Nicaraguan priest: ‘We sustain the people’s faith from the catacombs of prudence’
From the heart of Nicaragua, a priest in that nation says the Church is sustaining the peopleʼs faith from “the catacombs of prudence” in the face of fierce persecution by the dictatorship of President Daniel Ortega and his wife and vice president, Rosario Murillo.
The priest, who asked to remain anonymous for security reasons and to avoid reprisals, spoke with ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News, on July 3 immediately following the second time the bishop emeritus of Estelí, Abelardo Mata, was detained.
According to a source consulted by ACI Prensa who is close to the Church in Nicaragua, the bishop “is reportedly not under house arrest, and his whereabouts are unknown,” as he has not returned to his residence.
The priest stated that “it’s true that from the outside it can look like apparent silence; this should not be confused with indifference or paralyzing fear. It is in reality a silence born of prudence and profound pastoral responsibility.”
After noting that the dictatorship “has relegated the faith to the private sphere” or “within the walls of the churches,” the priest pointed out that several bishops are in exile.
“The absence of bishops in such important dioceses as Estelí, Jinotega, Matagalpa, and Siuna is also a direct blow to our Church and our community. Although we place our full trust in the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the lack of a visible [head] hinders administration, pastoral ministry, and ecclesial cohesion,” the priest noted.
For some time now, the dictatorship has banned the ordination of priests and deacons in these dioceses.
The priest emphasized: “We are carrying on then, but under the weight of fragmentation, and we also live in a state of constant uncertainty.”
‘Even the walls have ears’
The priest recounted that currently in Nicaragua “the proclamation of the Gospel and daily preaching take place under enormous pressure with the knowledge that any word or message can be misinterpreted or used to label us as opponents or destabilizers.”
“The surveillance is real; it’s constant. We say here that ‘even the walls have ears.’ And this has even taken its toll on internal communication, often sowing mistrust, something almost bound to happen in an environment where control is the norm,” he added.
Indeed, the police harass the priests, taking their photographs and demanding to be informed of every time they leave their parishes or go outside their parish boundaries. If any social issue is mentioned in their homilies, they risk imprisonment or exile.
The Church’s ‘silence’
The priest also explained to ACI Prensa that “we bishops and priests who remain in the country must act discreetly, with extreme discretion. This is not cowardice — no. It’s astuteness, I would say — like the cunning of the serpent and the simplicity of the dove that Jesus Christ speaks of in the Gospel.”
“Every step, every word, must be calculated so as not to cross that invisible line that would justify an accusation of insurrection, allowing us to continue accompanying the people entrusted to us. Ultimately, the Church in Nicaragua has not disappeared. No, it has not surrendered. It is resisting. We are resisting in silence,” he emphasized.
“We are sustaining the people’s faith from the catacombs of prudence, awaiting times of greater freedom.”
The priest said he also understands “the Vatican’s silence. In this regard, ecclesial communion does not depend solely on public statements. We know there are prayers and diplomatic gestures that do not draw attention; at this moment, the last thing the people of Nicaragua need is to create further divisions — rather, they need to keep hope alive within the Church.”
‘We don’t feel alone’
“When one member suffers, the whole body suffers with it. We don’t feel alone. Because of this we know that the Church suffers with us. The Church feels with us, and the entire universal Church sustains us, even though the forms and ways of that support must be discreet; that’s something that must be understood,” the Nicaraguan priest reflected.
“Those who apply pressure or claim we are doing nothing from within [the country] should also understand this. We are protecting that very pastoral work on the ground so that the people of God are not left abandoned,” he added.
The priest said he hopes “to be able to act freely one day and live out our faith in freedom, but for now, this is the reality we are living.”
This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Training journalists to be peacemakers: EWTN Summer Academy concludes in Rome
Inspired by its mission, EWTN News held its fifth annual EWTN Summer Academy in Rome to train future generations of Catholic journalists.
From June 22 to July 1, the EWTN Vatican Bureau hosted 43 young journalists and media professionals from 26 countries, training them in journalism, video editing, and storytelling to support the Church’s mission of evangelization.
The program took place at the Centro Internazionale di Animazione Missionaria (CIAM) on the campus of the Pontifical Urban University, where participants enjoyed a scenic view of St. Peter’s Basilica and Square from above.
Training journalists to be peacemakers
Pope Leo XIV has repeatedly highlighted the importance of the media for the Church and the world. In several of his public speeches to journalists, he challenged them to work for peace in a world marked by polarization, war, and fake news.
“In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus proclaimed: ‘Blessed are the peacemakers’ (Mt 5:9). This is a beatitude that challenges all of us, but it is particularly relevant to you [journalists],” Leo said in a speech to journalists after the 2025 conclave.
Anthony Johnson, a co-founder and program director of the EWTN Summer Academy, emphasized the importance of training young journalists at the academy to respond to the pope’s call.
“We as journalists need to be peacemakers first, because the truth is what is ultimately going to set us free,” Johnson told EWTN News.
Johnson also explained the academy’s aims and its connection to the vision of Mother Angelica, who founded the EWTN Global Catholic Network in 1981.
“In the academy here, we’re bringing in people from all around the world — 43 people from 26 countries more or less — and we put them in small groups from all different continents, and we put them through these exercises with the goal of finishing a final project at the very end of the academy.”
“We expect people to be 100% bought into the mission [of proclaiming Jesus Christ]. Mother Angelica knew it. I think people today know it, and our audience can tell from a mile away,” Johnson said.
