In this allocution of 28 January 1960, delivered in the Church of St. Ignatius in Rome, John XXIII addresses seminarians of the Roman diocese and those studying in Rome, using the occasion of the Roman Synod to exhort them to priestly virtue, detachment from the world, love of Sacred Scripture, and fidelity to prayer. He develops three key exhortations drawn from biblical imagery—“Digne ambulate”, “Accipite librum et devorate illum”, “Psallite sapienter et frequenter”—presented in a warm, paternal, and apparently pious tone, proposing an ideal of the clergy as selected, purified, studious, and prayerful servants of the Church and humanity. Yet precisely in this smooth, edifying rhetoric lies the poison: a subtle displacement of the supernatural, a preparation of souls for the conciliar revolution, and an appropriation of Catholic vocabulary to inaugurate an anti-Church oriented toward a new humanistic order.
Weaponized Piety: John XXIII’s Seminarians and the Program of the New Religion
Selective Catholicism as a Screen for Revolution
Already in 1960, in this discourse, the future architect of the conciliar catastrophe reveals the method by which the conciliar sect operates: not through open negation, but through a careful mixture of Catholic phraseology with imperceptible but decisive shifts of orientation.
Key facts and emphases of the allocution (verified from the Latin text at the cited URL):
– John XXIII:
– Speaks to seminarians from many nations gathered in Rome.
– Evokes the Roman Synod as a “pulcherrima ac frugifera auspicia” for the universal Church.
– Cites the Book of Judges and Gideon to describe vocation as a selective purification of candidates.
– Proposes three guiding imperatives:
– “Digne ambulate” – walk worthily, morally, intellectually, with prudence and kindness.
– “Accipite librum et devorate illum” – take and “devour” Sacred Scripture as nourishment.
– “Psallite sapienter et frequenter” – pray and chant wisely and frequently, especially with the Psalms.
– Urges detachment from earthly comforts, chastity, obedience, humility, and deep formation.
– Presents seminarians as “fragrans veluti ver futurae aetatis,” a fragrant springtime of the future.
– Stresses trust in Christ, love for the “Ecclesia Sancta,” and fidelity to bishops.
All this sounds impeccably Catholic at first glance. However:
– Nowhere is there a clear, combative affirmation of the dogmatic antithesis between the Catholic Church and error, so solemnly taught and defended by the pre-1958 Magisterium (for example, Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors, condemned indifferentism and liberalism; see Syllabus, propositions 15–18, 55, 77–80).
– There is silence about the intrinsic contradiction between the Faith and modern “progress,” “laicism,” Masonic political structures, and religious liberty condemned as “error having reference to modern liberalism.” (Syllabus, 77–80).
– There is no warning about Modernism already condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi Dominici gregis. The word “Modernism” does not appear; the concrete enemy is unnamed.
– The concept of “selection” (via Gideon) is invoked only in a moral-psychological manner, detached from doctrinal discernment; no insistence that heresy, liberal mentality, and naturalism are absolute impediments to Holy Orders.
In other words, a carefully curated Catholicism is presented: devotional, decent, textual—but disarmed. The allocution is anodyne where pre-conciliar Popes were precise; it exhorts without anathematizing; it speaks of holiness, but not of the concrete, historically defined enemies of holiness in the 20th century.
This is the first mark of the emerging neo-church: a rhetoric of virtue without the doctrinal sword.
Naturalistic Tone and the Eclipse of the Supernatural Combat
On the linguistic and rhetorical level, this allocution is revealing.
1. Sentimental paternalism:
John XXIII repeatedly addresses “dilecti filii” in a soft, affective tone. Paternal language is not in itself suspicious; what betrays the underlying shift is its consistent use without the sharp edge of supernatural warning:
– No explicit reminders of hell, divine judgment, the possibility of sacrilegious ordination, or the horror of doctrinal compromise.
– No insistence that the priest exists primarily to offer the Most Holy Sacrifice and to save souls from eternal damnation.
