The ANSA-reported article details Cardinal Matteo Maria Zuppi, President of the Italian Bishops’ Conference, presiding over a Mass for peace in Ukraine at the Basilica of Saint Francis in Assisi. Organized by the Ukrainian Embassy and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, the event coincided with the fourth anniversary of the Russian invasion. Zuppi, quoting the antipope “Leo XIV,” stated that “a peace imposed only by weapons is false,” invoking Gaudium et Spes to declare that “every act of war that aims indiscriminately at destroying entire cities is a crime against God and humanity.” He called for dialogue and a “just peace for all,” while Ukrainian Ambassador Andrii Yurash defined a just peace as “the will of God.” The article presents a liturgical ceremony centered on humanistic dialogue and natural justice, utterly devoid of the Catholic Church’s traditional call for the public and social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the conversion of nations, and the supernatural means of grace. This performance is not a Catholic act of peace but a sacrilegious parody, a symptom of the apostate “conciliar sect” which has replaced the immutable faith with the naturalistic religion of man.
The Naturalistic Religion of Man in the House of God
The very setting of this event—the Basilica of Saint Francis—is cynically exploited. Saint Francis of Assisi, a man of profound Catholic penance and loyalty to the Papacy, is reduced to a generic “brother meeting other brothers,” a symbol of vague universalism. The Cardinal’s language is pure naturalistic humanism, a direct echo of the condemned errors of *Syllabus Errorum*. He speaks of “the peace of all,” “finding peace together,” and “dialogue” as if these were ends in themselves. This is the religion of man, not of God. Pius IX’s *Syllabus* condemned the proposition that “the State… is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits” (Error 39) and that “the civil power may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government” (Error 44). Here, the “civil” influence is the Ukrainian embassy and the SMOM, a modernized Masonic order, dictating the agenda of a “Catholic” liturgy. The focus is entirely on human effort, “working for justice” as defined by human institutions, not on the sovereignty of God and the necessity of His law. The article’s silence on the necessity of the Catholic faith for true peace, on the social reign of Christ the King as taught by Pius XI in *Quas Primas*, and on the sin of war as a consequence of rejecting God’s law is deafening. It is the silence of the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place.
The Heresy of “Peace Imposed by Weapons is False”
Zuppi’s key phrase, “a peace imposed only by weapons is false,” is a direct quote from Paul VI’s *Populorum Progressio* and echoes the language of *Gaudium et Spes*. This is not Catholic teaching; it is Modernist propaganda. From the pre-1958 Catholic perspective, this statement is a grave error. Pius XI, in *Quas Primas*, taught that true peace is the fruit of Christ’s reign: “If men were ever to recognize Christ’s royal authority over themselves, both privately and publicly, then unheard-of blessings would flow upon the whole society, such as due freedom, order, and tranquility, and concord and peace.” Peace is not found in “dialogue” between aggressors and victims, but in the submission of all—states, individuals, and nations—to the law of Christ. The article’s framework accepts the false dichotomy between “peace through force” and “peace through dialogue,” both of which are naturalistic. Catholic peace is pax Christi, the peace of a world ordered according to divine law, which may, in extreme cases, require a just war to defend the innocent and restore order. To condemn the use of force categorically is to condemn the just war doctrine of the Church and to paralyze the defense of the innocent, a position Pius IX’s *Syllabus* implicitly condemns by defending the Church’s right to use force (Error 24: “The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect” is condemned as an error; the contrary is true). Zuppi’s statement, therefore, is not a nuanced theological position but a betrayal of the Church’s consistent teaching on the temporal power of the Church and the legitimate authority of the state to wield the sword (Romans 13:4). It is the language of the “peace” of the Antichrist, which is the absence of conflict achieved by surrendering to evil.
The Omission of Christ the King: The Central Apostasy
The most damning evidence of the article’s apostasy is its total omission of the doctrine of the Social Kingship of Christ. This is not an oversight; it is a deliberate exclusion, the hallmark of Modernism condemned by St. Pius X in *Pascendi Dominici gregis* and *Lamentabili sane exitu*. Pius XI’s encyclical *Quas Primas* is the definitive magisterial exposition of this doctrine. Christ’s kingdom “encompasses all men… His reign extends not only to Catholic nations… but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians.” The state has a duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him. The article mentions “justice” but defines it as the “will of God” in a vague, interreligious sense, not as the objective moral law codified in the Ten Commandments and the social teachings of the Church, which demand the establishment of Catholic society. There is no call for the conversion of Russia, of Ukraine, or of any nation to the Catholic faith. There is no mention of the Blessed Virgin Mary, no invocation of her Immaculate Heart, no reference to the First Saturday Devotion or the Consecration of Russia—all of which are central to true Catholic peace. This is the precise diversion from apostasy that the *False Fatima Apparitions* file identifies in the authentic (but misused) message: the focus must be on “national conversion without evangelization,” a contradiction. Here, there is no conversion at all, only a nebulous “dialogue.” The article’s peace is the peace of the “abomination of desolation” (Matthew 24:15), the peace of the world that hates Christ (John 15:18-19).
