Quamvis nullum is a short Latin congratulatory letter in which John XXIII, acting as supreme hierarch of the conciliar revolution, praises Tatsuji (Tatsuo) Doi on the 25th anniversary of his episcopal consecration as Archbishop of Tokyo, extols his role as a model ecclesiastical leader and first Japanese member of the College of “Cardinals,” notes the supposed flourishing of Catholicism in Japan, encourages the construction of a new principal church, and grants the faculty to impart a plenary indulgence on a chosen day to the faithful of his archdiocese. The text appears innocuous and “pious,” but in reality it is a distilled manifestation of the new paramasonic cult: a horizontalist, naturalistic, episcopocentric self-celebration that replaces the supernatural kingship of Christ and the militancy of the true Church with diplomatic flattery, human achievements, and the affirmation of a church born in 1958, foreign to the Catholic Faith.
The Celebrated Episcopate as Manifestation of a New Religion
The letter’s content is externally modest: anniversary, gratitude, pastoral praise, architectural plans, delegation of indulgence. Precisely this apparent harmlessness exposes its deepest perfidy. Corruptio optimi pessima (“the corruption of the best is the worst”): what should be a theological act of the Vicar of Christ becomes an ideological proclamation of the conciliar sect’s principles.
Let us recall the key elements of the text (English then Latin excerpts):
– John XXIII exhorts Doi to give thanks with the Psalmist:
“I will praise the name of God with a canticle, and I will magnify him with praise” (Ps 68:31).
«Laudabo nomen Dei cum cantico et magnificabo eum in laude.»
– He lauds Doi as:
“the first from the Japanese nation Archbishop of Tokyo… by zeal for religion, maturity of counsel, diligence in work.”
«Primus namque e Iaponia natione Tokiensis Archiepiscopus, religionis studio, maturitate consilii, sollertia operae…»
– He celebrates his elevation as “Cardinal” as a sign that:
“the Catholic Church grows there with good increase”
«profiteri voluimus Catholicam Ecclesiam bono auctu istic crescere…»
– He praises the “field of the Lord” in Tokyo as flowering, expects greater fruits, quotes Colossians 1:9–10, encourages the building of a new principal church as a lasting monument, and grants permission once to impart, in his name and authority, a plenary indulgence on a day of choice.
On the surface: nothing overtly heretical. But here Modernism reveals its true method, condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi and Lamentabili sane exitu: not primarily frontal denials, but systematic displacement of the supernatural Faith by a new set of principles, under Catholic language.
Episcopal Self-Celebration Without the Cross or the Kingship of Christ
The first and gravest feature is the cult of episcopal success severed from the theology of the Cross.
– Nowhere does John XXIII recall that the bishop is above all a *sacrificer of the Unbloody Sacrifice* and a *guardian of doctrinal purity*. No call:
– to defend the flock against heresy, indifferentism, syncretism;
– to preach that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation;
– to uphold the social reign of Christ against apostate States.
Instead, the letter is a polished human congratulations for a career.
This is in radical contrast with integral Catholic doctrine:
– Pius XI, in Quas primas, teaches that the calamities of nations result from “very many having removed Jesus Christ and His most holy law from their lives” and that peace will only come when individuals and States recognize Christ’s Kingship. The Japanese nation, publicly pagan and secular, is here mentioned only in terms of “noble zeal” and “growing” Catholic presence, without one word of the duty of that nation to abandon false religions and submit politically and socially to Christ the King.
– Pius IX, in the Syllabus, condemns the notion that “the State… is the origin and source of all rights” (prop. 39) and that “the Church ought to be separated from the State” (prop. 55). Yet the entire letter to Doi treats the Church’s situation in Japan as if the separation, the tolerance of idolatry, and the absence of Christ’s social reign were normal and sufficient context for “joy.”
The omission is conclusive. Silence about the *concrete obligation* to convert a pagan nation and to call its rulers to obedience to Christ is not a neutral gap; it is a program. It manifests the naturalistic and ecumenical mentality that would be dogmatized in the Vatican II documents.