In service of the truth
The academy participants were taught by Vatican journalists, clergy, producers, and art historians about the fundamentals of Catholic journalism.
Several of those participants reflected on this experience as a service to truth. One of those was Jonél Roos from South Africa, a religious educator and a convert to Catholicism.
“I think [this program] is of the utmost importance because it gives people the tools necessary to grow in their faith and also in order to grow within their professions,” Roos told EWTN News. “The whole point of all of this is to convey truth to people and to allow people to be guided towards the truth.”
George Cuesta, a filmmaker based in Austin, Texas, added: “I think forming young Catholic creators in [the journalistic] realm is extremely important because thatʼs really the language that the faithful are using to communicate with each other, to consume media, whether entertainment or education.”
An experience in the Eternal City through the eyes of faith
Several participants reflected on the importance of learning about Catholic journalism in Rome.
Ana Belén Hurtado, a communications professional from Ecuador, described her time in Rome as faith-filled.
“Being here in the heart of the Church makes it a whole new level for us. Having the amazing view [of St. Peter’s Square] every day definitely makes you aware of the history and the whole legacy that we have received through the gift of faith,” Hurtado said.
Lemmy Ogbonnaya Ijioma, a Nigerian photographer, videographer, and tutor at the academy, also highlighted Rome’s importance to one’s formation in Catholic journalism.
“I would say Rome renews my faith and allows me to experience the Catholic faith up close and personal — things I would ordinarily experience from a distance,” Ijioma told EWTN News.
Kevin Mario, a communications professional from India, added: “Returning to India, I carried with me not only new skills but also a renewed love for the Church. Walking through the basilicas of Rome and contemplating the masterpieces of Michelangelo, Bernini, Raphael, and countless other artists reminded me that beauty has always been one of the Churchʼs greatest evangelists.”
Why a WWII massacre dispute is testing Poland’s support for Ukraine
A deepening diplomatic rift between Poland and Ukraine over the memory of World War II-era massacres has drawn a rare joint intervention from senior Catholic leaders of both nations — and threatens to complicate Kyiv’s path toward the European Union.
In a joint appeal issued June 29, three Polish prelates — Cardinal Grzegorz Ryś, Cardinal Konrad Krajewski, and Cardinal Kazimierz Nycz — together with two Ukrainian Church leaders, Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, and Cardinal Mykola Bychok, urged both governments to pursue reconciliation, as EWTN News reported.
The bishops said they “are saddened to observe the growing tensions and resurgent hostility between Poles and Ukrainians.”
Echoing Pope Leo XIV, they called for a “disarmament of language,” arguing that words, symbols, and public gestures can either deepen divisions or foster peace.
The tensions revolve around wounded national sentiments over the contested memory of the Volhynia massacres during World War II.
Cause of diplomatic tensions
Poland and Ukraine have long-standing social and diplomatic tensions over their conflicting national narratives of World War II.
The current dispute began on May 26, when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy named a military unit after the “heroes of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA).”
The UPA was a nationalist partisan formation that waged guerrilla warfare in the mid-1940s against Nazi Germany, Soviet-backed forces, and the underground Polish resistance movement.
Ukrainians view the UPA as a symbol of resistance to foreign occupation in the fight for national independence.
In Poland, however, it is associated with the Volhynia massacres, in which the UPA led the targeted slaughter and ethnic cleansing of around 100,000 ethnic Polish civilians, mostly women and children, from 1943 to 1945.
The campaign was driven largely by a nationalist effort to secure territory for a future Ukrainian state by removing the minority Polish population from lands that had belonged to prewar Poland but were claimed by Ukrainian nationalists. In the chaos of World War II, the UPA sought to ensure that Poland could not reassert control over the region after the war on the basis of the Polish minority living there.
Poland has officially recognized the Volhynia massacres as a genocide, a label Ukraine has rejected.
Diplomatic aftermath
In response to Zelenskyy’s decision to name a unit after the UPA, Polish President Karol Nawrocki on June 19 stripped the Ukrainian president of the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest state honor, which had been awarded to him in 2023.
An opinion poll published on the day Nawrocki announced his decision showed that 51% of Poles supported rescinding Zelenskyy’s honor, while only 36% were opposed. Among Nawrocki’s support base, 80% favored withdrawing the order.
In response and in solidarity with Zelenskyy, on June 21 three former Ukrainian presidents, along with various other government officials and diplomats, returned the state awards they had been given by Poland.
This was followed by Polish government officials on June 22 returning awards they had received from Ukraine.
Adding further fuel to the dispute were statements made in February, when Oleksandr Alfyorov, the head of the Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance (UINR), described the Volhynia tragedy as “one of Poland’s state myths.”
Poland’s own Institute of National Remembrance (IPN) replied by declaring that “the Volhynia genocide is a documented fact” while criticizing the Ukrainian state for building elements of its identity on “the cult of individuals and organizations responsible for these crimes.”
The path toward reconciliation
The Polish and Ukrainian prelates also invoked the memory of St. John Paul II, most notably his words marking the 60th anniversary of the Volhynia massacres in 2003, in which he called for “Ukrainians and Poles not to remain enslaved by their sad memories of the past.”
The Polish pontiff also noted that Christians are called to acknowledge the errors of the past while needing the strength to “ask forgiveness for their own shortcomings” and to “forgive one another for the wrongs they have suffered.”
In that spirit, the prelates urged Poles and Ukrainians to “humbly ask for forgiveness and to courageously forgive” while extending “a hand of reconciliation” despite wounds that remain raw.
