The EWTN News portal — mouthpiece of the conciliar sect — reports through its Spanish-language arm ACI Prensa on the lamentations of the “Latin parish priest” of Taybeh, Mr. Bashar Fawadleh, regarding intensified attacks by Israeli settlers against the Christian population of that village, identified as the biblical Ephraim (John 11:54). The article functions as a humanitarian appeal: it begs the global audience for “voices,” “visits,” and “solidarity” to preserve a “Christian presence” reduced to an ethnic artifact. The cited “priest” frames the crisis solely in geopolitical and psychological terms, utterly silent on the rights of Christ the King, the necessity of the Church’s divine mission, or the supernatural reality of the conflict. This report lays bare the conciliar sect’s definitive apostasy: it has replaced the social reign of Christ with a secularized cult of “living stones” and humanitarian NGOs.
The Conciliar “Priest” and the Illusion of Legitimacy
The protagonist of this narrative, Mr. Bashar Fawadleh, is presented as the “Latin parish priest” appointed in 2021 by the “Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem.” From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, this title is a usurpation. The “Latin Patriarchate” is a structure of the conciliar sect, erected and maintained by the usurpers occupying the Vatican since 1958 — beginning with the antipope John XXIII and continuing through the current antipope Leo XIV (Robert Prevost). Mr. Fawadleh, presumably “ordained” in the novus ordo rite of Paul VI (1968), lacks the character indelebilis of the true priesthood, that rite being invalid in form and intention, crafted by the freemason Bugnini to destroy the propitiatory Sacrifice. He is a functionary of a paramasonic structure, not a minister of the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary. His “statement sent to ACI Prensa” carries no ecclesiastical authority; it is the press release of a lay administrator managing a dissolving ethnic enclave. The article notes he is a member of the Regnum Christi Federation — the Legionaries of Christ, the order founded by the predatory Maciel, protected by the conciliar hierarchy — further sealing his affiliation with the rotten fruits of the conciliar revolution.
Reduction of the Church’s Mission to Naturalistic Humanism
The theological bankruptcy of the report is absolute. Mr. Fawadleh describes the situation: “settler attacks almost daily,” “destruction of agricultural land,” “restrictions on movement,” “psychological suffering.” His remedy? “Raise your voices, speak the truth, visit us, and stand with the Christian community.” Not a word of the Most Holy Sacrifice. Not a word of penance, conversion, or the Kingship of Christ. This is the precise embodiment of the error condemned by Pope St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu (1907): the Modernist reduction of religion to “a certain religious movement, applied or applicable to different times and places” (Prop. 59), stripping the Church of her legislative, judicial, and executive power (Prop. 24, 26) to make her a mere humanitarian agency.
Pius XI, in Quas Primas (1925), thundered against this very secularism — laicism — which “began with the denial of Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations.” He taught: “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed… the entire human society had to be shaken, because it lacked a stable and strong foundation.” Mr. Fawadleh’s appeal to “international solidarity” and “human rights” derives authority from men, not God. He begs the secular world to enforce a secular peace, ignoring Pius XI’s doctrine that “peace is only possible in the kingdom of Christ” (Quas Primas). The Syllabus of Pius IX (1864) condemns the proposition that “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Prop. 55) and that “The civil government… has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs” (Prop. 41). The Taybeh narrative operates entirely within this condemned framework: the “Christian community” petitions the secular powers (international community, media) for protection, acknowledging the supremacy of the secular order over the Ecclesia.
