If you want to truly grow in grace, I suggest that you humble yourself and consider that you could be wrong, and that the vicar of Christ could be correct.
Certainly the pope "could" be correct - he has correctly (i.e. has been consonant with Catholic Sacred Tradition) in some other opinions he has proclaimed - but in his understanding of moral theology, he has been inconsistent and contradictory. The Catholic understanding of grace goes beyond the one category of actual grace, as of sin, he (as well as you, apparently) does not consider the grades of sin which affect one's relationship with God. That is, "all are sinners" - true - but all are not in mortal sin, not all have lost the state of grace, nor are all apostates.
When a child or an adult is baptized, he receives sanctifying grace and forgiveness of all sin, with the infusion into his soul of Virtues including the theological virtues (Faith, Hope, Holy Charity), and Gifts including the seven (Isaian) Gifts of the Holy Spirit (wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord - which are needed to
perfect the Virtues) - all these are habitual gifts and graces infused in
potency - in
potential -
not actualized to the perfection possible for the soul who desires to please God and live in obedience to His will. Thus we need "actual graces" to put into act in real time the potentials, the potencies given us in Baptism.
When you or I were first baptized we did not immediately start believing in God and in all God has revealed with supernatural faith. We received the "virtue" of faith - the power to believe, the potency of living faith - but we did not immediately begin living as a faithful Catholic, obedient to His will in all things. Each act of believing required - requires - a gift of actual grace to "enact" that act.
But what if the potency to believe, to hope or to love with the kind of love with which God loves (Holy Charity) - what if this one of the three theological virtues has been gravely sinned against and thus definitively rejected in the soul of the sinner? A man can sin gravely, culpably, against the virtue of Charity in some specific act, for example, but not against Faith. Suppose he continued to believe in God, but he chose to love himself to the exclusion of God in that act - he sinned a mortal sin, and thereby lost sanctifying grace in his soul. He has become dead to God, the life of God is no longer in him, yet he still believes in God!
IF the faith still in him is strong, in spite of his overly strong self-love, he will receive the actual grace God may offer to move him to Confession, and to restoration of his relationship with God in love. He can begin again a better man (like St. Peter did!) and begin again to grow in holiness.
BUT IF his self-love is strong, he could refuse the actual grace need for repentance and Confession and restoration - such would be offensive to that strong self-love - he could again choose self over God, and then sin gravely, culpably, this time against the virtue of Faith. It would then be likely that all hope would be lost as well - although perhaps he could receive actual grace to hope in God's mercy, and thus in the possibility of an eternity with God in Heaven - and perhaps thus move himself toward humility, Confession, and restoration of his life in Christ.
Free will must be a factor, God's grace is a necessity, our humble obedience is essential, our holiness is our vocation.
"Accompany" the sinner is a strange term to use - easy to misapply - why would a teacher or a guide choose ambiguity in leading his disciples? Why is this pope most criticized by his critics with terms like "confusing", "ambiguous", "duplicitous" ? Jesus was
happy to see Nathaniel approaching Him: "“Here is a true Israelite. There is no duplicity in him.”
Jesus told His disciples: "You are my friends if you do what I command you."
[He did not say, I 'will accompany' you no matter how you choose to live.]