The classical papal magisterium—e.g. Pius XI in Quas Primas—insists that peace and order come only from the public reign of Christ the King; that nations rejecting Him reap disaster. John XXIII’s discourse, by contrast, remains within a safe interior-moral register, well suited to coexist with the liberal world.
2. Optimistic humanism:
Consider the passage where he sees in the joyful youth almost a providential guarantee for the Church’s future:
“videtur Nobis Providentissimus Deus quasi Ecclesiae sanctae… ea quasi polliceri, quae hodie in votis sunt.”
“It seems to Us that most provident God as it were promises to His holy Church, concerned about the virtue and number and apostolic ardor of the future clergy, those very things which are today desired.”
This is the same optimism that will erupt in later pronouncements, the illusion of an “opening to the world,” contrasting starkly with:
– St. Pius X’s clear diagnosis of Modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies.”
– Pius IX’s identification of the Masonic revolution as the engine of a war against the Church.
– The Syllabus’ condemnation of the reconciliation with “modern civilization.”
The allocution’s mood: the future is bright, the youth are promising, the Church is robust. Almost entirely absent: the awareness that the world and its principles are at war with Christ (cf. John 15:18–19), that sects and revolutionary ideologies—explicitly identified by Pius IX as the “synagogue of Satan”—are infiltrating states and institutions, including seminaries.
3. Ambiguous universality:
He warmly emphasizes seminarians arriving from “varii nationes,” forming one atmosphere, sharing gifts. On its face this is Catholic. However, he does not anchor this universality clearly and exclusively in the full submission of all nations and institutions to the one true Church and the social kingship of Christ. There is a subtle shift:
– From the integral doctrinal unity of the Church as perfect society (cf. Syllabus 19, 21)
– Toward a sentimental-cultural unity of diverse backgrounds in Rome, which will seamlessly morph into the conciliar “people of God” ideology and ecumenical confusion.
The language is polished, biblical, devotional—and precisely by that, it camouflages a refusal to speak the hard words that the age required.
Scripture, Yes — Dogma, No: Controlled Spirituality Without Doctrinal Steel
At the theological level, the three programmatic formulas must be confronted with pre-1958 doctrine.
1. “Digne ambulate” – Moral exhortation without dogmatic exclusivity
John XXIII uses:
“Ambula coram me et esto perfectus” (Gen 17:1) and Philippians 4:8 to insist that seminarians cultivate virtue, prudence, charity, and detachment from earthly pleasures; he rightly warns against softness, worldliness, and mediocrity.
This would be laudable if it were integrated into the true doctrinal framework:
– A priest is not merely a morally upright, empathetic functionary. He is an alter Christus, sacrificing priest, judge of souls in the tribunal of penance, defender of truth against heresy.
– The allocution never:
– Affirms explicitly that adherence to all defined dogmas and anti-modernist teaching is an absolute condition.
– Recalls the Oath against Modernism (then still in force).
– Warns that liberal political and theological ideas, condemned unequivocally by Pius IX and St. Pius X, disqualify a candidate.
By omitting these, the exhortation “digne ambulate” gets severed from its dogmatic content and becomes compatible with a future clergy that will happily embrace religious liberty, ecumenism, and modernist exegesis—exactly what followed.
2. “Accipite librum et devorate illum” – Scripture appropriated for a new program
John XXIII invites seminarians to “devour” Sacred Scripture, citing Apocalypse 10:9 and a text of St. Lorenzo Giustiniani. He praises Scripture as:
“sapientiae Verbi speculum… divinitatis armarium… omnium morum scientiam continet.”
In itself, wholly Catholic. Pre-1958 Magisterium likewise insisted that seminarians be grounded in Scripture.
But here is the problem:
– Absolute silence about the binding interpretative authority of the Church against rationalist and modernist abuse, so powerfully defended in Lamentabili sane exitu:
– Proposition 4 (condemned): that the Magisterium cannot determine the proper sense of Scripture.
– Proposition 12 (condemned): that Scripture must be interpreted as any merely human document.
