Lebanon and its Church in the Turmoil of Three Holy Wars

The Church in Lebanon is currently caught in the turmoil of three “holy wars”: two distinct forms of Islamic fundamentalism (Shia and Sunni), a Judaic fundamentalism, and an eschatological religious shift – “Christian Zionism.” These competing spiritual visions share a common focal point: Jerusalem, the ultimate city of peace.

During his visit to Lebanon, Pope Leo XIV addressed the Lebanese people with the same message he has delivered to the world since his election – particularly to young Eastern Christians: “Be the architects of your own peace; be powerful levers for a peace between religions.” These words are intended for the men and women of a country that is an integral part of the Holy Land, and which, consequently, carries a mission of unity and communion.

Lebanon is regarded as a beacon and a safeguard for all Christians in the Middle East, as it remains the only country in the region where historical Christianity is still deeply and extensively rooted in society. Pope John Paul II saw the nation as “a message of freedom and an example of pluralism for both East and West.” Having been linked to the Vatican for centuries while remaining profoundly Eastern, Lebanon’s Maronites and their schools have transformed the country into an extraordinary bridge between East and West.

Conversely, in certain American religious perspectives – particularly those associated with “Christian Zionism” – the Middle East, including Lebanon, is perceived as a prophetic theater centered on the existence and security of the State of Israel. From this viewpoint, regional conflicts are not merely political: they are part of an eschatological reading of history, linked to the End Times. The Church has a duty to address them with a language of both truth and charity.

Prudence and Discernment

Certainly, the Church also believes in the End Times, but it does so with the prudence and discernment acquired over two millennia – and after many of its own failings. Indeed, without the grace of God, such lapses can still occur. However, the Church has a few things to say on the matter, particularly regarding the instrumentalization of religion to legitimate violence. For the Church, the only “legitimate” violence is that which is exercised against “what makes a person unclean,” that which “comes out of the heart: evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander” (Matthew 15).

This violence is directed first and foremost against oneself. It may also be exercised externally, within the limits of self-defense. Yet even this concept – though present in the Catechism of the Catholic Church – must be used with the necessary caution. Indeed, it is currently undergoing doctrinal revision, particularly when invoked collectively under the label of a “just war.”

Wilayat al-Faqih

In Iran, the Islamic doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih stipulates that during the occultation of the 12th Imam – known as the “Imam of the Age” (10th century) – the government falls under the responsibility of a faqih (a jurist-theologian). This theory, primarily developed by Ayatollah Khomeini, is the foundation of a theocracy that grants Shia clerics primacy over political power. The faqih is regarded as the Supreme Leader, governing the Muslim community (Ummah) with veto power across all domains – legislative, judicial, and military alike. He is chosen to conduct a policy as close as possible to what the Mahdi himself would have done.

Incorporated into the Iranian Constitution of the Islamic Republic, the implementation of this doctrine in Lebanon by Hezbollah raises the serious issue of its incompatibility with sectarian pluralism. Consequently, in 1995, Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah proclaimed himself a marja al-taqlid(source of emulation) – an act that amounted to an open challenge to the principle of Wilayat al-Faqih, in the name of a “pluralistic and non-hierarchical tradition” within Shia Islam.

“The Signs of the Hour”

In an article published in issue 422 of the journal L’Histoire (April 2016), the historian Jean-Pierre Filiu raised the issue of “End Times Jihad.” Several figures within the Iranian theocracy – from former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah – have publicly linked the theocracy established in Iran, along with its ideological and military proselytism, to the dawn of the “End of Days.”

According to Jean-Pierre Filiu, “in both Sunnism and Shiism, the end of days will be heralded by a series of clues, known as ‘the signs of the hour.’” Alongside relatively conventional signs – the rise of paganism, a contempt for religion and family ties, corruption, and immorality – other indicators are more specific: the seasons will become deceptive, time will contract, deserts will be developed and built upon, a mountain of gold will emerge from the Euphrates, and the Roums (Christians) will attack the cities of Aamaq and Dabiq in Syria. The Islamic State group has frequently invoked these signs, even naming its magazine Dabiq.

