U.S. Diplomat Exploits Cuban Suffering to Advance Globalist Agenda
EWTN News reports (February 6, 2026) that U.S. chargé d’affaires Mike Hammer conducted meetings with Cuban “bishops,” opposition activists, and citizens under the pretext of coordinating hurricane relief. The article frames these encounters as benevolent diplomacy while omitting the theological contradictions inherent in such collusion between modernist ecclesiastics and a secularist superpower.
Subordination of Ecclesiastical Authority to Secular Agendas
The reported meetings between Hammer and figures like “Archbishop” Arturo González Amador—president of the Cuban Episcopal Conference—violate the Church’s immutable teaching that sacerdotium (priestly authority) must never bow to imperium (secular power). Pius XI’s encyclical Quas Primas (1925) unequivocally declares: “Kings and princes are bound to give public honor and obedience to Christ”, not the reverse. By allowing a foreign diplomat to “review” Church-administered aid programs, these clerics invert the God-established hierarchy, treating the Church as an NGO subsidiary to U.S. geopolitical interests.
“If everything goes well and the aid is reaching those most in need, the Trump administration is ready to send more assistance” (U.S. Embassy statement)
This transactional language reduces the Church’s charitable mission to a logistical partnership with a government whose policies systematically oppose Catholic social order. The 1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 1495 §2) mandates that Church property be administered “for the purposes prescribed by the Church”, not contingent upon approval from civil authorities. The article’s silence on whether Hammer demanded policy concessions in exchange for aid exposes its propagandistic omission of imperialism veiled as benevolence.
Ecumenism of the Barricades: Unholy Alliance With Dissidents
Hammer’s deliberate engagement with anti-communist activists like Iván Hernández Carrillo and families of jailed protestors follows the modernist playbook of replacing theological conversion with political revolution. Nowhere does the article mention Hammer or the “bishops” urging Cubans to seek spiritual liberation through the Sacraments or devotion to Christ the King. Instead, the diplomat’s theatrics—such as gifting a “Liberty Bell” replica to Holguín’s “bishop”—reduce Catholicism to a symbol of American-style “freedom,” betraying the Syllabus of Errors’ condemnation of those who “place the Church’s salvation in liberty” (Proposition 77).
The praise for Father José Conrado—who supposedly “inspires” Hammer through his criticisms of the regime—further demonstrates the post-conciliar church’s descent into political activism. True shepherds warn souls of eternal damnation; hirelings incite temporal grievances. As the 1907 decree Lamentabili Sane condemned Modernists who reduce Christianity to “a certain religious movement adapted to different places and times” (Proposition 59), so does this collaboration reduce the Faith to a dissident appendage of U.S. foreign policy.
Naturalistic Humanism Disguised as Charity
The article’s repeated emphasis on “humanitarian aid” distributed through Caritas Cuba exemplifies the conciliar sect’s abandonment of supernatural charity for materialist philanthropy. No mention is made of requiring recipients to be in sacramental grace or even Catholic—a violation of Pope Pius XI’s prohibition against indiscriminate almsgiving in Quadragesimo Anno (1931). The U.S. Embassy’s boast about aiding “ordinary Cubans” who contact them directly completes this diabolical inversion: Souls in need of salvation are redefined as consumers selecting aid providers from a marketplace of competing secular powers.
“The Church has an important role in supporting ordinary Cubans” (Mike Hammer)
This blasphemous reduction of the Church’s divine mandate to a social service agency directly contradicts Pope Pius X’s condemnation in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907): “The Church is not a humanitarian institution”. By framing the Church’s mission as complementary to U.S. statecraft—rather than condemning both communist and capitalist systems for rejecting Christ’s sovereignty—these false shepherds confirm their apostasy from Catholic integralism.
Omission of the Only True Solution: Christ the King
The article’s entire narrative hinges on a demonic false dichotomy: Either maintain Cuba’s communist regime or replace it with liberal democracy. Both options constitute rebellion against the Social Kingship of Christ. Cuba’s authentic liberation requires:
- Public consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus by Cuba’s legitimate civil authorities
- Abrogation of all laws contrary to Catholic morality
- Expulsion of Masonic and Marxist influences
- Restoration of the Tridentine Mass as the exclusive liturgical rite
That neither Hammer nor the conciliar “bishops” propose such measures proves their complicity in suppressing the regnum Christi. As Pope Pius XI warned in Quas Primas, nations rejecting Christ’s authority will know “no lasting prosperity nor peace”. Until Cuba’s true Catholics demand its conversion into a confessional state, all diplomatic maneuvering serves only to replace one tyranny with another.
Source:
U.S. diplomat in Cuba meets with bishops, opposition figures (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 06.02.2026