Paglia Prioritizes Political Pragmatism Over Prophetic Witness
National Catholic Register, 26 April 2023
As has been the case before, the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life often begins with the political situation and then sees where the Gospel and the Catholic Tradition can fit.
The statement from the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL) should have been a dog-bites-man story, hardly worth issuing. Yet there it was, affirming that its president, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia “reiterates his ‘No’ towards euthanasia and assisted suicide, in full adherence to the magisterium.”
In recent years, that the PAL president fully adheres to the magisterium has become, surprisingly, something of a man-bites-dog story. Why that should be is worth noting and speaks to the general environment in Rome.
The PAL was founded by Pope St. John Paul II to advance the Church’s teaching and witness to the sanctity of human life by drawing on the best scholarship from a variety of disciplines. Thus, when Archbishop Paglia said last w that a potential Italian law removing criminal penalties for euthanasia and assisted suicide would be “feasible” and that “legal mediation may be the greatest common good concretely possible under the conditions we find ourselves in,” it struck many as contrary not only to Catholic teaching but the purpose of the PAL.
There was quite a fierce reaction from many Catholic and pro-life circles, especially given the archbishop’s history. He is one of the curious characters that has come to great prominence in the pontificate of Pope Francis.
The details of Archbishop Paglia’s original speech and the subsequent PAL clarification are now well known. This controversy echoed an earlier one, when he called Italy’s abortion law a “pillar” of society. That, too, brought a clarification from PAL, explaining that Archbishop Paglia was simply noting a sociopolitical fact, not endorsing the abortion license itself. His penchant for such statements prompted one Catholic news site to headline its story about this most recent one: “What did Archbishop Paglia say this time?”
Why does Archbishop Paglia speak in a way that appears to be at odds with the magisterium on life issues, especially given that St. John Paul II was exceptionally clear on abortion and euthanasia in his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae?
The answer lies in his starting point. Archbishop Paglia begins with the political situation and then sees where the Gospel and the Catholic Tradition can fit. That approach is not without value, as, often, bishops facing a hostile political environment have to make such calculations. But Archbishop Paglia is not a diocesan bishop having to navigate a delicate practical situation; he is head of an academy that is charged with bringing clarity and light to the Church’s teaching.
In both the latest euthanasia row and previously regarding abortion, the archbishop has taken as his starting point the pragmatism demanded by politics, rather than a prophetic witness. Sometimes political leaders find themselves in complex, even confusing situations — but Archbishop Paglia is not a politician. Yet he managed, by taking his lead from political calculations, to get terribly confused.
In his recent comments on euthanasia, Archbishop Paglia spoke of development in the Church’s teaching on the death penalty. Pope Francis amended the Catechism of the Catholic Church to declare it “inadmissible.” The Holy Father — like John Paul before him — would have seen the teaching on the death penalty and on euthanasia as part of the same principle regarding the sanctity of life.
However, Archbishop Paglia took a different tack, suggesting that if the teaching on the death penalty could develop toward its “inadmissibility” then perhaps the teaching on euthanasia could develop toward its “feasibility.”
From the point of view of Catholic moral teaching, that is an odd and incorrect comparison to make.
From a political point of view, though, it makes sense: The political consensus is against the death penalty in Italy, and Catholic teaching affirms that; so if the political consensus in Italy permits abortion and may favor euthanasia, then it might be feasible for Catholic teaching to accommodate that.
It is the priority of pragmatism over prophetic teaching.
Continue reading at the National Catholic Register.