They also warned against pursuing narrow national interests, saying true reconciliation requires both nations to seek the common good rather than impose their own vision of history on the other.
Future implications
A day before the Church’s joint appeal for peace, Zelenskyy declared that “no one will dictate” to Ukraine which heroes the country honors as he announced plans for a national pantheon celebrating notable Ukrainians.
This was widely read in Poland as a hardening of Kyiv’s position, prompting warnings from politicians across the spectrum that the issue could spill over into Ukraine’s European Union ambitions.
That matters because Ukraine’s path into the European Union ultimately requires the consent of every member state, including Poland.
In the long term, Warsaw is likely to seek a clearer acknowledgment from Ukraine’s highest political levels of the scale and character of the Volhynia massacres and of the role played by the UPA.
With Zelenskyy unwilling even to remove the UPA name from a military unit and Nawrocki escalating the issue in turn, any workable compromise now appears more difficult to reach.
U.S. ambassador describes July 4 dinner with Pope Leo XIV
Pope Leo XIV still has a Peruvian credit card, wakes in the middle of the night and checks soccer results, follows the Chicago White Sox, and uses a cellphone.
He is also, according to Brian Burch, the U.S. ambassador to the Holy See, a pope keenly aware of his role as pastor of the universal Church, careful not to give the impression of being merely an American pope and frustrated that his actions are sometimes interpreted as anti-Trump or anti-U.S. gestures.
Burch offered that personal portrait of the Holy Father in a conversation with a small group of Italian journalists about the historic July 4 dinner he hosted for Leo at Villa Richardson, the U.S. ambassador’s residence.
The pope came in person to the residence, prayed with Burch’s family, and shared a meal that included American charcuterie, watermelon salad, Chicago-style hot dogs, apple pie, and gelato. According to Burch, Leo approved of the menu. The evening was informal rather than bilateral: The pope arrived without secretaries, accompanied only by two Vatican gendarmes.
Burch said he had wanted to mark the 250th anniversary of the United States by inviting the first U.S.-born pope in history to dinner. The invitation was sent about two months ago, and confirmation came about one month ago, the ambassador said.
The dinner took place on the same day Leo made a brief visit to Lampedusa, a trip that some had interpreted as a symbolic gesture aimed against the Trump administration. Burch said the pope rejected that interpretation in their conversation.
The ambassador said the idea was to create an occasion to celebrate July 4. He noted that when Vice President JD Vance visited the pope for the Mass inaugurating his pontificate, Vance also invited Leo to visit the United States. While awaiting such a visit, Burch said, the embassy wanted to create a moment of celebration, and the pope’s acceptance of the invitation was received with gratitude and joy.
Burch stressed that the dinner at his residence should not be understood as an effort to resolve major political questions. Rather, he said, it was an extraordinary sign of the pope’s affinity with and warm closeness to the United States.
The pope arrived at about 7:30 p.m., according to the ambassador. He posed for a photo with Burch’s family, gave them his blessing, and joined them for an aperitif. Burch said he and Leo, both from Chicago, spoke about the city and the many friends they have in common.
After dinner, Burch also had time to speak privately with the pope in the garden. The ambassador said they discussed a wide range of subjects. Before leaving the embassy at about 10 p.m., the pope sang the patriotic song “God Bless America” and signed several baseballs, marking each one with the date.
Burch said Leo was relaxed and that the two laughed about many things. He added that people in the Church and in the world sometimes hold only an image of the pope and forget that the pope is also a man like everyone else.
The pope told Burch he had recently spent a sleepless night and ended up watching the Argentina-Cape Verde match. He also spoke about the White Sox and about his vocation, including why he chose to become a missionary priest.
Burch said Leo told him that he loves the United States, where he was born, and has great affection for the country, but he also wants to be careful not to appear too favorable or too close to the United States. The ambassador said the pope made the same point when Burch presented his credentials.
The Church in the United States is vibrant and growing, Burch said, but it is not the only place where the Church is present, and Leo is aware of the need not to appear too American.
Burch said there is also some hesitation regarding a possible papal trip to the United States. That hesitation, he said, is not because of hostility toward the president but because of the need to choose the right moment and to situate such a visit after a number of trips that demonstrate the pope’s apostolic commitment.
The ambassador said Leo also spoke about his frustration with the way every papal gesture can be attacked or interpreted through the lens of the United States. Burch said the pope’s July 4 visit to Lampedusa was not intended as an attack on the United States.
According to Burch, the pope’s role is to be pastor of the world and to point to the global challenges of migration, which is not only a U.S. issue. Through the Lampedusa visit, Burch said, Leo appealed to humanity and asked leaders to focus on migrants during a difficult moment.
The ambassador said relations between the Holy See and the United States are marked by a strong desire for cooperation. He added that his conversation with the pope did not delve deeply into areas of disagreement.
Burch noted that the Holy See supports nuclear nonproliferation, is attentive to the situation in Cuba, wants peace between Russia and Ukraine, and has opposed the exploitation of the Venezuelan people. On migration, he said, there is generally a broad sense of the need for processes through which nations can manage migration in a safe, orderly, and legal way.
The pope respects that balance, Burch said, because he understands that when tension arises, resolving that tension is the responsibility of nations.
According to the ambassador, the main differences concern how to reach shared goals: how to build peace in the Middle East, how to fight narco-trafficking in Central America, and how to protect people facing the challenges of mass migration. Burch characterized these as prudential differences.
