The Vatican News portal reports on an appeal for peace in Ukraine delivered by “Pope” Leo XIV following the Angelus prayer on February 22, 2026, marking four years since the start of the war. The appeal calls for an immediate ceasefire, the cessation of bombings, and strengthened dialogue, describing war as a “wound inflicted upon the entire human family” that leaves “death, devastation and a trail of pain that marks generations.” The article notes this continues a pattern of pleas from the post-conciliar hierarchy, mentioning humanitarian aid, papal conversations with world leaders, and meetings with Ukrainian pilgrims, praising the “faith of a land rich with ‘the testimony of many saints’ and ‘the blood of many martyrs.'” The appeal frames peace as an “urgent necessity” requiring “responsible decisions” and “sincere, direct and respectful dialogue” with international community support. This entire presentation constitutes a radical abandonment of Catholic social doctrine and a descent into the naturalistic humanism condemned by the pre-conciliar Magisterium, reducing the supernatural peace of Christ’s reign to a mere political program of dialogue and humanitarianism.
The Bankruptcy of a “Peace” Denying Christ the King
I. Factical Deconstruction: The Omission of the Supernatural Order
The article presents a “peace appeal” that is factically and theologically vacuous. It operates entirely within the natural order, speaking of “wounds to the human family,” “responsible decisions,” and “dialogue” while maintaining a studied silence on the true cause of war and societal disorder. This silence is not accidental but doctrinal, flowing from the modernist principle that the Church’s mission is to promote human fraternity apart from the explicit reign of Christ. The pre-conciliar Magisterium, however, was unequivocal: true peace is impossible without the public and social reign of Jesus Christ. Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical Quas Primas (1925), on the feast of Christ the King, directly addressed this error. He taught that when “God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed, because the main reason why some have the right to command and others have the duty to obey was removed. For this reason, the entire human society had to be shaken.” The “peace” offered by Leo XIV is precisely the peace of a society that has removed Christ from its laws—a peace that is, in Pius XI’s words, impossible. The appeal’s language of “dialogue” and “responsible decisions” is the language of the Freemasonic “humanitarian” projects condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors, which denounced the idea that “the civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government” (Error 44) and that “the civil power has the right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs” (Error 41). The article’s entire framework accepts the secularist premise that the State and “international community” are neutral arbiters, a premise Pius XI called the “secularism of our times, so-called laicism,” which is the “plague that poisons human society.”
II. Linguistic Analysis: The Tone of Apostate Humanism
The language of the article is a masterclass in post-conciliar naturalism. Phrases like “urgent necessity,” “responsible decisions,” “sincere, direct and respectful dialogue,” and “the support and commitment of the international community” are the vocabulary of UN resolutions and NGO reports, not of a Vicar of Christ. This bureaucratic, managerial tone is symptomatic of the “Church of the New Advent” which has exchanged the sensus supernaturalis for the spirit of the world. The invocation of “the faith of a land rich with ‘the testimony of many saints’ and ‘the blood of many martyrs'” is particularly grotesque. It uses the glorious pre-1958 Catholic heritage of Ukraine—a land martyred under communism and home to authentic saints like St. Josaphat—as a decorative backdrop for an appeal that utterly ignores the reason for that martyrdom. Those saints and martyrs died for the divine rights of Christ the King against the atheistic errors condemned in the Syllabus (Errors 1-7 on Pantheism, Naturalism, Rationalism). To praise their “faith” while promoting a “peace” that requires submission to the very secularist principles they died opposing is a supreme act of liturgical and doctrinal sacrilege. It is the conciliar sect’s standard practice: to wear the garments of Tradition while preaching the doctrines of Modernism.
III. Theological Confrontation: Against the Errors of Modernism and Indifferentism
The appeal’s core error is its implicit religious indifferentism. By calling for “dialogue” and a ceasefire without demanding the public recognition of the Catholic Church as the sole true religion and the necessary foundation for societal order, it adopts the condemned proposition of the Syllabus: “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (Error 15) and “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation” (Error 16). The article’s appeal is addressed to all parties in a conflict, treating all ideologies as equal before the “international community.” This is the “ecumenism of blood” inverted: it uses the suffering of Catholics to promote a peace that includes their persecutors’ ideologies. Pius XI in Quas Primas stated that Christ’s kingdom “encompasses all men” not in the sense of religious indifferentism, but in the sense that all are subject to His authority and must obey His laws. He explicitly condemned the secularist error: “the Christian religion began to be equated with other false religions and shamelessly placed in the same category.” Leo XIV’s appeal, by its very neutrality, equates the Catholic truth for which Ukrainians are martyred with the communist/globalist ideology that persecutes them. Furthermore, the appeal’s silence on the sacramental and moral life as the foundation of peace is a direct rejection of Catholic doctrine. As Pius XI wrote, the kingdom of Christ “is opposed only to the kingdom of Satan and the powers of darkness – and requires its followers not only to renounce earthly riches and possessions, to be distinguished by modesty of conduct, and to hunger and thirst for justice, but also to deny themselves and carry their cross.” There is no cross, no sin, no grace, no sacraments in the “peace” of Leo XIV—only geopolitical management.
