The “Gaze of Hope” That Blinds: How the Conciliar Sect Replaces Christ’s Reign with Naturalistic Humanism
The cited article from Vatican News features an interview with Archbishop Visvaldas Kulbokas, the apostolic nuncio to Ukraine, marking four years since Russia’s full-scale invasion. It presents a narrative centered on human resilience, diplomatic references (Budapest Memorandum, Minsk agreements), and a spiritual “hope” defined by prayer and humanitarian aid. The nuncio, speaking on behalf of “Pope Leo XIV,” urges support for Ukraine through “spiritual help” and a “gaze filled with hope,” while lamenting the intensification of violence and the failure of international law. The article’s thesis is that amid the “ashes” of war, the Church’s primary role is to foster a non-judgmental, service-oriented hope that looks for “sprouts” in human action and limited diplomatic efforts, all while carefully avoiding any assertion of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ over nations and their conflicts.
Level 1: Factual Deconstruction – The Idolatry of Human Frameworks
The article’s factual foundation is built entirely upon the natural and political order, explicitly excluding the supernatural order of Catholic doctrine. The nuncio’s analysis is framed by statistics of military escalation, UN reports on civilian casualties, and references to international treaties like the Budapest Memorandum and the Minsk agreements. This establishes a worldview where the resolution of a major war is a question of diplomatic compliance and human effort, not of divine justice and the reign of Christ the King.
“Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and bears responsibility for promoting peace and justice. Let us also recall the Budapest Memorandum… Then there was the 2003 Treaty… not to mention the Minsk agreements.”
This is a complete surrender to the naturalistic principles condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors. Error #41 states: “The civil government, even when in the hands of an infidel sovereign, has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs.” The nuncio appeals to the UN—a secular, masonic-influenced body that promotes religious indifferentism and population control—as the arbiter of “justice,” thereby implicitly endorsing Error #39: “The State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits.” The very act of placing hope in treaties signed by apostate regimes is a denial of the Catholic principle that true peace is found only in the Pax Christi, the peace of Christ’s reign. As Pius XI declared in Quas Primas, “the hope of lasting peace will not yet shine upon nations as long as individuals and states renounce and do not wish to recognize the reign of our Savior.” The article’s entire premise—that peace can emerge from negotiations between belligerents without first acknowledging Christ’s absolute sovereignty—is thus a recipe for perpetual conflict, rooted in the modernist error of believing society can be ordered without God.
Level 2: Linguistic Analysis – The Language of Apostasy
The article’s tone is bureaucratic, pastoral, and evasive, employing the soft, therapeutic language of the conciliar sect. Key phrases like “gaze of hope,” “sprouts of hope,” “broaden our gaze,” and “spiritual help” are devoid of doctrinal content. They reflect the Modernist hermeneutic condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu, which seeks to transform faith from an assent to revealed truths into a subjective, evolving religious sentiment (cf. Propositions 25, 26). The nuncio quotes “Pope Leo XIV” saying we must not “remain among the ashes, but rise and rebuild.” This is a direct echo of the secular humanist “culture of encounter” and “building a better world” promoted by the post-conciliar popes, which systematically omits the necessity of converting individuals and societies to the one true Church. The language is active (“rebuild”) but directionless without the goal of the Catholic social order. It mimics the “activism” of the Jansenists and naturalists, focusing on external works while ignoring the primacy of the interior life and the sacraments. The repeated emphasis on “not focusing on suffering” and “not accusing all Russians” is a moral relativism that contradicts the Catholic duty to judge rightly and to defend the innocent. It aligns with the “mercy” without repentance that defines the post-conciliar apostasy.
Level 3: Theological Confrontation – The Omission That Is Heresy
The gravest error is not what the article says, but what it omits: the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the central, non-negotiable doctrine of the Catholic Church regarding the ordering of society, defined infallibly by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas. The encyclical states unequivocally: “It is necessary that Christ reign in the mind of man… in the will… in the heart… in the body.” It declares that the state must publicly honor Christ and obey Him, and that all law must be based on God’s commandments. The nuncio’s interview contains zero reference to this. He does not call for the conversion of Ukraine, Russia, or the world to Catholicism. He does not demand that rulers acknowledge Christ’s authority. He does not mention the final judgment where Christ will avenge the insult of being “cast out of the state.” This silence is itself a denial of the faith. It is the practical adoption of Error #77 from the Syllabus: “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.” The nuncio operates entirely within the framework of a secular, multi-religious state, treating the conflict as a geopolitical dispute rather than a battle between the City of God and the City of Man. His “hope” is a hope in human resilience and diplomacy, not the hope of the Quas Primas that “unheard-of blessings would flow upon the whole society” only “if men were ever to recognize Christ’s royal authority over themselves, both privately and publicly.” The article’s spirituality is therefore a false, naturalistic religion, a “dogmaless Christianity” as condemned in Lamentabili (Prop. 65).
