Certiores quidem: Eucharistic Congress as Prelude to the Conciliar Betrayal
This short Latin letter of John XXIII appoints Francis Spellman as papal legate to the Central American Eucharistic Congress in Guatemala (February 1959), extols the “splendour” of the event, and enumerates themes to be discussed: the role of the Eucharist in “domestic concord,” youth education, social-class harmony, perfection of the human person, and the tranquillity and prosperity of the republics concerned — closing with a Marian invocation and the so‑called apostolic blessing.
This apparently pious missive already manifests the shift from the supernatural ends of the Most Holy Eucharist to a naturalistic, humanitarian, and politico-social instrument, prefiguring the entire conciliar revolution and revealing the theological emptiness of the neo-church’s discourse.
Elevation of a Manifest Revolutionary as “Pontiff” and the Spellman Factor
From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, the first and decisive datum is the person issuing this letter: John XXIII, initiator of the conciliar upheaval, convoker of Vatican II, promoter of condemned “aggiornamento” and “dialogue,” and thus, by his doctrine and practice, falling under the classical theological category of a public favorer of Modernism.
According to the pre-conciliar magisterium:
– *Modernismus est omnium haeresum conlectus* (“Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies” — St. Pius X, Pascendi).
– *Lamentabili sane exitu* and *Pascendi* solemnly bind Catholics to reject precisely the tendencies John XXIII embodied: historicism of dogma, adaptation of doctrine to modern errors, and subordination of supernatural truth to temporal “needs.”
The sede of Peter cannot be occupied by one who publicly promotes what the Church has infallibly condemned; St. Robert Bellarmine and the classical theologians cited in the Defense of Sedevacantism file are explicit: a manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church he is no longer a member of. Therefore this letter, issued in the first year of John XXIII’s usurped “pontificate,” must be read not as an act of the Catholic Magisterium, but as a document of the emerging conciliar sect.
The chosen legate, Francis Spellman, notorious for his intimate entanglement with American political and military power and liberal-capitalist interests, perfectly incarnates the deviation: the altar harnessed to the projects of the Masonic world, the Church’s sacramental life instrumentalized to sanctify geopolitical strategies rather than to call nations to the *Regnum Christi* as taught magisterially in *Quas Primas*.
This convergence of John XXIII and Spellman is not accidental ornament; it is a signum: the usurped authority of a Modernist antipope delegating to a politically compromised prelate the direction of a Eucharistic event whose stated priorities are horizontal, societal, and naturalistic.
Factual Level: The Eucharist Reduced to a Tool of Social Engineering
Central in the letter is the list of “arguments” proposed for the Congress. John XXIII states (English translation, then original):
We understand that in the individual meetings the topics to be treated are of no small importance; above all, it is to be considered how much benefit the Most Holy Eucharist confers for fostering domestic harmony, the education of youth, friendly cooperation of social classes, and the perfection of the human person; without these goods, assuredly, the tranquillity and prosperity of the state cannot stand.
«Neque enim parvi momenti sunt argumenta, quae in singulis coetibus erunt pertractanda; agendum praecipue quantum utilitatis sanctissima Eucharistia conferat ad concordiam domesticam fovendam, ad iuvenum educationem, ad amicam socialium classium conspirationem, ad personam humanam perficiendam; sine quibus profecto bonis reipublicae tranquillitas et prosperitas consistere nequeunt.»
The factual problem is not that these goods are mentioned; pre-1958 Catholic doctrine never denied that the Eucharist, as font of grace, elevates and harmonizes family, youth, and social order. The grave error is the exclusive framing:
– No mention of:
– propitiatory character of the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary;
– necessity of being in the state of grace to receive worthily;
– the Real Presence as object of adoration and reparation;
– the Eucharist as sacrament of unity in the *una fides, unus Dominus, unum baptisma*;
– the danger of sacrilege, indifferentism, or heresy.
– Instead, a utilitarian catalogue: domestic peace, pedagogy, class cooperation, human development, civic tranquillity, prosperity.
