John XXIII—the first antipope of the conciliar usurpers—addresses assembled members of the Society of Jesus in Rome (1961), praising their fidelity to the Roman See, exalting their special vow of obedience to the papacy, commending their apostolic works (especially youth formation and missions), and imparting his “apostolic blessing” as an encouragement to assist his program of religious renewal and moral restoration in society. In reality, this apparently devout allocution is a programmatic attempt to harness the Jesuits as the vanguard of a new, paramasonic religion of conciliar humanism under the label of obedience and “piety,” subordinating their famed discipline and intellectual power to the coming revolution against the integral Catholic faith.

---

The Jesuit Vow Weaponized: John XXIII’s Soft Opening of the Conciliar Revolution

Enthroning a Counterfeit Authority Against the Pre-1958 Magisterium

From the first lines, the allocution rests on a deadly false premise: that John XXIII is the legitimate “Successor of the Prince of the Apostles” to whom vowed fidelity is owed.

He greets them as men gathered to offer humble homage to the “Successor of Peter” and explicitly fastens their Ignatian vow of special obedience to his own person:

“Addito enim quarto illo voto… ut Apostolicae Sedi singulari cum oboedientia inserviretis, eidemque mentes, vires, voluntatesque addiceretis vestras.”

English: “By the addition of that fourth vow… that you might serve the Apostolic See with singular obedience, and dedicate to it your minds, strengths, and wills.”

This is the central maneuver: to leverage a supernatural vow, instituted for the defense of the true Papacy and the militant Church, in order to bind an entire body of influential religious to the emerging conciliar sect. Once the See is objectively profaned and doctrinally inverted, such obedience—if still rendered—is no longer a virtue but complicity.

Before 1958, the Church had already laid down the doctrinal armament against this abuse:

– Cum ex Apostolatus Officio (Paul IV, 1559) affirms that one who has defected from the faith and is elevated to the papacy has a promotion “null, void, and of no effect”—even if accepted by all.
– The constant doctrine summarized by St. Robert Bellarmine and others (as preserved in authentic pre-conciliar theology) states that a manifest heretic cannot be head of the Church because he is not even a member.
– Canon 188 §4 (1917 Code) states that a cleric who publicly defects from the faith loses office ipso facto.

By 1961, John XXIII had already clearly manifested his orientation toward condemned liberalism and modernism: his programmatic openness to “the modern world,” his intention to convoke the council that would enshrine religious liberty and false ecumenism (ideas explicitly condemned in the Syllabus Errorum of Pius IX and in Lamentabili and Pascendi of St. Pius X). This allocution must therefore be read as an early step in subjugating the Jesuits to a pseudo-petrine, modernist command.

What appears as praise is in fact a demand: attach your Ignatian vow to an anti-Ignatian revolution.

The theological conclusion—measured only by pre-1958 doctrine—is straightforward: to present such allegiance to a man preparing to overturn dogma as meritorious is objectively subversive. The allocution is an attempt to baptize disoriented obedience as holiness, weaponizing the very virtue of obedience against the Faith it exists to serve.

From Supernatural Militia to Moralistic Service Corps

The text presents the Jesuits as energetic collaborators in a program of vague religious uplift and moral restoration:

“ut adiutrices manus magno illi operi praestetis… ut sinceri nominis pietas apud omnes civium ordines reflorescat, incorrupta morum vigeat sanitas, ac veritas secura resplendeat.”

English: “that you may offer helping hands to that great work… that genuine piety of name may flourish again among all classes of citizens, that uncorrupted moral health may prevail, and that secure truth may shine forth.”

On the surface, these words sound Catholic. But the omissions are deafening:

– No mention of the necessity of the one true Church as the exclusive ark of salvation.
– No mention of the absolute obligation of states to recognize the social kingship of Christ, solemnly reaffirmed by Pius XI in Quas Primas: peace and order are impossible until laws, governments, and nations submit to Christ the King.
– No mention of the war against condemned errors: liberalism, indifferentism, socialism, secret societies, religious freedom, and false ecumenism enumerated in the Syllabus of Errors.
– No explicit call to defend dogma against modernist infiltration, despite St. Pius X’s binding condemnation of modernism as the “synthesis of all heresies” and his insistence that pastors unmask it mercilessly.