Burch acknowledged that Leo and President Donald Trump have not yet spoken. He said Trump has not spoken with many leaders and that, when a conversation is necessary, he expects they will speak. He added that the pope does not simply pick up the phone to discuss politics with world leaders.
Migration remains one area of difference. Burch said the pope’s message in Lampedusa is not inconsistent with the U.S. view of migration. The United States, he said, has always set rules and removed people who did not respect them, while the Trump administration is responding to a situation in which millions of people have entered outside the legal framework.
Burch said the pope does not argue that rules should be set aside in order to welcome migrants. Rather, he said, Leo asks people to look toward an ideal in which they are as welcoming as possible. The pope, Burch said, speaks as universal pastor of the Church and not as someone proposing a specific political implementation.
For Burch, differences of opinion over migration are not a serious problem. He said it is normal for leaders to have disagreements and that there will always be differences over how to reconcile U.S. policy with Catholic social teaching. Such differences, he said, do not mean relations must be difficult.
On the contrary, Burch said, there is much work the Holy See and the United States continue to do together, including on Cuba and peace in the Middle East. Looking at the past year and a half, he pointed to what he described as peace between Israel and Hamas, the removal of narco-terrorists, talks between Israel and Lebanon, cooperation among Arab states, conditions for real cooperation, the removal of the nuclear threat in Iran, and the removal of financing for terrorists. He also said there is much the two sides can do together for persecuted Christians.
In short, Burch said, the issue is not whether the pope and the president can become friends but whether there is a chance to achieve results together.
Asked what he took away from the dinner and what struck him most, Burch said there is great respect for the pope, whether one is Catholic or not. But then, he said, one meets a gentleman who is a human person like everyone else, someone who enjoys himself.
Above all, Burch said, the pope is highly informed. Leo had deep knowledge of everything they discussed, the ambassador said. When Burch asked how he manages that, the pope mentioned X, formerly Twitter, and a daily briefing he receives. Burch said he told Leo that surely those were not his only sources of information. The ambassador described the pope as a serious reader, very bright, and very well informed.
This story was first published by ACI Stampa, the Italian-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Memorials across India mark 5 years since Jesuit Father Stan Swamy died in custody
Memorial programs were held across India on July 5 to mark the fifth anniversary of the death of Jesuit Father Stan Swamy, the 84-year-old tribal rights activist who died in custody at a Mumbai hospital in 2021 while awaiting trial on terrorism charges.
Memorials in Ranchi and Mumbai
Archbishop Vincent Aind of Ranchi led supporters in garlanding Swamy’s bust at “Bagaicha,” meaning “garden,” the Jesuit social action center Swamy founded near Ranchi, the capital of Jharkhand.
After the floral tribute, Bagaicha director Jesuit Father P.M. Antony told EWTN News: “All of us proceeded to our program hall to discuss about the present socioeconomic and political situation in the country and the state of Jharkhand today.”
The commemoration featured a screening of “Carrying the Cross,” a roughly 100-minute documentary on Swamy’s life and work.
In Mumbai, where Swamy died, the anniversary was marked in the hall of St. Peter’s Church in Bandra, where his funeral was held in 2021. The Bombay Catholic Sabha, the lay wing of the archdiocese, organized the gathering with civil society groups, at which activists paid tribute to the priest, whom they praised as a fearless advocate for the oppressed tribal communities of Jharkhand.
“We are living in times when if you do anything to fulfill either the words or the spirit of the constitution you are likely to be the next martyr,” said senior advocate Mihir Desai, who led Swamy’s legal defense.
Desai repeatedly petitioned the Bombay High Court for the elderly Jesuit’s release on bail after he was brought to Mumbai following his October 2020 arrest at Bagaicha, in connection with the Elgar Parishad-Bhima Koregaon case, in which he was charged along with 15 others.
“If you speak with passion about equality, about nondiscrimination, about freedom of speech — all these are fundamental rights … If you speak about these things in the spirit in which they are incorporated in the constitution, you will be treated as an anti-national,” said Desai, who had worked with the Jesuit for three decades as a civil rights lawyer.
The Bhima Koregaon case
As the National Catholic Register, the sister partner of EWTN News, reported at the time of his arrest in October 2020, the priest, who championed the rights of oppressed tribal communities, was detained along with 15 other activists, academics, and lawyers on terrorism charges related to the “Bhima Koregaon conspiracy.”
The arrests, carried out on the grounds that the accused were allegedly linked to a banned Maoist organization, drew condemnation abroad, including a posthumous resolution honoring Swamy’s life and work in the U.S. Congress in July 2022.
Describing Swamy’s death as “institutional murder,” Desai said “why they wanted to arrest him was because they did not want any urban or rural voice … a dissenting voice of the marginalized to be heard” and alleged that documents had been planted on his computer by hackers, about which the priest had “no clue.”
In December 2022, Arsenal Consulting, a U.S.-based digital forensics firm engaged by Swamy’s lawyers, reported that “incriminating files” had been planted on his computer through a yearslong malware campaign — a finding his supporters said showed he had been framed. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has disputed the analysis, and the trial court declined to consider it.
“Father Stan is gone. But we want the court to declare him not guilty,” said Desai, who said he is preparing a fresh petition to that end after a judicial magistrate’s inquiry concluded that the priest had died of natural causes. “Compensation [must] be paid. Accountability has to be fixed and he has to be declared as innocent,” he said.
