The Vatican

Cardinal Semeraro explains how the Vatican examines miracles, martyrdom and heroic virtue, defending the rigour of the canonisation process against criticism that it has become too fast In a quiet office in Rome, far from the crowds that gather in St Peter’s Square below, the Church’s understanding of holiness is subjected to some of its most exacting tests. Here, within the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints, reputations are sifted and claims of miracles scrutinised with a care and precision that belie the recent perception of swift modern canonisations. The prefect in charge, Cardinal Marcello Semeraro, soft spoken and clearly at ease with the weight of his responsibilities, has spent years at the centre of this process. Though prefect only since 2020, he brings with him more than a decade as a member of the dicastery. The cardinal is keen to stress the deep historical roots of his work. The procedures stretch back centuries, shaped significantly by reforms following the Council of Trent and later refined under Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II. Cardinal Semeraro described the most recent reforms of the procedures as “in the very last phase”, explaining that there was a need to streamline a process “that had become very problematic, very complicated, very complex”. He presented this streamlining not as a lowering of standards but as a practical correction to a system that had grown excessively burdensome, while insisting that the core nature of the work remains unchanged: “a long procedure in which one goes in search of the truth”. Earlier centuries placed heavy emphasis on miracles, as well as on widespread popular devotion. Over time, however, the Church shifted its focus. Today, the decisive criterion is what the cardinal called “heroic virtue”, a life lived in a way that stands out, not as theatrical heroism, but as a sustained and exemplary fidelity to the Christian life. “‘Heroic’ can be misunderstood,” he noted. “It simply means something beyond the ordinary. Something worthy of imitation.” The cardinal explained that before the Council of Trent the evaluation of sanctity rested above all on “the abundance of miracles” and widespread popular recognition, but after Trent the focus moved decisively to “the presence of a Christian life verified through the virtues, the theological virtues and the cardinal virtues”. Even though the miracle requirement and the esteem of the people of God remain necessary, the real work of the dicastery now centres on verifying this heroic virtue, a life that is “outside the ordinary, that is, a bit more than the others, in such a way that it can be imitated”. One of the most common criticisms of the modern canonisation process is that it has become too fast. The relatively swift canonisations of figures such as Pope St John Paul II or of younger figures like Carlo Acutis have fuelled this perception. The cardinal rejects the idea that speed has replaced rigour. The five year waiting period after death – it used to be 50 years, as laid out by Urban VIII in the 17th century, but was reduced after the Second Vatican Council – is not, he insists, about haste but about preserving evidence. “If we wait too long, witnesses die and memory fades. The process depends on living testimony.” On the much criticised shortening of the waiting period, Cardinal Semeraro was emphatic: historically it was necessary that “50 years had passed from death to begin the process”, but today “to begin the process it is required that the person has been dead at least five years”. Far from being rushed, the cardinal insists, many causes take decades. And while the formal office of the “devil’s advocate”, a Vatican official formerly mandated to argue against a candidate’s cause, has been abolished, its function has not disappeared. Instead, it has been expanded. “Today,” he explained, “we have entire commissions of historians and theologians whose task is precisely to test, to challenge, to falsify.” If even a single serious doubt emerges, the process halts until it can be resolved. If heroic virtue forms one path to sainthood, martyrdom remains its most ancient and, in many ways, most revered form. “The first saints were martyrs,” the cardinal said. “And in a sense, all sanctity is a participation in martyrdom.” Yet even here, the Church proceeds cautiously. Martyrdom, in its strict sense, requires death inflicted out of hatred for the faith: odium fidei. But modern cases are often more complex. Take Óscar Romero, whose assassination in 1980 raised questions about whether he died for political or religious reasons. The cardinal acknowledged the difficulty: “Often the motivations are mixed. But if the Christian witness is essential to the act, then martyrdom can be recognised.” His Eminence insisted on the classical, strict understanding of martyrdom: “We use the word martyrdom in the strictest, classical sense, where life is taken for a motive of the faith or strictly linked to the faith, because he is a Christian.” He gave concrete examples, the Ulma family in Poland, killed for sheltering Jews, and the Sicilian judge Rosario Livatino, killed because his Christian integrity made him incorruptible, to illustrate that even when the immediate trigger is not an explicit demand to renounce the faith, the act must still be “linked to the faith”. Anything less does not qualify. At the same time, the Church has developed new categories. Under Pope Francis, the notion of the offering of life, where a person freely gives their life for others without being killed explicitly for the faith, has been formally recognised. It reflects a broader attempt to capture the realities of modern witness. One of the more delicate issues for the dicastery is the status of non Catholic martyrs. Figures such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer are widely regarded as witnesses to Christ, yet cannot be canonised in the Catholic Church. “The Church recognises holiness outside her visible boundaries,” the cardinal said carefully. “But canonisation is an act for her own faithful. It