Jean XXIII (Part 1)
Mgr Roncalli before his Election was Semi-Heretical
Table of Contents:
- Introduction
- The Facts
2.1. Influenced by Modernist Ideas since the Year 1914
2.2. Association with a Modernist Bishop
2.3. Acceptance of the Cardinal’s Hat from a Socialist
2.4. A Certain Ecumenism with Eastern Schismatics
2.5. Participation in Non-Catholic Worship
2.6. Preaching of an Erroneous Universal Fraternity
- Conclusion from the Facts
- Roncalli as Semi-Heretical
- Theological Notes on his Errors
5.1. Modernist Influence since the Year 1914
5.2. Association with Bishop Radini Tedeschi
5.3. Acceptance of the Cardinal’s Hat from a Socialist in 1953
5.4. Ecumenism with Eastern Schismatics
5.5. Participation in Non-Catholic Worship
5.6. Preaching of an Erroneous Universal Fraternity
5.7. In Conclusion
- The Attitude of Pope Pius XII: Roncalli “Suspect of Heresy”
- Opinion of Prominent Sedevacantists: Roncalli Semi-Heretical
7.1. No Consensus on the Subject
7.2. Testimonies that Roncalli was Semi-Heretical
- Final Conclusion
– What is Certain
– A Principle of Law
- Introduction
In the examination of the validity of the popes after the Second Vatican Council, the question of whether Angelo Roncalli, known as John XXIII, was a heretic before his election in 1958 is crucial for Catholics.
According to Catholic theology before 1963, a notorious heretic cannot be validly elected pope, because public heresy separates a person from the Church (see Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio of Paul IV, 1559).
- The Facts
This chapter examines, according to the principles of Thomistic logic and the certain teachings of the Church, the historical proofs suggesting that Roncalli adhered to heretical ideas, particularly modernism and ecumenism, before his election.
2.1. Influenced by Modernist Ideas since the Year 1914
From 1914, while he was a professor at the seminary of Bergamo, Roncalli was accused of modernism, a heresy condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907). According to the biography by Lawrence Elliot, I Will Be Called John: A Biography of Pope John XXIII (Reader’s Digest Press, 1973, p. 59), Cardinal De Lai, secretary of the Congregation of Seminaries, officially reprimanded Roncalli. The cardinal declared: “According to the information that has reached me, I knew that you had read Duchesne [an author whose three-volume work was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books for critical history and modernist tendencies] and other bold authors, and that on certain occasions you showed yourself inclined to that school of thought which tends to empty the tradition and authority of the past of its value, a dangerous current which leads to fatal consequences.”
This reprimand shows that Roncalli was already considered suspect of modernist sympathies, which reject Sacred Tradition and the authority of the Church in favor of an adaptation to modern ideas.
2.2. Association with a Modernist Bishop
From 1905 to 1915, Roncalli was secretary to Bishop Radini Tedeschi, a progressive known for his modernist sympathies.
In John XXIII: Initiator of the Changes by Leroux (p. 10), Roncalli describes Tedeschi in these terms: “His ardent eloquence, his innumerable projects and his extraordinary personal activity could at first give the impression that he contemplated the most radical changes and that he was moved by the sole desire to innovate… [Tedeschi] was less concerned with carrying out reforms than with maintaining the glorious traditions of his diocese and interpreting them in harmony with the new conditions and new needs of the times.”
This description reveals a willingness to reinterpret traditions according to the “needs of the times,” an approach typical of modernism, which seeks to adapt Catholic doctrine to modern ideals, in contradiction with the immutable teaching of the Church.
2.3. Acceptance of the Cardinal’s Hat from a Socialist
In 1953, Roncalli insisted on receiving the cardinal’s hat from the hands of Vincent Auriol, president of France and a convinced socialist. According to Elliot (I Will Be Called John, p. 59), Roncalli called Auriol an “honest socialist.” Now, Pope Pius XI had clearly taught in the encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (1931, §120): “No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true socialist.” By publicly associating with a socialist and accepting a distinction from him, Roncalli objectively gave a counter-witness to the teaching of Pius XI, suggesting an adherence to ideas incompatible with the Catholic Faith. However, accepting a civil honor is not automatically heresy. Roncalli presented it as a diplomatic act.
