Vatican City, Jul 29, 2019 / 04:00 pm (CNA).- The Pontifical John Paul II Institute issued a statement Monday, defending recent changes at the school. But some students and faculty members say that explanations do not address the full picture of issues at the theological institute.
“The academic project of the new Institute, approved by the Congregation for Catholic Education, is designed as a widening of reflection on the family, and not as a replacement of themes and topics. Such expansion, showing even more the centrality of the family in the church and in society, confirms and relaunches with new vigor the original and still fruitful intuition of St. John Paul II,” the July 29 press release said.
The statement aimed to respond to concerns raised by students, alumni, and faculty members of the Institute following the recent approval of its new statutes, or governing documents. The new statutes were called for in 2017, when Pope Francis reestablished the institute, broadening its focus from theology to include “family sciences.”
The Institute was initially founded in 1981 as a center for the study of Christian anthropology and theology, especially in light of the philosophical ideas expressed in Pope St. John Paul II’s “Love and Responsibility,” and the set of his teachings that eventually came to be called the “Theology of the Body.”
When Pope Francis legally refounded the Institute two years ago, he said he hoped its work would be “better known and appreciated in its fruitfulness and relevance.”
Adding a focus on the social sciences, he said, would be an expansion of “the field of interest, both in terms of the new dimensions of the pastoral task and the ecclesial mission, as well as in the development of human sciences and the anthropological culture in such a crucial field for the culture of life.”
The July 29 press release acknowledged that while a chair of fundamental moral theology at the school will no longer exist, changes made to the institute’s curriculum are intended to ensure that “moral doctrine of marriage and family,” and “theological ethics of life,” remain a part of the institute’s coursework.
Fundamental moral theology is already required in the “first cycle” of theological studies required for admission to the Institute’s graduate programs, the press release said.
But a professor at the Institute told CNA that scholarship in the field of fundamental moral theology has been a long-standing part of the school’s identity, and that other subjects also covered in the first cycle, such as Christian anthropology, remain a part of the Institute’s curriculum.
The professor, noting that Humanae vitae is not expressly mentioned in the Institute’s new statutes, said that the school’s chair of fundamental moral theology was established at the Institute’s inception, at the insistence of the school’s founder, Pope St. John Paul II.
“It is important to know that in the old statutes of 2011, based on a few words from Ratzinger about the Institute’s contribution to fundamental moral theology, explicit mention of fundamental moral theology was included,” the professor added.
Regarding concerns raised about faculty dismissals, the press release said that because of its partnership with the Pontifical Lateran University, the Institute has reduced its number of course offerings, and therefore not retained some professors, “according to a policy of consistency and economy.”
Some professors may be eligible for rehire, according to the future faculty needs of the Institute, the press release said.
Among those no longer included among the Institute’s permanent faculty is Monsignor Livio Melina, who held a chair in fundamental moral theology and served as the Institute’s long-time president. The press release said that Melina would no longer hold a permanent faculty position because the chair in moral theology “no longer exists.”
Also dismissed is Fr. Jose Noriega, DCJM, a professor of moral theology at the institute.
Noriega is the superior general of the Disciples of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, a Spanish religious community of 24 professed members. The press release said that Noriega could not continue on the faculty because of a provision in canon law which forbids holding two ecclesiastical positions which are “incompatible.”
Noreiga’s term as superior general of the Disciples of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary ends in January 2020.
Noriega has served as superior for 12 years. The priest told CNA that during his years as superior, including three years under the Institute’s current administration, the issue has not been raised to him by anyone at the Institute.
Noriega also said that there is no proof that his faculty position is “incompatible” with a leadership position in his religious community. He noted that during the time he has held both positions, he also served as editorial director of the Institute.
The press release took issue with reports that a new hiring process will be centralized in the office of the Institute’s Grand Chancellor, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, noting that “the appointment of new permanent teachers must be done through an open competition.”
Such a competition, according to the statutes, is judged by a commission constituted by the institute’s president, a faculty member, and an external member nominated by the Grand Chancellor or a vice-chancellor. Tenured faculty members can veto the commission’s decision by a two-thirds majority.
The faculty member told CNA that because the chancellor appoints the Institute’s president, the composition of faculty hiring commissions remains subject to his influence and control, noting that only one member of hiring commissions, the one appointed by the faculty, would have independence from the administration’s preferences and intentions.
