At some point, if you think you have insufficient input and are merely being used so someone else can claim moral or academic authority, and that this problem is not getting solved, you publicly resign. When that point comes... idk, but I'd think sometime before year 8 of practically no communication.
Exactly what I was thinking. If it's really this bad, they should resign in protest instead of lending their names to the "prestige" of the institution. It makes them look bad for continuing to be associated with it, and lends the Academy credibility that it certainly no longer deserves. It's been long enough that I think it's safe to say that it's a lost cause under current leadership.
Counterpoint: you wait out the leadership change, because resigning is a move you can only make once. You want to make it count.
In the meantime, you're doing other things that establish your reputation, and you aren't signing off on their garbage. When you have the chance, you kvetch about it a bit, and if enough of you get the bit in your mouth, you may be able to force an issue in a way that either effects change or lets you stage a newsworthy multiple-resignations incident.
One academic resigning from a think tank is just not something you are likely to hear about, or something to make your enemies tremble--just like almost all of us would be hard put to name even three members of this one (former or present).
The prestige does not flow from the average academic into the institution; it works the other way around. You use the institution's prestige to pursue your project and make it count, and you usually only quit doing that when it's hurting your project rather than helping. (And, interestingly, this report hints that there are significant murmurs among members that it may be doing that.)
A single resignation wouldn't register. Someone would need to organize a mass resignation of a significant proportion of the "academy". Although a better first step might be an open letter to the leadership calling for change to the Academy's processes. If that fails, then a large resignation would be in order.
I think these are all good points. The academics complaining about the Academy not organizing actual discussion, review, and agreement on publications, need to get together without the Academy's organization to discuss, review, and agree on publishing an open letter.
Seeing as they probably don't know each other particularly well, being rather far-flung, it is less surprising that they haven't done anything through 8 years of poor leadership. Someone would have to be willing and able to stand alone in a somewhat public fashion (at least within the academy) to have any hope of collecting a group that objects.
Wait out the leadership change for what? I can see waiting for the next Pope to fix everything, in 4-8 more years, unless the Academy becomes really damaging. Such as by defending abortion, euthanasia, contraception, in vitro...
This is a really important report— thank you, JD. It was certainly Pope Francis’s prerogative to change the scope of the academy’s work… whether or not that was prudent is a discussion for another day. However, I have really been confused and don’t understand what the purpose was in not having members pledge anymore to uphold Catholic doctrine regarding life. Because now: 1) how does this make it different from any other sociological think tank, and 2) it seems to create scandal and confusion. I certainly would never feel comfortable donating money directly to a group like this. However, they’re being funded directly by the Church…. what are we to make of that?
I will ask St Maximilian Kolbe, who as we might recall was starved and deprived of water as an attempted means of execution by an organization that is now synonymous in our language with cruelty and hatred, to pray for any members of this academy who are in need of his intercession.
If some of the members don't agree with the heretical positions put forward by this clown organization they should say so! Nothing prevents them from getting together outside the organizational structure of the Academy (Zoom exists, free texting apps are out there) and forming some sort of vocal resistance to the faith-destroying evils propagated by the inner party.
Great article. My observations lead me to believe that many small think tanks/foundations function essentially this way. Of course, they don't speak with the implicit authority of the Church.
One detail that I would have liked to see included: How is the PAL funded?
The perception that the Pontifical Academy for Life operates independently or in opposition to Pope Francis is incorrect. Pope Francis reformed the academy to align its focus with his vision of engaging with contemporary ethical issues through dialogue with scientific communities. This reform is part of a broader effort to integrate scientific insights with moral theology, reflecting Pope Francis's emphasis on a synodal and pastoral approach to theology[. Despite criticisms, these efforts aim to address modern challenges while maintaining the Church's core values, demonstrating a commitment to dialogue and cross-disciplinary exchange.
Hmmm...Not an intellectual,” a source close to the academy said, “but an ideologically driven man with managerial capacities". Reminds me in some ways of Bugnini, a man I am sure who was sincere but a little too facile with his "managerial capacities" in the service of the more radical wing of the Liturgical Movement.
At some point, if you think you have insufficient input and are merely being used so someone else can claim moral or academic authority, and that this problem is not getting solved, you publicly resign. When that point comes... idk, but I'd think sometime before year 8 of practically no communication.
Exactly what I was thinking. If it's really this bad, they should resign in protest instead of lending their names to the "prestige" of the institution. It makes them look bad for continuing to be associated with it, and lends the Academy credibility that it certainly no longer deserves. It's been long enough that I think it's safe to say that it's a lost cause under current leadership.
Counterpoint: you wait out the leadership change, because resigning is a move you can only make once. You want to make it count.
In the meantime, you're doing other things that establish your reputation, and you aren't signing off on their garbage. When you have the chance, you kvetch about it a bit, and if enough of you get the bit in your mouth, you may be able to force an issue in a way that either effects change or lets you stage a newsworthy multiple-resignations incident.
