The National Catholic Register reports that on April 22, 2026, the individual occupying the Vatican, Leo XIV (Robert Prevost), addressed young people and families at Bata Stadium in Equatorial Guinea. The event, characterized by singing, dancing, and flag-waving, featured testimonies from local Catholics and the usual modernist rhetoric about “dignity,” “love,” and “hope.” The former “cardinal” praised a young worker’s commitment to “dignity,” encouraged vocations with a promise of “a hundredfold and eternal life,” spoke of marriage as a “journey of true love” and “holiness,” and thanked a young man identified as “Victor Antonio” for his testimony on “protecting burgeoning life.” The entire discourse was capped with an appeal to “Christian love” that “transforms the world” β a thoroughly naturalistic and humanitarian framework devoid of any mention of the supernatural order, the necessity of sanctifying grace, the reality of sin, or the absolute Kingship of Christ over individuals and nations alike.
The Complete Absence of the Supernatural: A Modernist Hallmark
When one examines the entirety of Leo XIV’s remarks in Equatorial Guinea, a deafening silence emerges β the silence of the supernatural. Not once does the usurper mention sanctifying grace, the state of mortal sin, the necessity of confession, the reality of hell, the devil, the immortality of the soul, or the final judgment. This is not an oversight; it is the very essence of Modernism as condemned by Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907): the reduction of the Christian religion to a purely natural, sentimental, and social phenomenon. The Modernist, Saint Pius X taught, “is a man afflicted with a species of mania for novelty” who “begins by denying the supernatural” and ends by making religion nothing more than “a feeling” and “a practical activity” (Pascendi, §§3, 7, 40).
The entire address operates within the framework of what Pius IX condemned as error 40 of the Syllabus of Errors: “The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well-being and interests of society.” The Modernists invert this: they present the Church’s teaching as entirely coincident with naturalistic humanitarianism. Leo XIV speaks of “the dignity of every human being,” “building happiness,” “protecting burgeoning life,” and “respect for the vulnerable” β all of which are laudable in themselves but become instruments of deception when severed from their supernatural foundation. Without the context of man’s ultimate end β the Beatific Vision β “dignity” becomes a secular slogan, “love” becomes sentimentality, and “hope” becomes mere optimism.
Pius XI, in Quas Primas (1925), established the Feast of Christ the King precisely to combat this naturalistic reduction: “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.” The Kingdom of Christ is not a metaphor for social improvement; it is a reality that encompasses “all human nature” and demands that “Christ reign in the mind of man, whose duty it is to accept revealed truths with complete submission to the divine will and to believe firmly and constantly in the teaching of Christ; let Christ reign in the will, which should obey God’s laws and commandments; let Him reign in the heart, which, having despised desires, must love God above all and belong only to Him; let Him reign in the body and its members, which, as instruments… should contribute to the inner sanctification of souls.” Not a single syllable of this appears in Leo XIV’s address. The Christ of Leo XIV is a Christ without authority, without law, without judgment β a Christ who is, in reality, no Christ at all.
“Peace Be With You” β But Whose Peace?
The National Catholic Register headline announces: “Pope Leo XIV to Youth and Families: ‘Peace Be With You.'” This greeting, drawn from the lips of the Risen Christ (John 20:19), is here emptied of its supernatural content and repurposed as a modernist slogan. The peace Christ offered His Apostles was the peace of the forgiveness of sins through the sacramental authority He conferred upon them: “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them” (John 20:23). It was inseparable from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the sacraments.
The peace Leo XIV offers is the peace of humanitarian sentiment: “The light of charity, nurtured in our homes and lived out in faith, can truly transform the world β even its structures and institutions β so that every person is respected and no one is forgotten.” This is the language of the United Nations, not of the Church of Christ. Pius XI explicitly warned against this confusion in Quas Primas: “What happiness we would enjoy if individuals, families, and states allowed themselves to be governed by Christ. ‘Then at last,’ to use the words which our predecessor Leo XIII addressed to all bishops 25 years ago, ‘so many wounds can be healed, then there will be hope that the law will regain its former authority, sweet peace will return again, swords and weapons will fall from hands, when all willingly accept the reign of Christ and obey Him, and every tongue will confess that our Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father.'”
Peace is only possible in the Kingdom of Christ (Pius XI, Quas Primas). And the Kingdom of Christ demands the submission of every soul β in mind, will, and body β to His divine law. Leo XIV’s “peace” requires no conversion, no repentance, no submission to the Catholic Faith. It is the pax modernista: the false peace of a world that has expelled Christ from His throne and replaced Him with the cult of man.
