On 28 March 1960, in the Apostolic Palace, John XXIII delivered a secret consistorial allocution announcing the creation and publication of new members of the College of Cardinals, praising the Roman Curia, lamenting persecutions (notably recalling Aloysius Stepinac), exalting the recently concluded Roman Synod, and explicitly linking this new wave of cardinals from various continents with the preparation of the Second Vatican Council and the universal mission of the Church. He presents this expansion as a sign of unity, catholicity, and peace, and as an answer to contemporary social and political crises, concluding with the formal creation of several cardinals (including Traglia, Doi, Lefebvre, Alfrink, Santos, Rugambwa, Bacci) and three in pectore.

---

In reality, this allocution is a calculated programmatic act: a consolidation of a paramasonic, anthropocentric agenda, cloaked in traditional language, to structurally arm the future conciliar upheaval against the immutable Catholic order.

Conciliar Engineering under a Cloak of Continuity

Programmatic Self-Approval and the Cult of the Apparatus

From the outset, John XXIII indulges in a self-congratulatory affirmation of Curial operations and of his own governance:

“Perplacet enim Nobis opus, quod in omnibus Romanae Curiae Sacris Consiliis atque Officiis recte dispositeque fieri contingit…”

He asserts that, “at least up to now,” nothing is out of order in the Curia. This is not a neutral remark; it is a manifesto of continuity in the very moment when he is already plotting an unprecedented rupture via the Second Vatican Council. The contradiction is structural:

– If “nothing is out of order,” why convoke a new council that will, in fact, relativize and overturn the very doctrinal, liturgical, and disciplinary order built and defended by the pre-1958 popes?
– The language simulates filial confidence, but functions as rhetorical anesthesia to disarm vigilance among those still formed by Pius XI and Pius XII.

The allocution never confesses the real crisis condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi and reaffirmed in Lamentabili sane exitu: the infiltration of Modernism into the clergy, seminaries, and theology. Instead of naming doctrinal treason, John XXIII speaks only of:

– bureaucratic normality,
– administrative satisfaction,
– general reassurance.

Silence on doctrinal corruption in favor of institutional self-satisfaction is not accidental. It is the operating method of the conciliar sect: preserve appearances while inverting substance.

Instrumentalizing Persecution: Stepinac and the Omission of the True Enemy

John XXIII recalls Cardinal Stepinac and the sufferings of the Church under communist regimes, lamenting:

“vexationes crudeles… contra religionem, christianum civilem cultum, debitamque libertatem…”

On the surface, this is orthodox: condemnation of persecution and defense of religious liberty in the sense of protecting the Church. Yet observe:

– There is no doctrinal precision according to the integral Magisterium that true religious liberty is the liberty of the one true Church against the State, not the Masonic pluralistic idol of “freedom of all religions” condemned in the Syllabus of Errors (Pius IX, prop. 15-18, 77-80).
– The allocution speaks of “debitam libertatem, qua singuli omnesque simul homines fruantur oportet” (the due liberty all men should enjoy), without distinguishing:
– legitimate immunity of the Church from oppression,
– from the condemned thesis that man has a natural right, before God and society, to profess and propagate errors.

Under the guise of compassion for persecuted Catholics, the text subtly shifts to an anthropocentric horizon, compatible with later conciliar “religious freedom.” The Syllabus of Pius IX explicitly condemns the proposition that:

“Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true.” (Prop. 15)

Yet here, the rhetorical vector tends toward universalist language that will be systematized in the upcoming Vatican II documents. The grave omission: no call to the persecuting regimes to submit to the reign of Christ the King; no reminder, in the sense of Quas primas, that states sin gravely by excluding Christ and His Church from public law. Suffering is invoked; the Kingship of Christ is buried.

Lauding the Roman Synod: A Laboratory for Conciliar Deformation

John XXIII hails the First Roman Synod as a consolation and proof of clerical zeal, depicting it as a sign that:

“vita religiosam christianamque talem esse futuram, ut praeclariores aetates Romae adaequaret”

In reality, historically verifiable:

– The Roman Synod (1960) served as a trial balloon and technical rehearsal for the conciliar revolution, prefiguring the methodology and reforms later weaponized at Vatican II.
– The allocution uses the language of continuity with “glorious ages of Rome,” but the concrete trajectory that followed directly contradicts the pre-1958 doctrinal line regarding:
– ecclesiology (replacement of the clear identity of the Church with a vague “People of God”),
– ecumenism (condemned indifferentism transfigured into “dialogue”),
– liturgy (abandonment of the Most Holy Sacrifice’s sacrificial, propitiatory character).

As Lamentabili and Pascendi warn, Modernism operates through historical and pastoral language to metamorphose dogma. This allocution is precisely such language: praising structures while silently pivoting their orientation.

