Jerusalem Patriarchs’ Condemnation Masks Deeper Apostasy
The EWTN News article (January 24, 2026) reports on the Council of Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in Jerusalem condemning Christian Zionism as a “damaging ideology” threatening the Christian presence in the Holy Land. The council—including the Latin Patriarchate’s “cardinal” Pierbattista Pizzaballa, “bishop” William Shomali, and leaders of Orthodox and Protestant sects—denounced activities of figures like Ihab Shlayan, who promotes Israeli Christian political engagement. Responses from groups like Philos Catholic and the Association of Hebrew Catholics argued for distinguishing Protestant eschatological Zionism from Catholic-aligned political support for Israel. The article frames the dispute as pastoral and geopolitical rather than theological, omitting any reference to Christ’s universal kingship or the Church’s divine mission.
Naturalism Replaces Supernatural Faith
The council’s statement reduces the Church’s mission to a humanitarian NGO, lamenting how Christian Zionism “harms the unity of our flock” and “threatens the Christian presence” without ever invoking the regnum Christi (kingship of Christ) over nations or souls. This mirrors the modernist heresy condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili Sane (1907), which declared that “Revelation was merely man’s self-awareness of his relationship to God” (Proposition 20). By framing the issue solely around “church rights” and “political legitimacy,” the patriarchs adopt the secularist mindset Pius IX anathematized: “The Church is not a true and perfect society, entirely free” (Syllabus of Errors, Proposition 19).
Shomali warns of Christian Zionism’s dangers: “The church leaders are criticizing an ideology that defends one side over another and grants rights to one party while denying them to another. This is unacceptable.”
Here, the “bishop” inverts divine order. The Church cannot accept any political system that denies Christ’s sovereignty, yet Shomali reduces her to a referee between “sides”—a betrayal of Quas Primas (1925), where Pius XI taught that “nations will no longer be in opposition” only when “individuals and states allow themselves to be governed by Christ.” The silence on Christ’s social reign exposes the council’s adherence to Vatican II’s false “religious freedom,” condemned by the Syllabus (Proposition 77).
Protestant Errors Adopted as Catholic Doctrine
Philos Catholic director Simone Rizkallah claims the condemnation targets only Protestant “end-times narratives,” arguing that Catholics may support Israel’s existence as “providential” but not “theologically meaningful.” This smuggles in the very indifferentism the council pretends to reject. The Church has always taught that all political arrangements must submit to her authority, as Leo XIII decreed: “There is no power in the world, however great it may be, can deprive of the pastoral office those whom the Holy Ghost has made Bishops in order to feed the Church of God” (Syllabus, Source Excerpt). Rizkallah’s appeal to Benedict XVI’s “mysterious providence” echoes the modernist tendency to replace dogma with subjective sentiment—a tactic condemned in Lamentabili (Proposition 22: “Dogmas are interpretations of religious facts by the human mind”).
Ecumenical Apostasy in Action
The council’s inclusion of Orthodox and Anglican leaders—heretics outside the Church—as “Heads of Churches” confirms its apostasy. This follows Paul VI’s blasphemous embrace of schismatics at Vatican II, violating the oath against modernism that requires “complete submission to the condemnations, declarations, and prescriptions contained in the encyclical Pascendi” (1910). The Association of Hebrew Catholics compounds this by seeking “integration of Jewish traditions” into Catholic practice, a syncretism Pius XII forbade in Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943). Their statement that “Zionist convictions belong to the prudential order” ignores the Church’s duty to direct all politics toward man’s supernatural end.
Omissions That Condemn
Nowhere does the article or council mention:
1. The necessity of the Jewish people’s conversion to Catholicism for salvation (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus).
2. The Blessed Virgin Mary’s Queenship over Israel and all nations.
3. The Church’s right to govern the Holy Land as Christ’s earthly representative.
This silence proves the conciliar sect’s abandonment of divine mandate. As the False Fatima Apparitions file notes: “The message focuses on external threats (communism), omitting the main danger: modernist apostasy within the Church.” The council’s focus on “Palestinian rights” while ignoring Muslim persecution of Christians reveals its alignment with globalist forces seeking to eradicate Christendom.
Conclusion: A Masonic Diversion
The condemnation’s timing—amid rising global tensions—fits the “Masonic Operation ‘Fatima’” pattern: “Stage 3 (1958-2000): Takeover of the narrative by modernists, concealment of the Third Secret, ecumenical reinterpretation.” By attacking Christian Zionism while ignoring Islamism and promoting interfaith dialogue, the patriarchs advance the false “Abrahamic family” agenda of Bergoglio and the U.N. True Catholics must reject this neo-church entirely and return to the integral faith that proclaims Christ as King of Jews and Gentiles alike—not through political Zionism, but through the Social Reign of the Sacred Heart.
Source:
Condemnation of Christian Zionism by Heads of Churches in Jerusalem stirs controversy (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 24.01.2026