“Analysis of the statutes shows that the concentration of power in the hands of the Grand Chancellor is true,” the professor told CNA.
The June 29 statement also disputed reports that 150 students had signed expressing concern about the direction of the school. The statement said that only a few representatives of the students had signed the letter, which “asked for explanations about the innovations taking place.”
“All students were promptly informed of the news and reassured, in accordance with art. 89 of the statutes, about the three-year validity of the old curriculum. Everyone will be given the opportunity to choose between old and new systems and to draft any new plans of study.”
The faculty member said that while the Institute has told students they may continue in their preferred curriculum, changes to course offerings will make that impossible for those students who wish to continue with the Institute’s traditional theological offerings.
One of the letter’s organizers told CNA that, to date, 246 students and alumni have added their signatures to the letter through a website set up for that purpose. Organizers say they intend to publish the letter in the coming days.
A student at the Institute, herself among the authors of the letter, told CNA that while students received communication from the Institute’s administrators before they sent their letter, they have received no response to their concerns.
“We students have expressed our reactions of pain and our request for clarification, addressing the academic authorities, to understand, to know what is going on; to express our support to the professors that have been fired overnight –and it is the time to say it, by an academic institution only because they were spiritual and cultural heirs of John Paul II, only because they believe in the teachings regarding marriage and family from Humanae vitae.
With the new order and the new statutes, we don’t have changes that have been shared and agreed upon, but replacements and expulsions. We are witnesses to a true coup d’etat; it is not an integration and alignment of new courses and professors to what already exists and works, but instead the end of an era, with the expulsion of serious and thoughtful persons,” she added.
[…]
We can only pray that our next Pope is a faithful follower of Jesus Christ.
Archbishop Chaput made this comment:
“As a brother in the faith, and a successor of Peter, he deserves our ongoing prayers for his eternal life in the presence of the God he loved.
Having said that, an interregnum between papacies is a time for candor. The lack of it, given today’s challenges, is too expensive. In many ways, whatever its strengths, the Francis pontificate was inadequate to the real issues facing the Church. He had no direct involvement in the Second Vatican Council and seemed to resent the legacy of his immediate predecessors who did; men who worked and suffered to incarnate the council’s teachings faithfully into Catholic life. His personality tended toward the temperamental and autocratic. He resisted even loyal criticism.”
A pontificate “marked by mercy?” What mercy was ever extended towards the victims of the many sins he trivialized.
Let us pray he has received the real mercy in his final judgment to which his worldly pandering caused him to misunderstand, a mercy we all need.
Cardinal Dolan, on Fox & Friends, responded to a request for what he’d say to the American people on the death of Pope Francis:
“….So we believe he’s still alive, ok? He’s alive in, through, and with Jesus Christ, and, and so it, it, it just sorta’ strengthens our faith in the resurrection. It strengthens our faith in the Passover, as our Jewish brothers and sisters will say, that he’s only passing over from this life to the fullness of life. Now we don’t take that for granted. He was one eloquent teacher of mercy—the mercy of God. So he’s the first one that says, ‘You make sure that the Lord’s mercy extends to me at the moment of my death.’ And we do that. We do that. But we also pray with gratitude, and we also pray with utter confidence–uh–that he’s–uh–that–uh–that the Lord gives his mercy and he’s enjoying eternal reward which he so richly deserves.”
So there is one judgment.
Fr. Gerald Murray also appeared on Fox News today. He calmly pointed to the two paths the Church may take in choosing a new pope.
This guy showed no mercy to faithful Catholics; threw Chinese Catholics under the bus driven by their persecutors; never cared to understand victims of clergy sex abuse … Perhaps it is better to hold one’s tongue on such a day as this, but to present, as the CNA staff, a fairy tale tribute requires response. May he rest in peace.
Absolutely right, jpf!
This papacy is responsible for the coining of the term, “to Rupnik.”
As in, “For the past twelve years, Bergoglio has thoroughly Rupniked the Catholic Church by promoting evildoers within the hierarchy and by covering up for the evil deeds they have done.”
My current bishop is in the tradition of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
He reaches retirement age this year. This morning when I heard of Francis’
death, I could not help feel relief that he would not be appointing my next
bishop.
Lucky you!!!
Francy, I agree. And let’s have none of the “Santo Subito” mania with reference to this Pope.
