At the beginning of his usurped reign, Roncalli (John XXIII) replies to the German hierarchy, praising their loyalty to Pius XII, solemnly assuring continuity of attachment to Germany, extolling German cultural virtues, invoking concordats, consoling Catholics under communist oppression and refugees, and bestowing a paternal blessing while presenting himself seamlessly as Peter’s successor and guarantor of ecclesial stability and civic cooperation. In reality, this letter is a genteel manifesto of the coming conciliar revolution: a smooth rhetorical veil covering the transfer from the Church of Christ to the emerging neo-church of humanist diplomacy and ecclesial betrayal.
The Masked Beginning of the Conciliar Subversion
This document must be read not as a harmless seasonal courtesy, but as a programmatic signal: the first public self-inscription of Roncalli into the consciousness of one of the key episcopates he intended to mobilize for his aggiornamento. From the perspective of unchanging Catholic doctrine prior to 1958, several decisive points emerge.
The letter:
– Assumes without argument the continuity of authority between Pius XII and Roncalli, demanding from the German bishops an uncritical transfer of obedience.
– Elevates a diplomatic, national-psychological panegyric over explicit doctrinal clarity and over the supernatural primacy of the *Regnum Christi*.
– Anchors hope for the Church in Germany in concordats and civic collaboration rather than in the uncompromising reign of Christ the King and the integral social Kingship condemned enemies of His Church.
– Treats the German episcopate—already deeply compromised by accommodation with liberal states and infected by nascent Modernism—as solid pillars instead of calling them to repentance and militant resistance.
– Reduces persecution and doctrinal warfare largely to themes of human suffering, needing “freedom” and “tranquillity,” rather than to the central question: fidelity to the one true Faith against heresy, socialism, indifferentism, and masonic infiltration, precisely unmasked by Pius IX and St. Pius X.
Thus the text inaugurates in polished Latin the mentality that will issue in the Council of the “Church of the New Advent”: less dogmatic clarity, more horizontal comfort; less militant supernaturalism, more sentimental pacification.
1. Illusion of Continuity: Usurped Appeal to the Petrine Office
A central thread is Roncalli’s insistence that the German bishops’ devotion to the “Supreme Pastor” continues untouched despite the death of Pius XII:
“Quod de Summo Ecclesiae Pastore tam egregie sentitis … minime immutatur, quia, mortis lege cogente, alius post alium Ecclesiae gubernacula suscipit: nam ligandi solvendique arbitra ea quae in Petri Sede Petri vivit et excellit potestas…”
English: “What you think so excellently about the Supreme Pastor is in no way changed, because, by the law of death, one after another takes up the helm of the Church: for the power of binding and loosing, which lives and excels in the See of Peter, is honored by you with unbending obedience and sincere love.”
On the surface this echoes traditional teaching: the Petrine office, not the person, is the locus of authority. But several critical points, judged by pre-1958 doctrine:
– The same Magisterium, invoked but soon to be betrayed, teaches that a manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church, since he ceases to be a member of it. St. Robert Bellarmine, systematically cited in traditional ecclesiology, explicates: *a manifest heretic is not Christian and therefore cannot be Pope*. The integral doctrine summarized in the provided “Defense of Sedevacantism” file (Bellarmine, Wernz-Vidal, Billot) underlines that notorious heresy severs jurisdiction *ipso facto*.
– Roncalli’s background—modernist sympathies, ecumenist tendencies, irregular affiliations—was already a matter of concern for sound Catholic judgment. This letter self-presents him as natural heir without one word of doctrinal self-profession, without an explicit, solemn reiteration of the integral condemnations of Modernism (Lamentabili, Pascendi), the Syllabus of Errors, Quas Primas, or the anti-masonic magisterium. Silence here is indictment.
– Instead of recalling the bishops to the anti-liberal, anti-modernist line of Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Benedict XV, and Pius XI-XII, he presupposes their stance as sufficient and calls simply for continued “obedience” to “what lives in the See of Peter,” preparing the psychological ground for obedience to an impending revolution masked as papal.
