The “Hardness” of a Faith Without God: An Exposure of Apostasy in EWTN’s Ukraine Coverage
Summary of the Conciliar Narrative
The cited article from the EWTN news portal presents a human-interest story featuring “Father” Serhiy Zakharchenko, OMI, director of EWTN Ukraine, describing the material hardships endured by Ukrainians and his television team four years into the Russia-Ukraine war. The focus is on the lack of heat and electricity, the logistical challenges of maintaining a 24-hour broadcast amid power outages, and a psychological resilience drawn from Viktor Frankl’s secular humanism. The article omits any reference to the supernatural end of suffering, the moral theology of war, the duty of states to recognize Christ the King, or the existence of a true Catholic hierarchy. It presents a ministry operating within the post-conciliar “Church” as a neutral humanitarian effort, devoid of doctrinal context or spiritual combat. The thesis is clear: this is the apostasy of the conciliar sect—a reduction of the Catholic mission to naturalistic crisis management, utterly bankrupt of integral Catholic faith.
1. Factual Deconstruction: The Ministry of the “Conciliar Sect”
The article centers on the work of EWTN Ukraine, an entity of the post-Vatican II “Church.” “Father” Zakharchenko is a member of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate (OMI), an order whose modernized constitutions and practices are incompatible with the immutable Rule of St. Charles Borromeo and the pre-1958 monastic tradition. His priesthood, conferred in the Novus Ordo rite and under the authority of the conciliar bishops, is valid only if the ordaining bishop was validly ordained (a point of serious doubt for many post-1968 ordinations) but is illicit and operates in a schismatic structure. The very premise of his ministry—running a television channel under the aegis of a “Church” that has embraced religious liberty, ecumenism, and collegiality—is a fundamental rejection of the Catholic Church’s exclusive right to teach and govern.
The article notes: “Even in a war, they continue their work ‘with the same pace,’ Zakharchenko said. ‘Because we understand that the prayers, the holy Mass, the programs … is what really people want in order to back them up in this difficult time.'” This statement is theologically catastrophic. It reduces the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to a psychological comfort mechanism, one program among others (“prayers, the holy Mass, the programs”) to “back up” people. This is the naturalistic, therapeutic religion of Modernism condemned by St. Pius X. The Mass is not a “program” to support people in difficulty; it is the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary, the supreme act of adoration, propitiation, and thanksgiving, which alone can truly “back up” souls by applying the merits of Christ’s Passion. To place it alongside “programs” is to desecrate the sublime mystery and align with the “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:15).
2. Linguistic & Rhetorical Analysis: The Language of Naturalistic Humanism
The tone is one of stoic endurance and pragmatic problem-solving, utterly devoid of supernatural perspective. Key phrases reveal the apostate mindset:
- “It was hard and it is still hard”: A statement of material fact, with no reference to redemptive suffering, the cross as a means of salvation, or the intercession of the saints. It echoes the existentialism of Frankl, not the Catholic theology of consolatio in tribulatione.
- “extreme hardship for the civilian population”: A UN bureaucratic phrase, adopted without critique. The Catholic perspective would first and foremost speak of souls in danger of eternal damnation, the need for sacraments, and the violation of God’s law by both aggressor and defender if they act without justice. The article is silent on whether the Ukrainian state, by promoting “religious freedom” and “LGBTQ+ rights,” has not itself incurred the wrath of God, a central point in any authentic Catholic analysis of national catastrophe.
- “build plans… continue what I do”: This is the religion of the entrepreneur, not the priest. The Catholic priest’s primary plan is the sanctification of souls and the glory of God. The article presents a manager ensuring broadcast continuity. The focus is on human agency and productivity (“work gives him a chance ‘to not think about disaster'”), a direct inversion of the Catholic call to meditatio mortis and constant reference to the iudicium particulare.
- The invocation of Viktor Frankl: This is a decisive marker. Frankl, a Jewish psychiatrist, represents the “religion of man” condemned in Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors (Error #58: “All the rectitude and excellence of morality ought to be placed in the accumulation and increase of riches… and the gratification of pleasure” – here, the “pleasure” is meaning derived from work). The priest cites a non-Catholic, secular source as his philosophical foundation, demonstrating that his “faith” is a veneer over pure naturalism. A true Catholic priest would cite the Imitatio Christi, the writings of St. John of the Cross, or the lives of the saints who found meaning solely in Christ crucified.
3. Theological Confrontation: Omissions That Scream Apostasy
The analysis must focus on the silences, for they are more damning than the words.
- Silence on Christ the King: The war is presented as a geopolitical tragedy. There is no mention that all authority comes from God (Rom. 13:1), that states have a duty to publicly recognize and obey Christ the King (Pius XI, Quas Primas), or that the primary cause of societal collapse is the rejection of divine law. Pius XI, in the encyclical establishing the feast of Christ the King, directly links the “seeds of discord,” “unbridled desires,” and “shattered domestic peace” to the removal of Jesus Christ and His law from public life. The article’s entire premise—a humanitarian crisis requiring humanitarian (broadcast) solutions—is the very secularism Pius XI condemned. Where is the call for the consecration of Ukraine and Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? Where is the demand that rulers submit to the Social Reign of Christ? The silence is a denial of the Faith.
- Silence on the Sacraments and Salvation: The article mentions “prayers” and “holy Mass” in a list. It does not mention Confession, the sacrament of penance essential for forgiveness of sins and justification. It does not mention Extreme Unction for the dying. It does not mention the absolute necessity of baptism for salvation. It does not mention that outside the true Church (the Catholic Church, not the conciliar sect), there is no salvation (Pius IX, Syllabus, Error #16 condemned: “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation”). The people of Ukraine are in danger of eternal damnation, yet the priest’s response is to keep the TV on. This is the spiritual bankruptcy of Modernism: it has emptied the Church of her salvific function, reducing her to a humanitarian NGO.
