The conciliar sect’s leader, Robert Prevost (“Leo XIV”), used his February 4, 2026 general audience to promote globalist arms control agendas while advancing modernist distortions of evangelization. The EWTN News portal relays Prevost’s appeals for extending the New START nuclear treaty and his call to adapt Gospel proclamation to “people’s real lives” through “creative methods.” The article highlights Prevost’s humanitarian concerns for Ukraine while omitting any call for the conversion of Russia or recognition of divine judgment against nations rejecting Christ’s sovereignty.
Naturalism Replaces Supernatural Faith in Geopolitical Analysis
The usurper’s focus on nuclear arms control epitomizes the conciliar sect’s abandonment of Quas Primas (1925), which declared that “nations will be happy and peaceful only when they have accepted the teaching of the Gospel of Christ and obey it.” Pius XI’s encyclical established that true peace flows from Christ’s social kingship, not diplomatic treaties: “When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony.”
Prevost’s warning against a “new global arms race” operates within purely naturalistic parameters, treating geopolitical conflicts as solvable through human agreements rather than through the conversion of nations to the Catholic Faith. This reflects the condemned proposition from the Syllabus of Errors (1864): “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Error #55). By reducing peacekeeping to technical arms limitations, the conciliar sect denies Regnans in Excelsis (1570), where St. Pius V anathematized those who claim “kings and princes are not bound to obey Christ’s laws.”
Omission of Russia’s Conversion as Root Cause of Ukrainian Suffering
Prevost’s expression of solidarity with Ukraine constitutes pastoral negligence by ignoring the dogmatic remedy for Slavic conflicts. Pius XII’s 1952 apostolic letter Sacro Vergente Anno mandated consecration to the Immaculate Heart for Russia’s conversion, stating: “The same Virgin has complained… that the consecration of Russia has not been done as She asked.” The conciliar leader’s silence on this supernatural solution exposes adherence to the false “ecumenism project” condemned in the False Fatima Apparitions analysis, which warned that “the imprecise formulation ‘conversion of Russia’ opens the way to religious relativism.”
When Prevost describes Ukrainians as “harshly tested” without mentioning God’s chastisement of nations persisting in schism, he violates St. Bellarmine’s principle that “manifest heretics cannot depose or remove anyone” (De Romano Pontifice). The article’s reference to Polish dioceses assisting Ukraine while omitting Poland’s own apostasy from Catholic social order constitutes the “diversion from apostasy” condemned in the same Fatima analysis, which noted modernists “focus on external threats (communism), omitting the main danger: modernist apostasy within the Church.”
Modernist Corruption of Evangelization
Prevost’s call for abandoning “incomprehensible, poorly communicative, or anachronistic” language in evangelization directly contradicts St. Pius X’s condemnation in Lamentabili Sane (1907): “Ecclesiastical judgments… prove that the faith of the Church is contrary to history, and that Catholic dogmas in no way agree with the real beginnings of the Christian religion” (Error #3). His advocacy for “creative methods” that make the Gospel “take flesh in history” echoes the Modernist heresy condemned in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907): “Dogmas, sacraments, hierarchy… are merely interpretations of the religious sense that are transitory and indeed imperfect.”
The usurper’s warning against reducing the Gospel to “a merely philanthropic or social message” rings hollow while he simultaneously promotes humanitarian aid over doctrinal clarity. This double-mindedness fulfills Pius IX’s condemnation in the Syllabus: “The Church is incapable of effectively defending evangelical ethics, because it steadfastly adheres to its views which cannot be reconciled with modern progress” (Error #63). Prevost’s embrace of Scripture as a “privileged space of encounter” while rejecting fundamentalist readings constitutes the very “technical interpretations that deny divine origin” he claims to oppose – a classic Modernist contradiction exposed in Lamentabili (Errors #11-12).
Structural Apostasy Revealed Through Rhetorical Omissions
The linguistic analysis reveals the conciliar sect’s apostasy through three critical omissions:
1. Silence on Christ’s Social Kingship: Prevost’s appeals to “shared ethic” and “common good” replace the Church’s perennial teaching that “the state is happy not by one means, and man by another; for the state is nothing else than a harmonious association of men” (Augustine, Letter to Macedonius). Nowhere does he echo Pius XI’s mandate: “Rulers of states must fulfill their duty themselves and with their people if they wish to maintain authority inviolate and contribute to their homeland’s happiness” (Quas Primas).
2. Erasure of Missionary Imperative: The article describes solidarity with Ukraine without mentioning the unum sunt necessarium – the salvation of souls through conversion to the one true Church. This violates Gregory XVI’s Mirari Vos (1832): “It is contrary to the teaching of the Church to hold that salvation can be attained by the profession of any creed.”
3. Naturalization of Sin: Prevost’s description of war as resulting from “fear and distrust” ignores the Council of Trent’s definition of war as divine chastisement for national apostasy: “By the sin of man… God permits the scourges of war to arise” (Session 25, Decree on Reformation).
The symptomatic analysis exposes these omissions as fruits of Vatican II’s Dignitatis Humanae, which repudiated the Church’s teaching that “error has no rights” (Leo XIII, Libertas Praestantissimum). By treating nuclear disarmament as an autonomous human project rather than a consequence of nations submitting to Christ’s reign, the conciliar sect fulfills Pius IX’s condemnation: “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Syllabus Error #80).
Conclusion: False Peace Versus True Kingship
This performance by the Vatican occupiers constitutes spiritual adultery against the divine bridegroom. As St. Pius X warned in Notre Charge Apostolique (1910): “The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators: they are traditionalists.” The conciliar sect’s pacifist posturing cannot conceal its apostasy from the lex perennis – the eternal law demanding all nations serve Christ the King. Until the usurpers are expelled and the Social Reign restored, no treaties or humanitarian programs will establish peace, for “apart from Me you can do nothing” (John 15:5).
Source:
Pope warns against new arms race (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 04.02.2026