The “Victor Antonio” Testimony: Manufactured Sentiment in Place of Doctrine
Perhaps the most revealing moment in the entire address is Leo XIV’s effusive praise for the testimony of a young man identified as “Victor Antonio,” who spoke about “the need to protect life and care for the vulnerable.” The former “cardinal” said: “I warmly thank Victor Antonio for sharing his story with such sincerity and courage. His testimony may unsettle us, but it does not discourage us. Rather, it invites us to build a better world β one founded on respect for burgeoning life and on a sense of responsibility toward the most vulnerable among us.”
Several observations are in order. First, the name “Victor Antonio” does not appear among the named witnesses listed earlier in the article (Alicia Ikimo Ipo, PurificaciΓ³n Nntongono Nguema, Jaime Antonio Ndong, Francisco MartΓn Nze Obiang, Arnoldo Abeso Ondo). This discrepancy raises the question of whether this name was introduced in the official text as a composite or editorial construction β a common practice in Vatican communications to manufacture narratives.
Second, and far more importantly, the content of this testimony β “protecting burgeoning life” and “caring for the vulnerable” β is presented in the most generic, naturalistic terms possible. There is no mention of the right to life from conception to natural death as defined by the perennial Magisterium. There is no mention of abortion as a mortal sin and a crime against God’s law. There is no mention of the Fifth Commandment. There is no mention of the Church’s infallible teaching that the child in the womb is a person with an immortal soul from the moment of conception.
Compare this with the language of the Fathers of the Council of Trent, who anathematized anyone who denied that the Church has the power to establish diriment impediments of marriage and to defend the sanctity of life. Compare it with Pius IX’s Apostolicae Sedis (1869), which reserved excommunication to those who procured abortion. Compare it with the constant teaching of the Church that the direct killing of the innocent is always and everywhere gravely evil, regardless of civil law.
Instead, Leo Antonio offers: “welcoming life requires love, commitment, and care.” This is the language of a social worker, not of the Vicar of Christ β except that there is no Vicar of Christ in the Vatican. The conciliar sect has replaced the proclamation of God’s immutable law with the language of feelings and personal stories, precisely as Saint Pius X predicted: “Faith, as assent of the mind, is ultimately based on a sum of probabilities” (Proposition 25, Lamentabili Sane Exitus, condemned 1907).
Marriage as “Journey” β The Destruction of Sacramental Theology
Leo XIV’s treatment of marriage is a textbook example of the modernist dissolution of sacramental theology. He says: “Being spouses and parents is an exciting mission β a covenant to be lived day by day. Within this covenant, you will continually rediscover one another as you cooperate with God in the miracle of life and in building happiness for yourselves and for your children.”
He urges couples to embrace marriage “as a journey of true love that grows in freedom; as a journey of hope, born from the knowledge that God will never abandon you; and as a journey of holiness, in which you always seek the good and happiness of others.”
The word “journey” (itinerarium) has been a favorite of the conciliar sect since the time of the antipope Francis, and its repeated use is not accidental. It reflects the modernist principle β condemned in Lamentabili, Proposition 58 β that “truth changes with man, because it develops with him, in him, and through him.” If marriage is a “journey,” then its nature, its ends, its indissolubility are not fixed realities but evolving experiences. The Council of Trent defined under anathema that marriage is a sacrament instituted by Christ, that it is indissoluble, and that the Church β not the couple β has authority over matrimonial matters (Session XXIV). Leo XIV’s language undermines every one of these doctrines by presenting marriage as a subjective, evolving “journey” rather than an objective sacramental bond with defined ends (fides, proles, sacramentum).
Furthermore, the phrase “a journey of true love that grows in freedom” is a direct echo of Amoris Laetitia, the heretical document of the antipope Francis that opened the door to Communion for the divorced and “remarried.” The “freedom” here is not the freedom of the children of God who live according to the commandments; it is the modernist freedom condemned by Pius IX in error 79 of the Syllabus: “it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism.”
The “Dignity of Every Human Being” Without the Foundation
Leo XIV tells the young worker Alicia: “Her words invite reflection on the importance of productive, committed effort and on the need always to uphold the dignity of every human being.”
The phrase “dignity of every human being” has been so thoroughly co-opted by the modernist and secular world that it has become meaningless in the mouths of the conciliar sect’s officials. In Catholic teaching, human dignity is derived from the fact that man is created in the image and likeness of God (imago Dei), redeemed by the Precious Blood of Christ, and called to eternal beatitude. This dignity is not autonomous; it is relational and dependent on man’s relationship with God. As Pius XI taught in Quas Primas: “You were redeemed not with corruptible gold or silver… but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. We no longer belong to ourselves, for Christ has bought us with a great price; and our bodies are members of Christ.”
