EWTN News reports that on April 16, 2026, the Vatican released a message from the current usurper of Peter’s throne, Leo XIV (Robert Prevost), addressed to Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, president of the Italian Bishops’ Conference, on the occasion of the Second National Meeting of Local Representatives for the Protection of Minors and Vulnerable Adults, held in Rome under the theme “Forming Authentic Relationships.” Leo XIV stated that the protection of the vulnerable “challenges the conscience of the Church and measures its ability to express authentic care,” and that respect is “a demanding form of charity, expressed in safeguarding others without possessing them, accompanying them without dominating them, and serving them without humiliating them.” He further claimed that protection “cannot be understood merely as a set of rules to apply or procedures to follow” but requires a wisdom “that shapes the style of communities, the exercise of authority, the formation of educators, vigilance over contexts, and transparency of behavior.” The message encourages growth in “a culture of prevention that is, above all, a culture of evangelical care,” so that “communities may grow in which the most fragile are welcomed, protected, and love.” This message, while superficially unobjectionable in its naturalistic language, is a textbook example of the conciliar sect’s systematic substitution of bureaucratic proceduralism and naturalistic humanism for the supernatural life of grace, the sacramental system, and the immutable moral doctrine of the Catholic Church — all while the very structures that produced and enabled the abuse crisis remain entirely unaddressed and unreformed.
The Complete Absence of Supernatural Doctrine
The most immediately striking feature of Leo XIV’s message is what it does not say. In a communication entirely devoted to the protection of minors and vulnerable adults — a subject that touches upon the most grave sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance — there is not a single mention of sin, grace, the sacraments, Confession, the state of mortal sin, final judgment, Hell, the necessity of conversion, penance, mortification, or the supernatural virtue of chastity. The word “charity” appears once, but stripped of its theological content — it is reduced to a naturalistic “respect” and “safeguarding,” as though the protection of children were merely a matter of organizational culture rather than the fruit of souls in the state of sanctifying grace, nourished by the sacraments, and living in obedience to God’s Commandments.
This silence is not accidental. It is the hallmark of Modernism, which, as St. Pius X taught in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), “places the foundation of religious philosophy in that false doctrine of experience” and reduces the supernatural to the natural, faith to sentiment, and religion to social action. The condemned Proposition 26 of Lamentabili sane exitu (1907) states: “The dogmas of faith should be understood according to their practical function, i.e., as binding in action, rather than as principles of belief.” Leo XIV’s message is a perfect illustration of this condemned principle: the “protection of minors” is presented as a practical, organizational, and relational matter, entirely divorced from the dogmatic foundations that alone give it meaning — the existence of God, the reality of sin, the necessity of grace, the authority of the Church’s Magisterium, and the eternal consequences of moral failure.
“Forming Authentic Relationships”: The Language of Therapeutic Modernism
The theme chosen for the meeting — “Forming Authentic Relationships” — is itself revelatory. This is the language of secular psychology and humanistic self-help, not of Catholic theology. The Church has always taught that authentic human relationships are ordered toward God and governed by the virtues of justice, charity, temperance, and prudence, all of which are supernatural virtues infused by grace. The very concept of “forming authentic relationships” as a framework for child protection is a reduction of the supernatural order to the natural, a substitution of therapeutic language for the language of sin and grace.
Pius XI, in Quas Primas (1925), taught that “Christ reigns in the minds of men… because He Himself is Truth, and men must draw truth from Him and accept it obediently,” and that “Christ the Lord is King of hearts because of His love, which surpasses knowledge.” The reign of Christ the King demands that every aspect of human life — including the protection of the innocent — be ordered according to divine law and supernatural charity, not according to the fashionable jargon of “authentic relationships” borrowed from secular therapeutic culture.
The Bureaucratic Substitute for Justice and Reparation
Leo XIV’s message states that protection “cannot be understood merely as a set of rules to apply or procedures to follow” — and yet the entire content of the message is precisely about procedures, community styles, formation of educators, vigilance over contexts, and transparency of behavior. This is the conciliar method: to denounce the insufficiency of rules while offering nothing but more rules, more procedures, more bureaucratic structures, all devoid of supernatural content.
The message speaks of “sincere closeness, humble listening, and perseverance in seeking what is right and possible for repair” for those who have suffered abuse. But what is “repair” in the vocabulary of the conciliar sect? It is not the reparation demanded by divine justice — the restoration of the victim’s dignity through the application of canonical penalties, the prosecution of criminals under both canon and civil law, the public acknowledgment of institutional guilt, and the offering of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for the spiritual and temporal welfare of victims. Instead, “repair” in the conciliar lexicon means therapy, counseling, listening sessions, and bureaucratic processes — all of which may have a natural utility but which, when divorced from the supernatural order, become a mockery of true justice.
St. Pius X, in Lamentabili, condemned the proposition that “the Church, in condemning errors, has no right to require any internal assent from the faithful to the pronouncements issued by the Church” (Proposition 7). The conciliar sect’s entire approach to the abuse crisis reflects this condemned principle: it demands procedural compliance while refusing to require internal assent to the Church’s immutable moral teaching on chastity, the gravity of sins against the Sixth Commandment, and the necessity of canonical penalties for clerical offenders.