is not within her competence to declare saints for other communities.” Nevertheless, there have been gestures towards broader recognition. Initiatives begun during the Great Jubilee of 2000 and renewed under Pope Francis have commemorated “new martyrs” from across Christian traditions. It remains, however, an acknowledgment rather than a formal declaration. If martyrdom is one path to sainthood, miracles remain another essential requirement, particularly for beatification and canonisation outside martyrdom cases. Here, the dicastery’s methods are strikingly empirical. Claims must be supported by rigorous medical documentation and are examined by panels of specialists, often seven or more doctors, whose task is not to prove divine intervention but to exclude any natural explanation. “The doctors must say only this,” the cardinal explained: “that, according to current medical knowledge, there is no explanation.” Advances in science have, if anything, made the process more demanding. Conditions once considered incurable may now have treatments, raising the bar for what counts as miraculous. Cases are debated intensely; some discussions, he noted, can last hours. What happens when troubling information emerges about a candidate for sainthood? The answer, again, is caution. Every cause undergoes exhaustive historical scrutiny. If credible doubts arise, whether about moral conduct or factual claims, the process is suspended. “Not cancelled,” the cardinal emphasised, “but stopped until clarity is reached.” Even after canonisation, the Church does not reverse its decisions. But the cardinal insisted that the thoroughness of the process makes serious errors exceedingly unlikely. The conversation turned to politics and whether someone with controversial political views could be canonised. Here, the cardinal distinguishes between political positions and ideologies. While the former do not in themselves exclude a candidate, ideologies fundamentally opposed to Christianity pose a deeper problem. “The question is always the person,” he said. “Their life, their conversion, their witness.” When asked if his dicastery would ever canonise a fascist, for example, the cardinal shook his head. Cardinal Semeraro replied that such a cause “can be technically excluded from the canonisation process”. He explained that Nazism and Fascism are not ordinary political parties but “an ideology, not a party”. For Cardinal Semeraro, ideologies such as Nazism, Fascism and Communism “are now considered de facto anti Christian”. Therefore, belonging to an ideology fundamentally opposed to Christianity constitutes a genuine obstacle to the recognition of heroic virtue. Looking ahead, Cardinal Semeraro has a strong sense of the kind of men and women he would like to see canonised. “What we need today,” he said, “are not figures who simply comfort us, but figures who make people ask: why do they live like this?” With more than 1,500 causes under examination, including some dating from the 15th century, the cardinal will have plenty to choose from.

Cardinal Kevin Farrell, prefect of the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life, says baptisms of young children have fallen by 31.1 per cent and Catholic marriages by 48 per cent since 1991, warning of a weakening transmission of the faith within families Cardinal Kevin Farrell has warned of a sharp global decline in Catholic baptisms and marriages, pointing to figures showing a sustained weakening in the transmission of the faith within families over the past three decades. Speaking at a Vatican study seminar on marriage formation held in the Vatican Gardens on April 28, the prefect of the Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life cited data from the Annuarium Statisticum Ecclesiae 2021 indicating that between 1991 and 2021 the number of baptisms administered worldwide to children under the age of seven fell by 31.1 per cent, while Catholic marriages declined by 48 per cent. “The transmission of faith within families is weaker now than in the past,” Cardinal Farrell said. “According to the Annuarium Statisticum Ecclesiae 2021 , between 1991 and 2021, the number of baptisms administered worldwide to children under the age of seven declined by 31.1 per cent, and Catholic marriages by 48 per cent.” The cardinal added: “Faced with these figures, we must not lose heart; rather, we must remain fully aware of them so as to transform this situation into an opportunity for ecclesial renewal.” The remarks were delivered during a study day entitled The Sacrament of Marriage, Faith, and the Munus Docendi , which brought together representatives of the Roman Curia, seminary rectors, theologians and those involved in priestly formation. The gathering focused on how future priests are trained to teach and accompany families in a rapidly changing cultural environment. In a text published in L’Osservatore Romano , Cardinal Farrell said that “profound cultural transformations have redefined the processes of family formation”, noting that the bond between couples is “increasingly seen as an individual experiment, less and less as a definitive bond”. “Marriage is no longer considered necessary for the formation of a family alliance,” he said, adding that cohabitation has become “the choice, now considered almost obligatory by many, to test the couple’s stability with a view, though not always, to a stronger future bond”. He said these developments pose “urgent” challenges for the Church, particularly in youth and family ministry, and pointed to reports from bishops during their ad limina visits describing “enormous difficulties in reaching the families of baptised faithful who no longer come to the Church”. The cardinal asked how the Church might make its teaching mission more effective so that “new generations of priests can raise children and young people in the faith, cultivate in them the Christian vocation of marriage, and accompany families in the value-based challenges of our time”. The seminar also heard from Fr Andrea Bozzolo, rector of the Pontifical Salesian University, who emphasised the need