Pope Francis meets with the Order of Malta’s Fra’ Marco Luzzago on June 25, 2021. / Vatican Media
Rome Newsroom, Mar 31, 2022 / 04:42 am (CNA).
Pope Francis received two drafts of a new constitution for the Order of Malta at an audience with members of the 1,000-year-old institution on March 19. He reserved the right to read them calmly and then make his final decisions.
To understand what’s at stake, it’s essential to know how the order is structured. The organization’s members belong to three classes.
The First Class consists of the Knights of Justice, or professed knights, and Professed Conventual Chaplains, who take the religious vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. They are defined as religious but not required to live in a community.
The Second Class is composed of Knights and Dames in Obedience, who promise to strive for Christian perfection in the spirit of the order.
The Third Class comprises lay members who neither take vows nor make promises but are committed to living a fully Catholic life according to the order’s principles.
Only First Class knights who descend from a family of four quarters of nobility are eligible to be elected as the Grand Master, the order’s religious superior and sovereign. This provision means that fewer than 40 people in the order can be considered for the position.
The Grand Master oversees the order with the help of a body called the Sovereign Council, whose members are elected for five-year terms by the order’s General Chapter.
Members of the Sovereign Council include the influential figure of the Grand Chancellor, who oversees the order’s 133 diplomatic missions, and the Grand Hospitaller, responsible for the order’s extensive humanitarian initiatives.
The order has three different types of national institutions spread around the world: six grand priories, six sub-priories, and 48 local associations.
The participants in the meeting with the pope on March 19 represented two sides in a years-long debate over reforms to the order’s constitution.
Some of those present were members of the group entrusted with drafting the new constitution, led by the papal delegate Cardinal Silvano Maria Tomasi. Also attending were representatives of the professed knights, the government of the order, the procurators of the priories, and the presidents of the associations, as well as the order’s current leader, Fra’ Marco Luzzago, who is known as the Lieutenant of the Grand Master.
The gathering enabled Pope Francis to hear the advocates of two contrasting visions for the order. First, that of the working group led by Tomasi, which stressed the need for the Order of Malta to be led above all by the professed. And second, that of the group set up by the Grand Chancellor Albrecht von Boeslager and entrusted to the leadership of Marwan Sehanaoui, president of the order’s Lebanese association, which called for a more collegial style of government.
The private papal audience lasted for two and a half hours instead of the expected hour and a half. According to participants who spoke with CNA, the pope said that he wanted to retain everything that makes the Order of Malta such an effective provider of humanitarian aid and he would review material provided by both sides before making a decision.
The two colliding visions have shaped the debate ever since Pope Francis launched the reform process in 2017 after he accepted the resignation of Grand Master Fra’ Matthew Festing in the middle of an internal governance crisis.
The debate over the new constitution became even more problematic following the death of Festing’s successor, Giacomo dalla Torre del Tempio di Sanguineto, in 2020.
Luzzago was then chosen to lead the order, not as Grand Master but as Lieutenant of the Grand Master, who typically serves a one-year term. But this term was extended by the pope himself, to an unlimited extent, amid the push to conclude the constitutional reform.
Pope Francis believes that the reform must, first of all, strengthen the Order of Malta as a religious institution and, secondly, reinforce its service to the poor. The draft presented by Tomasi’s working group should be read in this light.
The Tomasi-led group is composed of the canon law expert Father Gianfranco Ghirlanda, S.J., Msgr. Brian Ferme, the secretary of the Vatican’s Council for the Economy, and Maurizio Tagliaferri, Federico Marti, and Gualtiero Ventura.
Ghirlanda is understood to have spent about an hour explaining his position that the professed should lead the organization because it is at heart a lay religious order.
In practice, Ghirlanda derives authority from religious consecration. This, however, is only valid if the Order of Malta is considered primarily as a spiritual body. The situation is different if its governing bodies are considered “governing bodies” in the strict sense.
Ghirlanda was among the speakers at a recent press conference after the launch of Praedicate evangelium, the new Vatican constitution reforming the Roman Curia. At the press conference, he commented on the change allowing any baptized person, not only a bishop, to lead certain Vatican dicasteries. He said that this was possible because it was not ordination but receiving a canonical mission that gave dicastery heads their authority.