This is the first deceit: asserting juridical continuity while preparing substantive rupture. *Simulatio continuitatis* (the simulation of continuity) is the method of Modernism condemned by St. Pius X in *Pascendi Dominici Gregis*: change dogma and ethos while verbally venerating Tradition.
2. Empty Panegyric of the German Nation as Prelude to Doctrinal Weakening
Roncalli devotes long passages to lyrical praise of German national virtues:
“ingentem hominum multitudinem… qui avitam fidem indemnem et incontaminatam tutati sunt… qui in exaedificanda civitate Dei speciosos spiritales lapides validasque structuras suppeditarunt… religionis observantia, disciplinis et artibus, … oeconomici et socialis generis multigena industria…”
He enumerates cultural merits, industry, discipline, artistic achievements. But from the perspective of integral Catholic faith, several grave omissions and distortions appear:
– No explicit denunciation of the errors ravaging Germany: Protestantism, religious indifferentism, Social Democracy, Marxism, Freemasonry, rampant theological criticism in universities, the destructive work of those pretending to be traditional Catholics while flirting with liberalism.
– No direct recall of the Syllabus of Errors or the solemn condemnations of religious liberty, separation of Church and State, and the notion that modern “civilization” or “progress” is neutral. Yet these errors characterize precisely that milieu.
– No mention that many German bishops and theologians had already imbibed the poison of Modernism explicitly condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili and Pascendi—errors on Scripture, dogma development, the Church’s constitution—errors which this episcopate would carry into the upcoming council as architects of the conciliar sect.
The exaggerated national-cultural praise, devoid of doctrinal confrontation, reveals a naturalistic optic: the Church is pleased because the nation is industrious, organized, artistic—*quasi* the criteria of Masonic civil virtue. This stands in tension with Pius XI in *Quas Primas*, who teaches that peace and order come only from the public submission of nations to Christ the King, not from merely human virtues. Here, that supernatural criterion is rhetorically submerged.
3. Humanitarian Lament Without Doctrinal Militant Clarity
Roncalli expresses compassion for Catholics under communist regimes in Eastern Germany and for refugees:
“ubi erga Ecclesiam fidelitas et christianorum virtutum exercitatio in difficilibus rerum adiunctis versantur, quin etiam interdum tecte aut aperte moralis legis conscientia opprimitur.”
He urges perseverance, charity even toward persecutors, and prays that rulers grant Catholics liberty “ut … quietam et tranquillam vitam transigi” in accord with 1 Tim 2:2.
On the surface, this corresponds to Catholic exhortations. The deadly problem is what is missing:
– There is no explicit denunciation of atheistic communism as intrinsically evil, anti-Christian, anti-natural, as Pius XI did in *Divini Redemptoris*, or Pius XII repeatedly. Communism appears merely as a tragic circumstance: a context of “difficult conditions” where conscience is oppressed.
– He does not name the ideological enemies: socialism, communism, laicism, Freemasonry. Compare this with the Syllabus of Errors, which directly unmasks the liberal and masonic systems as instruments of the “synagogue of Satan.”
– There is no summons to spiritual warfare, no call to rely on the Most Holy Sacrifice, the sacraments, the Kingship of Christ. Persecution is treated primarily psychologically and socially.
Thus suffering is sentimentalized; the supernatural meaning of persecution is diluted. The letter avoids the militant vocabulary of the pre-1958 magisterium, softening conflict into generic appeals for “freedom” and “tranquillity.” This anticipates the Vatican II cult of “dialogue” even with systems that formally wage war on God.
Silence on the ideological nature of the enemy is complicity.
4. The Concordat and the Political Theology of Accommodation
A striking passage concerns “Solemn Conventions” between the Holy See and Germany:
“Propterea quod pactis stare sanctum est, … Apostolica Sedes datam fidem sinceram constantemque servabit; neque dubitat quin Germanorum gentis supremi moderatores … huiusmodi pacta conventa … fideliter integra et indemnia tutanda…”
English: he insists it is sacred to abide by agreements; the “Apostolic See” will faithfully maintain its pledged word and expects the German authorities to protect and implement the concluded concordats.