– No reminder that Scripture, detached from Tradition and the constant Magisterium, becomes the weapon of heretics.
Instead, the allocution places Scripture at the center in a way that anticipates the coming “biblical renewal” which in the conciliar sect often:
– Diluted dogma into “salvation history,”
– Undermined the inerrancy of Scripture,
– And subordinated defined doctrine to historical-critical fashions.
The call to “devour” the book, without simultaneous militant insistence on anti-modernist safeguards, functions as an invitation to a Scripture which will soon be re-read through the lens of the “new theology.”
3. “Psallite sapienter et frequenter” – Prayer aestheticized, combat silenced
The third exhortation promotes:
– Constant prayer,
– Love of the Psalter,
– Interior life as the soul of priestly existence.
Again, in itself, Catholic. But once more, note what is missing:
– No explicit emphasis that liturgical prayer is intrinsically bound to right doctrine (lex orandi, lex credendi).
– No warning against experimental liturgy, creativity, vernacularization, horizontalism—developments already in preparation.
– No connection between prayer and the defense of the flock against wolves, errors, and profanations.
Prayer is presented as psychological-spiritual cultivation, not as participation in the militant worship of the Church that anathematizes error and implores God against the enemies of Christ’s reign.
Thus, the trilogy Scripture–Morality–Prayer is offered as a hermetically closed “safe” spirituality, cut away from the explicit anti-liberal, anti-modernist, anti-ecumenist positions that defined integral Catholic faith up to Pius XII.
The Omission that Condemns: No Word against Modernism and the Masonic Onslaught
From the perspective of unchanging doctrine:
– Pius IX explicitly denounced the Masonic sects as the vanguard of the “synagogue of Satan,” plotting to overthrow the Church (see the Syllabus context and his repeated allocutions).
– St. Pius X identified Modernism as infiltrating seminaries, clergy, and Catholic institutions, demanding systematic purging, vigilance, and juridical measures (Pascendi, Lamentabili).
– Quas Primas (Pius XI) taught that the crisis of the world results from rejecting the social kingship of Christ, insisting that states and societies must submit publicly to Christ and His Church.
Given this background, we must rigorously ask: what does it mean that John XXIII, speaking in 1960, to seminarians in the very heart of the Church, mentions none of this?
– No explicit:
– Condemnation of Modernism.
– Mention of the Syllabus of Errors.
– Warning against liberal democracy, secular education, Masonic political structures.
– Denunciation of the nascent ecumenical relativism.
Instead, he speaks, near the end, of:
“Haec profecto carmina… testantur antiqua vaticinia iam expleta esse, ac novum nasci saeculorum ordinem: tempora scilicet Evangelii aeterni, libertatis, unitatis pacisque certissimi nuntii. Hoc Evangelium Ecclesia Sancta, quae animosa est et novis aetatibus semper accommodata, vestris manibus tradit.”
“Indeed, these canticles… bear witness that the ancient prophecies are now fulfilled, and that a new order of the ages is being born: namely the times of the eternal Gospel, of liberty, of unity and of peace, a most certain message. This Gospel the Holy Church, which is courageous and always adapted to new ages, hands over into your hands.”
Here the mask slips:
– “novus saeculorum ordo… Evangelii aeterni… libertatis, unitatis pacis… Ecclesia… novis aetatibus semper accommodata”
– This language resonates disturbingly with:
– The liberal “new order,”
– An historicist, evolutionary conception of the Church “always adapted to new ages,”
– And the modernist thesis (condemned in Lamentabili 58–60) that truth evolves with man and doctrine must be re-shaped to contemporary consciousness.
This is not an accidental phrase. It is a programmatic signal:
– From the integral doctrine of Quas Primas, which subjects all ages to the immutable kingship of Christ,
– To a doctrine in which the “age” becomes the implicit norm, and the Church “adapts.”
Thus, the allocution’s omission of anti-modernist rigor is not neutral; it is structurally ordered toward the coming conciliar revolution.
