On January 17th, leaders of the John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family formally requested that Pope Francis dismiss Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández from his post as Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.
“The sensual-mystical literature for which the cardinal has a particular propensity is one of the worst evils of our time,” wrote Dr. Thomas Ward, Academy president and founder of England’s National Association of Catholic Families. It “does nothing but justify the worst excesses of the sexual revolution that is deeply corrupting our society and leading our youth to the abyss.”
That statement speaks with authority, because the John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family has a distinguished history. In fact, the work of its members represents the original intentions of Saint Pope John Paul II when he founded the Pontifical Academy for Life in 1992. Its purpose was simple and clear: To pursue the interdisciplinary study and defense of human life in all its stages.
The Academy’s work continued smoothly, defending life and the family for twenty-four years. Then, on December 31, 2016, Pope Francis suddenly saw fit to dissolve the Academy’s membership and change its guiding statutes.
And that change wasn’t long in coming. Within a year, Maurizio Chiodi, professor of moral theology at the Theological Faculty of Northern Italy and a newly appointed member of the Academy for Life, led the way.
On December 14, 2017, at a conference sponsored by the Pontifical Gregorian University, Chiodi declared that “an artificial method for the regulation of births could be recognized as an act of responsibility that is carried out, not in order to radically reject the gift of a child, but because in those situations responsibility calls the couple and the family to other forms of welcome and hospitality.”
Note the definitions: “artificial” – doesn’t that mean “unnatural”? And “regulation”: doesn’t he really mean “prevention”? And the same goes for “responsibility”: he says it twice, in case you might have seen it as a fabrication the first time; and it’s all proven beyond a doubt by a passive conditional phrase that, on inspection, admits that such a “recognition” would take a lot of arm-and-mind-twisting to embrace, because it claims to create a truth ex nihilo.
As Sandro Magister reported, the conference had been organized by the university’s faculty of moral theology, directed by none other than the Argentine Jesuit Humberto Miguel Yáñez, a protege of then-Archbishop Bergoglio. And note the irony (one dare not call it perfidy): the conference was billed as a celebration of the Fiftieth Anniversary of Humanae Vitae (promulgated by Saint Paul VI on July 25th, 1968).
Unfortunately, Chiodi took this historic opportunity to mock the truths defended in that prophetic document.
By what authority? Chiodi cited Amoris Laetitia (“On Love in The Family”), the 2016 Encyclical of Pope Francis.
And that document, Vatican sources say, was ghostwritten, – by none other than Tucho Fernández.
And Tucho now serves as Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith – the position held by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger from 1981 until he was elected to the papacy in April 2005.
The revolt against the timeless teaching of the Church has now come full circle.
A Note on History
When Pope Francis cleansed the membership roster of Saint John Paul’s original Academy seven years ago, a number of those who were “members ad vitam” (“members for life”) were nonetheless not reappointed. They refused to allow that slight to deter them. They had made a lifelong commitment to promote the goals of the Academy and of Saint John Paul.
These scholars were compelled in conscience to fulfill that obligation, and they steadfastly decided to continue their life’s work. So, in 2017, they founded the new lay Academy, dedicating it to revealing the splendor of truth about life and family as taught by Pope Saint John Paul and every Supreme Pontiff before him.
They continue their work today, fully faithful to the authentic magisterium and perennial doctrine of the Catholic Church.
Meanwhile, however, while Pope Francis’ wrecking crew proceeded to turn truth on its head, we note that he kept the Academy’s original name.
Does his decision reflect his respect for the continuity of Church teaching, however sharply that teaching collides with the sinful way of the world?
Our Peronist pope is not a man of continuity. In fact, since his final profession as a Jesuit in 1973 he has breathed the noxious fumes of the Liberation Theology that has ravaged the Latin American Church and nearly asphyxiated it in the past half-century.
Pope Francis clearly understands ideology – both its dangers and its attractions.
In fact, he often invokes the term – usually referring to those Catholics loyal to his predecessors.
But students of leftist movements like Marxism and its Liberation Theology offshoot recognize another feature in his choice to keep the Academy’s original name: ideologues – that is, by definition, those advocating any gnostic revolt against reality – often hijack the beloved symbols of their enemies, empty them of their original content, and refill them with their perverted teaching: poisonous indeed, but often recognized only slowly, disguised as it is by the familiar and beloved label and language of old.
The most flagrant of such hijackings is Liberation Theology’s perversion of the Person of Christ that depicts Him as a political revolutionary.
Anatoly Vasilyevich Lunacharsky, Vladimir Lenin’s first Minister of Education, put it succinctly: “Christ was the first Communist!”
There you go. And that statement is no merely wistful fantasy; it represents a profound and powerful call for revolutionary action.
Introducing The New Paradigm
In 2017, Pope Francis named Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia as the Academy’s new Director. The scandals that followed — both in the Academy and beyond — have sadly not come as a surprise, and Tucho Fernández simply personifies them all.
Last August, in an interview with Steven Mosher, President of the Population Research Institute, Dr. Ward quoted Archbishop Paglia’s own description of the new path he has charted for the Academy:
“In his words,” said Dr. Thomas, “the role of the Academy is ‘to accept the invitation contained in paragraph 3 of the pope’s Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium,’ where he calls for ‘a broad and generous effort at a radical paradigm shift, or rather — dare I say — at a bold cultural revolution.’”
Wait a minute. Isn’t that somewhat extreme?
Not to worry. The Holy Father is quoting here an authoritative encyclical:
“All of this shows the urgent need for us to move forward in a bold cultural revolution.” (Laudato Si, No. 114).
Promulgated in 2015.
Yes, Pope Francis is quoting himself.
Archbishop Paglia, Ward continues, believes that Veritatis Gaudium calls for “a radical paradigm shift in theological reflection.… to render a service to the Magisterium by opening up a space for dialogue that makes research possible and encourages it. This is how we see the role of the Academy, which Pope Francis himself also wanted on the front line on delicate issues to be addressed through a transdisciplinary approach.”
On hearing this, Mosher, a researcher whose copious works recount the horrors of the Cultural Revolution of Chairman Mao, asks, “who are some of the others collaborating with Francis on the “radical paradigm shift” we have been talking about?”
Dr. Ward recounts how Cardinal McCarrick was so impressed in 2013 when “one influential Italian told him that Cardinal Bergoglio ‘could reform the Church. If we gave him five years, he could put us back on target… [he] could make the Church over again.”
There you go. “On target.” The revolution marches on, to the cheers of none other than “Uncle Ted” McCarrick.
The most accurate Italian translation of the “new paradigm” is “Senza Uscita.”
Dead End.
Tucho has to go.