Ghirlanda said that this decision resolved the question posed by Canon 129 of the Code of Canon Law, according to which authority derives from priestly ordination. Ghirlanda noted that the decision had resulted from extensive debate.
But if the possibility for the laity to participate in government applies to the Roman Curia, why doesn’t it apply to the government of a body such as the Sovereign Order of Malta?
This is a much-debated topic that is at the heart of the reform proposals. Although the order’s sovereignty derives from a concession from the Holy See, it is constituted as a state without territory. With this international personality, it maintains diplomatic relations with other states and it is its sovereignty that allows it to continue working with the poor.
Many in the Order of Malta have stressed that a reform highlighting only the religious character, mainly submission to the Holy See, would dilute its sovereignty forever.
The importance of the order’s sovereignty was also raised by Luzzago in a speech to the diplomatic corps accredited to the order on Jan. 11 (although the text of the address can no longer be found on the order’s website.)
The pope’s affirmation that he wants to keep everything that allows the order to continue its work for the poor stems from this debate.
The vision of the group led by Sehnaoui, according to a source inside the order, is markedly different. It proposes that the General Chapter, the body bringing together representatives of all classes, would have 15 representatives of the professed knights. The associations would be represented not by assessing the number of works carried out but rather based on the budget allocated to these works. If the budget was less than $20 million, an association would be entitled to one delegate. If it exceeded $20 million, there would be a right to another representative, up to a total of four.
In this way, associations would see some of their concerns represented. Marc Odendall, a member of the first commission established by the pope to clarify the order’s internal problems in 2016, summed up this reasoning when he told CNA that “$2 billion turnovers, 45,000 employees, 100,000 volunteers in the world cannot be managed by 19 professed who are under 70 and have no professional qualifications.”
Sehnaoui’s draft reflects this concern, trying to find a balance between the need to maintain the order’s religious character and having a government more independent from the Holy See that also considers the professional work of many associations.
It remains to be seen which of the two world views will prevail. Now, everything is firmly in the pope’s hands. At the same time, the role of the papal delegate, Cardinal Tomasi, seems to be increasingly marginal.
[…]
May God bless Fr. Weinandy.
They hadn’t the courage to fire him. Similar to Pilate washing his hands. What’s disheartening is what it says about the USCCB. They unlike Churchill say, “We will always surrender”. Darkness pervades. Catholics faithful to the Gospel of Christ firmly rooted in the Apostolic Tradition are mocked, disdained, forced to resign, fired like Josef Seifert by other Catholics who have sworn allegiance to the new gospel. Whether these are End Times is unknown. Prayerfully a passing phase soon to be corrected. Yet it certainly is unprecedented. Unlike previous Pontiff’s who erred this distancing from Apostolic Tradition is too sweeping. Can this be permitted by God and why asks Fr Weinandy. As do most of us. Sin and disobedience to Christ’s commandments. Apostasy. As a priest I cannot repudiate the Gospels for something other than what the Apostles handed down to me. At judgment I, all priests [Bishops and Cardinals included] will be asked “Peter, did you feed my Lambs”. My hopeful prayer is, “Yes Lord, I fed them good food. Your words”.
Is Weinandy seriously a Theologian and still acts thinking he can lay conditions on God to prove to him that he should proceed as planned.?? Come off it! The management of the Church and indeed the planet Earth rests solely in evolution and in the hands of humanity protected by oversight of the Spirit of God.
“The management of the Church and indeed the planet Earth rests solely in evolution…”
Do you really want to keep this up? It’s embarrassing.
Signor Olson. We’re all due for a bit of comic relief.
ditto!
I agree with Carl that this comment is truly embarassing.
I hope comment is made about some authors’ use of the word “dissent.” It is VERY misleading and slanderous against Father Weinandy.