The NIA maintains its case, alleging that Swamy aided the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist) through the civil society groups he worked with; the special NIA court repeatedly denied him bail, citing what it called “prima facie” evidence.
A judicial magistrate’s inquiry, mandatory in custodial deaths, ruled his death a “natural death” and found no wrongdoing, and in May 2025 the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission accepted those findings, concluding there was nothing “unnatural” in his death and no medical negligence.
In December 2025, the Bombay High Court disposed of a petition by Swamy’s family to clear his name but granted them liberty to file a fresh challenge to the magistrate’s report.
Speakers noted that all 15 surviving co-accused have since been granted bail, while Swamy did not live to see trial.
Teesta Setalvad, who heads Citizens for Justice and Peace, described Swamy as “a priest who jumped out beyond [clerical] culture and took up perverted cases [against the poor tribals] and worked for the release of prisoners, exposing fabricated cases.”
Activist Irfan Engineer read out a protest letter from Surendra Gadling — the last of the 16 accused still jailed, now over a separate case — who was staging a one-day hunger strike at Taloja Central Jail, where Swamy had also been held.
“Father Stan Swamy was a victim of institutional murder because he refused to surrender before those in power and chose to stand firmly for the rights of Adivasis [tribals], Dalits, and the marginalized and oppressed masses,” Gadling wrote. “He fearlessly raised his voice against injustice, repression, and attacks on democratic rights. This one-day hunger strike is to protest against the institutional repression that led to his death.”
Anand Teltumbde, a former professor at the Goa Institute of Management who was released on bail after 31 months in the case, told EWTN News: “July 5 has become a historic day for the country with 84-year-old Father Stan Swamy’s death in custody.”
Dolphy D’Souza, a Bombay Catholic Sabha spokesman, recalled: “During Father Stan Swamy’s funeral at peak COVID time, only 25 people were allowed inside the church here and many of us had to wait outside. Today we are all here to remember him.”
Across India, the anniversary drew commemorations in several cities, including New Delhi, along with a spontaneous wave of social media posts remembering the priest’s imprisonment and death in custody and pressing for his name to be cleared.
Lebanon’s Christians fear sovereignty will be traded in regional diplomacy
Maronite patriarch Cardinal Bechara Boutros Rai, who met with Pope Leo XIV last week, said the pope’s visit to Lebanon last December, held under the motto “Blessed are the peacemakers,” marked the beginning of a new phase of dialogue for peace. Rai expressed hope that the ongoing negotiations between Lebanon and Israel would lead to a true, just, comprehensive, and lasting peace — but Christians there fear their country’s sovereignty may be at stake.
Rai warned in his Sunday homily that Lebanon “must not become the price of any international or regional understanding, nor an arena for settling scores, but rather a message of peace.” He expressed hope that the efforts involving the United States, Lebanon, and Israel would bear fruit and lead to an agreement that removes “the specter of war” from Lebanon.
His remarks come as Lebanon finds itself at the center of two parallel diplomatic tracks: a U.S.-Iran agreement and a direct trilateral framework involving Lebanon, Israel, and the United States. In both, Lebanon’s future is at stake and the country’s Christians remain a central part of the national conversation on peace and sovereignty.
For many Christians in Lebanon, the fear is that their country’s future could once again be treated as part of a broader regional bargain rather than as a sovereign national question.
This concern was reflected in a letter sent by Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea to U.S. Vice President JD Vance, in which he urged Washington to separate the Lebanese issue from negotiations with Iran. Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem described the agreement as “a great victory” and “a pivotal point for Lebanon.”
Speaking to EWTN News, Lebanese member of Parliament Pierre Bou Assi said that, as the Lebanese Forces leader stated in his letter to the U.S. vice president, their project remains the establishment of a real state in Lebanon. But he said such a state cannot fulfill its role as long as Hezbollah remains armed and continues to drag Lebanon into wars and suffering in service of Iran.
“We want to be freed from Hezbollah’s weapons in order to build a state that protects everyone, Christians and Muslims alike,” he said.
Bou Assi added that he does not believe the U.S.-Iran understanding will have a direct impact on Hezbollah’s behavior in Lebanon. According to U.S. sources, he said, the talks did not focus specifically on this point but rather on the Strait of Hormuz and a monitoring mechanism for Iran’s peaceful nuclear program. Many in Lebanon stress that including the Lebanese issue in these regional negotiations has allowed Iran to regain leverage over the Lebanese political sphere.
Moreover, President Donald Trump’s recent suggestion that Syria could play a role in addressing the issue of Hezbollah has touched a deep nerve among many Lebanese Christians. For them, any talk of Syrian involvement in Lebanon triggers the memory of nearly three decades of Syrian military and political occupation, which only ended in 2005.
Bou Assi said that, as a Lebanese and Christian member of Parliament belonging to the largest Lebanese and Christian parliamentary bloc, and despite respect for the United States as a friendly country, “we cannot accept the return of the Syrian army to Lebanon.”
“The Lebanese suffered greatly under the occupation of the Assad regime, which lasted for 30 years between 1975 and 2005,” he said. “For this reason, as a sovereignist component that resisted that occupation, we cannot accept the repetition of this bitter and destructive experience.”
At the same time, Bou Assi pointed to repeated statements by the Syrian president that Syria has no intention of entering Lebanon again, out of respect for Lebanese sovereignty.
He said such positions are in line with the Lebanese Forces’ desire for the best possible relations with Syria, relations based on respect for the sovereignty, stability, and interests of both countries and peoples.
