Oddly enough this appeared today on Traditio.

Historically Speaking, It Was Pius XII, Not John XXIII
Who Started the Novus Ordo Revolution
From: J.C.
 
Pope John XXIII Celebrating a Traditional Pontifical Latin Mass at St. Peter's
Notice the Two Papal Tiaras Placed upon the Altar, Later Given Away by Paul VI
Also Notice that John XXIII Celebrates Mass Faced in the Traditional Direction
Pope John XXIII Was Very Traditional When It Came to the Sacred Liturgy and Catholic Doctrine
Later, the Modernists Tried Falsely to Characterize Him as One of Their Own
Dear Fathers:

Notwithstanding his staunch traditionalism with respect to the Roman liturgy, John XXIII did, on his own, insert the name of St. Joseph into the Canon of the Mass in 1962 and thus became the first violator of the Sacred Canon of the Mass, which had been fixed since the early Church. This little seed of error opened a floodgate of later changes to the Canon, eventually leading to the total demolition of the Mass.

The Fathers Reply.

No question: John XXIII had no power to touch the Sacred Canon and should not have done so. But there is no evidence that the reason he took this action was anything other than his long-standing and well-known devotion to St. Joseph, Confessor and Patriarch. Others afterward may have used the situation in the way that you mention, but not John XXIII. After all, the Freemason presbyter Hannibal Bugnini, the Chief Architect of the New Order, hardly needed such a precedent. Pope Pius XII, usually considered a "traditional" pope, had already acceded to two great waves of "modernization" of the Mass in preparation for the Novus Ordo service. Even the rites of Holy Week in the Missale Romanum were corrupted during his papacy.

After all, the idea of adding St. Joseph to the Canon of the Mass did not originate with John XXIII. It went back at least to the 19th century, when devotion to St. Joseph was growing markedly in the Church. Many cardinals, bishops, and faithful petitioned Pope Pius XI incessantly to add the name of St. Joseph to the Sacred Canon of the Mass in two places. Pope Pius XI did declare St. Joseph the the Patron of the Universal Church in 1870, but declined to add the Saint's name to the Sacred Canon, stating: "How can I do that? I am only the pope!" John the XXIII in 1962 ended up adding the name of the Saint in only one place, disappointing many of the Saint's devotees, who wanted it in two places.

And, remember, it was Pius XII who in 1948 made the Freemason presbyter, Hannibal Bugnini, the General Secretary of his Pontificia Commissio pro Generali Liturgica Instauratione, the pontifical commission that was supposed to institute a "general liturgical modernization." It was though this commission of Pope Pius XII that Bugnini did his dirty work to lead up to the invalid Novus Ordo service of 1969. In fact, John XXIII fired Bugnini, but Paul VI reappointed him and made him chief architect of the Novus Ordo.

Mrs Engel is apparently friends with the Judaics J Riesman and S Montieth and I know for a fact that it is there business to discredit the Church whenever poss. Of course there is going to be some good info in her book but as we are all familiar with the Cabalistic formula of mixing truth with lies, caution should be used in reading it.The unecessary inclusion of explicit, graphic sɛҳuąƖ descriptions in the book is more to be worried about.

I do not even believe that Pius XII(XIII) was a bad Pope. For those who do not under stand how a marrano like Bea could be the confessor of Pius XII(XIII) i would suggest going through the table of contents of each vol( beg w/ v 11) of Prof Pastor's History Of Popes that are avail at wikipedia.

Read every account of the Jesuits. At one point there is a revolt against the constitutions of St Ignatius that is led by marranos who spent their whole lives trying to destroy the Jesuit order from within.

Are you saying he was infallible in character judgment?

It is the Freemason Franz-Joseph who attempts to use the veto against Rampolla in 1903. Franz-Joseph is 'suurounded by Jєωs' acc to the Judaic Kertzer in Pope Against The Jєωs.

I believe it is possible for them to have lied about Rampolla. For whatever reason. Is it possible that he worked against them (mondernists)? Also possible that he was outspoken against homos, and by then they where in the Vatican.
When I saw how they stacked the deck against Fr. Feeney in the 1940's anything is possible.
Roscoe, I trust you on Rampolla as you have delved into this matter so deeply. It is for God to know the absolute truth of his soul and not me.