Humanist Rhetoric and the Eclipse of Supernatural Combat
The linguistic texture of Quamvis nullum betrays a bureaucratic humanism:
– Emphasis on “merit,” “diligence,” “maturity,” “flourishing nation,” “useful undertakings”:
«…ad Regnum Christi amplificandum et ad utilia incepta provehenda…»
– Christ and His Kingdom are mentioned, but only as exalted background vocabulary that decorates a fundamentally horizontal agenda:
– growth of structures,
– recognition of local culture,
– celebration of a national figure elevated to Roman dignity.
The decisive elements of Catholic supernatural militancy are absent:
– no admonition on perseverance in the state of grace;
– no warning about hell, judgment, or the peril of idolatry;
– no mention of the Most Holy Sacrifice as propitiatory for sins;
– no denunciation of the anti-Christian forces (Freemasonry, secularism, false religions) that block the reign of Christ.
Compare this with the pre-1958 Magisterium:
– Pius IX unmasks the “sects… called masonic or by another name” as the organized “synagogue of Satan” seeking to destroy the Church and Christian order. He commands bishops to expose and fight them, not to weave pastoral texts distilled of combat.
– St. Pius X, in Pascendi, exposes Modernists precisely for baptizing naturalistic, evolutionary, and horizontal ideas in pious language, while neutralizing dogma and severing it from practical governance.
Quamvis nullum is an example of this: the language is ecclesiastical; the operative content is that of a *new religion of institutional affirmation*, in which local hierarchs are praised not for guardianship of dogma against the world, but for being integrated into the global conciliar project.
Theological Neutralization: A “Catholic Church” Growing Without Conversion
John XXIII states, regarding Doi’s elevation to the “Sacred Purple”:
“we wished to profess that the Catholic Church there grows with good increase, and openly to recognize the noble zeal of your famed nation toward the Gospel of Christ.”
«profiteri voluimus Catholicam Ecclesiam bono auctu istic crescere, palamque agnoscere inclitae gentis tuae dignum laude erga Christi Evangelium nobile studium.»
From the perspective of immutable doctrine, this formulation is poisonous.
1. It suggests that:
– the mere presence of a “native cardinal” signifies authentic growth of the Church;
– a vague “zeal towards the Gospel” on the part of the nation warrants praise.
2. Missing:
– Any affirmation that such “growth” means the abandonment of Buddhism, Shinto, and other idolatries, and the public profession of the one true Faith.
– Any insistence that as long as Japan as a State does not publicly recognize Christ the King, its “zeal” is objectively gravely deficient.
The Magisterium before 1958 is crystal clear:
– The Church alone possesses the fullness of truth and the means of salvation; Protestantism and all non-Catholic religions are excluded as paths of salvation (Pius IX, Syllabus condemning propositions 16–18).
– Catholic rulers and nations have the duty to profess the true religion exclusively and to reject the liberal-indifferentist thesis (Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius XI).
By calling “Catholic Church” the conciliar structure in Japan and measuring its “growth” by sociological signs and personnel promotions, John XXIII reveals the underlying modernist thesis: *the Church is an evolving, inculturated, globally networked institution whose vitality is measured by diplomatic inclusion and local coloring*, not by the uncompromising confession of dogma and the destruction of false worship. This is the ecclesiology of the Church of the New Advent, not of the Mystical Body as taught by Pius XII in Mystici Corporis.
The Conciliar “Purple”: Reward for Service to the Neo-Church
The letter underscores that Doi is:
“the first from this most flourishing nation to be honored with the Sacred Roman Purple.”
«primus te ex ista fiorentissima natione Sacra Romana Purpura honestare gavisi sumus.»
Two points expose the antichurch logic:
1. The so-called “Sacred Purple” is presented as if it were unquestionably a token of Catholic fidelity and ecclesial maturity.