2.4. A Certain Ecumenism with Eastern Schismatics
During his stay in Bulgaria, Roncalli developed close relations with Orthodox schismatics. According to Luigi Accattoli in When A Pope Asks Forgiveness (New York: Alba House and Daughters of St. Paul, 1998, pp. 18-19), Roncalli declared:
“Catholics and Orthodox are not enemies, but brothers. We have the same faith; we share the same sacraments, and especially the Eucharist. We are divided by a few disagreements concerning the divine constitution of the Church of Jesus Christ. The persons who caused these disagreements have been dead for centuries. Let us abandon the old disputes and, each in his own sphere, work to make our brothers good, by giving them good example. Later, although traveling by different paths, we will achieve the union of the Churches to form together the true and only Church of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
This assertion is gravely erroneous, because the Orthodox, as schismatics, do not share the same faith as the Catholic Church, notably because of their rejection of papal primacy and other dogmas. Read “Mortalium Animos” by Pius XI, 1928, as well as “Satis Cognitum” by Leo XIII, 1896, on the unity of faith.
Fortunately Roncalli somewhat corrects this error by saying that “We are divided by a few disagreements.”
Indeed, the idea of a “union” without the conversion of schismatics to the Catholic Faith is contrary to the teaching of the Church, which requires submission to revealed truth for unity (see Mortalium Animos by Pius XI, 1928).
2.5. Participation in Non-Catholic Worship
According to Renzo Allegri (Il Papa che ha cambiato il mondo, p. 66), a Bulgarian journalist, Stefano Karadgiov, reported:
“I knew Catholic priests who refused to enter an Orthodox church, even as tourists. Mgr Roncalli, on the contrary, always participated in Orthodox services, arousing astonishment and perplexity among certain Catholics. He never missed the great ceremonies celebrated in the main Orthodox church of Sofia. He would stand in a corner and follow the rites with devotion. He particularly liked the Orthodox chants.”
This passive or doubtfully active participation in non-Catholic worship is dangerous because the theologian Merkelbach, in Summa Theologiae Moralis (1:746), teaches that external heresy manifests itself not only by words, but also by dictis vel factis (by words or deeds), including signs, actions or the omission of acts. To participate actively in a schismatic worship, even without verbal profession of heresy, constitutes a scandalous act and an implicit adherence to a false religion. One could object that Roncalli had only a passive presence in this liturgy, yet it is “male odorans” (“smelling bad, smelling of heresy”).
See CIC 1917, canon 1258, which forbids active participation in acatholic worship.
And read the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, 5 June 1948 “Monitum Cum compertum,” concerning common meetings between Catholics and non-Catholics.
Moreover, according to John Hughes in Pontiffs: Popes Who Shaped History (Our Sunday Visitor Press, 1994), Roncalli became friends with the Reverend Austin Oakley, chaplain of the British embassy and personal representative of the Archbishop of Canterbury to the schismatic Ecumenical Patriarch.
Even more troubling, Roncalli visited Oakley’s chapel, where the two men prayed together. This common prayer with an Anglican minister, whose orders are invalid according to Apostolicae Curae by Leo XIII (1896), constitutes a grave violation of the Catholic prohibition on participating in heretical activities. Roncalli could protest that he prayed for the conversion of the other, so again: “smoky.”
2.6. Preaching of an Erroneous Universal Fraternity
Finally, according to Kerry Walters in John XXIII (A Short Biography) (Franciscan Media, 2013, p. 14), Roncalli proclaimed from the pulpit that Jesus Christ “died to proclaim universal fraternity.”
This assertion is incomplete and lends itself to theological errors, because Christ died principally to redeem humanity from sin and to re-establish communion with God. Only in this way does there exist a universal fraternity in the sense of the communion of Catholic saints (Catholic means “universal”).
But He did not die to promote a vague notion of universal fraternity independent of the Catholic Faith. Such a statement without other explanations seems to reflect a humanist vision, influenced by modernism, which minimizes the necessity of conversion and adherence to the Church for salvation.
It becomes dangerous precisely because it omits the supernatural end of the Redemption. Read Pius XI “Quas Primas,” 1925 and “Mystici Corporis” by Pius XII.
- Conclusion from the Facts
The historical facts gathered above constitute a body of concordant indices that Angelo Roncalli, before his election as John XXIII, manifested modernist and ecumenical inclinations contrary to Catholic doctrine.
His reading of forbidden authors, his association with a modernist bishop, his acceptance of a distinction from a socialist, his passive participation in schismatic and heretical worship, as well as his equivocal declarations on faith and universal fraternity, constitute acts which, according to traditional Catholic theology, are incompatible with clear and net orthodoxy.
These elements suggest that Roncalli was, before his election, in a position of semi-heresy.