The “Mercy and Reform” narrative for the Pontiff Francis is a worn out meme, the epilogue of a 12-yr-long PR campaign, signifying…nothing.
“Thy will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven.”
“Mercy and reform”? Ruthless suppression of enemies real and imagined, a gossip hound who took gossip as truth driving his acts of suppression, slapped at adoring women, yelled at them, surrounded himself with perverts whom he protected in exchange for as much protection as he could afford, opened wide doors shut by two prior Popes, sewing confusion and chaos, and published an encylical on prayer telling contemplative orders to get a REAL job, and launched an assault on those orders…a Machiavellian Peronist who spouted power to the people while while ruling as a dictator, a reign of fear in the Vatican, and terror of orthodox bishops.
dropped text…”protected them in exchange for loyalty with as much protection as he could afford”
The dialogue here on the “Pope of the people” shows a vitriol and disparagement of the deceased “Bergoglio,” the name frequently used by those who should never “throw the first stone”. The innuendo reveals much fervor, but few details.
Seems like the court of opinion will rage on with the use of terms that Pope Francis often used. Love, not hate, compassion, not repulsion, build bridges, not walls, plea to remember the poor, being a homosexual is not a sin. I have a Gay friend. Am I supposed to isolate him and reject him?
We must love our neighbor. Inclusion, not isolation, which in some cases causes violence. The Church opposes the Gay lifestyle. I believe that Francis thought the act was sinful. Will the upcoming conclave seek to “solve” the issue?
Harken to the signs of support when many thousands prayed in the courtyard of the Vatican, and condolences from millions around the world on April 21st. The real evidence of support will come from the Conclave and the entire communion of clerics.
Pray for Pope Francis.
The use of the name “Bergoglio” is not, in itself, an insult or attack. Anyone familiar with past popes and commentary knows this.
“I have a Gay friend. Am I supposed to isolate him and reject him?”
Seriously?
First name Carl. There must be more in your turse retort than name-calling. It’s not the last name that causes concern, it’s the context that surrounds it.
Thank you for your comment.
Amen to that sentiment, let’s pray for popes francis & leo.
Last letter D morgan, that line is from Poseidon 2006 Maggie Jacinda Barrett James to Dylan Josh Lucas Johns. Near the start of the film before the wave hit them good and nice.
Everywhere in society worldwide people go by last names. The familiar then comes in when a basis for it is established. Such has been my experience anyway from early schooling to now. I have found that many do not observe it so as to give themselves leeways. On the other hand other people insist on last name so as to have heavy formalities all the time.
Although it might be that in some areas first names have become the norm and the expectation. Perhaps the US is one such place.
If I ever meet the Pope I won’t say “Hi there Prevost”. I’d say “It’s good to meet the Holy Father”; or something such.
I have a homosexualist acquaintance, I call him by his first name.
Sometimes getting serious with my father I could say, “Look here, Mr. Galy …”. But I didn’t start it he did.
With some others remaining on last names is actually how we preserve the familiar in its most healthful setting.
What can be noticed is that people like homosexualists who have put themselves out for roasting then get over-sensitive over everything. Eventually as you have seen there in the US, they want to mount everything into laws suited to them that take total precedence where they alone can call the shots as homosexualists which nobody else may define for them. At that point what material difference does it make re first name / last name. Well, it could matter to homosexualists, I suppose, whether we had a choice in it or not.
You know Mr Morgan, Pope Francis didn’t come up on his own with the concept of homosexual behavior being disordered. It’s clearly explained in our Catechism.
Those attractions are only sinful when acted upon. We each have some kind of disorder and inclination to sin because we all share the same broken human nature.
MorganD, we read: “Will the upcoming conclave seek to “solve” the issue?”
“Issue”? What issue?
Half century ago the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith already offered clarification: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_en.html
And, then, in 1986 Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect for the Congregation, referred to this clarification in his “Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. In which, he recalled, for example: “…the [1975] Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual actions. These were described as deprived of the essential and indispensable finality, as being ‘intrinsically disordered’, and able in no case to be approved of 9cf. no. 8, Section 4).” https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html
Perhaps the real “issue” to be solved is today’s amnesiac mindset that disregards the longstanding distinction you now rightfully request, replacing it with, what, der Synodal Weg, Fr. Martin/Sister Jeannine Gramick photo-ops, parts of the metastasized Synod on Synodality, and then a follow-up Study Group #9 on so-called “hot button issues”—this Group charged with proposing “[t]heological criteria [!] and synodal methodologies [! say what?] for shared discernment of controversial [meaning perpetually controverted?] doctrinal [!], pastoral [!], and ethical issues [!].”