When Leo XIV speaks of “dignity” without reference to man’s creation, redemption, and supernatural destiny, he is using the language of the French Revolution and of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights β not of the Catholic Church. Pius VI, in Quod Aliquantum (1791), condemned the Declaration of the Rights of Man as a rejection of the divine order. Pius IX, in error 39 of the Syllabus, condemned the proposition that “the State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits.” The “dignity” proclaimed by Leo XIV is the dignity of the autonomous man β the very man whom the Church has always taught is a slave of sin without the grace of Christ.
Encouraging Vocations Without the Necessary Context
Leo XIV tells young people: “If you feel that Christ is calling you to follow him in a path of special consecration β as priests, religious sisters, or religious brothers β do not be afraid to follow in his footsteps. As he himself promised, I too wish to assure you that you will receive ‘a hundredfold and β¦ eternal life’ (Mt 19:29).”
On the surface, encouraging vocations sounds praiseworthy. But in the context of the concilar sect, this encouragement is deeply problematic. The young men and women of Equatorial Guinea are being encouraged to enter religious life and “priesthood” within structures that have systematically destroyed the priesthood, the religious life, and the sacraments. The post-conciliar “Mass” is not the Most Holy Sacrifice of Calvary; the post-conciliar “ordination rites” are of doubtful validity; the religious orders have been emptied of their supernatural purpose and refashioned as humanitarian organizations.
To encourage a young man to become a “priest” in the concilar sect is to encourage him to participate in a system that offers not the true sacraments but simulacra β empty rituals that mimic the sacred while conveying no grace. The Council of Trent taught that the Mass is a true and propitiatory sacrifice (Session XXII, Canon 1), and that the priesthood is a power “to consecrate, offer, and administer the Body and Blood of the Lord, as well as to forgive and retain sins” (Session XXIII, Chapter 1). The concilar sect has replaced this with a “memorial meal” and a “presider” who “gathers the assembly.” To encourage vocations within this system is not to serve God but to serve the abomination of desolation.
The Transformation of the World Through “Charity” β Without Christ the King
The culmination of Leo XIV’s address is a call to “transform the world” through “charity lived in the home”: “The light of charity, nurtured in our homes and lived out in faith, can truly transform the world β even its structures and institutions β so that every person is respected and no one is forgotten.”
This is the social gospel of the concilar sect β the replacement of the supernatural mission of the Church (the salvation of souls through the sacraments and the preaching of the Gospel) with a program of social transformation. It is the very error condemned by Pius XI in Quas Primas: “The plague is the secularism of our times, so-called laicism, its errors and wicked endeavors… It began with the denial of Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations.”
The Church does not exist to “transform the structures and institutions” of the world. The Church exists to sanctify souls through the sacraments, to preach the Gospel to every creature, and to lead men to eternal salvation. The “reign of Christ” is not a program of social reform; it is the acknowledgment by individuals, families, and states that Jesus Christ is King and that His law must govern all aspects of human life. Until that acknowledgment is made, no amount of “charity” β understood in the modernist, naturalistic sense β will produce anything but the continued decay of Christian civilization.
Saint Pius X, in Pascendi, identified the ultimate aim of the Modernists: “The united wishes of the Modernists are as follows:… that the religious society should be transformed from a supernatural society into a natural one, from a hierarchical one into a democratic one, from a divinely constituted one into a humanly constituted one.” Leo XIV’s address in Equatorial Guinea is a perfect realization of this program. There is no supernatural society, no hierarchy of truth, no divine constitution β only “love,” “dignity,” “hope,” and the transformation of the world through feeble human effort.
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation Speaks
The address of Leo XIV in Equatorial Guinea is not a pastoral message; it is a demonstration of the complete theological bankruptcy of the concilar sect. Every element β the naturalistic language, the absence of supernatural truths, the reduction of religion to sentiment, the co-opting of human rights language, the encouragement of vocations within a system of doubtful validity, the call for social transformation without the Kingship of Christ β is a fruit of the Modernist revolution that has occupied the Vatican since 1958.
The faithful who still profess the integral Catholic faith must recognize these addresses for what they are: not the words of a shepherd, but the words of the abomination of desolation (Matthew 24:15). The true Church endures β not in the structures occupying the Vatican, but in the faithful who cling to the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, to the sacraments validly administered, and to the unchanging doctrines of the Catholic Faith. As Pius XI proclaimed: “His reign encompasses all human nature… It is therefore necessary that Christ reign in the mind of man… let Christ reign in the will… let Him reign in the heart… let Him reign in the body and its members.” Against the empty “peace” of Leo XIV, the Church offers the true peace of Christ the King β the peace that comes only through submission to His divine law, the grace of the sacraments, and the hope of eternal life.
Source:
Pope Leo XIV to Youth and Families: βPeace Be With Youβ (ncregister.com)
Date: 22.04.2026