Apostolic Journey to Lebanon: Syncretism in the Guise of Sanctity
Vatican News portal (November 30, 2025) reports on antipope Leo XIV’s visit to the tomb of the Maronite monk Charbel Makhlouf in Annaya, Lebanon, framing it as a celebration of “interreligious coexistence” and a “symbol of solidarity” for a nation in crisis. The article quotes Fr. Youssef Matta, a monk at the Monastery of St. Maron, who claims Makhlouf’s miracles and asceticism “transcend religious divisions,” attracting Muslim and Druze veneration. Antipope Leo XIV’s prayer at the tomb is hailed as a “historic recognition” of Makhlouf’s role in promoting “dialogue” and “peace among all religions.” The report concludes by linking Makhlouf to a “network of Lebanese saints” whose “spiritual roots” allegedly offer hope against political corruption. **This narrative epitomizes the conciliar sect’s systematic replacement of Catholic soteriology with naturalistic humanism.**
Syncretism Masquerading as Holiness
The article’s central thesis—that Makhlouf’s tomb serves as a “point of contact and common hope for all Lebanese denominations”—directly contradicts the dogmatic teaching that extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation). By celebrating Makhlouf as a “miracle worker for humanity” whose “grace transcends specific doctrine,” the conciliar sect reduces sanctity to a utilitarian instrument of social cohesion. Fr. Matta’s assertion that miracles attributed to Makhlouf “make no distinction between Christians and Muslims” is a gross theological error, as miracles are signs of divine truth, not indifferentist spectacles.
“The concrete result is that grace transcends specific doctrine. He is the miracle worker for humanity, and he does not care so much about religion in the strict sense.”
This statement, attributed to Fr. Matta, is blatantly heretical. Grace is intrinsically ordered toward the salvation of souls within the una vero fides (one true faith), not a nebulous “humanity” divorced from doctrinal fidelity. The 1907 decree Lamentabili condemned the modernist error that “Revelation was merely man’s self-awareness of his relationship to God” (Proposition 20). Here, Makhlouf’s miracles are reinterpreted as a universalist “divine intervention” detached from the Church’s missionary mandate.
The Conciliar Sect’s Betrayal of Catholic Mission
Antipope Leo XIV’s visit exemplifies the conciliar sect’s abandonment of the Church’s divine mission to “teach all nations” (Matt. 28:19) in favor of a secularized “ethical reconstruction.” The article praises Makhlouf’s asceticism as an “ideal of spiritual purity revered in all Eastern religious traditions,” equating Catholic holiness with pagan asceticism. This echoes the condemned proposition in Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors that “the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Proposition 55).
Moreover, the claim that antipope Leo XIV’s visit “reaffirms the historical importance of these [Eastern] communities” while ignoring their schismatic tendencies reveals the conciliar sect’s betrayal of ecclesial unity. The Maronite Church’s submission to Rome was historically rooted in doctrinal orthodoxy, not interfaith pageantry. Pius XI’s encyclical Quas Primas (1925) unequivocally declared that Christ’s kingship demands the “public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ” by nations, not a relativistic “coexistence” with false religions.
Miracles as Political Theater
The article’s focus on Makhlouf’s “incorrupt body” and miraculous healings follows the same pattern as the fraudulent “Fatima apparitions”—a Masonic psychological operation analyzed in the provided theological critique. Just as the “Miracle of the Sun” exploited mass suggestion, Makhlouf’s posthumous reputation is weaponized to legitimize the conciliar sect’s syncretism. The report admits that his canonization was orchestrated by Paul VI (1965-1977), an antipope who promulgated the heretical Nova Missa and ecumenism.
Fr. Matta’s hope that antipope Leo XIV’s visit will “reignite international attention” on Lebanon reduces the Church to a geopolitical NGO. Pius IX’s Syllabus condemned the notion that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Proposition 80). Yet here, the conciliar sect’s leader parades as a statesman, declaring state holidays and exchanging “significant gifts” with civil authorities while Lebanon’s Christians face existential threats.
Conclusion: A Church in Apostasy
The article’s silence on the necessity of conversion for non-Catholics—coupled with its glorification of interfaith “dialogue”—exposes the conciliar sect’s total rupture with Catholic Tradition. The true Church teaches that “there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12), not that saints are “bridges” between truth and error. By promoting Makhlouf as a “symbol of coexistence,” the conciliar sect confirms its role as the “abomination of desolation” foretold in Daniel 9:27—a pseudo-church that worships man instead of God.
Source:
St. Charbel Makhlouf, a symbol of coexistence and support for Lebanon (vaticannews.va)
Date: 30.11.2025