Silence on the Social Kingship of Christ and the Duty of Conversion
The village is identified as Ephraim, where “the Lord Jesus visited shortly before his passion” (John 11:54). The article treats this as historical trivia, a marketing hook for “biblical tourism” (“globally renowned for its beer”). It omits the terrifying reality: the modern State of Israel is a political entity founded on the rejection of the Messiah, a denial of the Divinitas Christi. The “settlers” attacking the village are often driven by a Talmudic hatred of Christianity (odium fidei). True Catholic pastoral care would proclaim the Social Kingship of Christ over that land, demanding the conversion of the persecutors and the public recognition of Christ’s rights by the civil power. Instead, the conciliar “priest” asks for “solidarity” that “reminds us that we are all one body in Christ” — a false ecumenism that blurs the distinction between the Church Militant and the enemies of the Cross. There is no “body of Christ” encompassing those who crucify Him anew in His members. St. Cyprian teaches: “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” — outside the Church there is no salvation. The “Christian presence” preserved as a museum piece, devoid of the Sacraments of the true Church (valid Mass, valid Orders, true jurisdiction), is a corpse, not a living stone. The “living stones” metaphor (1 Pet 2:5) is perverted to signify ethnic endurance rather than supernatural incorporation into the Mystical Body through valid Baptism and the true Faith.
Complicity with the Enemies of Christ: The Regnum Christi/EWTN Apparatus
The source of this article — EWTN News / ACI Prensa — is a primary organ of the conciliar sect’s propaganda. The author, Andrés Henríquez, is identified as a member of the Regnum Christi Federation. This network represents the “conservative” wing of the neo-church, designed to channel traditional instincts into the safe harbor of recognition of the usurpers. They stage the “Traditional Latin Mass” (indult) while accepting the Novus Ordo, the Council, and the false “popes.” This article serves their agenda: it portrays the conciliar sect as the victim, the defender of Christians, the voice of the Holy Land. In reality, the conciliar hierarchy — through Nostra Aetate and the “Fundamental Agreement” with the State of Israel (1993) — has legitimized the Zionist entity, betraying the rights of the Church and the duty to evangelize the Jews. The “Latin Patriarch” Pierbattista Pizzaballa (a “cardinal” of the antipope) recently participated in interreligious prayer with rabbis and imams, a scandalous violation of the First Commandment and the decree Ex Quo of Pius XI. Mr. Fawadleh’s silence on this apostasy of his own hierarchy is complicity. He cries out against the effect (settler violence) while serving the cause (the conciliar sect’s surrender to the world).
The False “Living Stones” Narrative: Ecclesiology of Presence vs. Ecclesiology of Conquest
The article concludes with the “priest” calling the faithful “living witnesses and ‘living stones’ in the land where our faith was born.” This is the ecclesiology of the Conciliar Church: the Church as a historical monument, a cultural heritage site to be preserved by UNESCO and international pressure. It is the hermeneutic of continuity applied to geography — preserving the stones while losing the Soul. The true Church, the Ecclesia Catholica, is not a demographic statistic. She is the Societas Perfecta, endowed by her Divine Founder with proper and perpetual rights (Syllabus, Prop. 19), independent of secular authority (Quas Primas). Her mission is conquest — “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them… teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matt 28:19-20). The “Christian community of Taybeh,” if it remains in communion with the conciliar sect, is schismatic from the true Church (which subsists in the remnant faithful to Tradition, served by valid bishops and priests). Their preservation as a “Christian enclave” under Israeli occupation or Palestinian Authority rule, secured by “global voices,” is a triumph of Masonic naturalism — the very “ecumenism project” denounced in the analysis of false Fatima: “The imprecise formulation ‘conversion of Russia’ (without specifying Catholicism) opens the way to religious relativism.” Here, the imprecise formulation “Christian presence” (without specifying the Una, Sancta, Catholica et Apostolica Church) serves the same relativism.
The only solution for Taybeh, for Jerusalem, for the Holy Land, is the Social Reign of Christ the King. Not “solidarity,” not “visits,” not “raising voices” to deaf secular powers. The conciliar sect’s humanitarian theater in Ephraim is a parody of the Church’s mission. It confirms the sentence of Pius XI: “The state is happy not by one means, and man by another; for the state is nothing else than a harmonious association of men… Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ.” Until the “priests” of the neo-church preach this, their “Christian presence” is salt that has lost its savor, “good for nothing any more but to be cast out, and to be trodden on by men” (Matt 5:13).
Source:
Parish priest: Israeli settlers’ push to drive Christians from Taybeh continues (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 07.08.2026