Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, grand chancellor of Rome’s Pontifical Institute John Paul II and president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, has responded to controversy over a plan to restructure the school’s faculty and curriculum.
“We will be able to address and overcome the concerns and the hesitancies that have greeted the renewed structure of the Academy, and I might add of its sister entity, the John Paul II Institute as well,” Paglia said Sept. 3 at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.
Paglia emphasized that the school must “participate in dialogue with everyone” while working to fulfill its mission.
In his address, Paglia spoke about the importance of a Catholic perspective in the study of bioethics, saying linguistic and cultural differences, as well as different theological and philosophical approaches, can condition the way subjects are studied and taught, even when they are foundational to the Catholic faith.
Paglia acknowledged the recent conflict which has engulfed the pontifical institute, following the approval of new statutes for the school in July, and reiterated the pope’s stated aims for its reform.
The new statutes were issued in response to a 2017 announcement by the pope that he would legally refound the institute to broaden its curriculum, from a focus on the theology of marriage and the family to an approach that will also include the study of the family from the perspective of the social sciences.
Critics of the changes voiced their concern that the essential purpose of the institute was being diluted, and a group of 49 academics from universities around the world wrote to the administrators of the Institute asking for the reinstatement of the dismissed faculty.
Earlier this week, it was reported that the vice-president of the Institute proposed a compromise between university administrators and concerned faculty members.
Noting an apparent “impasse” between faculty and administrators, Fr. Jose Granados suggested a “proposal for a constructive solution” in an Aug 27 letter to Paglia and the school’s president, Msgr. Pierangelo Sequiri.
Granados’ proposal is that a chair of fundamental moral theology, scheduled for elimination from the university’s faculty, be retained, and that a new chair be added to the university’s faculty to complement it.
In his speech Wednesday, Paglia reiterated Francis’ stated aims in refounding the school, saying that “the Pope wants the Academy, and the Institute, to widen its scope of reflection: not limiting itself to addressing specific situations of ethical, social or legal conflict; articulate an anthropology that sets the practical and theoretical premises for conduct consistent with the dignity of the human person; and make sure it has the tools to critically examine the theory and practice of science and technology as they interact with life, its meaning and its value.”
Full story at Catholic News Agency.
This archbishop put up a homoerotic mural in his cathedral. And, he redefined the term “life” for the Catholic Church, stating that it will now refocus its pro-life mission to include issues of migration, arms control, poverty and the environment. How on earth, or in hell, can he be a Church leader on life, marriage and family? Lord, have mercy on us all! Saint John Paul the Great, pray for us!
Paglia is a disgusting cleric. One look at his homo-erotic mural at his Cathedral church in Italy shows what motivates this man. He is simply a supplicant for Pope Francis and his NewChurch program. Pay attention to him, though, as he is reported to be very close to the Pope, but avoid him. Time to stand up to such thuggery.
The refounding of the Academy and Institute sounds like a terrible mistake, to me! Instead, I think the proper focus should be on Catholic teaching!
I agree with the posts of St. Christopher and “without life…!” We must daily pray for our poor, afflicted Church! Today is Our Lady’s birthday! Our Blessed Mother, pray for us, and for all Catholic marriages and families– and for the protection of the unborn child, in the womb!
Anon we must do a lot more than pray,,, we need to take direct action…end of story
Bohemond– In the Catholic Church, laymen have very little power– power to run the Church is in the hands of the Pope and his trained, ordained clergy! However– we can speak up , write letters– and pray!
Uh you are very wrong….. think Crusades..,,
Well, Bohemond— I don’t know what to say, except, you will GO CRAZY, trying to get the Pope and Church leaders to operate the Church by Christian morals, and use good, common sense! They are all simply HOPELESS!! No Church discipline, since Vatican II!!
I am joining Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider in their big 40-day vigil of prayer and fasting– hopefully, this will help the Church!
I read what he said. Sounds like mishagosh to me.
Sometimes autocorrect can be really funny, by gosh.
Here’s the background story on Paglia’s grossly perverted mural: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/leading-vatican-archbishop-featured-in-homoerotic-painting-he-commissioned .
Paglia should be condemned, disgraced, and laicized — not left in charge of the John Paul II Pontifical Institute and Pontifical Academy for Life.
With respect, dialogue requires knowing what one has to say and “frank and candid exchanges.” LMU, the archbishop’s hosting institution, has little to say. What it does say is often soaked in public relations. Better that the archbishop had joined in a panel discussion addressing, for starters, three painful realities: (1) pro-abortion extremism, (2) the acceptance of euthanasia, and (3) indifference to the stockpiling of nuclear weapons. St. John Paul II goes to the heart of our anthropological crisis: when we lose sight of our Creator, we lose sight of human dignity.
Notice above Paglia’s use of the word “dialogue.” Sirens and whistles should be going off in the head of any thoughtful Catholic, because in the real world “dialogue” means surrender to secularism – you can take that generalization to the bank. As Orwell illustrated powerfully, a major tactic by authoritarian movements is the perversion of language.
The ferocity of some of the comments posted here are based on innuendo and fake news. Give Archbishop Paglia a chance. He is following the instructions of the Pope. God is working through both men.
Cyril, Is this mural commissioned by Paglia “innuendo and fake news”?
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/homoerotic-archbishop-st-john-paul-ii-pope-francis/
Cyril, this is a very dangerous situation for the Church! I hope that Abp. Paglia’s altar boys are SAFE!! Very, very dangerous! I pray that Our Blessed Mother can intervene, to help the wayward, untrustworthy Church!
Cyril, It is the archbishop who again stated that the academy must broaden its scope and welcome non-Christian “experts.” What is innuendo or “fake” about noting what he said? Do you think the tragedies associated with life for the vulnerable innocent, marriage and family have been solved and that the Church should no longer have an institutional means of addressing those crises? That’s why Saint John Paul the Great initiated such efforts. My questions are sincere, not merely rhetorical.
And look who showed up on Vigano’s Hit Parade:
“As far as the Roman Curia is concerned, for the moment I will stop here, even if the names of other prelates in the Vatican are well known, even some very close to Pope Francis, such as Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio and Archbishop *Vincenzo Paglia*, who belong to the homosexual current in favor of subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality, a current already denounced in 1986 by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then-Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. . . .”
Italian for “Shove It” – innuendo !
“Cyril,” your comments are false: (1) there is nothing “fake” in any of these posts, and you offer no proof of any competing fact; (2) you offer only the “Nuremberg” defense for Paglia; he can resign if he knows the direction of Francis to be morally wrong; and (3) Paglia knows he is complicit in creating a NewChurch.
How superficial of me to miss that important detail. I just committed strawman sarcasm. I hope you can forgive me, since whenever I see anything representative of Dr. Mann’s positive achievements, I tend to skim over the writing, since my sense of his positive achievements is negative.