Instead we are offered generalized moral language—”pietas,” “sanitas morum,” “veritas”—divorced from precise dogmatic content and the concrete rights of the Church over nations. This is the classic modernist displacement: supernatural realities are coated in pious verbiage while being silently evacuated of their doctrinal and militant sharpness.

Lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief): when the supreme claimant of authority systematically speaks of “piety” and “truth” without confessing the exclusive claims of the Catholic Church and without denouncing the reigning errors, he is not bolstering the faith but habituating consciences to a new, broader, malleable religion compatible with liberal civilization.

Linguistic Cloaking: Pious Vagueness as Instrument of Apostasy

The rhetoric of the allocution is soft, paternal, affective. Benevolence replaces combat. Key features:

– Continual insistence on consolation, joy, “gratissimum,” “paterna caritas.”
– No warlike language about heresy, Freemasonry, rationalism, or secularism, despite their explosive dominance in 1961—decades after Pius IX, Leo XIII, and St. Pius X had unmasked the same forces as the organized conspiracy of Satan against the Church.
– The Jesuit fourth vow is praised not as a weapon in doctrinal defense but as a means of “religiosa virtus” in generalized terms.

This style is not accidental; it is symptomatic.

Pre-1958 magisterial language when confronting error is clear, juridical, uncompromising:

– Pius IX unmasks secret societies as the “synagogue of Satan” and condemns religious liberty and liberalism as pernicious.
– Leo XIII in encyclicals like Humanum Genus and Immortale Dei speaks with juridical and theological precision: the Church is a perfect society; the State must acknowledge the true religion; Masonry is intrinsically hostile to God and the Church.
– St. Pius X in Pascendi and in the Oath against Modernism uses direct, forensic language, naming modernist tactics and condemning their double-speak.

Here, by contrast, John XXIII uses devout generalities to avoid the central conflicts. That is a hallmark of modernist diplomacy: never deny directly, but suffocate the dogma under cotton wool. Silence where the Faith demands clarity is itself a betrayal.

The Jesuits—founded to be the shock troops of the Counter-Reformation—are addressed not as defenders of doctrine against heresy, but as a pliable workforce to embellish a universal, non-confrontational religiosity. Their historical charism is neutralized by sentimental paternalism.

Theological Inversion: Obedience Severed from Truth

The allocution’s focal point is the exaltation of obedience to the “Apostolic See,” i.e., to John XXIII and his successors, as if this obedience were self-justifying:

“Perstate, dilecti filii, in hac consiliorum inceptorumque constantia… omnibus virtutibus assiduo nisu segui pergite, ut Christi Ecclesiam laetificantes, indefatigato studio crescatìs.”

English: “Continue, beloved sons, in this constancy of your counsels and undertakings… strive to follow with all virtues, that, gladdening the Church of Christ, you may grow with tireless zeal.”

But Catholic doctrine knows no such notion of blind supernaturalized submission to a human person abstracted from the objective faith.

– Obedience is a moral virtue subordinate to faith and charity. It is not absolute; it has as its formal object a legitimate command within the limits of divine and ecclesiastical law.
– Non est obediendum in malis (“one must not obey in evil”): a principle universally recognized by the theologians and moralists before the conciliar subversion.
– St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that we must not obey superiors against God, and that authority destroying its own end loses its binding moral force.

By 1961, the looming council, the coming liturgical revolution, the opening to condemned doctrines of religious freedom and ecumenism were already in preparation. Thus this allocution functions as a spiritual conditioning: hitch your vow to a trajectory that will soon contradict the very magisterium that formed you.

From the perspective of unchanging Catholic theology prior to 1958, this is a strategic perversion of Ignatian obedience—turning a vow designed as a bulwark of orthodoxy into an instrument of post-conciliarism.