This is a textbook naturalistic reduction: the supernatural Mystery is praised primarily as an efficient means for temporal wellbeing. This directly contradicts the magisterial teaching of Pius XI in *Quas Primas*, where the peace of Christ is inseparably tied to submission to the Kingship of Christ and to the integral social reign of His law, not to vague “concord” and “cooperation” detached from conversion to the one true Church.
Contrast:
– *Quas Primas*: Peace and order only where Christ’s royal rights are publicly recognized; states must officially submit to His law; religious indifferentism and secular “neutrality” are condemned as sources of social ruin.
– John XXIII here: a liturgical-political celebration in which the Eucharist is presented as a spiritual resource to secure the “tranquillitas reipublicae” and “prosperitas,” with no explicit demand that nations and rulers confess the Catholic faith, abolish false worship, or reject liberalism and socialism as condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX.
Factual conclusion: the letter reframes Eucharistic devotion into a functional ornament for the liberal nation state, in open tension with the integral pre-1958 doctrine that subordinates the state to Christ the King and to His Church.
Linguistic Level: Humanitarian Piety and the Eclipse of the Supernatural
The vocabulary and rhetoric of the letter are revealing. It is written in polished Latin; yet beneath the classic form lurks the modernist mentalité:
1. Emphasis on “splendour” and “magnificence”:
– Spellman is praised as adorned with “Roman purple,” governing a “metropolitan see of such importance” and enjoying “great esteem.”
– The legation is to “increase the dignity and majesty” of the solemn rites.
– This aesthetic courtly language, detached from doctrinal clarity, cultivates the theatre of prestige while the substance of faith is being displaced.
2. Central expressions:
– “Concordiam domesticam,” “amicam socialium classium conspirationem,” “personam humanam perficiendam,” “reipublicae tranquillitas et prosperitas.”
– These terms are not in themselves wrong; but in this context, their absolutization and isolation from explicit mention of sin, grace, conversion, the Cross, the Four Last Things, and the Kingship of Christ signals a mentality aligned with the condemned optimism of liberal humanism and personalism.
3. Silence on:
– *Peccatum mortale*, hell, judgment, need of Confession for fruitful Communion.
– The necessity of the Catholic faith as unica via salutis (Syllabus, prop. 16 condemned: “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation”).
– Condemnations of secret societies and Masonic powers (Pius IX, Syllabus; Leo XIII, numerous encyclicals), which in fact were especially relevant in Central America and in the United States — Spellman’s own political milieu.
This carefully crafted silence is the loudest word of the letter. Language once forged by Leo XIII and Pius XI to assert the absolute primacy of Christ and His Church is here diluted into an innocuous, diplomatic, socio-religious register: sacralized “values,” not salvific truth.
In theological analysis, such silence on the essential supernatural elements, when combined with a positive exaltation of natural goods, is not neutral; it is a mark of Modernism. *Qui tacet, consentire videtur* (he who is silent is seen to consent) when speaking from supreme office on crucial themes and systematically omitting defined doctrine.
Theological Level: Naturalism, Inversion of Ends, and Implicit Denial of Christ’s Kingship
Let us confront the core affirmations and omissions with the perennial magisterium (pre-1958), using it as the sole criterion.
1. The Eucharist instrumentalized for temporal purposes
By stating that from the Eucharist flows, as principal themes for discussion, the foundation of domestic concord, youth education, class harmony, human perfection, and state prosperity, John XXIII inverts the hierarchy of ends:
– The primary end of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is:
– adoration of God,
– propitiation for sins,
– impetration of graces,
– mystical union of souls with Christ in the state of grace.
This is constantly taught by:
– The Council of Trent (Session XXII),
– Pius X in his Eucharistic catechesis,
– Pre-conciliar moral and dogmatic theology.
To invert this by foregrounding socio-political benefits is to adopt the modernist principle condemned in *Lamentabili* and *Pascendi*: that dogma and cult must be “adapted” to historical circumstances and evaluated by their pragmatic efficacy for human progress (*veritas mutatur* in proposition 58 of Lamentabili, condemned).