Toni Nissi, president of the Committee for the U.N. Security Council Resolutions on Lebanon and secretary-general of the National Council for the Cedar Revolution, echoed similar concerns in a conversation with EWTN News.
“For many Lebanese, and certainly for many Lebanese Christians, such remarks inevitably awaken painful memories,” Nissi said.
He explained that his generation remembers a period in which Lebanon’s sovereign institutions were overshadowed by external tutelage. For that reason, he said, any suggestion that Syria might once again assume a political or security role inside Lebanon naturally provokes concern.
Nissi also stressed that diplomacy becomes problematic when nations become objects of negotiation instead of subjects of their own history.
“For far too long, Lebanon has been treated as a battlefield where others settle their disputes and as a diplomatic mailbox through which regional powers exchange messages,” he added.
There are growing concerns in Lebanon, especially among Christians, that the U.S.-Iran memorandum and the wider diplomacy surrounding it could overshadow the Lebanon-Israel talks promoted by President Joseph Aoun as an effort to return decisions of war, peace, and sovereignty to state institutions.
For many Lebanese Christians, those talks carry a deeper meaning. They are not only a diplomatic opening with Israel but also a possible step toward restoring the authority of the Lebanese state after years in which Hezbollah’s weapons and Iran’s influence have shaped the country’s security choices.
Lebanese officials have described the move toward direct negotiations with Israel as a historic step through which the state could reclaim responsibility for Lebanon’s foreign and security policy. Yet the government now faces the delicate reality of seeing Iran negotiate with Washington over issues that directly affect Lebanon’s future, raising fears that Beirut could once again be treated as a secondary actor in decisions concerning its own sovereignty.
Nonetheless, last week’s signing of the Trilateral Framework Agreement between Lebanon, Israel, and the United States, announced by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, marked a major milestone, offering a possible path toward placing Lebanon’s sovereignty, security, and state authority back at the center of the diplomatic process.
Nissi explained that the framework “establishes a phased mechanism intended to strengthen security, extend the authority of the Lebanese state across its entire territory, and create a practical pathway for implementing long-standing international commitments while reducing the risk of renewed conflict.”
“It is neither a final peace treaty nor merely another ceasefire,” Nissi added. “It is a roadmap for restoring state authority through implementation.”
For Nissi, the framework also carries a deeper national significance. “Perhaps the greatest opportunity created by this framework is that Lebanon can finally stop being a battlefield for others,” he said. “For decades, Lebanon functioned less as an independent strategic actor than as an arena through which regional powers projected their rivalries.”
What these parallel diplomatic tracks will ultimately achieve for Lebanon remains uncertain. For now, the country’s sovereignty continues to be violated from both directions: by Hezbollah’s weapons and decision-making outside the authority of the state and by Israel’s continued occupation of Lebanese territory and military actions inside Lebanon.
Netanyahu claims unnamed Lebanese Christian villages sought annexation
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said unidentified Lebanese Christian villages asked Israel to annex them.
“Christian villages in Lebanon, some of them have actually asked to be annexed to Israel, because we protect them against the Hezbollah, Hezbollah fanatics who want to kill them, and we do the same things with Christians everywhere,” Netanyahu said during an appearance on Fox News’ show “The Sunday Briefing” on July 5.
“It’s ridiculous that [Netanyahu] would say such a thing,” said Alberto Fernández, a former U.S. ambassador and contributor to EWTN News on Middle East topics. “It’s something that only makes sense within the context of him trying to look good to his own Israeli audience. Within the context of Lebanon, it’s ridiculous.”
Fernández noted Netanyahu’s claims have been repeatedly denied in the Arab and Lebanese press. Lebanese officials have rejected Netanyahu’s claims, including senior members of the Kataeb party, and Hanna al-Amil, the mayor of Rmeich, a Christian village in southern Lebanon, according to several Arab news outlets.
“We canʼt forget that itʼs Hezbollah that keeps plunging Lebanon into war with Israel,” he said. “And one thing that Christian villagers do not want is, they may not want to be part of Israel.”
They donʼt want to be at war with Israel either, Fernández said.
“They want peace. They want to be left alone. They want to be able to live their lives and their villages and farm their land and be left alone,” he said.
Various U.S. bishops ‘invite home’ SSPX attendees after excommunications of leadership
A growing number of Catholic bishops are instructing the faithful to avoid illicit sacraments celebrated by the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) after the traditionalist group’s bishops incurred the penalty of excommunication last week.
The Vatican declared July 2 that six prelates involved in the SSPX’s unauthorized July 1 episcopal consecrations incurred automatic excommunication. Despite repeated warnings, SSPX bishops consecrated four new bishops without a pontifical mandate — an act of open disobedience to the authority of the pope that carries automatic excommunication for the six bishops involved.
The SSPX is a fraternity of priests known for its celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass and opposition to the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
Various Catholic bishops with SSPX locations in their areas are explicitly forbidding Catholics from attending SSPX services while also urging frequent attendees or SSPX priests to seek spiritual guidance and return to the Catholic Church.
Invited ‘home’
Archbishop Bernard Hebda of St. Paul and Minneapolis urged SSPX families in his community to stay with the Catholic Church.
“In the 10 years that I have led this local Church, I have met many sincere people who worship regularly or occasionally at the chapels of the SSPX within the territory of our archdiocese,” Hebda said. “I have been impressed by the strength of their families and their commitment to traditional Catholic values.”