IV. Symptomatic Analysis: The Fruit of the Conciliar Revolution
This “peace appeal” is the logical and necessary fruit of the conciliar revolution, which St. Pius X condemned in his decree Lamentabili sane exitu (1907). The document condemned propositions that are now the operating system of the conciliar sect:
* Proposition 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.” Leo XIV’s appeal assumes this principle by not calling for the Catholicization of Ukraine and Russia but for a pluralistic “peace.”
* Proposition 80: “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.” The entire tone of the article—praising “dialogue,” avoiding doctrinal confrontation, appealing to “international community” values—is the fulfillment of this condemned error.
* The modernist heresy of the “evolution of dogma” (condemned in Lamentabili, Props. 54-55) is evident in the implicit downgrading of the Social Kingship of Christ from an immutable dogma (defined by Pius XI in Quas Primas as based on Scripture and Tradition) to a “spiritual” ideal that must bow to “prudent realism” and political compromise. The article mentions the Pope “contemplated a visit to Kyiv, though he acknowledged the necessity of prudent realism”—a phrase that encapsulates the modernist rejection of the Church’s duty to prophetically denounce error, even at the cost of political friction.
V. The “Twofold Power” Perverted: The State as Sovereign
The appeal’s framework accepts the modern error of the State’s absolute sovereignty, condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus (Errors 39, 42). It implicitly accepts that the State (or “international community”) is the primary agent of peace, to which the Church offers spiritual support. This inverts the Catholic doctrine of the twofold power, where the State is subordinate to the Church in matters of morality and the common good. Pius XI in Quas Primas taught that rulers must “publicly honor Christ and obey Him,” and that “the final judgment, in which Christ… 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.” Leo XIV’s appeal makes no such demand. It does not remind rulers of their duty to acknowledge Christ’s Social Kingship. Instead, it pleads with them to engage in “dialogue,” treating them as autonomous peers. This is the perfect expression of Error 42 of the Syllabus: “In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails.” The “peace” of the conciliar sect is the peace of Caesar, not of Christ.
VI. The Omission of Justice and the Primacy of God’s Law
The appeal speaks of “peace” but never of justice, because in the modernist framework, justice is a human construct to be negotiated. Catholic doctrine, however, holds that true peace is the “tranquility of order” (pax), which requires the ordering of society according to God’s law. Pius XI wrote that Christ’s reign “consists of a threefold authority”: legislative, judicial, and executive. A “peace” that does not submit all laws—domestic and international—to the judgment of Christ the King is an unjust and demonic peace. The article’s silence on the moral evil of communism/socialism (condemned in the Syllabus, Section IV) and on the duty of states to recognize the Catholic faith as the sole true religion (condemned in Error 21) is a damning admission. It treats the conflict as a mere political dispute between equal parties, not as a cosmic battle between the City of God and the City of Man. The “suffering” and “victims” are presented in purely humanitarian terms, stripped of their supernatural meaning as martyrs for the Faith. This is the ultimate modernist reduction: to make the Church a humanitarian NGO that laments consequences while denying the cause.
VII. The Scandal of “Solidarity” with the Conciliar Sect’s Victims
The article notes that “Pope Leo has sent repeated humanitarian assistance from the Papal Almoner to Ukraine” and “met with Ukrainian pilgrims, praising the faith of a land rich with ‘the testimony of many saints’ and ‘the blood of many martyrs.'” This is a profound theological scandal. The Papal Almoner of the conciliar sect distributes alms in the name of a false “pope” to people who, if they are true Catholics, are being persecuted for the very faith the conciliar sect has betrayed. It creates a false communion: the persecuted faithful are made to seem in gratitude to the very hierarchy that has abandoned them doctrinally and liturgically. It is a diabolical inversion: the conciliar sect uses the suffering of true Catholics to legitimize its own apostate existence. A true Pope would excommunicate the leaders of the nations waging an unjust war and call for the conversion of Russia—not as a vague “conversion” open to schism and heresy as in the disputed Fatima “message” (which we reject as a possible Masonic operation), but as a conversion to the one true Faith, as Pius XI demanded in Quas Primas. Instead, we have photo-ops and humanitarian platitudes.
VIII. Conclusion: The Peace of Antichrist vs. the Peace of Christ
The “peace” offered by Leo XIV is not the peace of Christ. It is the peace of the world, which St. Pius X condemned as the synthesis of all errors in Modernism. It is the peace of the “international community” built on the denial of the Social Kingship of Christ, the acceptance of religious indifferentism, and the reduction of the Church to a voice of conscience in a secularized world. The true Catholic peace, as defined by Pius XI, can only come when “all men, prone to forgetfulness, consider how much our Savior cost us” and when “individuals, families, and states allowed themselves to be governed by Christ.” This requires the explicit rejection of the errors enumerated in the Syllabus and the public confession that “there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12) except Jesus Christ, and that His law must govern all human laws. The appeal of Leo XIV is therefore not a call to peace but a call to apostasy, a cementing of the “abomination of desolation” in the “holy place” (Mt 24:15). It is a satanic parody that uses the language of peace to perpetuate the war against Christ the King. The only “responsible decision” is to reject this conciliar sect and its false peace, and to pray and work for the restoration of the immutable Catholic Faith in its integral and militant form, which alone can bring about the true peace “which the world cannot give” (Jn 14:27).
Source:
Pope Leo: Peace is urgently needed, requiring responsible decisions (vaticannews.va)
Date: 22.02.2026