Once the doctrinal rupture appears (and it did with the promotion of religious liberty, collegiality, false ecumenism, the emasculation of the social Kingship of Christ, and the manufactured new rite of “mass”), those who post factum apply this allocution to justify their adherence are effectively told: “Your holiness consists in executing the revolution in the name of obedience.” That is spiritual abuse of authority.

Systemic Omissions: No Kingship of Christ, No Condemnation of Liberalism

Measured against Pius XI’s Quas Primas (1925), the allocution’s deficiencies are stark.

Pius XI:

– Insists that society’s miseries come from excluding Christ and His law from public life.
– Declares that peace will not come until individuals and states submit to Christ’s reign.
– Decrees the feast of Christ the King to assert publicly that rulers and nations must obey Christ or face His judgment.
– Condemns laicism, indifferentism, and the secular State as rebellion.

In contrast, John XXIII:

– Speaks merely of “pietas” and “morum sanitas” among “all classes of citizens.”
– Says nothing about the duty of the State to profess the Catholic faith.
– Offers no reminder that error has no rights, that religious indifferentism is condemned, that liberty of cult is a pestilence (Pius IX).
– Avoids any mention that the very modern civilization he aims to befriend had been denounced by his predecessors as saturated with Masonry and rationalism.

The omission is not neutral. It is the suppression of the kingly claims of Christ in favour of a moralized religiosity compatible with pluralistic, Liberal regimes—precisely what the Syllabus and Quas Primas declared intolerable.

When a supposed supreme authority addresses the elite troops of the Church in 1961 without:

– Commanding them to wage war against modern philosophy and modernist theology.
– Reminding them of the binding condemnations of Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X.
– Calling them to defend the social reign of Christ against apostate states.

he effectively trains them to accept and implement the coming denial of those very principles. Their silence later at the conciliar and post-conciliar corruption is pre-programmed here.

Jesuit Mission as Engine of the Neo-Church

The allocution singles out two fields:

– Youth education.
– Missionary activity.

These are precisely the two most potent levers for either consolidating or destroying the faith.

Instead of instructing the Jesuits to form youth in:

– The condemnations of modern errors.
– The unique salvific necessity of the Catholic Church.
– The duties of rulers to Christ the King.
– The sacrificial doctrine of the Most Holy Sacrifice.

John XXIII wraps their mission in neutral formulas, unmoored from doctrinal precision. The later historical record (verified in abundant documentation) shows exactly what such rhetoric facilitated:

– Jesuit-led and Jesuit-inspired pedagogies that replaced catechism with relativistic “dialogue” and sociological activism.
– Missionary work reinterpreted through the lens of “inculturation” and religious pluralism, undermining the dogma “extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” in practice if not always in words.
– Intimate complicity of Jesuit institutions with modernist biblical criticism, evolutionary dogma theories, and the dismantling of scholastic theology so forcefully condemned in Lamentabili and Pascendi.

The allocution is not the cause of all this, but it is a lucid snapshot of the reorientation: from a Church that commands conversion, anathematizes heresy, and subdues nations to Christ, to a neo-church that flatters educators and missionaries as artisans of a hazy “piety” and “truth” open to all.

The pre-1958 Magisterium had warned of exactly this tactic:

– St. Pius X condemns the idea that dogma evolves to suit the needs of conscience and history.
– Lamentabili rejects the notion that doctrine must be re-formed by modern thought, that revelation continues in Christian consciousness.
– The oath against Modernism obliged clergy to reject precisely the historicist, evolutionist, and subjectivist currents that post-conciliar Jesuits would propagate.

By encouraging without qualifying, by praising without doctrinally arming, the allocution functions as a green light to deploy Jesuit energy in service of the impending conciliar ideology.

Abuse of Blessing: Pseudo-Apostolic Seal on a Program of Subversion

The allocution culminates:

“Cuius supernae pacis et sempiterni gaudii pignus esto Apostolica Nostra Benedictio…”

English: “As a pledge of His heavenly peace and eternal joy, let Our Apostolic Blessing be upon you…”

A blessing is not a magical ornament. In Catholic theology, it presupposes legitimacy of office and is ordered to the true good of souls—namely perseverance in the unadulterated faith, in the sacraments, in the divine law.

