The Naturalistic Pacifism of a Modernist Prelate
The cited article reports statements by “Archbishop” Timothy Broglio, head of the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA, concerning the U.S.-Iran war. Broglio, a former president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, asserts that the conflict likely fails the test of “just war theory” because it preempts a threat not yet realized. He aligns himself with “Pope Leo XIV” (the current antipope) and echoes Paul VI’s “never again war” slogan, concluding that war is “always a last resort.” His analysis is presented as a moral evaluation, yet it operates entirely within a naturalistic, secular framework that systematically omits the supernatural ends of the State and the exclusive sovereignty of Jesus Christ over all nations. This represents not a development, but a complete repudiation of Catholic doctrine on the purpose of political authority and the just use of force.
1. Factual Deconstruction: A Fraudulent Application of “Just War”
Broglio invokes Saint Augustine and “just war theory” but fundamentally misrepresents it. The classical Catholic doctrine, expounded by Aquinas and the Fathers, requires a just war to have a right intention (recta intentio), which includes not only defense against injustice but also the promotion of virtue and the suppression of heresy. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (pre-1958 editions, e.g., St. Pius X’s 1912 Catechism) taught that the State’s primary duty is to protect the true religion and punish heretics. By reducing the justification for war to the mere prevention of physical harm (a “threat with nuclear arms”) and the preservation of “innocent lives” in a generic sense, Broglio strips the concept of its Catholic substance. He employs the terminology of the doctrine while emptying it of its supernatural content, reducing it to a humanitarian calculus acceptable to the modern secular world.
2. Theological Level: The Omission of Christ the King
The gravest error is the total silence on the doctrine of the Social Kingship of Christ. Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Quas Primas, promulgated in 1925, is unequivocal:
The Kingdom of our Redeemer encompasses all men… His reign extends not only to Catholic nations… but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ… Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ…
A Catholic analysis of any war must begin with this principle: the State’s authority is derived from and subordinate to Christ the King. The Syllabus of Errors (1864) condemns the opposite view:
Error #40: The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well-being and interests of society.
and
Error #77: In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.
Broglio’s framework, by ignoring whether the war serves to defend or advance the reign of Christ, tacitly accepts the secularist premise condemned by Pius IX and Pius XI. He evaluates the conflict on the basis of “international law” and “humanitarian” norms, not on the basis of whether it defends the rights of the Catholic Church, punishes heresy, or upholds the law of God. This is the naturalism Pius X condemned in Lamentabili sane exitu (Propositions 56-58), which separates morality from divine sanction.
3. The Apostasy of Recognizing the Usurper
Broglio’s alignment with “Pope Leo XIV” is an act of public communion with a manifest heretic. The theological arguments for the automatic loss of office by a manifest heretic (sedevacantism) are not a matter of opinion but of doctrine, as demonstrated by St. Robert Bellarmine and the 1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 188.4). To acknowledge as Supreme Pontiff one who promotes the errors of Vatican II—religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality—is to be complicit in apostasy. Broglio’s reference to this antipope’s appeal for peace is therefore not a Catholic appeal but a conciliar sect’s internal directive. The true Catholic position, as defined by the Holy Office under St. Pius X, is that Modernism is “the synthesis of all heresies.” Any “peace” promoted by the leaders of the conciliar sect is the false peace of the Antichrist, which the Syllabus calls “the corruption of morals and minds” (Error #79).
4. The Heresy of “Never Again War”
Broglio’s citation of Paul VI’s “never again war” is a direct embrace of a condemned error. The Syllabus of Errors states:
Error #63: It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even to rebel against them.
and
Error #64: The violation of any solemn oath, as well as any wicked and flagitious action repugnant to the eternal law, is not only not blamable but is altogether lawful and worthy of the highest praise when done through love of country.
The “never again war” slogan, in its context, promotes a pacifism that denies the State’s right and duty to wage a just war, thereby undermining the authority of legitimate princes and promoting rebellion against the divine order. It is a specific manifestation of the “public apostasy” Pius XI lamented in Quas Primas, where the removal of Christ from public life leads to “seeds of discord sown everywhere” and “unbridled desires.” Broglio’s endorsement of this slogan places him in direct opposition to the Magisterium of Pius IX and Pius XI.
