Catholic News Agency portal reports on a planned digital encounter between “Pope” Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) and teenagers at the National Catholic Youth Conference (NCYC) in Indianapolis. The article features 15-year-old Mia Smothers from Maryland, who expresses excitement about questioning the antipope about vocational discernment. The event, organized by the National Federation for “Catholic” Youth Ministry (NFCYM), involves 40 teens in dialogue planning, with five selected for direct interaction. Smothers anticipates asking how the antipope “felt about becoming pope” and seeks guidance on being “more hands-on in the Church.” The portal frames this as the Vatican “starting something that will be passed on to the following generations” through digital engagement with youth.
Naturalization of Apostasy Through Youth Manipulation
The event constitutes a textbook example of modernist subversion condemned by Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907): “They are to be sought most of all in young people…they seize upon the young, rightly indeed, for they are more adaptable.” By featuring a minor as the face of this encounter, the conciliar sect weaponizes youthful enthusiasm to normalize its illegitimate hierarchy. The article’s description of adoration as a “very powerful experience” reduces the latria due to God alone to emotional stimulation – precisely the subjectivist corruption denounced in the Holy Office’s Lamentabili Sane (1907) regarding Modernist reinterpretations of worship.
“We have been meeting up on Zoom and doing follow-up questions — practicing what the pope might tell us…”
This rehearsal of dialogue reveals the carefully scripted nature of these exchanges, transforming doctrinal instruction into therapeutic conversation. The Syllabus of Errors (1864) explicitly condemned the notion that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Proposition 80). Yet here we witness the antipope engaging in precisely such accommodation through youth platforms.
Erasure of Supernatural Finality in Vocational Discernment
Smothers’ stated intention to inquire how the antipope “found out he wanted to become priest” exemplifies the naturalization of vocation endemic to the conciliar sect. Contrast this with Pius XI’s encyclical Ad Catholici Sacerdotii (1935): “The priest is not a priest for himself, but for you.” Authentic priestly vocation originates not in personal discovery but through the Church’s discernment of divine calling – a concept rendered foreign to these youth formed in neo-modernist catechesis.
The article’s silence on sacramental grace proves damning. Nowhere does it mention confession, Eucharistic devotion, or Marian consecration as foundations for vocational clarity – the very means upheld by saints like John Vianney and Thérèse of Lisieux. Instead, the NFCYM promotes a horizontal ecclesiology where being “more hands-on in the Church” replaces growth in holiness. This inversion fulfills Pius X’s warning that Modernists would reduce religion to “a certain kind of yearning” divorced from objective truth (Pascendi, 6).
Digital Sacrilege and the Desacralization of Authority
The planned 45-minute “digital encounter” constitutes technological sacrilege, reducing what should be paternal apostolic blessing to video-conference entertainment. Compare this with Pius XI’s establishment of Vatican Radio in 1931, which maintained hieratic distance while transmitting sacred ceremonies. The conciliar sect’s embrace of Zoom dialogues embodies the democratization of sacred authority condemned in Pius VI’s Auctorem Fidei (1794) against synodal innovations.
“the Vatican and the pope are starting something that will be passed on to the following generations.”
This statement unwittingly confesses the revolutionary agenda. As the Syllabus declared: “The Roman Pontiff cannot and should not reconcile himself with progress” (Proposition 80). True apostolic succession transmits immutable doctrine, not novel “generational” programs. The article’s celebration of novelty – “something you’ve never heard of and never seen before” – manifests the revolutionary spirit anathematized by Pius IX: “The principal errors have their origin in the heretical doctrine commonly called Modernism” (Pascendi, 39).
Omission of Christ’s Kingship as Pedagogical Foundation
The complete absence of reference to Christ the King in this youth formation scandal proves the sect’s apostasy from Catholic royalism. Pius XI’s Quas Primas (1925) established that “Nations will be happy when both citizens and government render public worship to Christ.” Yet NCYC’s programming substitutes therapeutic dialogue for doctrinal instruction on Christ’s social reign.
Nowhere does the article mention the teens receiving formation on:
- The Church’s condemnation of false ecumenism (Pius XI, Mortalium Animos)
- Requirements for valid sacraments (Council of Trent)
- Dangers of religious indifferentism (Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos)
This systematic doctrinal deprivation constitutes spiritual abuse, leaving youth vulnerable to apostasy. As Leo XIII warned: “Once the idea of the authority of God as the Judge of right and wrong is forgotten, law must necessarily lose its primary authority and punishment its moral force” (Immortale Dei, 6).
The Antichurch’s exploitation of teenage enthusiasm through technological spectacle reveals its desperation to manufacture legitimacy. Authentic Catholic youth formation occurs through sacramental life and doctrinal clarity – precisely what the conciliar sect cannot provide without betraying its modernist foundations. Let the faithful recognize this NCYC spectacle as Satan’s counterfeiting of true Catholic action, remembering Pius X’s admonition: “The Modernists make their way into the very veins of the Church…they put their designs for her ruin into operation not from without but from within” (Pascendi, 2).
Source:
Teen anticipates speaking to Pope Leo XIV at upcoming National Catholic Youth Conference (catholicnewsagency.com)
Date: 19.11.2025