But here, what is being blessed?

– A body whose distinctive vow is being silently re-riveted from the defense of dogma to servility toward a coming anti-dogmatic council.
– An apostolic zeal not expressly oriented to the exclusive claims of the Catholic religion, but to a broad moral and devotional enterprise easily co-opted by the “Church of the New Advent.”
– A future in which many of these men or their successors will be instrumental in the fabrication, dissemination, and defense of the new theology, new liturgy, and new ecclesiology.

Thus the so-called “apostolic blessing” becomes, in objective reality, a counterfeit seal attached to counterfeit aims: a sign not of Peter confirming his brethren in the faith (Luke 22:32), but of an intruder confirming his agents in the work of transforming the visible structures of the Church into a paramasonic structure.

From the immutable standpoint of Catholic doctrine before 1958, no subjective good intention can change this: the allocution is a misuse of apostolic language to further a non-apostolic design.

Symptomatic Fruit: The Conciliar Jesuit and the Collapse of Doctrine

What this text foreshadows is now a matter of verifiable history:

– Large sectors of the Society of Jesus became the avant-garde of doctrinal dissolution, liberation theology, liturgical profanation, relativistic “dialogue,” and practical denial of the dogmas on grace, the Church, and Christ’s kingship.
– Jesuit universities and schools around the world became laboratories of syncretism, moral dissolution, and rebellion against the pre-conciliar Magisterium.
– The notion of unconditional obedience to the conciliar claimants in Rome was used to silence or marginalize those few Jesuits and others who wished to remain faithful to Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Pius XI, and Pius XII.

All this is not an accidental abuse of a neutral allocution; it is the unfolding of its logic. Once obedience is torn from its dogmatic anchor, once the language of militant faith is replaced by sentimental generalities, once the kingship of Christ is muted to make way for peaceful co-existence with apostate states, then the most disciplined religious corps becomes the ideal tool of an abomination of desolation standing where it ought not.

Abusus non tollit usum (abuse does not take away proper use), but here the abuse is systemic: the entire direction of the speech is to secure personal allegiance to the very authority that will introduce what the previous Magisterium had solemnly condemned.

Conclusion: Integral Fidelity Demands the Rejection of Conciliar Obedience

Seen by the light of pre-1958 Catholic doctrine, this allocution:

– Replaces clear doctrinal militancy with ambiguous piety.
– Exalts obedience to a manifestly revolutionary authority as the apex of Jesuit holiness.
– Omits the non-negotiable demands of Christ’s social kingship and the exclusive rights of the Catholic Church.
– Silences the condemnations of liberalism, indifferentism, and modernism at precisely the moment when they need to be wielded.
– Prepares a powerful order to become an engine of the “Church of the New Advent” instead of the sword of the true Church.

True obedience is owed only where the rule of faith is intact. When a putative authority prepares to enthrone principles anathematized by the solemn Magisterium, fidelity to St. Ignatius, to Trent, to Pius IX, Leo XIII, and St. Pius X requires resistance to such demands, not subservience.

Therefore, the only coherent response from the standpoint of unchanging Catholic teaching is:

– To recognize that binding a vow to the conciliar revolution is morally null.
– To reject all appeals to “obedience” that serve to implement doctrines and practices condemned before 1958.
– To return to the perennial doctrine, discipline, and worship that draw their authority from Christ the King and His true Vicar—not from the usurping structures that occupy the Vatican and trade on the prestige of the betrayed name of Peter.

Veritas Domini manet in aeternum (the truth of the Lord remains forever). No allocution of a conciliar antipope can overturn it; all such documents, however perfumed, must be exposed as instruments of that long-prepared revolt which the authentic Magisterium had already foreseen and condemned.

---

Source:
Ad quosdam Societatis Iesus sodales coram admissos (die 1 m. Octobris, A. D. MCMLXI)   (vatican.va)
Date: 08.11.2025