the “synthesis of all heresies” (Modernism) condemned by St Pius X; contrariwise, a serene confidence in a council aligned with the world.
– Shift of emphasis from doctrinal exactness to affective motifs: “sweet consolation,” “devout crowds,” “beautiful shrines,” “celestial comforts.”
This is textbook Modernist rhetoric: retain the shell (piety, Latin, shrines, congresses) while infusing a new spirit (openness, convergence, humanitarianism, ecumenism). *Sub specie devotionis introducitur dissolutio* (under the appearance of devotion, dissolution is introduced).
Deliberate Silence Against Condemned Errors
Measured against the pre-1958 magisterium, the omissions become formally culpable.
Integral Catholic teaching had:
– Explicitly condemned religious indifferentism, naturalism, rationalism, Liberalism, socialism, communism, Freemasonry, separation of Church and State (Pius IX: Syllabus; Leo XIII: multiple encyclicals; St Pius X: Pascendi).
– Affirmed the Church as a perfect, sovereign society, superior to the State in spiritual matters, with innate rights not granted by civil power.
– Insisted that dogma is immutable, not subject to historicist evolution or adaptation to “modern conscience.”
John XXIII, writing in 1959 to bishops in a country ravaged by Protestantism, liberal democracy, and Masonic power, preparing a council declaredly meant to “update” (*aggiornare*) the Church, says nothing of any of this. No warning. No repetition of condemnations. Only a smiling invitation to a global ecclesial event and to soft ecumenical interactions.
This studied silence fulfills exactly the pattern condemned by St Pius X: the Modernist, who no longer attacks dogma frontally, but consigns the anti-liberal, anti-ecumenical tradition to oblivion, thus effectively abrogating it in practice. What the Syllabus anathematized (liberal “progress,” reconciliation with modern civilization) is here being introduced gently, by mood and by the project of the “Ecumenical Synod,” without one word of continuity with prior anathemas.
Apostolic Authority Instrumentalized for a Non‑Catholic Project
The letter is signed with all the external insignia of papal authority. Yet its direction, theology by omission, and programmatic orientation align with what the pre-1958 magisterium had already identified as the program of the enemies of the Church: subjection to “modern civilization,” religious liberty, ecumenism, and masonic humanitarianism.
Compare:
– Pius IX explicitly rejects the proposition that the Roman Pontiff can and must reconcile himself with progress, liberalism, and modern civilization (Syllabus, 80).
– John XXIII’s entire approach — culminating later in his opening speech to the council — is precisely an embrace of such reconciliation; this letter is an early specimen.
– St Pius X, in Pascendi, unmasks Modernists who wish to harmonize faith with the modern mind by transforming doctrine and ecclesial structures from within. John XXIII here solicits from future conciliar “experts” and “commissions” exactly this kind of adaptation, under the language of pastoral care and missionary zeal.
Thus, the authority of the Petrine office is rhetorically invoked to authorize what prior Popes had bound that office never to endorse. The contradiction is not accidental; it is systemic. When a man seated in the Roman See uses its prestige to legitimate a project effectively overturning the prior magisterium, the integral Catholic conscience recognizes a usurping program in action.
Ecclesiology Diluted: The Fold Without Walls
When John XXIII alludes to “other sheep” of John 10:16, he mentions:
“My thought now flies to those sheep who have left or do not know the legitimate fold of Christ, of whom Jesus Christ said: ‘Other sheep I have, that are not of this fold’.”
He affirms that many of them have upright consciences and thirst for religious truth; he praises those who, through publications and conversations, answer these needs and show them Catholicism.
What is missing?
– The dogmatic explanation that these “other sheep” must be brought into the one fold, the Catholic Church, by renouncing their sects.
– The clear statement that remaining outside the visible unity of the Church is objectively sinful and gravely dangerous to salvation.
– Any warning against the false opinion — condemned by Pius IX — that salvation is easily attainable in any religion.
Instead, the tone suggests a kind of mutual approach, an exchange, a pastoral accompaniment long before the word was popularized. This is the embryonic mentality of the post-conciliar ecumenical movement, condemned in substance by Pius XI in Mortalium animos as a betrayal of Catholic doctrine on the Church.
Marian Devotion as a Cloak for Doctrinal Erosion
The letter closes with an effusive invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the German shrines as “bulwarks of the faith” and “sources of grace,” then quotes Jude on building upon “your most holy faith.”
But what “most holy faith” is being promoted?
– Not the faith of the Syllabus, which condemns liberalism and religious liberty.
– Not the faith of Pascendi, which unmasks Modernism.
– Not the faith of Quas primas, which demands the public social Kingship of Christ and rejects secularist states.
– Not the faith of Lamentabili, which condemns historicism and evolution of dogma.
Instead, Marian language is exploited to anesthetize resistance while the ground is prepared for a council that would enthrone precisely those errors. It is the classic Modernist tactic: keep the devotions, drain the dogma, and eventually reinterpret even the devotions in a sentimental and ecumenical key.
Systemic Fruits: From This Letter to the Conciliar Sect
Viewed symptomatically, this 1959 letter perfectly prefigures the later state of the “Church of the New Advent”:
– Replacement of doctrinal clarity with pastoral optimism.
– Reduction of the supernatural mission of the Church to a facilitator of world peace, unity, and humanitarian aid.
– Transformation of mission from calling souls out of error into dialogue with false religions.
– Neutralization of anti-modernist teaching through silence and practical contradiction.
– Use of spectacular religiosity (congresses, shrines, pilgrimages) as cover for theological revolution.
Everything that would later culminate in the paramasonic structures occupying the Vatican, in the cult of man, in “religious liberty,” “ecumenism,” and interreligious syncretism, is already here in seminal form: the heart of the revolution is in the method and the omissions.
Measured solely by the unchanging doctrine of the pre-1958 magisterium, this letter is not a harmless exercise in pastoral encouragement. It is a strategic declaration of intent: to recast the Church’s self-understanding and activity along lines already condemned by prior Popes. Pious Latin does not sanctify a program that methodically prepares the betrayal of integral Catholic faith.
Source:
Apostolici Muneris – Ad Iosephum S. R. E. Card. Frings, Archiepiscopum Coloniensem; Iosephum S. R. E. Card. Wendel, Archiepiscopum Monacensem et Frisingensem; Iulium S. R. E. Card. Doepfner, Episcopum… (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025