From integral Catholic doctrine:
– Concordats are legitimate instruments insofar as they serve the *libertas Ecclesiae* and the recognition of the true Religion. However, Pius IX and Leo XIII repeatedly warn that the Church cannot bind herself in ways that compromise her divine mission or accept neutralist or pluralist principles condemned by the Syllabus.
– Here, concordats are elevated as central pillars of Church-state relations, detached from any reminder that the State is morally obliged to profess the Catholic Faith and reject indifferentism and “religious freedom” understood as equal rights for error.
– There is no assertion that civil authority must recognize the exclusive truth of the Catholic Church (cf. Syllabus, propositions 15–18, 55, 77–80 condemned). Rather, Roncalli’s language is technocratic: treaties, fidelity, mutual benefit; precisely the juridical naturalism that will slide into the Vatican II doctrine of “religious liberty” and practical acceptance of pluralism.
In *Quas Primas*, Pius XI explicitly identifies laicism and the dethronement of Christ in public life as the “plague” of the age, to be confronted by proclaiming Christ King over societies. Roncalli, in contrast, flatters secular rulers and concordats, without recalling their duty to acknowledge Christ’s sovereignty. This is not accidental; it is the atmospheric preparation for Dignitatis Humanae and the cult of human rights, condemned in principle pre-1958 when detached from the rights of God and His Church.
5. Paternal Tone as Instrument of Disarmament
The letter is drenched in warm paternal language:
“amplectimur … universam inclitam Germanorum gentem”; “Vos misericordes adsumus”; “amantissimam hanc paternam Nostram erga Germanorum gentem voluntatem…”
The rhetorical effect:
– It creates emotional fusion: the German bishops, whose modernist tendencies and compromises demanded severe correction, are instead caressed as faithful stewards.
– It avoids any specific condemnation of doctrinal deviations in German theology: historical criticism of Scripture, denial of traditional exegesis, undermining of the sacrificial nature of the Mass, liturgical experimentation, ecumenism with Protestantism—all of which were already gestating and soon would explode at the Council under German leadership.
– It subtly replaces the supernatural fatherhood of a Pope who guards the deposit of faith with the affable sentimentality of a statesman-bishop who “understands” and “accompanies.”
Integral Catholic doctrine knows authentic paternal charity is inseparable from severe correction of error. St. Pius X in Lamentabili and Pascendi anathematizes attempts to indulge modernist tendencies out of misplaced “pastoral” softness. By that standard, Roncalli’s letter is not fatherhood but indulgent abdication: *caritas adulterata* (adulterated charity).
6. Idealized Bishops Instead of Calling Them to War
Roncalli exhorts each bishop to be faithful at the helm of his Church, quoting St. Ignatius to St. Polycarp:
“Tempus expetit te, ut gubernator ventos…”
Yet this flattering application is inverted in reality:
– He presumes the German bishops already embody Ignatian fortitude, when many had long engaged in compromises with the liberal state and had tolerated or fostered modernist errors in seminaries and faculties.
– He does not demand from them doctrinal purgation: rooting out professors aligned with condemned propositions (Lamentabili), publicly reaffirming the Syllabus against liberalism, enforcing orthodoxy in catechesis, liturgy, and sacramental discipline.
– He does not mobilize them to resist socialism, communism, Freemasonry, and Protestant infiltration with the virility of earlier Popes; instead, he encourages polite collaboration with civil authorities and maintenance of existing agreements.
This is symptomatic: the emerging conciliar sect would cultivate a hierarchy of administrators, not confessors; managers of diplomacy, not guardians of dogma. The letter dignifies that caste instead of summoning them to martyrdom of intellect and blood if needed.
7. Truncated Invocation of Peace and the Nativity
Near the end, Roncalli invokes Christ as “Princeps pacis” and prays for peace rooted in God’s will. This language superficially aligns with Tradition, but again we must ask: what is missing?
– Pius XI in *Quas Primas* teaches that true peace is only possible under the social reign of Christ the King; the encyclical was instituted precisely to combat laicism and naturalistic pacifism. Roncalli, by contrast, speaks of “suavissimam pacem” without connecting it to the duty of states to submit publicly to Christ’s law.
– There is zero mention of the Last Judgment, hell, or the necessity of remaining in the state of grace. Silence about last ends, sin, propitiatory sacrifice, and the narrow way is, according to the provided framework, the gravest accusation.
