Now everything is about closeness, not truth!
While the pastoral approach prior to Amoris Laetitia, in dealing with divorced and remarried persons, aimed above all at objectivity—that is, at the union of truth and love—the synodal Church operates with a predominantly sentimental vocabulary that contributes little to objectively clarifying the situation of these persons according to the criteria of sacramental theology and canonical justice. It exclusively emphasizes closeness, accompaniment, and appreciation—a word used in an inflationary manner—of these couples by the representatives of the Church, and not their mission to lead them in the truth.
Question: what should I really appreciate in the sinner, for example, in the bank robber, the adulterer, the thief, or the violent offender? I can love the sinner—wish him well, that is, desire his salvation—yes, while at the same time condemning his sin without compromise. But how does “appreciation” fit into this context? Should I ask a judge who has to judge a crime to appreciate the offender? Would that not be pure sentimentalism, of little use for the task he must perform? The comparison is imperfect, but it shows that this category of appreciation is simply not a priority in certain contexts. Because that—appreciation—is not what matters when the question is to determine whether or not a valid marriage exists.
A guide1 of the synodal Church states that divorced and remarried couples must regain confidence, recognize themselves as part of the community, and experience God’s mercy. Question: is it irrelevant for this whether or not they live in adultery? Does conveying God’s mercy to them mean unconditionally recognizing their second union or, at least, tolerating it, even though an indissoluble matrimonial bond opposes it? Why then did Jesus not precede us with this practice? On the contrary, He rejects Moses’ practice of divorce—supposedly merciful—and tightens the prohibition of divorce, to the displeasure of His disciples! Does recalling this amount to retraumatizing these couples because those affected might feel wounded and excluded again when reminded of the truth, after having already experienced abandonment and suffering in the separation from their legitimate spouse (cf. the mentioned guide)?
The more sentimental the language becomes, the greater the suspicion that the aim is to vaporize and soften immovable doctrinal positions by appealing to the easy tear. Now, this is nothing new. The word “mercy” has already been used many times as sand thrown into the eyes of the observer or the reader. Words produce an immediate effect. Only when one delves deeper does one recognize what the semantics conceal. The hardness of truth is no longer tolerated or addressed in the synodal Church, although it is truth that sets free (Jn 8:32). Sentimentalism rejects and incriminates it. Familiaris Consortio is, therefore, yesterday—too harsh. Amoris Laetitia is today—merciful.
The magisterium of the synodal Church begins with Francis, with the new zero hour. Time (the process) is more important than space (doctrinal positions). Therefore, investment is made in the process (the revision of doctrine), in feeling, in life, not in truth, which, however, remains. The latter is like a sword that the synodal Church prefers to wrap in cotton and store until He comes who carries it in His mouth (Rev 1:16; 2:12; 2:16; 19:15; 19:21).
Published on Marian-Eleganti.ch
1 Cited in: Roberto de Mattei, “The Supreme Destiny of Man” (article): https://katholisches.info/die-hoechste-bestimmung-des-menschen/. Thematic guide for the preparation of the meeting of Pope Leo XIV with the representatives of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Vatican, from October 7 to 14, 2026, entitled: “In the Difficulties of Life: Accompanying and Supporting. Walking with Families in Difficult Situations.”
Revelation 1:16 — In the first vision of Christ:
“A sharp two-edged sword came out of his mouth.”
Revelation 2:12 — In the message to the Church of Pergamum:
“Thus says the one who has the sharp two-edged sword.”
Revelation 2:16 — Christ announces:
“Otherwise, I will come to you soon and wage war against them with the sword of my mouth.”
Revelation 19:15 — Christ as the eschatological rider:
“From his mouth came a sharp sword; with it he will strike the nations.”
Revelation 19:21 — End of the battle scene:
“The rest were killed by the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider.”