The Vatican News portal reports that “Pope Leo XIV” expressed “profound sorrow” for victims of bombings in the Middle East, specifically mentioning children and Maronite priest Fr. Pierre El-Rahi, killed in Lebanon. The statement, released by the Holy See Press Office, says the “Pope” is “following what is happening with concern and prays that every hostility may cease as soon as possible.” The article quotes Fr. Toufic Bou Merhi lamenting the war and stating, “Enough war; enough violence. Weapons, as the Pope said, do not generate peace; they generate massacres and hatred. All we ask is to live with a little dignity.”
The Apostasy of Naturalistic “Mourning” and “Peace”
The statement attributed to the usurper “Pope Leo XIV” is a masterclass in the post-conciliar Church’s complete abdication of its supernatural mission. It presents a facade of pastoral concern while systematically omitting every essential truth of the Catholic faith regarding war, peace, and the duty of rulers. The entire utterance is a naturalistic, humanistic lament that treats temporal suffering as an absolute evil while remaining utterly silent on the sin that provokes God’s chastisements, the necessity of conversion, and the exclusive reign of Christ the King over nations. This is not Catholic teaching; it is the language of the world, spoken from the chair of the abomination of desolation.
1. The Naturalistic Reduction of Peace and War
The statement’s core error is its complete reduction of the grave evil of war to a purely natural, humanitarian problem. “Pope Leo XIV” mourns “victims” and prays for the cessation of “hostilities.” There is not a single word about sin, which is the ultimate cause of war and all societal disorders. This omission is not accidental; it is the hallmark of the modernist, who has exchanged the supernatural for the natural.
Pius XI, in the encyclical Quas Primas, on the Feast of Christ the King, directly confronts this error. He teaches that the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ is the only remedy for the “seeds of discord sown everywhere” and the “flames of envy and hostility” that consume nations. The Pope writes:
“When God and Jesus Christ – as we lamented – were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed… For this reason, the entire human society had to be shaken, because it lacked a stable and strong foundation.”
The conciliar “Pope” speaks of “hostilities” as if they were mere political disagreements. Pius XI, speaking with the true Catholic Magisterium, identifies the root cause: the removal of Christ from public life. The statement from “Leo XIV” implicitly accepts the modernist premise of the Syllabus of Errors condemned by Pius IX: that the civil power can govern without reference to God and that the Church should not interfere in temporal affairs (cf. Syllabus, Errors 39, 41, 44). By praying for a generic “cessation of hostilities” without calling for the public recognition of Christ’s kingship and the obedience of states to His law, the statement reinforces the very error that causes the wars.
Furthermore, the quote from Fr. Merhi, presented approvingly, that “Weapons… do not generate peace; they generate massacres and hatred,” is a profound pacifist error condemned by the Church. It suggests an intrinsic evil of war divorced from justice and the authority of a legitimate sovereign. The Church has always taught the just war doctrine. The statement offers no distinction between aggression and defense, no mention of the duty of a state to protect its people, and no call for the guilty parties to do public penance and make restitution. It is a purely sentimental, anti-doctrinal outcry.
2. The Omission of Christ the King: The Gravest Sin
The most damning silence in the entire statement is the complete absence of Our Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords. This is not a minor oversight; it is the deliberate exclusion of the sole source of true peace. Pius XI, in Quas Primas, instituted the feast of Christ the King precisely to combat the “secularism of our times, so-called laicism.” He declared:
“It would, of course, be the task of Catholics to prepare and hasten this return through their work and activity; however, many of them do not hold the position in so-called social life… This unfavorable situation may perhaps be attributed to the laziness and timidity of the good… But if all the faithful understood that they must fight bravely and always under the banner of Christ the King…”
Where is the banner of Christ the King in the statement of “Leo XIV”? It is absent. Instead, we have a generic appeal to “peace” and “dignity” – the vocabulary of the United Nations, not of the Catholic Church. The Pope, by his office, is bound to be the herald of Christ the King. The false “Pope” of the conciliar sect has instead become a chaplain for the forces of naturalism, offering a spiritual palliative for a problem that has a supernatural cause and requires a supernatural solution: the public and solemn submission of all nations to the Social Reign of Christ.
The statement also fails to remind rulers of their duty. Pius XI explicitly states:
“The annual celebration of this solemnity will also remind states that not only private individuals, but also rulers and governments have the duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him: for it will remind them of the final judgment, in which Christ, whom not only was cast out of the state, but was also forgotten and ignored through contempt, will very severely avenge these insults, because His royal dignity demands that all relations in the state be ordered on the basis of God’s commandments and Christian principles.”
The conciliar statement contains no reminder of the Final Judgment, no demand that rulers obey Christ, and no condemnation of the modern secular state that explicitly excludes God from its constitution. It is a surrender to the very “public apostasy” Pius XI lamented.