- Roncalli as Semi-Heretical
According to these texts it is necessary to attribute to Angelo Roncalli, before his election in 1958, the crime of semi-heresy, in the precise sense understood by the teaching of the Church: indeed certain propositions or attitudes of Roncalli can be qualified as temeraria, erronea, scandalosa and falsa. For the notion of “semi-heresy,” consult our chapter on “Heresy and Heretic.”
First, let us recall the definition of semi-heresy (taken from the file “Hérésie…pdf”): an inclination or partial adherence to grave doctrinal errors, without necessarily reaching the fullness of formal heresy (which requires fully conscious and obstinate pertinacity after admonition – see the chapter on heresy).
As we have seen in the said chapter, semi-heresy implies equivocal acts or words which manifest a material deviation or proximity to error, without total exclusion from the Church, but rendering the person here Roncalli suspect of modernism or illicit ecumenism.
This aligns with the infallible Formula of Pope Saint Hormisdas (around 519), which requires anathema of past heresies and entire adherence to the apostolic faith, as a guide for discerning semi-heretics.
Let us apply this to the accusations above, which provide objective and verifiable historical proofs, without speculative hypothesis.
Roncalli manifests several acts which, according to Thomistic theology (Summa, II-II, q. 11, a. 1: heresy as a vice against faith, by deviation of the intellect from divine truth), pertain to a material or semi-formal error, but not to an occult or public full heresy before the election.
- Theological Notes on his Errors
Here are the key elements, classified by degree of theological gravity (which enumerates the notes as “temerarius” for bold opinions, “scandalosus” for acts troubling the faithful, and “erroneus” for partial doctrinal deviations):
5.1. Modernist Influence since the Year 1914:
The reprimand of Cardinal De Lai (cited in Elliot, I Will Be Called John, p. 59) for reading forbidden authors like Duchesne (placed on the Index for modernist theses, condemned by Pascendi Dominici Gregis of Saint Pius X, 1907:
“Modernismus est veluti collectum omnium haeresium.”
“The modernism is like the collection of all heresies.”) indicates a temeraria inclination (temerarious opinion), which empties Tradition of its authority.
This does not reach formal pertinacity, because Roncalli did not persist publicly after correction, but it places him under suspicion of material semi-heresy.
5.2. Association with Bishop Radini Tedeschi (1905-1915): The description by Roncalli (in Leroux, John XXIII: Initiator of the Changes, p. 10) of a reinterpretation of traditions according to the “needs of the times” reflects an erronea error (erroneous), typical of adaptive modernism, contrary to the immutability of the Depositum Fidei, the Deposit of Faith.
Note of Semi-heresy by doctrinal proximity.
5.3. Acceptance of the Cardinal’s Hat from a Socialist in 1953:
Qualifying Vincent Auriol as an “honest socialist” (Elliot, p. 59) contradicts Quadragesimo Anno by Pius XI (1931) that no one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true socialist, manifesting a scandalosus act (scandalous), because public and contemptuous of pontifical teaching. This suggests a semi-adherence to incompatible ideas, without explicit dogmatic negation.
5.4. Ecumenism with Eastern Schismatics:
The declaration in Bulgaria (Accattoli, When A Pope Asks Forgiveness, pp. 18-19: “Catholics and Orthodox are not enemies, but brothers. We have the same faith; we share the same sacraments, and especially the Eucharist.”) is gravely erroneous, because the Orthodox reject papal primacy (dogma defined by Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, 1870).
Although corrected by “We are divided by a few disagreements,” it remains a falsa proposition (false) on unity without conversion, contrary to Mortalium Animos by Pius XI (1928).
Note of semi-heresy by ecumenical equivocation.
5.5. Participation in Non-Catholic Worship:
The presence at Orthodox rites (Allegri, Il Papa che ha cambiato il mondo, p. 66) and common prayer with an Anglican (Hughes, Pontiffs, 1994), despite possible protests of passivity, constitute periculosus acts (dangerous), because external heresy includes factis (deeds) according to Merkelbach (Summa Theologiae Moralis, 1:746: heresy by “dictis vel factis”). Forbidden by Apostolicae Curae by Leo XIII (1896) on the invalid Anglican orders. This borders on material heresy, but remains semi by absence of verbal profession.
5.6. Preaching of an Erroneous Universal Fraternity:
The proclamation that Christ “died to proclaim universal fraternity” (Walters, John XXIII, p. 14) is captiosa (captious), minimizing the redemption from sin in favor of a vague humanism, influenced by modernism (Pascendi, §39). Semi-heresy by omission of the full doctrine on the communion of saints.
