The Vatican News portal reports on the conclusion of the ecclesial encounter “Ten Years After Amoris laetitia: Proclaiming the Gospel with Families Today,” convened by the antipope Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) to commemorate the tenth anniversary of Francis’s apostolic exhortation. The gathering assembled presidents of episcopal conferences, heads of Eastern schismatic churches, married couples, and self-styled experts to discuss “accompaniment,” “listening,” and “discernment” of families in “fragile” situations — including cohabitation, domestic violence, and excessive mobile phone use. Speakers such as “Archbishop” Scicluna, “Father” Costa, “Monsignor” Bordeyne, “Cardinal” Herrera, and Professor Chu Ilo emphasized a pastoral approach that refuses to judge, stays with “wounds,” and goes to “existential peripheries” rather than calling sinners to conversion. The synthesis document highlighted the “accelerating pace of change” affecting marriage customs and the need for a “clear-eyed view” of reality animated by hope. This celebration of a heretical document that adulterates Catholic teaching on marriage, the Eucharist, and moral law confirms the conciliar sect’s definitive rupture with the immutable doctrine of Christ the King.
The Celebration of Heresy as “Gospel Proclamation”
The very premise of this gathering — commemorating Amoris laetitia as a document for “proclaiming the Gospel with families” — constitutes a blasphemous inversion of reality. Amoris laetitia (2016) is not a Gospel proclamation but a syllabus of errors against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, explicitly permitting the divorced and “remarried” to receive Holy Communion under the guise of “discernment” and “mitigating circumstances” (cf. Amoris laetitia, n. 305). This directly contradicts the defined dogma of the Council of Trent: “If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church… can be condemned… let him be anathema” (Session VII, Canon 13), and the perennial teaching that no one conscious of mortal sin may receive the Body of the Lord without sacramental confession (Trent, Session XIII, Canon 11).
Pius XI, in Quas Primas, teaches that Christ’s Kingdom is primarily spiritual and relates to spiritual matters, requiring “repentance… faith and baptism… renounce earthly riches… deny themselves and carry their cross”. The conciliar sect’s “accompaniment” eliminates the Cross, repentance, and the very notion of sin. As the Syllabus of Errors (Pius IX, 1864) condemns: “The Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion” (Error 21) — yet here the sect celebrates a document that effectively defines adultery as a “living Gospel” for families.
The Language of Apostasy: “Accompaniment,” “Discernment,” “Fragility”
The rhetoric deployed at this press conference reveals the gnostic vocabulary of Modernism condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu (1907). “Archbishop” Scicluna speaks of “an attitude of listening to families before judging, and also discerning situations with an open heart” and “facilitating the meeting with God’s mercy, embracing people, finding them where they are.” This is the hermeneutic of subjectivism: the sinner becomes the criterion of truth, the pastor becomes a therapist, and the moral law becomes a mere “ideal” (cf. Amoris laetitia, n. 303).
“Monsignor” Bordeyne describes “fragility” as “a central concept in Amoris laetitia and the focus of Chapter Eight” — that chapter being the Trojan horse for communion for adulterers. He speaks of “the accelerating pace of change” affecting marriage customs and the need for a “clear-eyed view” of reality — evolutionism applied to the sacrament of matrimony, as if the divine institution could mutate with sociological trends. This is precisely the Modernist error condemned in Lamentabili, Proposition 53: “The organic structure of the Church is subject to change, and the Christian community, like the human community, is subject to continuous evolution.”
Professor Chu Ilo’s testimony — “we are staying longer with the wounds… like Thomas touched the wounded side of Jesus, and then there was a transformation” — perverts the Gospel. Thomas touched the wounds after the Resurrection, as confirmation of faith in the risen Christ (John 20:27-28), not as a pastoral method for leaving sinners in their sin. The conciliar sect’s “Church that stays with wounds” is a Church that refuses to apply the healing balm of truth and the surgeon’s knife of correction — “Them that sin reprove before all: that the rest also may have fear” (1 Tim 5:20).
Reduction of the Church’s Mission to Naturalistic Humanism
The entire framework of this meeting reduces the Church to a social service agency for “family well-being”. “Cardinal” Herrera identifies four characteristics of family life: “prayer, communion, formation and mission” — but the common thread is “accompaniment… for the benefit of the entire Church.” “Father” Costa highlights “spiritual and practical support in situations of domestic violence and abuse… timely… protecting children and vulnerable people… reduce the stigma that can accompany seeking help.” While temporal goods are not to be despised, the primary mission of the Church is the salvation of souls, not the management of sociological dysfunctions.
Pius XI in Quas Primas declares: “The state must leave the same freedom to the members of Orders and Congregations… who are indeed the most valiant helpers of the Pastors of the Church and contribute most to the expansion and establishment of Christ’s Kingdom, either by combating the triple concupiscence of the world through religious vows, or by striving for perfection.” The conciliar sect’s “pastoral conversion” replaces combating the triple concupiscence with accompanying fragility. It replaces striving for perfection with living lightly with problems (Bordeyne’s anecdote of the family with mobile phones: “We still have the same problem, but we are trying to live with it more lightly”). This is Jansenism inverted: not rigorism, but laxism masquerading as mercy.