Yes, Father Weinandy is courageously opposing dissenters in the highest places. Who among us could ever imagine that we would experience this persecution of the Faith in our lifetime, when it seems like yesterday, that it was honored by all? Who could have believed that the most vigorous persecution would come from the pope and his team of unprincipled (as though they were not Christian) revolutionaries?
Today, those who vowed to preserve and defend our Faith, dishonor it in word and deed, while bowing low before all kinds of false beliefs.
Sometimes the shock and terror are overwhelming. I must remind myself constantly that this has been known from the beginning. Our Lord Jesus Christ says: Fear not!
I should abandon my bad inclination, and I should trust and obey Him.
Given the extraordinarily rapid timeline, with publication of the letter and publication of the USCCB press releases only six hours apart, it appears that the member bishops did not hold a meeting, make sure they had a quorum, and hold a vote. It appears that one or more post-Catholic ordained bureaucrats made this decision, which may go down in history as the “jumping of the shark” by the USCCB.
A pope who will not clarify his own exhortation, either in private or public. This pope who is on the brink of formal heresy while claiming to be “a faithful son of the Church”.
Fr. Martin weighs in????
How long, Lord?
I’m curious, why did he not just let them fire him? This is not a criticism, but what advantage to him if he “resigns” than if he is “fired”? Is there something in the vow of obedience? Although if he were to have been fired, it may well have raised his standing even more? I imagine Father did not fully anticipate the fallout of his letter.
These folks also don’t seem to realize that this infers Francis is proposing new teaching, for what else would require a new/current act of assent, as though Weinandy would have withdrawn his previous assent from the perennial teaching?
I am a lay Catholic. I do not agree with what Father Weinandy did: I disagree with both the content of the letter and the way he made it public. I am only weighing in on this because Father Weinandy emphasized that he received many letters and emails, mostly from lay people, all of them positive. I support Pope Francis and thought the letter read like an attack on him. The USCCB was right to force Weinandy’s resignation (they could have just terminated him; it was very gracious of them to allow him to resign).
Irene,
You present a false notion: that Fr. Weinandy is “anti-Francis” and this was the reason for his letter. This is unfortunately a way people are trying to discount it and if you think about it, this mode is exactly what they are accusing him of. It was quite the opposite if you read his reasons for it. The ultimate point is whether what he states in the letter is true and that even what one might call the more subjective parts are his actual experience as a priest, hearing from what he says is “many” people. Exactly what in his letter is false? Can you say without any doubt that none of what he mentions is happening anywhere? Are you saying he is lying when he speaks of his personal experience? If you can’t rule this out then the foundation of his letter stands.
Oh, yes, very gracious… So Fr. Martin now calls himself “Irene” ?
So where is the “mercy and dialogue” that Pope Francis and bishops keeps talking about? Did I miss something here?
There is “mercy and dialogue” for the LGBTQ people, so-called “catholic” politicians or pro-aborts or atheists but none whatsoever for the catholic theologian who embraces and preaches the Gospel?!!
Remember when St. Paul rebuked Peter (the first pope) in Galatians 2:11-13
In John 16:2 Jesus said “They will expel you from the synagogues; in fact, the hour* is coming when everyone who kills you will think he is offering worship to God.
They will do this because they have not known either the Father or me”.
Rejoice Fr. Weinandy!! You are truly blessed for being found worthy!
Jesus will bless you greatly!
I fully agree, Fr. Weinandy is our hero. I hope he will honor us by becoming a Member of our newly founded John Paul II Academy for Human Life & the Family!
Mercedes Arzú Wilson.
What I would like to know is: did anyone at USCCB get a phone call from the Vatican before “encouraging” Father Weinandy to resign?
Yes. May God bless Fr. Weinandy. He is a good and faithful servant of the Lord.
If Fr. Weinandy had come out in support of Planned Parenthood, he would still be judged employable by the USCCB.
I would love to know, on what date was Father Weinandy ‘s letter published and on what forum?
Thank you for a reply,
Teréz Barna
Fr. Weinandy’s letter appeared on November 1st, and was published by various outlets, including on Sandro Magister’s site, CRUX, and The Catholic Herald. It also appeared here at CWR on the same day, with a note of explanation by Fr. Weinandy.