When the Eucharist is primarily praised as a power for “social cooperation” and “tranquil prosperity of the republic,” we have:
– an implicit subjection of the highest sacrament to the temporal common good;
– a horizontalization that anticipates the conciliar sect’s later abuses (“Eucharistic Congresses” as interreligious spectacles, “Bread of the world,” etc.).
This is diametrically opposed to Pius XI in *Quas Primas*, who insists that society will only enjoy peace if it subjects itself formally to Christ’s law; he does not present the Kingship of Christ as a neutral resource to underwrite pluralistic states, but as their judge.
2. Christ the King replaced by “the human person”
The letter extols:
«ad personam humanam perficiendam» — “for the perfection of the human person.”
The term *persona humana*, isolated and absolutized, is a watchword of the personalist and humanist current that Pius XII and earlier popes treated with caution and that the conciliar sect subsequently weaponized for the “cult of man.”
Pre-1958 doctrine always subordinates the dignity and perfection of the person to:
– the supernatural order,
– the final end of the vision of God,
– the objective order of truth defined by the Church.
Here, “perfection of the human person” is listed alongside civic peace as an aim, with no reference to:
– sanctifying grace,
– the necessity of living faith,
– conformity to Christ crucified,
– subjection to Catholic dogma and morals.
This is not a merely incomplete phrase in an incidental note. Within the architecture of a magisterial-style letter about a Eucharistic Congress, the choice of criteria reveals a theological reorientation: the sacrament ordered toward man’s temporalized development, not man ordered to God through the sacrament.
Thus the text aligns with the condemned modernist notion (Lamentabili 26, 58, 59) that dogma and cult serve primarily practical and moral functions — “binding in action” — rather than being immutable truths to be believed for God’s sake.
3. Silence on the exclusivity of the Catholic Church
The letter concerns Central American nations, historically Catholic peoples systematically de-Catholicized by liberal and Masonic regimes. A truly Catholic pontiff, speaking at such a juncture, would:
– Reaffirm that only the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ (Syllabus, 21).
– Condemn separation of Church and state (Syllabus, 55).
– Recall that indifferentism and secular “neutrality” are mortal dangers (Syllabus, 15–18, 77–80).
– Urge rulers to publicly acknowledge Christ’s social Kingship (*Quas Primas*).
John XXIII says nothing. Instead, he blesses civil magistrates generically and focuses on temporal peace and prosperity, as if these goods could be secured without explicit repudiation of liberalism and Freemasonry.
This omission is not excusable as “brevity”; it is a definitional silence that prefigures the “religious freedom” heresy of the conciliar structure and its ecumenical relativism. Where Pius IX and Pius XI raised the supernatural standard of Christ the King against the modern state, John XXIII speaks the language of cooperative coexistence.
4. Delegation of Revolutionary Program under Catholic Guise
By constituting Spellman as his legate “in Our person and with Our authority,” John XXIII effectively:
– Projects the authority of his nascent conciliar agenda into the heart of Catholic Eucharistic cult in Central America.
– Uses the Eucharistic Congress as a platform to inculcate themes which will shortly dominate Vatican II: social peace, dialogue among classes, human development — all severed from the condemnation of error and the insistence on Christ’s exclusive reign.
In classical canonical and theological terms:
– *Simulata catholicitas* — a simulated Catholicism — is employed to smuggle naturalistic and liberal conceptions into the sanctuary.
– This corresponds to the modus operandi exposed in the Syllabus regarding secret societies and liberal governments: outward respect for religion while subverting its substance.
The letter is thus a micro-manifesto of post-1958 neo-church praxis: use traditional forms and Eucharistic vocabulary to underwrite a revolution in the Church’s self-understanding.
Symptomatic Level: A Precursor and Symptom of the Conciliar Sect
Seen in light of the entire trajectory (1958 and after), *Certiores quidem* appears as an early, lucid symptom of the same disease which matured in Vatican II and the structures occupying the Vatican today.