The “Synodal” Structure: Democracy Replacing Divine Authority
The composition of the gathering — “presidents of Bishops’ Conferences, heads of Eastern Churches, married couples and experts” — manifests the conciliar heresy of collegiality and synodality, which subverts the monarchical constitution of the Church established by Christ. Lamentabili, Proposition 55 condemns: “Simon Peter never even suspected that he had received primacy in the Church from Christ.” The conciliar sect operates as a parliament of opinions where “mutual learning” between families and the Church replaces the Magisterium’s duty to teach authoritatively.
“Father” Costa describes the process: “the final part of the meeting was devoted to presenting the synthesis report, followed by discussions first in small groups and then in plenary session… the report was recognised as a faithful reflection of the discussions, although some constructive observations were made to further emphasise its ‘missionary dimension.'” This is the democratic method of the Masonic lodges, not the apostolic method of “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations… teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matt 28:19-20). The Syllabus of Errors (Error 55) condemns: “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” — here the Church separates itself from Christ the King, becoming a humanitarian NGO governed by focus groups.
Cohabitation and the “Transformation of Customs” as Pastoral Norm
“Monsignor” Bordeyne explicitly addresses “issues that are understood differently in different parts of the world, including cohabitation among couples” and states: “When two young people decide to marry, they become, within their own generation, agents of the transformations of their time.” This is cultural relativism applied to the Sixth Commandment. The Council of Trent defined: “If anyone says that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity or celibacy… let him be anathema” (Session XXIV, Canon 10). But more fundamentally, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Ex 20:14) admits no “cultural transformation.”
Pius XI in Casti Connubii (1930) teaches: “This mutual molding of husband and wife… cannot be brought about except by the grace of the sacrament… Those who are joined in matrimony receive a special grace by which they are enabled to fulfill the duties of their state.” The conciliar sect’s “accompaniment” of cohabiting couples as “agents of transformation” denies the supernatural order of grace and the indissolubility of marriage as a divine law, not a human custom. It fulfills the prophecy of Lamentabili, Proposition 59: “Christ did not proclaim any specific, all-encompassing doctrine suitable for all times and peoples, but rather initiated a certain religious movement, applied or applicable to different times and places.”
The Antipope’s Role: Validating the Revolution
The article notes that “Pope Leo XIV… convened the meeting… participated in the meeting at the Monday morning session, ahead of his surgery on 13 October… wrote a letter to the meeting’s participants… ‘What kind of Church will people find when they feel fragile?'” This antipope (Robert Prevost), like his predecessors in the line of usurpers since John XXIII, acts as the supreme legislator of the new religion. His “surgery” is mentioned with the same reverence due to the Vicar of Christ — a grotesque parody.
Pope Paul IV’s Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio (1559) declares: “…if at any time it shall appear that any Bishop… or even the Roman Pontiff… has defected from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy: (i) his promotion or elevation… shall be null, void, and of no effect.” The “pope” who convenes a celebration of Amoris laetitia — a document that formally permits sacrilege and adultery — manifests heresy ipso facto and loses all jurisdiction. As St. Robert Bellarmine teaches (De Romano Pontifice, II, 30): “A manifest heretic cannot be Pope… he cannot be the head of something of which he is not a member; now, he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian.”
The “Domestic Church” as Idol of the Neo-Church
The repeated emphasis on “families at the centre of the Church’s pastoral mission” (Scicluna), “families as active participants in the life and mission” (Leo XIV’s letter), and “the family has a prophetic role not only in society but for humanity’s future” (Scicluna) elevates the natural institution of the family to an idol replacing the Kingship of Christ. Pius XI in Quas Primas institutes the Feast of Christ the King precisely to combat “the secularism of our times, so-called laicism… the denial of Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations.” The conciliar sect’s “family-centered” pastoral care is laicism baptized: it seeks the temporal happiness of families without the eternal salvation of souls through the social reign of Christ the King.
The Syllabus of Errors (Error 77) condemns: “In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.” The conciliar sect’s “accompaniment” of families in irregular situations is the ecclesial equivalent of religious liberty: each family’s “conscience” becomes the supreme norm, the pastor becomes a facilitator, and the Church becomes a “field hospital” that never discharges the healed because it never diagnoses the disease.
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation in the Holy Place
This press conference, this meeting, this celebration of Amoris laetitia — all manifest the full maturity of the conciliar apostasy. The “Church” that “stays with wounds” without applying the remedy of truth is the Church of the Antichrist foretold by St. Paul: “They shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Tim 4:4). The true Church of Christ, the remnant faithful to the integral Tradition, continues to teach “all things whatsoever I have commanded you”, to deny Communion to public adulterers, to call cohabiting couples to separation or marriage, to proclaim Christ the King over every family, every nation, every law. The conciliar sect’s “synodal journey” leads only to the abyss. “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema” (Gal 1:8).
Source:
Church renews commitment to families at conclusion of 'Amoris laetitia' meeting (vaticannews.va)
Date: 14.10.2026