Gideon Inverted: From Chosen Warriors to Managerial Clergy of the New Advent
John XXIII deploys the story of Gideon (Judges 7):
“Qui formidolosus et timidus est revertatur… Qui lingua lambuerint aquas… separabis eos seorsum… trecenti tantum viri… probati remanserunt. Hoc praeclarum exemplum intuemini, dilecti filii, et ad vos vestramque agendi rationem diligenter aptate.”
His application:
– Eliminate the fearful, slothful, self-indulgent.
– Choose those detached from comforts.
– Prepare “veri Dei Regni milites.”
Superficially excellent. But:
– Gideon’s chosen were warriors against idolatrous enemies.
– In Catholic tradition, this has been understood as image of the few faithful called to combat heresy and paganism, to defend God’s rights publicly.
John XXIII’s version:
– Transforms Gideon’s host into:
– Agents “ad populos novo melioreque ordine conformandos et ad universam hominum familiam… Christi lege virtuteque consociandam” – to shape peoples into a “new and better order” and unite humanity by Christ’s law and virtue.
– The terms are left elastic, capable of being filled with the conciliar program:
– Dialogue, human rights, religious liberty, ecumenism.
Missing is the clear teaching of Pius XI:
– Peace and order are only possible “in the Kingdom of Christ,” understood as the social and political reign of His law (Quas Primas).
– The state and all institutions must submit to Christ; religious pluralism as a principle is condemned.
– Errors and false religions can never be placed on equal footing.
John XXIII speaks of a “new order” of liberty and unity, but does not explicitly bind it to the confessional state and condemnation of false cults. This deliberate lack of precision allows:
– The reinterpretation of “Christ’s law” as a vague humanitarian ethic compatible with religious liberty and ecumenism.
– Seminarians to imagine themselves as chaplains of global “unity and peace,” rather than soldiers of Christ King engaged in an irreconcilable war with liberal, Masonic, and modernist systems.
Thus, Gideon is inverted:
– Not the few against the world for the glory of Christ the King,
– But the few selected to integrate a worldwide aggiornamento, the “new Advent” of a man-centered religion.
Subverting Authority: Preparing Obedient Instruments for a Counterfeit Hierarchy
The allocution heavily emphasizes obedience, docility, and affective union with “the Church,” “Episcopis vestris,” and the speaker as “Vicarius Iesu Christi.”
He repeats:
– Seminarians must:
– Serve as “adiutricem operam” to their bishops.
– Be joy, ornament, and support for their dioceses.
– Embrace ecclesiastical discipline and spiritual practices as proposed.
From the standpoint of true Catholic theology:
– Obedience is a virtue only insofar as it is ordered to God and the immutable Catholic faith.
– The Pope is true Vicar of Christ only when he professes and defends the same faith handed down once for all; a manifest heretic or promoter of condemned doctrines cannot hold the office (as taught by classical theologians like St. Robert Bellarmine and as reflected in the principle that a manifest heretic is outside the Church and cannot be its head).
By 1960, John XXIII had already initiated:
– The calling of what would become Vatican II.
– The atmosphere of “aggiornamento.”
– A pattern of discourse that bracketed condemnations and promised a “new Pentecost.”
This allocution functions concretely as:
– Formation of a clergy that:
– Is morally zealous and affectively attached to a “Pope” who is quietly reprogramming the Church,
– Is untrained in doctrinal combat against Modernism,
– Is conditioned to equate fidelity with submission to a coming conciliar overhaul.
He tells them:
“Nos, utpote Iesu Christi Vicarius, vos ex animo diligimus.”
He demands their confidence and love without simultaneously binding them explicitly to the anti-modernist oaths and condemnations.
Thus, obedience is being detached from the objective content of the faith and reattached to a person and institution preparing to alter praxis and teaching. This violates the classical Catholic principle:
– Lex credendi statuit legem oboedientiæ (the rule of belief determines the rule of obedience), not vice versa.
The seminarians are trained to obey the structures that, shortly thereafter, will:
– Introduce a new “Mass,”
– Dilute catechesis,
– Promote ecumenism,
– Demolish the social kingship of Christ.