– In the integral Catholic understanding, the College of Cardinals is to be the Senate of the Church, guardians of doctrine, electors of a true Roman Pontiff.
– Under John XXIII, it becomes the visible organ of the conciliar revolution, expanded and re-engineered to guarantee acceptance of Vatican II and the ensuing apostasy.
2. The criterion for praise is national representation:
– “first Japanese cardinal” is emphasized as such, mirroring the modernist obsession with demographic and diplomatic symbolism.
– This logic is alien to Catholic theology, in which honor in the Church is not granted to validate nations or cultures, but to recognize sanctity of life, integrity of faith, and proven doctrinal reliability.
The letter is therefore a certificate of allegiance: Doi is raised and glorified as a pillar of a structure that recognizes the legitimacy of John XXIII’s claim, participates in the conciliar process, and ushers in the ecumenical, religious-freedom agenda in Asia. This is ecclesiastical architecture in the service of the “abomination of desolation,” not the continuation of apostolic governance.
The Instrumentalization of Indulgences in the Service of the Sect
Particularly telling is the indulgence clause:
“We grant you the faculty that, on whatever day you will, with the Christian faithful present, in Our name and with Our authority, you may bestow [a blessing], with a plenary indulgence proposed.”
«id tibi facultatis facimus, ut, quo volueris die, adstantibus christifidelibus nomine Nostro Nostraque auctoritate benedicas, plenaria Indulgentia proposita.»
Key observations:
– The plenary indulgence is explicitly tethered to:
– John XXIII’s person and authority (“in Our name and with Our authority”);
– the celebration of Doi’s episcopal milestone.
– Missing:
– any strong condition of repentance, confession of the true Faith, detachment from sin, rejection of errors;
– any linkage to combat against prevailing apostasy or false worship.
The structure here is typical of the conciliar sect:
– Sacramentals and indulgences are not presented as instruments to deepen participation in the propitiatory merits of Christ’s Sacrifice within the true Church, but as ceremonial currency to legitimize new hierarchies and celebrations.
– By centering the indulgence around the usurper’s name and the conciliar episcopate, the text functions as a spiritualization of sectarian loyalty. Participation in the celebration equals participation in John XXIII’s “church,” presumed identical with the Catholic Church.
From the standpoint of pre-1958 doctrine and canon law:
– Indulgences presuppose valid jurisdiction and communion with the true Roman Pontiff.
– If the source of authority is a manifest heretic or an implementer of a new religion, the act loses its Catholic character. The invocation of this power becomes, objectively, part of the deception by which souls are attached to a counterfeit hierarchy.
Thus, what the text presents as a “gift” for the faithful is, in fact, a spiritual mechanism to bind them more closely to the conciliar structure and to its architect.
The New Ecclesial Aesthetic: Monument over Martyrdom
The letter warmly encourages the construction of a new principal church:
“We greatly desire that especially the new principal temple, which you desire to build, may as soon as possible, skillfully completed, raise its summits to heaven. This will also be for your piety a lasting monument.”
«ac praesertim ut novum templum princeps, quod exaedificare cupis, quam primum affabre factum ad caelum sua culmina extollat. Pietatis tuae posteris quoque durabile erit hoc monumentum.»
In authentic Catholic spirit, churches are built:
– to house the Most Holy Sacrifice,
– to be sanctuaries of true doctrine,
– to be fortresses against paganism and heresy.
In Quamvis nullum, the “temple” is above all:
– a monument to the person of Doi,
– a sign of the successful integration of Japanese Catholicism into the conciliar vision.
The perspective is subtly inverted:
– The priority is not: “May this temple be the throne of Christ the King over Tokyo, where idols are overthrown.”
– The priority is: “This temple will be a lasting monument to your piety and thus to the mature presence of a Japanese hierarchy in our global institution.”
This anthropocentric and historicist note is characteristic of post-1958 construction: architectural symbolism serving a new ecclesiology. The building is less the house of the Eucharistic Lord, more the stone manifesto of cultural and ecclesial aggiornamento.