A quite broad scavenger hunt, originally scheduled to report in June 2025 and to be humbly tendered to the ruminations of Cardinal Grech’s congregational (?) “2028 Ecclesial Assembly.”
Name one moment in time anyone you declare to be an “enemy” of Francis who ever expressed Christian values in opposition to the concepts of compassion for all people, whatever their affliction, belief system, of inclinations for sin.
Why are you so weirdly capitalizing the G in “gay?”
Would you also write, “I have an Adulterous friend?”
“I have a Thief friend?”
“I have an Oppressive of the Poor friend?”
“I have a Murderous friend?”
So why this one?
He’s trying to justify the lifestyle to himself. He has often posted comments indirectly supporting homosexuality. Maybe it’s projection or wishful thinking.
Yes, I’m wondering the same thing??!!…good observation.
Suppose, morganD, if I had a Razzle-Dazzle friend, should I pass laws legalizing razzle-dazzle to prove I love him outside there and “genuinely in my heart” too besides. That would be kind of an over-burden of something I would say was not Christian love or anything humane even when I could not quite identify the something right away.
I have a homosexual acquaintance. Why should that part of it be defining anything or overtake what really counts. The only “reason” would be so that it eludes its necessarily near and already long past due vanishing point; and that “reason” is not Christian either. The emphasis on such the past 12 years was diabolical.
I tip my hat to these here writers at CWR with their sharp pencils. Easter Greetings.
Thank you for your truthful insights & your compassion. Before I read your letter/response I was convinced that 99.9% of the readership if this periodical are all right wing haters. You have proven me wrong. Peace & blessings; let us pray for both pope francis & pope leo?!
Thank you for your loving, merciful, and caring remark. It brings a smile to my face.
We are Called not to order ourselves toward our sinful inclinations and desires but to overcome our disordered inclinations and desires, by ordering ourselves to authentic Salvational Love that serves only for that which is True, Beautiful and Good and becoming transformed through accepting God’s Grace and Mercy. For if it were True that it is Loving and Merciful that we or a Loved one, remain in our sin, and not desire to overcome our disordered inclinations toward sin , we would have no need for our Savior, Jesus The Christ.
The desire to engage an a demeaning act of sin of any nature, does not change the nature of the demeaning sinful act.
Although it is True, at the hour of our death, only God can judge the state of our souls, and who is worthy of His Kingdom , our Call to Holiness is a Call to be Temples of The Holy Ghost and discriminate justly between behavior that affirms the inherent Dignity of a beloved son or daughter and is thus an act of Love, and behavior that demeans the inherent Dignity of a beloved son or daughter and is thus devoid of Love .
This article presents a really clear account of Pope Francis’ life and contributions! So informative and eye – opening.
I suppose I should be amazed or shocked by the mean spirited uncharitable un christian uncatholic tone taken by those that responded to this article online. But I sadly am not! This forum is at heart a narrow minded right wing organization of communication that only wishes to aggrandize an ultra conservative set of viewpoints.JP2 is always praised; Francis is always disparaged & made out to be “the antichrist”! I suppose it’s obvious where this publications sympathies lie when so many of your readers refer to Pope Francis as “Bergoglio”! I posted a reply to Christopher Altieri’s article “pope francis’s all out battle against clerical abuse has been a failure” & have grave doubts that it will e published (same with this missive). I suppose I expected too much from right wing RC partisans. I’m a left wing RC partisan who tries to not judge but from now on in I’ll stick to the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) & America for sane balanced nuanced intelligent insights. As to your reader’s brutal judgements on Pope Francis, clearly kindness is at a discount among your readership.
“… who tries to not judge …”
Yes. It’s obvious. Your self-control is commendable. Laudable. Remarkable. Please, continue in your walk of kindness and charity.
It is disrespectful to both The Blessed Trinity and The Papacy to refer to a man as Pope, who could not possibly be validly elected to the Papacy, having denied sexual immorality to be sin, prior to his election, without manifesting any sign that he repented or even desires to repent, and thus setting himself above The Word Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love Incarnate, Our Savior, Jesus The Christ, and Divine Law.