3. The Legitimization of Conciliar Structures Through Emotional Manipulation
The article’s presentation of the statement is designed to elicit an emotional, uncritical response. It uses the tragic death of a priest and children to manufacture a sense of moral urgency that bypasses doctrinal discernment. This is a classic modernistic technique: to substitute sentiment for principle, and humanitarianism for dogma. The faithful are meant to think, “How can we criticize a Pope who is so sorrowful and prayerful?” But the question must be: Is this the doctrine of Christ? The answer is a resounding no.
The statement comes from the “Holy See Press Office” of the conciliar sect. By treating its utterances as authoritative, the article and the original statement themselves legitimize the entire paramasonic structure that occupies the Vatican. The 1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 188.4) and the Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of Paul IV are clear: a manifest heretic loses all jurisdiction ipso facto. The line of usurpers from John XXIII through the current antipope “Leo XIV” (Robert Prevost) are all manifest heretics, as proven by their consistent teaching and actions against the immutable faith. Therefore, they possess no authority. Their “statements” are not acts of the papacy but of the “synagogue of Satan” mentioned by Pius IX in the Syllabus. To report their words as if they were from a legitimate Pope is to participate in the fraud.
4. Symptomatic of the Conciliar Apostasy: Silence on Modernism and Sin
The statement is perfectly consistent with the entire conciliar religion, which is a synthesis of all heresies – Modernism. St. Pius X, in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis and the decree Lamentabili sane exitu, condemned the errors of the Modernists. Among them:
* The denial of the Church’s right to define the sense of Scripture (Lamentabili, 4).
* The idea that dogma evolves and changes (Lamentabili, 54-59).
* The separation of the spiritual from the temporal, making religion a private affair (Syllabus, 55).
* The reconciliation of the Church with “progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Syllabus, 80).
“Leo XIV’s” statement embodies all these errors. It makes no dogmatic definition, no call to repentance, no condemnation of the sins of modernism, indifferentism, and secularism that are the true causes of the Middle East conflict. It speaks as if the Church’s mission is merely to be a “voice for the voiceless” in a naturalistic sense, rather than to convert nations to Christ. It is the exact opposite of Pius XI’s program in Quas Primas, where he states the Church’s mission is to “teach, govern, and lead all to eternal happiness,” which “cannot depend on anyone’s will.”
The article also quotes Fr. Merhi saying, “We say and repeat that the last thing that must not die in us is hope in the Lord.” This vague, interiorized “hope” is not the Catholic theological virtue of hope, which is founded on the certainty of God’s promises and the desire for the Beatific Vision. It is a vague optimism devoid of content, typical of the post-conciliar “spirituality” that replaces doctrine with feelings.
5. The Scandal of the “Maronite Priest” and the False “Rites”
The article identifies Fr. El-Rahi as a “Maronite rite Catholic priest.” This highlights another fatal error of the conciliar sect: its endorsement of “Eastern Catholic” rites as legitimate alternatives to the Roman Rite, thereby destroying the unity of the Latin Church, which was the standard for the universal Church. The true Catholic Church, before the revolution, always held the Roman Rite as the primary and normative expression of the Roman Catholic faith. The conciliar acceptance of “Eastern Catholic” churches as equal partners in a “dialogue” is a manifestation of the ecumenical error condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus (Errors 15-18) and by St. Pius X against the “Modernists” who seek to dismantle the Church’s unity. Furthermore, the Maronite Church, in full communion with the apostate Rome, is in a state of formal schism from the true Church, which endures only in those who hold the integral faith and are not in communion with the modernist hierarchy.
Conclusion: A Call to Reject the Conciliar Sect and Return to Christ the King
The statement from “Pope Leo XIV” and its reporting by Vatican News is a stark demonstration of the apostasy that has consumed the structures occupying the Vatican. It is a naturalistic, sentimental, and doctrinally vacuous appeal that omits the very foundations of Catholic social teaching: the Social Reign of Christ the King, the doctrine of just war, the duty of public penance, and the condemnation of sin as the root of all evil. It legitimizes the conciliar “peace” initiatives that are, in reality, a surrender to the principles of the French Revolution and the errors of the Syllabus.
The faithful are called to do the exact opposite of what this statement implies. They must:
1. Reject utterly the authority of the antipope and the conciliar sect.
2. Proclaim, with Pius XI, that “the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ” is the only true peace, and that this peace requires the public recognition of Christ’s kingship by all nations.
3. Understand that wars are chastisements from God for collective sin, especially the sin of apostasy and the rejection of His law.
4. Pray not for a generic “cessation of hostilities,” but for the conversion of sinners, the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (as defined in the true, pre-1958 understanding), and the restoration of the Catholic Church in all its integrity, free from the conciliar abomination.
The blood of Fr. El-Rahi and the innocent children calls not for a naturalistic lament, but for a supernatural act of reparation and a fierce sermon on the necessity of a Catholic state, the death penalty for heretics and blasphemers, and the exclusive right of the true Church to govern society. The conciliar “Pope” offers the world’s peace. The true Catholic faith, as taught by Pius XI and all pre-1958 Pontiffs, offers the Peace of Christ, which is purchased by the Blood of the Lamb and established by His law.
Source:
Pope Leo mourns victims in Middle East, prays for peace (vaticannews.va)
Date: 09.03.2026