Key symptomatic points:
1. Continuity of form, rupture of substance
– Latin, references to Eucharistic solemnity, Marian mention: all the external markers of continuity.
– But the content systematically avoids:
– assertion of the Catholic Church as the one ark of salvation;
– calls to conversion of individuals and states;
– doctrinal condemnation of prevalent errors.
– This is the perfected modernist method condemned by St. Pius X: maintain appearances while altering inner meaning.
2. Humanitarian Eucharistic rhetoric
– The Eucharist is presented as sacral energy for familial, pedagogical, and socio-political goods.
– This anticipates the banalization of “Eucharistic spirituality” in the conciliar sect, where sacrilege is normalized, doctrine on the Real Presence is obscured, and pseudo-liturgies become platforms for social messaging and ecumenical spectacle.
– The letter thus participates in the diversion described in the False Fatima Apparitions file: attention shifted from internal apostasy and doctrinal corruption to external socio-political themes.
3. Alliance with liberal power structures
– Spellman’s prominent political ties exemplify the de facto reconciliation with “progress, liberalism, and modern civilization” explicitly condemned in the Syllabus (80).
– Rather than warning Central American faithful against Masonic and liberal elites, John XXIII’s letter sends a legate whose presence offers ecclesiastical prestige to those regimes, under the sign of a “Eucharistic Congress.”
4. Preparation for the cult of man under Leo XIV and the neo-church
– The trajectory from John XXIII’s veiled humanism to the explicit cult of “human dignity,” “human rights,” and interreligious syncretism under subsequent usurpers (up to the current antipope Leo XIV) is linear.
– In each step, Eucharistic language is retained, but the doctrinal core — the Sacrifice, the need for supernatural faith and repentance, the Kingship of Christ over states — is eroded.
Thus this seemingly innocuous letter is an early node of a paramasonic structure’s propaganda: employing the Most Holy Eucharist as a banner to legitimize its theological and political revolution.
Exposure of the Spiritual Bankruptcy
From the sole vantage of unchanging Catholic doctrine prior to 1958, the spiritual and theological bankruptcy of *Certiores quidem* can be synthesized in several decisive points:
– It instrumentalizes the Eucharist for naturalistic ends and civic prosperity, inverting the proper supernatural hierarchy of ends.
– It suppresses proclamation of the exclusive salvific necessity of the Catholic Church and the social Kingship of Christ, in contradiction to the Syllabus of Pius IX and *Quas Primas* of Pius XI.
– It embodies the modernist technique: traditional language, evacuated content, substitution of “human person” and social harmony for the Cross and the Four Last Things.
– It prepares the faithful to accept Vatican II’s doctrines of religious liberty, ecumenism, and the cult of man by habituating them to a Eucharistic discourse centered on temporal welfare.
– It confirms, in the person of John XXIII and in the choice of Spellman, the presence of a liberal, paramasonic orientation within the structures occupying Rome, consistent with the pre-conciliar condemnations of secret societies and liberal Catholicism.
The only coherent Catholic response is:
– To reject such texts as non-magisterial utterances of an antichurch usurper.
– To hold fast to the clearly taught pre-1958 doctrine:
– that the Eucharist is first and foremost the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary and the sacrament of the Real Presence, requiring faith, grace, and integral doctrine;
– that peace and prosperity are possible only under the public reign of Christ the King and the juridical supremacy of His true Church over all claims of the modern state;
– that any attempt to dilute or naturalize these truths is not pastoral development, but apostasy in slow motion.
Where Pius XI solemnly teaches that “peace is only possible in the kingdom of Christ” (Quas Primas), John XXIII in *Certiores quidem* offers instead a Eucharistic varnish for the kingdom of man. Therein lies its condemnation.
Source:
Certiores Quidem – Ad Franciscum Tit. Sanctorum Ioannis et Pauli, S. R. E. Presb. Card. Spellman, Archiepiscopum Neo-Eboracensem, quem legatum mittit Congressui Eucharistico ex Americae Centralis Nati… (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025