Modernist Vatican Diplomacy Undermines Catholic Truths
The VaticanNews portal (21 January 2026) reports on statements by “Cardinal” Pietro Parolin at an event celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Osservatorio for Independent Thinking in Rome. Parolin addressed tensions between the U.S. and Europe, urging dialogue “without polemics” to avoid worsening the “already serious international situation.” He confirmed the Vatican received an invitation to join a U.S.-led “Board of Peace for Gaza,” though he ruled out financial participation, citing the Holy See’s “different situation.” Parolin emphasized “respect for international law” over “personal feelings,” praised “responsible use” of media to avoid polarization, reminisced about his time in Venezuela, and echoed Bergoglio’s “Third World War fought piecemeal” rhetoric. He reiterated support for the “two-state solution” in Israel-Palestine, claiming it remains “viable” despite decades of failure. This performance epitomizes the conciliar sect’s surrender to naturalism and betrayal of Catholic mission.
Naturalism Replaces Supernatural Order
Parolin’s insistence that “respect for international law” is the “essential point” (blockquote>”What matters is respect for international law. I believe this is the essential point”) exposes the conciliar sect’s systemic apostasy from Regnum Christi. The Church has always taught that human laws derive validity only insofar as they conform to Divine Law (Summa Theologica I-II, Q. 93, A. 3). Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors (1864) condemned the proposition that “the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Error 55). By prioritizing secular “international law”—a modernist construct rejecting Christ’s Kingship—Parolin implicitly denies Quas Primas (1925), where Pius XI established the Feast of Christ the King to combat “the plague of secularism” that “removed Jesus Christ from legislation.”
Ecumenical Betrayal in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Parolin’s promotion of the “two-state solution” and recognition of “Palestine” ignores the Church’s immutable teaching: only conversion to Catholicism secures true peace. The conciliar sect’s 2015 recognition of “Palestine” contradicts Pius X’s condemnation of religious indifferentism in Lamentabili Sane (1907), which rejected the idea that “Revelation could not be… perfected” (Proposition 21). Christ’s mandate—“Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them” (Matthew 28:19)—is replaced with geopolitical bargaining. Nowhere does Parolin mention the Gospel’s necessity for Palestinians or Israelis, reducing the Church to a NGO chasing “agreements” instead of souls.
Disarmament Heresy and the Rejection of Just War
Parolin’s claim that nuclear weapon possession is “immoral” directly opposes Catholic theology. While the Church condemns indiscriminate warfare, it has always upheld the right of sovereign states to defend themselves with proportionate means. Pius XII’s 1953 Christmas Message affirmed that nuclear deterrence could be morally permissible if oriented toward peace. Parolin’s pacifist rhetoric aligns with Modernist tendencies condemned in Lamentabili, which rejected the “evolution” of dogma (Proposition 22). His reduction of war to “unspeakable suffering”—ignoring distinctions between aggressor and victim—echoes Bergoglio’s sentimentalism, not Augustine’s bellum iustum principles.
False Neutrality and the Corruption of Media
The call for “responsible use of the press… to build up rather than polarize” masks a deeper error: the abandonment of truth. Catholic journalism must admonish sinners, not avoid “polemics.” Pius XII’s 1957 encyclical Miranda Prorsus warned that media must serve truth, not “neutrality.” Parolin’s plea for non-polarizing discourse ignores St. Paul’s command: “Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke” (2 Timothy 4:2). When heresy devours nations, silence is complicity.
Venezuela: Silence on Communism’s Ravages
Parolin’s nostalgic recollection of Venezuela—“a beautiful country… unforgettable experience”—whitewashes the socialist tyranny that enslaved it. The “tension between bishops and Chávez” arose because Venezuelan prelates denounced Chávez’s Marxist persecution of the Church, a duty enshrined in Canon Law (1917 CIC 1325). Pius XI’s Divini Redemptoris (1937) explicitly condemned communism as “intrinsically perverse,” yet Parolin reduces the crisis to “political difficulties” and “uncertainty,” omitting Marxism’s theological crimes.
The Gaza Farce: Apostolic Authority Reduced to Observer
The “Board of Peace for Gaza” invitation underscores the conciliar sect’s impotence. True popes like Benedict XV mediated World War I through moral authority; Parolin admits the Vatican might join only as a token participant, “not financially.” This aligns with the post-conciliar church’s role as a geopolitical beggar, not Christ’s militant voice. Leo XIII’s Immortale Dei (1885) declared the Church’s right to intervene in all matters affecting salvation, yet Parolin treats Gaza as a mere “issue that requires time to assess.”
Conclusion: Apostasy Wears a Diplomatic Mask
Parolin’s statements—devoid of references to Christ’s Kingship, conversion, or the Four Last Things—expose the conciliar sect’s essence: a Masonic operation imitating the Church while denying Her power (2 Timothy 3:5). As the true Church teaches, “There is no peace except in the kingdom of Christ” (Quas Primas). Those who reject this crown Him anew with thorns.
Source:
Cardinal Parolin: Tensions between US and Europe worsen international climate (vaticannews.va)
Date: 21.01.2026