5. Symptomatic Analysis: The Modernist Hermeneutic of Discontinuity
Broglio’s entire approach is a textbook example of the “hermeneutics of discontinuity” condemned by Benedict XVI (ironically, a modernist himself). He selects isolated phrases from Augustine and Paul VI, divorces them from their Catholic context, and synthesizes them with modern secular humanism. The result is a hybrid doctrine that sounds “Christian” but is fundamentally pagan. This is the method of Modernism described in Lamentabili sane exitu:
Proposition 58: Truth changes with man, because it develops with him, in him, and through him.
Broglio’s “just war” is not the immutable doctrine of the Church but a “developing” ethic that adapts to the “progress” of humanitarian sentiment. The pre-Vatican II doctrine, as taught by the Roman Catechism and the moral theologians (e.g., Gury, Ballerini), required for a just war not only defense against aggression but also that the war be waged for a just cause (e.g., punishment of heretics, recovery of stolen property, defense of the faith). The U.S.-Iran conflict, even if deemed a “last resort” by Broglio, cannot be evaluated without asking: Does it serve to defend the Catholic faith? To protect the Church’s rights? To punish a nation that persecutes Catholics or promotes Islam? His silence on these questions is a confession of his apostasy from Catholic political doctrine.
6. The Duty of Obedience and the “Chain of Command”
Broglio’s counsel to soldiers—to obey unless an order is “clearly immoral” and to consult chaplains—is a betrayal of the Catholic doctrine of legitimate authority. The Syllabus condemns:
Error #54: Kings and princes are not only exempt from the jurisdiction of the Church, but are superior to the Church in deciding questions of jurisdiction.
In a truly Catholic State, the “chain of command” is subordinate to the law of God and the authority of the Church. A soldier is not bound to obey an order that violates divine or ecclesiastical law, even if the order comes from a legitimate sovereign. But Broglio’s framework assumes the State’s autonomy in waging war, provided it avoids “clear” immorality as defined by a secularized “just war” theory. He thus places the State’s decisions outside the proper jurisdiction of the Church, which is the essence of the error condemned in Syllabus #20 and #21.
7. The “Last Resort” Fallacy
The claim that war is “always a last resort” is a relativistic principle that contradicts the absolute sovereignty of Christ. Pius XI in Quas Primas states that Christ’s reign “encompasses all human nature” and that “there is no power in us that is exempt from this reign.” Therefore, the decision to wage war is not a matter of prudential judgment left to secular rulers alone; it is subject to the moral law as defined by the Church. If a war is just according to Catholic doctrine (i.e., for a cause that defends the faith or punishes heresy), it may be obligatory, not merely a “last resort.” Broglio’s language reduces the use of force to a tragic necessity of international relations, rather than an instrument of divine justice when properly ordered.
Conclusion: A Prelate of the Apostasy
“Archbishop” Broglio’s statements are a perfect specimen of the theological and spiritual bankruptcy of the post-conciliar hierarchy. He employs the vocabulary of Catholic moral theology while systematically evacuating it of its supernatural meaning. He acknowledges an antipope, promotes a condemned pacifism, and evaluates a major war without a single reference to the Social Kingship of Christ, the duty of the State to profess the Catholic faith, or the Church’s authority to judge the justice of wars. This is not a legitimate theological disagreement; it is a public manifestation of the apostasy foretold by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici gregis and by Pius IX in the Syllabus. The true Catholic, adhering to the integral faith of the ages, must reject such modernist rhetoric as the poison it is and pray for the conversion of those who, like Broglio, have handed themselves over to the “errors of Modernism, the synthesis of all heresies.” The only peace worth seeking is the peace of Christ the King, which requires the public rejection of the conciliar sect and its false shepherds.
Source:
Archbishop Broglio: War should always be 'a last resort' (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 04.04.2026