Globalization of the College: From Catholicity to Horizontalist Universalism

The central operative act of the allocution is the creation of cardinals from diverse regions: Japan, the Philippines, Tanganyika, etc. John XXIII presents this as proof of the Church’s universality:

“ad gloriam Dei, qui populos ad sanctimoniam vocat nullo habito discrimine linguae, generis, coloris”

Two levels must be distinguished:

1. On the level of perennial doctrine:
– The universality of the Church is dogma: *una, sancta, catholica et apostolica*.
– The call of all nations to holiness is affirmed by Scripture and tradition; no error here in itself.

2. On the level of this concrete act and its context:
– This is not a neutral extension of representation; it is an engineering of an electorate and senatus that will ratify and perpetuate the conciliar agenda.
– Among those created or later associated stand figures who will be protagonists and symbols of conciliar subversion:
– Bernardus Alfrink: key progressive at Vatican II, supporter of doctrinal dilution.
– The elevation of new hierarchies formed already in an atmosphere open to relativistic “dialogue” with the world.

The very rhetoric anticipates post-conciliar egalitarian slogans. John XXIII invokes Mark 16:15 and Matthew 28:19; however, he empties their integral sense:

– The mandate is: teach all nations to observe everything Christ commanded, incorporating them into the one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation.
– The allocution never explicitly affirms the exclusive truth and salvific necessity of the Catholic Church as defined against Liberalism and Indifferentism by Pius IX and others.
– Instead, it prepares the shift from integral mission to a humanitarian, horizontal presence among nations.

The gravity lies not merely in choosing geographically diverse cardinals, but in building a “College” ideologically predisposed to accept and propagate post-1958 novelties. The continuity formula conceals a revolution in personnel and mentality.

Misappropriation of the Canon of the Most Holy Sacrifice

John XXIII dwells on the Canon’s prayer:

“pacificare, custodire, adunare et regere toto orbe terrarum”

He uses these words as an emblem of ecclesial vitality and unity, supposedly reflected in his cardinalatial choices and conciliar plans. Yet:

– The Canon’s petition is ordered to the true Church, indefectible in faith and worship, not to an experimental, democratized, ecumenical federation.
– “Pacify, keep, unite, and rule” (*pacificare, custodire, adunare, regere*) presupposes:
– unity in doctrine,
– protection from error,
– hierarchical, monarchic government under the Roman Pontiff as defined by Vatican I.

John XXIII exploits this sacrificial prayer while preparing structures that will soon:
– introduce doctrinally ambiguous schemas,
– later allow a fabricated rite that reduces the Unbloody Sacrifice to a communal meal,
– weaken in practice the very dogmas on Papal primacy and the inerrancy of the universal ordinary Magisterium.

The allocution’s serenity about the Church’s condition is in direct tension with Pius X’s, Pius XI’s, and Pius XII’s condemnations of Modernism, Communism, secularism, and Masonry as mortal threats requiring militant clarity, not “optimistic” irenicism.

The Second Vatican Council Announced as the Apex of This Strategy

The text explicitly links this third creation of cardinals to the preparation of the Second Vatican Council:

“Alterum autem Concilium Oecumenicum Vaticanum celebrandum… tertiam hanc Patrum Cardinalium creationem… magnopere suadet eique non leve tribuit momentum.”

He presents the Council as:

– an endeavor requiring broad authority and representation,
– a means to clarify doctrine and discipline,
– a path to promote Christian life and apostolate.

Measured by integral Catholic doctrine and by the subsequent facts (which are verifiable and notorious):

– The council became the matrix of:
– religious freedom contrary to the Syllabus,
– collegiality diluting divinely instituted primacy,
– ecumenism contradicting the exclusive identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church as traditionally taught,
– liturgical reform that de facto undermined belief in the sacrificial and propitiatory nature of the Mass.

The allocution’s sweet rhetoric about:

“christianae vitae christianique apostolatus incrementum efficacius promoveatur”

is the typical modernist method: using orthodox vocabulary to introduce principles and personnel that will subvert its perennial meaning. As St. Pius X exposes in Pascendi, the modernist “reformer” never begins with open negation, but with ambiguity, sentimentalism, and appeals to “needs of the times.”

Here, John XXIII constructs the theological and institutional scaffolding:
– a College widened and ideologically filtered,
– a Roman Synod used as a rehearsal,
– a language of serene optimism in the face of an objectively escalating internal apostasy,
for the launching of what will be, in its fruits and doctrine, a conciliar deviation.

Naturalistic Sentimentalism and the Silencing of Supernatural Absolutes

A decisive criterion: what is not said.

In this allocution, while speaking of world crises, John XXIII laments:

“tantas… hominum miserias, dissensiones, resque incertas…”

He mentions:
– social turbulence,
– mutual suspicions,
– need for truth and justice,
– the influence of Christ’s example.

But he does not:
– recall the dogma of original sin and its social consequences,
– insist on the necessity of the state of grace,
– warn of judgment, hell, or the absolute urgency of conversion to the Catholic Church,
– condemn the liberal, Masonic, and socialist ideologies systematically unmasked by Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII,
– affirm vigorously that there is no peace outside the reign of Christ the King, as taught in Quas primas.