5.7. In Conclusion.
According to these texts, which harmonize with certain pre-1963 theology, Roncalli was not a formal heretic because of the absence of proof of a public heresy, but certainly semi-heretical, with cumulative notes of errors “temeraria, erronea, scandalosa et falsa” on points of faith; these censures indicate a partial opposition to the divine and Catholic Faith.
- The Attitude of Pope Pius XII: Roncalli “Suspect of Heresy”
The Church which does not permit heresy and does not tolerate heretics in its bosom never condemned Roncalli for heresy, although he was on a list of “suspect of heresy” under Pius XII because of his association with Ernesto Buonaiuti, a contemporary and close friend, which may have led to his sudden withdrawal from a seminary post. Source: “The Facts about ‘Pope’ John XXIII” (https://novusordowatch.org/john-xxiii/, consulted on 13 November 2025).
- Opinion of Prominent Sedevacantists: Roncalli is Semi-Heretical
Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli is at least semi-heretical, even if according to most sedevacantists he is considered heretical and therefore unfit to receive the papacy.
Therefore opinions are divided, “in opiniis libertas” see the chapter on this adage.
7.1. Testimonies that Roncalli was Semi-Heretical:
Here are testimonies from prominent sedevacantists:
– Mgr R.: “I find no formal heresy in John XXIII, but for me he is a heretic.” But if one finds no heresy, one cannot accuse of heretic, but only of suspect of heresy or a similar accusation.
– Mgr S.: “I have doubt about the papacy of John XXIII.”
– The editor B. S.: “I find no formal heresy in John XXIII, although he is a scandalous pope, I have doubt about his papacy.”
– Abbé B. accepts John XXIII as pope for lack of formal heresy and celebrates his 1962 Mass out of obedience to a pope.
No one identifies a public formal heresy in John XXIII.
NB The names of these persons are well known to the editors, but we do not produce them here for lack of permission to publish.
- Final Conclusion
In traditional Catholic theology, an accumulation of suspicious facts, even numerous ones, never constitutes by itself the proof of formal heresy. The latter requires the public profession of an objectively heretical proposition, understood in its heretical sense and maintained with pertinacity. Suspicions, imprudences, dangerous associations, ambiguities or even scandals never replace this proof. It is precisely for this reason that canonists carefully distinguish the suspectus ab haeresi from the haereticus.
– What is certain
.. and sure is therefore that Mgr Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli, before his election, was “semi-heretical” (see the chapter on “Heresy”) in the sense of favoring heresy, modernism and liberalism, naturalism and indifferentism etc., without ever clearly uttering a public heresy in the strict sense.
Yet that he is a heretic pure and simple is disputed among sedevacantists, among whom a certain number find that all his suspicious acts and thoughts together constitute a heretical attitude. This is however not the classic definition of the formal heretic. To designate someone as a formal heretic it is necessary to have proof of his public expression of a heresy in the strict sense (see chapter on “Heresy”).
Up to the present we are not convinced of the existence of clear proof of a public heresy in Mgr Roncalli.
However this great number of confreres, bishops and lay authors considering John XXIII as an antipope because of heresy, must well understand that a serious Catholic awaits from them conclusive proof of one or more certain and evident heresies. And as long as there is none, we must well accept that John XXIII is pope (but favoring heresy).
Indeed the proofs currently examined are not sufficient, according to our judgment, to establish with certainty a public heresy prior to his election.
– Universal Principle of Law:
Nulla poena sine culpa certa et publica. (No penalty without certain and public fault)
Code of 1917: (on the distinction between suspectus and convictus) An individual is never declared a heretic without public, notorious, and certain proof.
Indeed the 1917 Code requires, for any declaration or sanction of heresy, public, notorious and certain proof. No ecclesiastical authority can declare someone a heretic on the basis of suspicions, rumors or doubtful proofs. This principle is an application of natural justice and traditional Catholic doctrine: nulla poena sine culpa certa et publica.
Thus, the principle we cite is certain, sure and in conformity with the 1917 canon law, and it is an exact synthesis of canons 2195, 2197, 2223 § 4 and 2314.
AMDG
Note:
Since in the sedevacantist world several confreres, including a certain number of bishops and priests, hold an opinion different from mine, I accept and apply the adage “in fide unitas, in opiniis libertas, in omnibus caritas.”
Since they are quite numerous, it is necessary to take into account an “extrinsic evidence” in their favor, although the force of the arguments I use in the text above seems to give it the value of an “intrinsic evidence.” In any case I submit in advance to any decision of the Church in this matter.