- Silence on the Moral Law and Just War: The article presents the war as a simple narrative of victimhood. It does not ask: Is the Ukrainian state defending a just cause? Are its means proportionate? Is it promoting immorality at home? Does it honor God? The Catholic moral tradition, as taught by St. Thomas Aquinas and the Church’s doctors, requires a rigorous analysis of the ius in bello and the moral character of the state. To omit this is to adopt the secular, emotional narrative of the media. It also ignores the possibility—taught by Pius IX and Leo XIII—that God can use a pagan or schismatic power (like Russia) as a scourge for a Catholic nation that has abandoned Him (see Pius IX’s warnings about “enemies within”). The article’s one-sidedness is not neutrality; it is complicity with the modernist, anti-Catholic world order.
- Silence on the Usurpation of the Papacy: The priest operates under “Pope” Francis (Bergoglio) and his predecessor “Popes.” From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, the See of Peter has been vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958, as the subsequent conciliar “popes” have publicly and pertinaciously embraced heresies (Modernism, religious liberty, ecumenism). The article assumes the legitimacy of the conciliar hierarchy. This is a fundamental error. A true Catholic analysis would begin by denouncing the “abomination of desolation” occupying the Vatican and urge the faithful to reject the false shepherds (John 10:1). The priest’s obedience to this hierarchy makes him an active participant in the apostasy.
4. Symptomatic Analysis: The Fruit of the Conciliar Revolution
This article is a perfect microcosm of the post-conciliar apostasy.
- The Hermeneutics of Continuity in Action: The article pretends that the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar “Church” are the same. It uses Catholic terminology (“holy Mass,” “prayers,” “priest”) while emptying it of its Catholic content. This is the “hermeneutics of continuity” condemned by sedevacantists as a diabolical synthesis.
- The Cult of Man: The entire focus is on human suffering, human resilience, human work. The supernatural is absent. This is the “cult of man” of which Pius XI warned in Quadragesimo Anno and Pius XII in his warnings against “the error of… secular humanism.” The priest becomes a social worker with a cassock.
- False Ecumenism and Indifferentism: By operating a channel in a war-torn, largely schismatic (Orthodox) country without any explicit call to conversion to the one true Church, the ministry practices the indifferentism condemned in the Syllabus (Errors #15-18). The implicit message is: “We are all Christians here, let’s support each other.” This is the ecumenical poison of Vatican II.
- The Democratization of the Church: The priest’s authority comes not from his ordination by a bishop in communion with the true pope (which he lacks), but from his role as a “director” of a media outlet. He speaks as a motivational speaker, not as a teacher with the authority of Christ. This reflects the conciliar shift from hierarchical, sacramental authority to charismatic, functional authority.
5. Doctrinal Weapons: The Unchanging Faith vs. The Modernist Synthesis
- On the Social Reign of Christ: “The kingdom of our Redeemer encompasses all men… His reign extends not only to Catholic nations… but also to all non-Christians” (Pius XI, Quas Primas). The article’s silence on this dogma is a denial of it. The war in Ukraine is a direct consequence of the rejection of Christ’s kingship, as Pius XI taught: “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” The conciliar “Church” has removed Christ from the public square by embracing religious liberty and secularism.
- On the Nature of the Church: “The Church is a perfect society… endowed with proper and perpetual rights… conferred upon her by her Divine Founder” (Pius IX, Syllabus, Error #19 condemned). The article presents the Church as a voluntary association of “good people” doing “good work” (broadcasting). This is the liberal, Protestant conception of the Church, not the Catholic one. The true Church has the right and duty to teach all nations, to govern, and to require obedience. The conciliar “Church” has surrendered this right to the “civil power” (the Ukrainian state, the UN, etc.).
- On the Necessity of the Church for Salvation: “Outside the Church there is no salvation” (Fourth Lateran Council, Canon 1; defined by Boniface VIII in Unam Sanctam). The article’s universalist, humanitarian tone implies that the “good work” of broadcasting is salvific for all Ukrainians, regardless of their religious affiliation. This is the indifferentism of Modernism, condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici gregis.
- On the Duty of Rulers: “Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ” (Pius XI, Quas Primas). The article does not call on the Ukrainian government to recognize Christ as King, to stop promoting sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance (abortion, “LGBTQ+ rights”), or to consecrate the nation to the Sacred Heart. It implicitly endorses a secular state fighting a war without reference to God. This is the error of the “separation of Church and State” condemned by Pius IX (Syllabus, Error #55).
Conclusion: An Apostate Ministry in an Apostate Sect
“Father” Serhiy Zakharchenko’s work, as portrayed, is not Catholic ministry. It is the work of a conciliar functionary in the “paramasonic structure” occupying the Vatican. His reliance on Frankl’s secular humanism, his reduction of the Mass to a “program,” his silence on the Social Reign of Christ, the necessity of the Church for salvation, and the moral law, and his operation within a schismatic hierarchy, expose the complete theological and spiritual bankruptcy of the post-conciliar “Church.” This article is not a testimony of faith; it is a symptom of the “abomination of desolation.” The only authentic Catholic response to the Ukraine crisis is: 1) Denounce the conciliar antipopes and their false church; 2) Pray and work for the return of a true pope and the restoration of all things in Christ; 3) Explicitly call for the consecration of nations to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the public recognition of Christ the King; 4) Provide sacraments and sound doctrine to souls, not psychological comfort. What EWTN Ukraine offers is the “cure of the poor” without the “cure of souls”—a ministry of the Antichrist, who offers earthly peace while destroying eternal salvation.
Source:
‘It is still hard’: Priest describes conditions in Ukraine 4 years into war (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 24.02.2026