Systemic Symptoms of the Conciliar Revolution in a Brief Text
When read through the lens of the unchanging doctrine reaffirmed by Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, and Pius XI, this letter reveals at least six systemic pathologies of the conciliar sect:
1. Naturalistic optimism without doctrinal clarity:
– Praise of “zeal” and “growth” without explicit dogmatic content;
– No insistence that all non-Catholic religions in Japan are false and damnable.
2. Silence on the obligation of States to recognize Christ the King:
– In stark disobedience to Quas primas, the text does not even hint that Japan, as a political body, has duties toward Christ and His Church.
3. Episcopalism and careerism disguised as piety:
– The bishop is glorified for tenure and alignment with conciliar structures, not for the defense of dogma and discipline.
4. Instrumentalization of indulgences:
– Spiritual treasury used as ornament for jubilees, implicitly to canonize the legitimacy of the conciliar hierarchy.
5. Inculturation as an end in itself:
– The accent on being the “first Japanese cardinal” manifests a horizontal, national-representational criterion foreign to the supernatural constitution of the Church.
6. Hermeneutic of continuity through selective quoting:
– Occasional biblical citations (Psalms, Colossians) create a faux continuity, while the essential pre-1958 teachings—on Modernism, social kingship, exclusivity of the true Church—are practically denied by omission.
Here the method of Modernism, condemned in Lamentabili sane exitu, is evident: *dogma is not assaulted frontally; it is evacuated by being no longer operative*. Theological truth is submerged under pastoral rhetoric, diplomatic courtesy, and institutional self-affirmation.
The Pre-1958 Magisterium as Judge of Quamvis nullum
Judging this letter solely by the doctrine of the true Church prior to 1958:
– The integral Magisterium insists:
– that the Church is a perfect society with divine rights, independent of the State (Pius IX, Syllabus);
– that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church;
– that civil authority has duties toward the true religion;
– that Modernism, evolution of dogma, and religious indifferentism are to be condemned with the utmost severity (St. Pius X, Pascendi, Lamentabili).
In light of these truths:
– A papal letter to a bishop of a pagan land that:
– omits every mention of the necessity of converting that nation;
– omits any condemnation of its false worship;
– measures ecclesial growth by honors and structures;
– tightens bonds to a revolutionary council and hierarchy;
cannot be read as a simple pastoral kindness. It is a signature of the shift from the Catholic Church to the conciliar sect.
The very gentleness of the text is a weapon: it soothes, anesthetizes, and integrates souls into a pseudo-Catholic organism that will soon ratify doctrines and practices condemned by all preceding Popes—religious liberty, ecumenism, the cult of man, the profanation of the sacred liturgy.
Conclusion: Beneath Harmless Phrases, the Architecture of Apostasy
Quamvis nullum, dated January 20, 1963, stands chronologically and theologically on the eve of the full explosion of Vatican II. It already breathes the same spirit:
– The Church redefined as a sociological, multicultural community;
– Success measured by dialogue, expansion of the episcopate, and construction of monuments;
– Doctrinal militancy replaced by congratulatory prose;
– Indulgences and blessings bent into instruments of allegiance to a new regime.
From the perspective of integral Catholic Faith, the letter is not a minor note of piety, but a symptom of the usurping structure occupying the Vatican—a structure that speaks in Catholic idiom while quietly dethroning Christ the King, dissolving the exclusivity of the Church, and enthroning the modern cult of human progress.
The true Catholic conscience, instructed by the pre-1958 Magisterium, must therefore read such documents not as expressions of the perennial Church, but as evidence against the conciliar sect: proof of its method, its objectives, and its profound rupture with the immutable doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His spotless Bride.
Source:
Quamvis, cum nullum – Epistula ad Petrum tit. S. Antonii Patavini de Urbe S. R. E. Presb. Cardinalem Tatsuo Doi, Archiepiscopum Tokiensem, a suscepta episcopali dignitate quinque impleta lustra celebr… (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025