The allocution is a psychological prelude: virtuous instruments for an unvirtuous revolution.
Spiritual Vocabulary in the Service of Ecclesial Self-Dissolution
We must read the final crescendo with attention:
“Haec profecto carmina… testantur antiqua vaticinia iam expleta esse, ac novum nasci saeculorum ordinem… Hoc Evangelium Ecclesia Sancta, quae animosa est et novis aetatibus semper accommodata, vestris manibus tradit… Quod ut accipitis, dilecti filii, ita custodite: in corde et in labiis vestris ut digne illud annuntietis!”
Key elements:
– “New order of the ages”
– “Eternal Gospel of liberty, unity, peace”
– “Holy Church… always adapted to new ages”
Contrasted with:
– Pius IX: condemned the proposition that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Syllabus, 80).
– St. Pius X: Excommunicated those opposing Lamentabili and Pascendi, identifying Modernism’s essence in precisely this adaptationist, evolutionary tendency.
– Quas Primas: rooted the remedy of modern evils in restoring the objective reign of Christ the King, not in accommodating “new ages.”
Therefore, the allocution’s concluding theology:
– Aligns more with the condemned idea that the Church must adapt herself to modern civilization and “progress.”
– Uses biblical and liturgical language (Benedictus, Magnificat, Nunc Dimittis) not to reaffirm the triumph of Christ over the nations in the integral Catholic sense, but to baptize a “new order” whose actual historical content (after 1962) will prove to be:
– Religious liberty as a principle,
– Ecumenism with heretics and schismatics,
– Dialogue with false religions,
– Subordination of Church praxis to humanistic ideology.
This is the precise pattern of Modernism: maintain formulas, invert meaning.
Conclusion: An Allocution as Manifesto of Crafted Ambiguity
Measured against the immutable Catholic doctrine before 1958, this speech is not an innocent spiritual exhortation with minor gaps; it is a paradigmatic text of transition:
– It:
– Retains Scripture, saints, Eucharist, prayer, chastity, obedience—at the level of vocabulary.
– Carefully avoids:
– Naming Modernism,
– Restating the Syllabus,
– Demanding anti-liberal militancy,
– Affirming the non-negotiable social kingship of Christ.
– Introduces:
– The idea of a “new order of the ages” under the sign of “eternal Gospel” and liberty,
– The notion of the Church “always adapted to new ages” as programmatic principle,
– A pious, docile clergy whose zeal is detached from doctrinal combat, and ready to serve the conciliar revolution.
Thus, what appears as paternal care for seminarians is, in its omissions and its loaded phrases, a calculated step preparing a generation of clergy for the ecclesial self-destruction that will follow. The rhetoric forms “Gideon’s three hundred” not as confessors of the Kingship of Christ against the world, but as disciplined functionaries of the Church of the New Advent.
Any integral Catholic reading this text today must:
– Reject the modernist hermeneutic of “aggiornamento” smuggled in under biblical and devotional imagery.
– Reassert against such ambiguous texts the binding authority of:
– The Syllabus of Errors,
– Quas Primas,
– Lamentabili sane exitu and Pascendi,
– The constant condemnation of liberalism, indifferentism, and doctrinal evolution.
– Recognize that the true discernment of vocations and the true formation of seminarians require:
– Total, explicit, non-negotiable adherence to the pre-1958 Magisterium,
– Militant rejection of modernist novelties,
– Formation in the theology of the Most Holy Sacrifice, the uniqueness of the Catholic Church, and the public reign of Christ the King over individuals, families, and states.
In light of that, this allocution stands not as a benign spiritual address, but as a discreet manifesto of the paramasonic structure that would soon occupy the visible institutions, dressing its future clergy in borrowed garments of Catholic piety while marching them toward the abomination of desolation.
Source:
Ad sacrorum alumnos ex romana dioecesi vel Romae studiorum causa commorantes, d. XXVIII m. Ianuarii a. 1960, Ioannes PP.XXIII (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025