The False Authority of “Pope Leo XIV” and the Conciliar Sect
The article repeatedly cites “Pope Leo XIV,” the current occupant of the Vatican. From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, this individual is an antipope, a member of the line of usurpers beginning with Angelo Roncalli (“John XXIII”). The *Defense of Sedevacantism* file provides the theological basis: a manifest heretic loses the papacy *ipso facto*. The post-conciliar “popes” have consistently promulgated heresies: religious liberty (Dignitatis Humanae), collegiality, ecumenism, and the evolution of doctrine. They have committed the errors condemned in *Lamentabili sane exitu*, such as Proposition 65: “Contemporary Catholicism cannot be reconciled with true knowledge without transforming it into a certain dogmaless Christianity.” The “magisterium” of these men is null. Therefore, when Zuppi quotes “Leo XIV,” he is quoting a private individual whose words have no authority in the Catholic Church. The entire event is thus a liturgical and pastoral act of the “conciliar sect,” a paramasonic structure as described in the *False Fatima Apparitions* file’s analysis of the “Masonic operation ‘Fatima’.” The use of the term “Cardinal” for Zuppi is also problematic. While his episcopal consecration (if done with the proper form and intention) may be valid, his jurisdiction is null because he is in formal schism with the true Church, which endures in those who reject the heresies of Vatican II and recognize the See of Peter as vacant (*sede vacante*). His “presidency” is an exercise in usurped authority.
The Sacrilege of the Liturgy and the Absence of Grace
The Mass described is almost certainly the post-conciliar “Mass of Paul VI,” which is not the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass but a Lutheran-style “Lord’s Supper.” Even if the essential elements were present (which is doubtful given the pervasive context of heresy), the sacrilege lies in the intention and context. The prayers, the focus, the entire orientation of the celebration is toward a naturalistic, humanistic peace. There is no mention of the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary, no propitiatory intent for the sins of the world, no explicit prayer for the conversion of Russia to the Catholic faith. The relics of St. Francis are venerated in a context of interreligious sentiment, not as the bones of a saint who fought for the Church’s rights. This is the “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place (Daniel 9:27, Matthew 24:15). The grace of God is not invoked for the supernatural transformation of souls and societies, but for a vague “hope” and “dialogue.” The article’s silence on the state of grace, on mortal sin, on the necessity of the sacraments for salvation, is complete. This is the logical outcome of the Modernism condemned by St. Pius X: a religion of sentiment and social action, devoid of dogma and supernatural efficacy.
Conclusion: The Bankruptcy of Modernist Peace-Mongering
The article presents a stark contrast to the integral Catholic faith. Where *Quas Primas* commands the feast of Christ the King to combat secularism, this event promotes secularism under a thin Catholic veneer. Where the *Syllabus Errorum* condemns the separation of Church and State (Error 55) and the civil power’s interference in religion (Errors 44, 45), this event is co-organized by a civil embassy. Where the *Defense of Sedevacantism* proves that a manifest heretic cannot hold the Petrine office, this event quotes “Leo XIV” as a moral authority. The entire spectacle is a diabolical deception, offering a false peace that is the peace of the Antichrist, the peace of apostasy. True peace can only be found in the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ, in the public acknowledgment of His law, in the conversion of nations to His one true Church, and in the sacramental life of the Catholic faithful. This peace is not achieved through “dialogue” with error but through the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which will only come about by the Consecration of Russia to the Catholic faith. The article’s peace is the peace of the “new world order” of the conciliar sect, a peace that precedes the final confrontation with God. It is a peace that leads to hell. The faithful must flee such sacrileges and hold fast to the unchanging faith of their fathers, in the sede vacante, awaiting a true pope who will restore all things in Christ the King.
Source:
Cardinal Zuppi on Ukraine: ‘A peace imposed only by weapons is false' (vaticannews.va)
Date: 12.03.2026