One academic resigning from a think tank is just not something you are likely to hear about, or something to make your enemies tremble--just like almost all of us would be hard put to name even three members of this one (former or present).
The prestige does not flow from the average academic into the institution; it works the other way around. You use the institution's prestige to pursue your project and make it count, and you usually only quit doing that when it's hurting your project rather than helping. (And, interestingly, this report hints that there are significant murmurs among members that it may be doing that.)
A single resignation wouldn't register. Someone would need to organize a mass resignation of a significant proportion of the "academy". Although a better first step might be an open letter to the leadership calling for change to the Academy's processes. If that fails, then a large resignation would be in order.
I think these are all good points. The academics complaining about the Academy not organizing actual discussion, review, and agreement on publications, need to get together without the Academy's organization to discuss, review, and agree on publishing an open letter.
Seeing as they probably don't know each other particularly well, being rather far-flung, it is less surprising that they haven't done anything through 8 years of poor leadership. Someone would have to be willing and able to stand alone in a somewhat public fashion (at least within the academy) to have any hope of collecting a group that objects.
Wait out the leadership change for what? I can see waiting for the next Pope to fix everything, in 4-8 more years, unless the Academy becomes really damaging. Such as by defending abortion, euthanasia, contraception, in vitro...
For what it's worth, I'm not saying it's my strategy, just one I understand for the reasons stated. Cheers.
For most of these individauls, it's an honorific title anyways. It's not their day job.
" with communications director Fabrizio Mastrofini taking an unusual and aggressive stance on social media against any critics of the academy."
-How many cliquey middle school girls has Mastrofini been hanging around with that makes him think that this is effective?
<<Ciucci, the author of several cookbooks, is “the leading man on Paglia’s team,” according to one source close to the academy.>>
I love these types of journalistic asides.
Wow that is incredible.
Let us hope and pray that the next Pope will clean up the hot mess this "Pontifical Academy" has become.
Does this mean Max is out of the hospital?
Yes, yesterday. TY, Jesus.
This is a really important report— thank you, JD. It was certainly Pope Francis’s prerogative to change the scope of the academy’s work… whether or not that was prudent is a discussion for another day. However, I have really been confused and don’t understand what the purpose was in not having members pledge anymore to uphold Catholic doctrine regarding life. Because now: 1) how does this make it different from any other sociological think tank, and 2) it seems to create scandal and confusion. I certainly would never feel comfortable donating money directly to a group like this. However, they’re being funded directly by the Church…. what are we to make of that?
I will ask St Maximilian Kolbe, who as we might recall was starved and deprived of water as an attempted means of execution by an organization that is now synonymous in our language with cruelty and hatred, to pray for any members of this academy who are in need of his intercession.
If some of the members don't agree with the heretical positions put forward by this clown organization they should say so! Nothing prevents them from getting together outside the organizational structure of the Academy (Zoom exists, free texting apps are out there) and forming some sort of vocal resistance to the faith-destroying evils propagated by the inner party.
Great article. My observations lead me to believe that many small think tanks/foundations function essentially this way. Of course, they don't speak with the implicit authority of the Church.
One detail that I would have liked to see included: How is the PAL funded?
I was interested in Fr Tad's take on the little lexicon.
The perception that the Pontifical Academy for Life operates independently or in opposition to Pope Francis is incorrect. Pope Francis reformed the academy to align its focus with his vision of engaging with contemporary ethical issues through dialogue with scientific communities. This reform is part of a broader effort to integrate scientific insights with moral theology, reflecting Pope Francis's emphasis on a synodal and pastoral approach to theology[. Despite criticisms, these efforts aim to address modern challenges while maintaining the Church's core values, demonstrating a commitment to dialogue and cross-disciplinary exchange.
This sounds like it was written in chatGPT
It's all so troubling. Will anything be left of John Paul's legacy to the Church and world when this Papacy comes to an end?
Hmmm...Not an intellectual,” a source close to the academy said, “but an ideologically driven man with managerial capacities". Reminds me in some ways of Bugnini, a man I am sure who was sincere but a little too facile with his "managerial capacities" in the service of the more radical wing of the Liturgical Movement.
"Managerial capacities" means a paper pushing bureaucrat with bandwidth. Not necessarily skills at managing.
The Vatican deep state strikes again! Lots for the next Pope to clean out when he assumes the throne of Peter.
The new statutes of the academy, promulgated by Pope Francis in 2016, state that ordinary members of the academy are chosen on the basis of "proven professional integrity, professional expertise and faithful service in the defence and promotion of the right to life of every human person" (https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/motu_proprio/documents/papa-francesco_20161018_statuto-accademia-vita.html) -- which makes the 2022 appointments of proponents of abortion all the more troubling (https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=56648).