– The Cross appears only as generic consolation. The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the central instrument of redemption and bulwark against apostasy, is not even named. In a letter to bishops. On the eve of a supposed papal reign.
This is not incidental style; it reveals a shift: from soteriological Christocentrism to humanitarian Christ-inspiration. Such a sentimental Christ, separated from His rights as King and Judge, becomes the icon of the “Church of man” later celebrated by the conciliar sect.
8. Systemic Fruits: How This Text Prefigures the Conciliar Sect
If we read the document in light of the pre-1958 Magisterium (Quas Primas, Syllabus, Lamentabili, Pascendi, anti-masonic teaching) and the subsequent historical outcome, its symptomatic role is unmistakable:
– Modernist hermeneutic of continuity: Roncalli speaks as if nothing has changed (“alius post alium”) while silently repositioning the papal office as facilitator of inter-state harmony and national affirmation, rather than as hammer of heresies. This illusion of continuity is exactly the tactic by which the neo-church smuggled in doctrinal novelties under traditional labels.
– Naturalistic humanism: The emphasis on national virtues, economic and cultural contributions, social order, refugee care, civic peace, concordats, overshadowing explicit doctrinal militancy, showcases a horizontal orientation. It is the polite face of the later cult of “human dignity” detached from adherence to the one true Faith.
– Soft-pedalling historic enemies: Socialism, Freemasonry, Protestantism, Modernism, liberal democracy—here unnamed, uncondemned, indirectly normalized by silence. Exactly what Pius IX warned against: to coexist with the sects and their errors as if they were benign partners.
– Episcopal flattery and empowerment of compromised hierarchies: Instead of sifting bishops and calling them to account, Roncalli canonizes their status, inviting their collaboration in a future event—the council—that will be steered by their already deformed theology. This letter is part of the moral enlistment.
– Replacement of militant supernaturalism with pastoral sentimentalism: Tears for suffering, wishes for peace, paternal warmth—all good in themselves—but here weaponized to anesthetize vigilance. St. Pius X called Modernism the “synthesis of all heresies” precisely because it corrodes from within through sentiment and imprecision, not frontal denial.
From an integral Catholic point of view, the text is spiritually and doctrinally bankrupt not because it contains overt formal heresy, but because it embodies the precise method of apostasy: carefully omitting the hard edges of dogma, the concrete enemies, the non-negotiable rights of Christ the King and His Church, while enveloping all in sweet phrases and diplomatic assurances.
9. The Judgment of Integral Catholic Doctrine
Measured against the immutable pre-1958 teaching (as summarized in the provided magisterial files and classical theology):
– Ecclesia Christi is a perfect, sovereign society with divine rights over states (Pius IX, Syllabus; Leo XIII; Pius XI). Roncalli’s letter marginalizes this claim, preferring the language of treaties and “mutual” fidelity.
– Dogma non mutatur (dogma does not change). Authentic papal teaching must vigorously reaffirm prior condemnations of liberalism, Modernism, indifferentism, false ecumenism. Roncalli is silent where he should trumpet. That silence, given the context, is materially treacherous.
– Nemo potest duobus dominis servire (no one can serve two masters). The attempt to be simultaneously chaplain of liberal nation-states and guardian of unbending dogma inevitably sacrifices one. History has proven which side Roncalli and his successors chose: the conciliar sect of human rights, interreligious “dialogue,” desacralized liturgy, and doctrinal relativism.
This letter, therefore, stands as an inaugural monument of that betrayal: a polished, Latinate, sweet-smelling text whose omissions shout louder than its words. It consoles where it should command, flatters where it should chastise, trusts structures and concordats where it should call kingdoms to the feet of Christ the King, and enthrones an unexamined personal claim to the Petrine office precisely at the threshold of the most devastating revolution ever perpetrated under the name of “Catholic.”
The integral Catholic conscience must recognize in such documents not the voice of the perennial Magisterium, but the early, courteous accents of the *abominatio desolationis* gaining confidence in the occupied halls of the Vatican.
Source:
In primordio – 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 Berol… (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025