The Unaddressed Root: Modernist Apostasy and the Destruction of Formation
The most damning omission in Leo XIV’s message is any acknowledgment that the abuse crisis is not an isolated institutional failure but the direct and predictable fruit of the Modernist revolution that has consumed the conciliar sect since the Second Vatican Council. The systematic destruction of orthodox seminary formation, the introduction of psychological screening methods that replaced the traditional discernment of vocations based on supernatural criteria, the infiltration of homosexual networks into seminaries and religious orders, the suppression of the traditional moral theology of the Church in favor of situation ethics and proportionalism — all of these are the proximate causes of the abuse crisis, and all of them are the direct consequences of the conciliar revolution.
Yet Leo XIV’s message contains not a single word about the necessity of restoring orthodox Catholic formation, the traditional seminary system, the immutable moral teaching of the Church, or the supernatural criteria for discerning vocations. Instead, it speaks of “the formation of educators” and “vigilance over contexts” — bureaucratic euphemisms that carefully avoid any confrontation with the theological and spiritual roots of the crisis.
Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors (1864), condemned the proposition that “the best theory of civil society requires that popular schools open to children of every class of the people… should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority, control and interference” (Proposition 47). The conciliar sect’s approach to formation — whether of clergy, educators, or laypeople — has been precisely this: the replacement of supernatural, ecclesiastical formation with secular, psychological, and bureaucratic methods. The abuse crisis is the harvest of this apostasy.
“Evangelical Conversion” Without the Gospel
Perhaps the most blasphemous passage in Leo XIV’s message is his description of “evangelical conversion”: “when it does not shield itself from the pain of those who have suffered but allows itself to be questioned by it; when it does not minimize evil but acknowledges it; when it does not become closed in on itself in fear of scandal but accepts the demanding paths of truth, justice, and healing.”
This is “evangelical conversion” stripped of every supernatural element. There is no mention of repentance, contrition, confession, satisfaction, the grace of absolution, the necessity of amendment of life, or fear of God’s judgments. “Evangelical conversion” in the conciliar lexicon means nothing more than acknowledging institutional failures and committing to procedural reforms — a purely naturalistic and horizontal “conversion” that has nothing to do with the conversion preached by Our Lord: “Repent, and believe the Gospel” (Mark 1:15).
The true “evangelical conversion” that the conciliar sect refuses to embrace would require: the public condemnation of Modernism as the root cause of the crisis; the restoration of the traditional seminary formation based on the teachings of the Council of Trent and the Roman Catechism; the removal from office of all bishops and superiors who have covered up abuse or promoted Modernist theology; the prosecution of canonical crimes according to the 1917 Code of Canon Law; the restoration of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in its traditional form, which alone nourishes the faithful with the grace necessary to live chastely; and the public profession of the integral Catholic faith, including the Social Reign of Christ the King over all nations and institutions.
The Primacy of God’s Laws Over Human Procedures
Leo XIV’s message is constructed entirely within the framework of human, natural, and procedural categories. It speaks of “wisdom,” “care,” “relationships,” “prevention,” “transparency,” and “healing” — all of which, in themselves, are not evil, but which, when divorced from the supernatural order, become instruments of deception. The true protection of minors and vulnerable adults requires, above all else, the restoration of the supernatural life of the Church: the preaching of the integral Catholic faith, the administration of the sacraments in their traditional form, the formation of clergy and laity in the immutable moral teaching of the Church, and the recognition that the protection of the innocent is a matter of divine justice, not merely of human procedures.
Pius XI taught in Quas Primas that “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.” The abuse crisis is, at its root, a consequence of the rejection of Christ’s royal authority — the rejection of His law, His Church’s teaching authority, and His sacramental grace. No amount of “safeguarding” procedures, “authentic relationships,” or “cultures of prevention” can substitute for the restoration of the supernatural order.
Conclusion: The Bankruptcy of Conciliar Rhetoric
Leo XIV’s message on the protection of minors and vulnerable adults is a perfect specimen of the conciliar sect’s method: it addresses a real and grave evil with language that is superficially compassionate but entirely devoid of supernatural content; it proposes bureaucratic and procedural solutions while refusing to acknowledge the theological and spiritual roots of the crisis; it speaks of “evangelical conversion” without the Gospel, “charity” without grace, and “justice” without the recognition of sin and the necessity of reparation.
The true Church of Jesus Christ — the Church that endures in the faithful who profess the integral Catholic faith and are led by bishops with valid sacraments and validly ordained priests — has always taught that the protection of the innocent begins with the preaching of the whole truth, the administration of the sacraments, the formation of souls in the fear of God, and the recognition that every sin is an offense against the infinite majesty of God, requiring not merely procedural reform but true repentance, confession, and satisfaction. Until the structures occupying the Vatican embrace this supernatural reality, their “safeguarding” rhetoric will remain what it is: a substitute for the life of grace, a diversion from the true causes of the crisis, and an insult to the memory of the victims whose suffering demands not bureaucratic procedures but divine justice.
Source:
Pope Leo XIV calls for the ‘safeguarding’ and ‘accompanying’ of minors and vulnerable adults (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 17.04.2026