RKKnipsel: "Pontifical academy for life: A sincere dialogue?"

Inside the Vatican meldt:

"The leaders of the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAV) have invited the institution’s members to help foster a “sincere dialogue” following the controversy that has raged on over the past weeks. A failed assembly, a cancelled congress, letter exchanges and a heated media debate have marked a crisis that was a long time coming. Now, members of the Vatican organisation who are critical of it have shown a willingness to discuss the situation, but they nevertheless remain mistrustful, claiming that what was lacking was dialogue.

In a communiqué published last 10 May, PAV leaders asked for “recent misunderstandings” to be seen as an opportunity to examine and reaffirm the Academy’s identity, as Vatican Insider previously reported. 

The communiqué attemted to respond to the issues raised by a group of distinguished Academy members who expressed their “firm disagreement” and “serious concern” regarding a certain straying within the Academy. They claim that through their institutional activities, certain Academy members are trying to advance an agenda which goes against the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Two days prior to this, in an attempt to calm tensions, PAV president, Ignacio Carrasco de Paula, had sent a missive to all Academy members, in which he apologised for the messages and the content of some previously sent letters, which could have been regarded as disrespectful. He defined said content as “unfortunate phrases which, if misunderstood, could have offended the sensitivity of certain people.”

These letters “did not intended as a sign of disrespect and certainly not towards those with whom we have collaborated closely for so many years,” Carrasco stressed, whilst underlining his commitment towards the Gospel of life “now more than ever.” 

But not everyone was satisfied by the president’s apologies and the subsequent communiqué calling for “sincere dialogue”. Christine de Marcellus Vollmer, President of Alianza Latinoamericana para la Familia (Latin American Alliance for the Family), expressed her willingness to engage in dialogue because “this is the Academy’s raison d’être and it is what has been missing recently.”

According to Vollmer, the necessary condition for launching any dialogue is the respect and equal dignity of each and every member, not one section trying to dominate over the other. This, he said, is precisely what has happened with certain PAV officials, who have been imposing their own ideas instead of promoting internal dialogue.

Although no one openly mentions his name, many believe that part of the problem is being caused by the Academy’s current chancellor: Renzo Pegoraro. He was responsible for coordinating two events which sparked disputes: last February’s plenary assembly which was defined as “the worst in history” by Professor Joseph Seifert and the congress on adult stem cells scheduled to take place in April and cancelled amid heated debates.

In response to the request for “sincere dialogue”, critics made a number of concrete proposals. They asked that the Academy drop issues that have already been resolved in the Church magisterium, such as stem cells and IVF treatment. They asked it not to favour “hard sciences” with representatives that are openly against Catholic doctrine, giving space instead to the cultural pro-life battle. They also requested the next plenary assembly, held to mark the Year of Faith, be dedicated to the study of the “sciences of persuasion” which offer Catholic leaders with more tools to promote the culture of life in today’s society.

It seems clear that hidden in this crisis, are two different visions of the role the Pontifical Academy for Life should play. The debate is between those who see the institution as a space for discussion with the world of science without this discussion being limited by doctrine, and those who would like it to be at the forefront of the fight in favour of Catholic “non-negotiable” values. Mediation between the two has become an almost impossible mission. As such, the current controversy looks far from being resolved".