“It is my hope they will not follow the above-mentioned bishops in separating themselves from the successor of Peter, Pope Leo XIV, and from the Church that he humbly leads,” Hebda continued. “Throughout the centuries, our Catholic Church has consistently echoed the teaching of St. Ambrose: Ubi Petrus ibi ecclesia (Where there is Peter, there is the Church).”
“At this difficult moment, we are blessed that the same traditional Eucharistic liturgy beloved by those who have worshipped with the SSPX in the past continues to be celebrated in six locations throughout the archdiocese,” Hebda said. “I am confident that those who prefer the Traditional Latin Mass could find a home here."
Bishop Terry LaValley of Ogdensburg, New York, noted that in light of the “formal schism,” the disobedience “gravely harms the unity of the Church for which Christ so fervently prayed the night before he died.”
LaValley said in a statement that Catholics are “forbidden” to participate in SSPX sacraments, the only exception being “when there is danger of death.” He noted that the schism “is not simply about the celebration of the Mass.”
“The SSPX repudiates and denounces the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, in particular, ecumenism, religious liberty, collegiality of the bishops with the pope, and the Church’s understanding of and relationship with Judaism,” LaValley noted.
LaValley instructed the faithful to avoid participation with SSPX and invited SSPX priests to remain with the Church.
In a similar vein, Bishop Frank Caggiano of Bridgeport, Connecticut, invited anyone who previously worshipped with SSPX to come “home.”
“The Holy See has made clear that the clergy of the society are now to be regarded as schismatic,” Caggiano said in a statement. “This means that, from this day forward, the sacraments they celebrate are illicit and, most significantly for the faithful, the confessions they hear and the marriages at which they preside are considered invalid by the Church.”
“I know these words are difficult to hear, especially for those among us who have worshipped, whether regularly or on occasion, at liturgies celebrated by priests of the society,” Caggiano said. “Over the years I have come to know some of these families. I have been moved by their love for the beauty of the sacred liturgy, their devotion to our Catholic tradition, and the seriousness with which they seek to raise their children in the faith.”
“My heart goes out to them at this painful moment, and I want them to know that they remain very much a part of our diocesan family,” Caggiano said.
“I also wish to offer a word of reassurance. This excommunication does not fall upon those who have simply attended these liturgies out of a sincere desire to worship and who have never intended to reject the authority of the Holy Father or the teaching of the Church,” Caggiano said. “What the Church now asks is straightforward: Knowing the situation as it now stands, the faithful of the Catholic Church can no longer take part in the liturgies of the society, for to do so knowingly would be to share in a separation from the successor of Peter.”
Caggiano noted that the “vetus ordo,” also known as the Traditional Latin Mass, is still celebrated in his diocese at several parishes throughout the diocese.
He emphasized that the diocese also welcomes any SSPX priest who wants to return to full communion “with open arms and great tenderness.”
Bishop James Johnston of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Missouri, said he will “be preparing guidance to assist our clergy, lay faithful, and especially any of the lay faithful who have worshipped locally with the SSPX at St. Vincent de Paul Kansas City.”
“While it is imperative to not abandon future efforts toward full communion and to fervently pray for such, those who wish to maintain communion with the Catholic Church, including valid reception of the sacraments of matrimony and penance (confession), will no longer find that possible within the SSPX,” Johnston said in the statement.
“In this moment, I wish to reassure the members of the SSPX within this diocese of my pastoral concern as a shepherd with a desire to assist you in this time of crisis,” Johnston said.
Schism ‘wounds’ the body of Christ
Bishop Douglas Lucia of Syracuse, New York, emphasized that the announcement “forbids Roman Catholics of good standing to participate in and to receive the sacraments from bishops and priests associated with the Society of St. Pius X.”
“[F]ormal adherence to schism is a grave offense against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Churchʼs law,” Lucia wrote July 2.
“I grieve over the wound that has been inflicted on Christʼs body, the Church, and its effect on the spiritual good of the faithful,” Lucia said. “Although todayʼs action relates to a specific event, I would caution that such wounds occur in the Church, when peopleʼs pain and concerns are ignored and the universal call to holiness is subjugated to personal agenda.”
“I regret that the communion and trust that has been built in my seven years as bishop here in Syracuse is now so imperiled, but there cannot be accord when discord has been sown,” Lucia said.
Bishop Donald Hying of Madison, Wisconsin, instructed Catholics “to refrain from attending Mass at any SSPX chapels.”
“The Catholic faithful should attend Mass at a Catholic church with a Catholic priest where they can receive licit and valid sacraments,” Hying said.
“For many years, the Church has been in dialogue with the leadership of SSPX in the hope that the group would return to full communion with the Catholic Church,” Hying said. “Their continued rejection of papal authority and decision to undertake blatantly schismatic acts have harmed these discussions and wounded the path to unity.”
Archbishop Shawn McKnight of Kansas City, Kansas, called the bishopʼs consecrations "a source of profound sorrow for the whole Church because it wounds the visible unity that Christ desires for his body.” He noted that Pope Francis and Pope Benedict XVI took several steps toward communion and acceptance of the society.
“Fidelity to sacred tradition is never opposed to fidelity to the successor of Peter,” McKnight said in his letter. “Rather, both are gifts entrusted by Christ to his Church and serve together to safeguard the deposit of faith and promote the salvation of souls.”
“The Church’s living tradition is preserved by remaining close to the successor of Peter, by adhering to the apostolic faith handed down through the centuries and safeguarded within the communion of the Church,” McKnight said.