In his article, Filiu revisits two historical examples of “apocalyptic opportunism” – occurring in Sudan in 1883 and in Mecca in 1979 – both of which were crushed. The seizure of the Grand Mosque, it should be recalled, involved the taking of hostages at al-Masjid al-Haram in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, by Islamist fundamentalists and opponents of the Saudi royal family. The event took place on 20 November 1979, during the Hajj pilgrimage. Leading the siege was a retired corporal from the Saudi National Guard, whose primary goal was the recognition of his brother-in-law, who was among the group, as the Mahdi. He justified his actions by claiming that the House of Saud had lost its legitimacy through corruption, a life of luxury, and the destruction of Saudi culture via its policy of opening up to the West.

Jean-Pierre Filiu illustrates the apocalyptic illuminism of the Islamic Republic of Iran through the figure of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – President from 2005 to 2013 – who was convinced of the imminent return of the Hidden Imam and claimed to have been “shrouded in the light of the Mahdi during his speech at the UN.”

“The Lebanese militia Hezbollah also claimed a ‘divine victory’ after a month of clashes with Israel in the summer of 2006. Its propaganda invoked an intervention by the Mahdi alongside Shia fighters,” the historian notes.

What about Israel?

What about Israel? We all know how the small “national home” of the Balfour Declaration (1918) has become the “roaring lion” of the Tehran bombings (2026). Lebanon has also closely witnessed the war in Gaza, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government responded to the atrocities of October 7 with a genocide.

To reveal Benjamin Netanyahu’s nationalist messianism, one need only cite his televised address on the Israeli national channel i24 on Wednesday, 26 October 2023: “We are the people of light, they are the people of darkness, and light shall triumph over darkness. Our war against Hamas is a test for all of humanity; it is a struggle between the Iranian axis of evil – involving Hezbollah and Hamas – and the axis of freedom and progress. The time has come to unite for a single purpose: to move forward and achieve victory through joint forces and a profound belief in justice, a profound belief in the eternity of the Jewish people. We shall fulfil the prophecy of Isaiah.”

Hamas and the “Hadith”

The eschatological dimension of Hamas – a creation of the Muslim Brotherhood – is clearly visible in its charter, adopted on 18 August 1988. Its fundamental objectives include the establishment of a Palestinian state, the liberation of the occupied Palestinian territories, and the elimination of Israel. However, one of the most significant passages in the Hamas charter is the eschatological hadith (an oral tradition of the Prophet Muhammad) cited in Article 7: “The Hour will not come until Muslims fight the Jews and kill them; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, and these will cry out: ‘O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him!’”

“Christian Zionism” and the Second Coming

There is no need to recount here the history of Zionism, which led to the creation of the State of Israel. For our purposes, let us simply say that the belief in the State of Israel’s place within the history of salvation is present in a very specific way among certain American evangelical circles, who view Israel as the fulfilment of biblical prophecies. For many of its supporters, events in the Middle East are interpreted through an eschatological reading of history. These circles believe that Israel’s return to its land (“from the Nile to the Euphrates”) will hasten the Second Coming of Christ.

Through its literal biblical understanding of the subject, this belief distinguishes itself from nationalist Zionism. Evangelicals believe that the very existence of the State of Israel will bring Jesus back to Earth and ensure God’s triumph over the forces of evil, while Jews who convert to Christianity will be saved.

“Christian Zionism” was denounced once again very recently by the Churches of the Holy Land. In a declaration dated 17 January 2026, the Greek and Armenian Orthodox Patriarchs classified it as a “harmful ideology.” These ideologies, the statement asserts, “mislead the public, sow confusion, and damage the unity of the flock.” The signatories warn against “a possible political instrumentalization that could harm the Christian presence in the Holy Land and throughout the Middle East.” The warning is clear.

Beyond missiles, alliances, and geopolitical rivalries, the true battle for Lebanon – and for its Church – lies in proving that a Middle Eastern country can preserve its religious diversity, build a just state, and resist the political manipulation of the sacred. This may seem utopian, but if, amidst all the turbulence, Lebanon succeeds in meeting this challenge in a region marked by the blindest religious arbitrariness, it could become not a regional battlefield, but a beacon and a spiritual pivot for the entire Middle East.