Level 4: Symptomatic Analysis – The Fruit of the Conciliar Revolution
This interview is a perfect symptom of the post-conciliar “Church of the New Advent.” The nuncio, a high-ranking cleric of the “conciliar sect,” exhibits the three characteristics of Modernism defined by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici gregis: 1) Immanentism: his “hope” is entirely immanent, focused on this-worldly outcomes (humanitarian aid, diplomatic talks). 2) Symbolism: he uses religious language (“prayer,” “Holy Father”) stripped of its objective, supernatural referent. The “hope” he transmits is not the theological virtue of hope in God’s promises, but a psychological optimism. 3) Reformism: his call to “rebuild” is not a call to rebuild society according to Catholic principles, but a vague call to continue humanitarian work, which is the essence of the “reform of the Church” and “reform of society” as understood by Modernists—a reform away from Catholic dogma and toward a secular humanist project. The nuncio’s statement that people “thank God for what they still have” is a prime example of the Modernist reduction of God to a vague, impersonal force who blesses human endeavors, not a personal, sovereign King who demands obedience. This aligns with the sedevacantist understanding that the current occupiers of the Vatican have forfeited their office by publicly embracing the errors of Modernism, as defined by St. Pius X. The article demonstrates that the “Pope” and his nuncios have fully internalized the errors of the Syllabus and Lamentabili, making them, in the words of St. Robert Bellarmine, manifest heretics who have ipso facto lost their office. Their teachings are not Catholic but are the “synthesis of all heresies” (St. Pius X).
The “Two Loves” in stark contrast: Christ the King vs. the Cult of Man
The integral Catholic faith, as taught before the revolution of John XXIII, presents two irreconcilable loves: the love of God, which demands the total subjection of all human activity to His law, and the love of the world, which seeks to build a kingdom without God. Quas Primas is explicit: “the state is happy not by one means, and man by another; for the state is nothing else than a harmonious association of men.” True happiness and peace for the state come only from conforming its laws to the divine law. The nuncio’s article promotes the opposite: a “hope” that works within the existing, apostate, secular order, seeking to ameliorate suffering without calling for the conversion of that order. This is the “cult of man” condemned by Pius XI, where human effort and solidarity become ends in themselves. The women’s group he praises—focusing on prosthetics and rest without “accusing all Russians”—exemplifies the Modernist error of separating charity from justice and truth. Catholic charity must be accompanied by the prophetic denunciation of sin and error, especially the error of atheistic communism and the apostasy of the post-conciliar hierarchy. The nuncio’s silence on the need for the Social Reign of Christ, on the duty of Catholic rulers to profess the Faith and suppress false religions, and on the ultimate goal of all suffering—the salvation of souls—reveals that he serves not the Church, but the “paramasonic structure” occupying the Vatican. His “hope” is the hope of the Antichrist: a world united in rejecting God, under the guise of humanitarianism.
Therefore, the article is not a Catholic commentary on war but a manifesto of apostasy. It replaces the Regnum Christi with the “rights of man,” the Sacraments with “spiritual closeness,” and the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary with vague “prayer.” It is a spiritual poison that leads souls to believe they can serve both God and mammon. The only legitimate response for a Catholic is to reject this teaching with the same fervor as the Syllabus rejected the errors of its day, and to cling to the immutable faith that Christ must reign, or society will perish. As Pius XI warned, “the entire human society had to be shaken, because it lacked a stable and strong foundation.” The nuncio’s “hope” is built on that same shaky, godless foundation.
Source:
Apostolic Nuncio to Ukraine: Amid pain of war, we keep a gaze of hope (vaticannews.va)
Date: 24.02.2026