Instead, he offers a horizontal exhortation to “good living” and “right action,” and hopes that cardinals and bishops will inspire peoples and their leaders to:

“consilia inceptaque arcto foedere socianda, quae laetam concordemque pacem praestent”

This is precisely the naturalistic register condemned by the pre-1958 Magisterium:
– politics and peace detached from explicit subordination to the social kingship of Christ,
– moral exhortation severed from doctrinal combat against concrete, named errors.

The gravest accusation is this silence. In an age of modernist infiltration and global apostasy, to speak in such terms without doctrinal precision is to confirm, not correct, the descent into naturalism.

Cardinalatial Selections as Symptom of Systemic Subversion

The published names are not accidental; they are symptomatic:

– Antonius Bacci: a Latinist of the Curia, apparently “traditional,” yet inserted into a college that will facilitate the conciliar transformation.
– Bernardus Alfrink: will act as a major progressive influence.
– Others representing mission territories: symbolically used to project a new image of the Church.

From the perspective of integral Catholic criteria:

– A true pope must defend the deposit of faith in continuity with his predecessors, applying canonical rigor against heresy and error.
– Yet John XXIII elevates men aligned—or soon aligning—with the conciliar reorientation, while no reference is made to the doctrinal integrity required of cardinals as defenders of the faith.

This is an ideological filtering of the hierarchy:
– not according to intransigent fidelity to the pre-existing Magisterium,
– but according to suitability for “aggiornamento.”

The formula:

“lectissimos Praesules… qui… multumque ad christianae religionis contulerunt incrementum”

is, in reality, code for men prepared to “develop” doctrine in the modernist sense condemned in Lamentabili (prop. 58-65) and in Pascendi—to treat dogma as evolving expression of religious consciousness.

From Ecclesia Militans to Ecclesia Dialogans: Betrayal of the Church’s Divine Constitution

Throughout the allocution, several fundamental supernatural marks of the Church are mentioned verbally—unity, holiness, catholicity, apostolicity—yet their practical content is hollowed out:

– The Church is presented primarily as:
– a global moral actor,
– a reconciler of earthly tensions,
– a promoter of concord.

Missing or muted:
– the note of militancy (*Ecclesia militans*),
– the obligation to combat heresy with anathema,
– the reality of the Church as a perfect society distinct from and above the State (against the condemned separation thesis, Syllabus prop. 55),
– the uncompromising necessity of submission of nations to Christ the King, as Pius XI authoritatively expounds: peace in the world is possible only in the reign of Christ and under the law of His Church.

John XXIII’s pastoral tone is not benign; it is programmatic. By replacing the sharp categories of:
– truth vs. error,
– Church vs. sects,
– Christ vs. Belial,
with:
– dialogue,
– sympathy,
– global representation,
he inaugurates the mentality that will enthrone “religious liberty,” “ecumenism,” and the cult of man in the structures occupying the Vatican.

This allocution, thus, is not a harmless ceremonial oration:
– It is an early node in the systematic mutation from the divinely instituted Monarchy of the Church to a collegial, democratized, and eventually desacralized “neo-church”—the conciliar sect.

Conclusion: The Allocution as an Early Manifesto of the Neo-Church

Measured strictly by pre-1958 Catholic doctrine and by the binding condemnations of Liberalism and Modernism:

– The allocution:
– exploits traditional formulas while preparing their inversion;
– sentimentalizes persecution without reaffirming non-negotiable dogmas and the social Kingship of Christ;
– uses legitimate universality to justify an ideological restructuring of the College of Cardinals;
– explicitly connects this restructuring to a coming council whose verified fruits stand in radical tension with prior Magisterium;
– suppresses any mention of the duty of states to honor Christ and His Church, of the horror of heresy, or of the penalties attached to defection from the faith.

Thus, its theological and spiritual content—precisely in what it exalts and what it omits—manifests the emerging Antichurch logic:

– from *Ecclesia docens* to “listening Church,”
– from dogmatic clarity to pastoral ambiguity,
– from the reign of Christ the King to an ecumenical coexistence of religions,
– from the Most Holy Sacrifice as propitiation to a horizontal sociological symbol.

This secret consistorial allocution is an operative step in the establishment of structures and mentalities that would soon enthrone the “abomination of desolation” within the visible edifices once occupied by the true Church. The spiritual bankruptcy lies not in screaming ruptures, but in the smiling, tranquil, “optimistic” language that refuses to confess Christ as exclusive King and Lawgiver over nations, doctrines, and souls, and instead consecrates the coming conciliar revolution under the guise of continuity.

---

Source:
Consistorium Secretum – Allocutio in consueta aula Palatii Apostolici Vaticani (die 30 mensis Martii, A.D. MCMLX)   (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025