China releases detained Christian pastor Ezra Jin Mingri
China has freed underground Christian pastor Ezra Jin Mingri about two months after President Donald Trump publicly called for his release.
Jin, who was arrested by Chinese authorities on Oct. 10, 2025, was reunited with his family in Los Angeles on July 3 ahead of America 250 celebrations.
“I am profoundly grateful that Pastor Ezra Jin has been released and reunited with his family,” Rep. Chris Smith, R-New Jersey, a Catholic, said in a July 5 statement. “I especially thank President Trump for personally raising Pastor Jin’s case with CCP [Chinese Communist Party] General Secretary Xi Jinping and for ensuring that U.S. diplomats remained committed in pressing for his freedom.”
Trump said following his visit to China in May that President Xi Jinping was “giving very serious consideration to the pastor,” referring to Jin. Congress had urged Trump to use the U.S.-China summit to advocate for Jin’s release alongside Jimmy Lai, the jailed Catholic media tycoon and democracy advocate. Trump noted China’s president was less likely to release Lai.
A statement issued to reporters by the pastor’s family said: “We truly witnessed a miracle and we are feeling so overwhelmed with joy. We thank God for this tremendous miracle. We also thank President Trump and his administration for their tremendous leadership. We hope this is a signal of a positive turn for people of faith in China and relations between our two nations.”
Jin was among nearly 30 people arrested by Chinese Communist Party authorities during a sweeping crackdown across nine cities on the underground Zion Church, of which he is the founder.
Frances Hui, policy and advocacy manager at the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation, wrote on social media: “Incredible to hear that [Jin] is free, has just arrived in L.A., and is finally reunited with his family.” Hui was among advocates who rallied on behalf of those imprisoned in China ahead of Trump’s visit.
Hui described standing beside Jin’s daughter, Grace Jin Drexel, as “a privilege,” noting that she and her husband, Bill Drexel, had advocated for Jin’s release while preparing for the birth of their third child.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, said in a statement: “Despite months of imprisonment, Pastor Jin stayed true to his faith. Yet again, President Trump has demonstrated his ability to stand up for persecuted Christians worldwide.”
Former vice president Mike Pence said in a statement: “President Trump should be commended for securing Ezra Jin’s release by raising the case with Xi Jinping in Beijing this year. Truly treasure in heaven to see this godly man of faith set free.”
U.S. solicitor general urges Supreme Court to stop Colorado’s exclusion of Catholic preschools
A broad coalition including the U.S. solicitor general has lined up behind Colorado Catholic families and two Catholic preschools as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether Colorado violated the First Amendment by excluding Catholic preschools from its universal preschool program because they operate according to Catholic teaching.
The case, St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, challenges Colorado’s requirement that schools participating in its universal preschool program comply with state policies that the Catholic schools say would force them to violate religious beliefs about marriage, sexuality, and employment to receive public funding.
The U.S. solicitor general joined more than 20 states and 43 Republican members of Congress urging the high court to rule against Colorado’s “discriminatory exclusion” of the faith-based schools. The solicitor general argued that Colorado’s policy discriminates against religious exercise, imposes unconstitutional conditions on participation in a public benefit, and conflicts with recent precedents.
Colorado forces petitioners to choose, the solicitor general wrote. “They can either adhere to their faith, which precludes enrolling families who refuse to adhere to Catholic teachings, and lose the subsidy, or obtain the subsidy but abandon their religious beliefs,” the brief said.
Supreme Court to hear case
Represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, St. Mary Catholic Parish in Littleton and St. Bernadette Catholic Parish in Lakewood, part of the Archdiocese of Denver, along with several Catholic families, argue that the state cannot deny otherwise available public benefits simply because the schools remain faithful to their religious mission.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case this fall after the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Colorado’s policy in September 2025 to exclude Catholic preschools because of their religious beliefs.
Broad coalition of support
Support for the Catholic families has continued to grow ahead of oral arguments. A total of 29 friend-of-the-court briefs have been filed urging the justices to rule in favor of the schools, including briefs by more than 20 states, religious liberty scholars, education advocates, and a broad coalition of faith groups.
Among those filing briefs is the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). U.S. bishops stated that “if that decision stands, it will provide a roadmap for governments to circumvent this court’s decisions, directly threatening the free exercise rights of religious adherents and organizations.”
Dan and Lisa Sheley, Catholic parents of seven whose children attend St. Mary’s, said they were encouraged by the widespread support.
“We’re grateful that so many people from across the country are rallying behind our case,” they said in a statement provided by Becket. “Colorado promised preschool for all but then showed Catholic families the door. That’s unfair to parents, unfair to children, and contrary to the spirit of the Constitution’s promise of religious freedom.”
Previous religious liberty cases
Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, said in a statement the coalition demonstrates the significance of the case.
“Colorado has united a diverse array of Americans around a simple point: It’s wrong to promise preschool support to every family in the state and then yank it away from Catholic families,” Rassbach said. “This broad coalition shows just how egregious and unlawful Colorado’s religious discrimination has become. We’re confident the court will remind Colorado — once again — that the First Amendment protects religious people too.”
The case follows a series of Supreme Court decisions strengthening protections for religious schools, including Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, and Carson v. Makin, all of which held that states generally may not exclude religious institutions from publicly available benefits because of their religious identity. A decision in St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy could further define the constitutional protections afforded to religious schools participating in government education programs.