for “pastoral guidance” that combines biblical and theological formation with an understanding of contemporary cultural realities and “listening to concrete family experiences”, with particular attention to “the emotional and sexual education of adolescents and young people”. Fr Fabio Rosini, a biblical scholar and professor of homiletics and pastoral theology, warned against a model of priestly formation that remains detached from lived experience. “If we continue to train priests to be producers of a penultimate life, it won’t be of much use to sacramentally married couples, and it won’t matter what they have to say,” he said. “We run the risk of continuing to sell the world to the world.” He added that “after centuries of parenthetical language, after the conciliar revival of kerygmatic language, given the need to proceed with the pedagogy that leads to Baptism, the time has come to return to didactic-instructive language”. Cardinal Farrell said that while many seminaries and pontifical universities provide solid theological teaching on the sacrament of marriage, this “risks remaining theoretical” if it is not connected to the realities of family life and the cultural conditions in which people live. “This makes it difficult for many pastors to effectively engage with the world of young people and families as it presents itself today,” he said, referring to “families marked by processes of de-Christianisation, young people disinterested in marriage, or coming from fragile and discontinuous family situations”. He added that requests for Church weddings often “do not reflect a mature faith, nor an awareness of the ecclesial and sacramental significance of what is being requested”, and that in some cases “even a trace of predisposition to faith is lacking”. The cardinal said this helps explain “the high number of couples in crisis who choose to separate, unable to find the grace to save their marriage in the sacrament”. “At the pastoral level, it cannot be reduced to the simple transmission to the laity, in didactic and theoretical form, of what the Church teaches and requires regarding marriage,” he said. “Rather, it requires the ability to accompany those intending to marry on a path of experiential maturation, preparing them to welcome the grace of Christ, enabling them to live a Christian life.” Quoting the Pope, the cardinal said: “In the family, faith is transmitted together with life, from generation to generation,” and added that “since families struggle to transmit the faith and could be tempted to shirk this task, we must try to stand alongside them without replacing them”. He said the aim of the current reflection is to promote a form of priestly formation “more closely aligned with pastoral practice and capable of generating new Christian families in the faith”. The study day concluded with a call for continued discernment on how best to proclaim, protect and accompany the vocation to marriage in contemporary society, with an emphasis on forming “teachers of the faith and authentic spiritual fathers to foster Christian families”.

Pope Leo received Cardinal Ernest Simoni in a private Vatican audience on April 27, marking their second meeting since Easter Sunday. The Albanian cardinal, once sentenced to death under communism, presented a relic the Albanian martyrs Pope Leo received Cardinal Ernest Simoni in a private audience at the Vatican on April 27, less than a month after their appearance together on Easter Sunday. The audience took place in the Hall of Popes and included around 40 members of the cardinal’s family. It marked the second notable encounter between the two men in recent weeks, following the Easter Sunday Urbi et Orbi blessing on April 5, when Cardinal Simoni stood alongside the cardinal protodeacon during the papal appearance from the central loggia of St Peter’s Basilica. Speaking afterwards to Vatican Media, Cardinal Simoni described the meeting in direct and emphatic terms. “All joy, all hope,” he said, describing the atmosphere of the encounter. He added: “It was an atmosphere of all joy, all hope, gazing upon the face of the Holy Father, which represents the face of Jesus, to proclaim to all men the news of Heaven, of peace, of brotherhood and of love for all the peoples of the world.” “Let us proclaim together for all the peoples of the world the peace that comes from Heaven,” Cardinal Simoni said. At the conclusion of the audience, Cardinal Simoni presented Pope Leo with a gift connected to the history of Catholic persecution in Albania. “Coming to Italy from Albania, my thoughts are with the martyrs,” he said, before offering “the cross and a relic of the Albanian martyrs who gave their lives for fidelity, for the love of Jesus, for the salvation of the Albanian people, to see all men smile upon Heaven”. A priest of the Archdiocese of Shkodra-Pult, he marked the 70th anniversary of his ordination earlier this month, on April 7, a milestone reached after a lifetime marked by persecution under Albania’s communist regime. Arrested on Christmas Eve 1963 for celebrating a Mass deemed illegal by the authorities, he was initially sentenced to death before the penalty was commuted to 25 years of forced labour. Released in 1981, he remained under suspicion and was still regarded by the regime as an “enemy of the people” until the collapse of communism in 1990 allowed him to resume public ministry. His testimony later came to wider attention during the papal visit to Albania in 2014, when Pope Francis listened to his account and referred to him as a “living martyr”. Two years later, he was created a cardinal in recognition of that witness. Despite his age, Cardinal Simoni has remained active in maintaining links with communities attached to the Traditional Latin Mass. He is a defender of the older liturgical form and has longstanding associations with traditionalist institutes, including regular visits to the International Seminary of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest at Gricigliano, near Florence. He has been present there for major liturgical celebrations, including the Feast of St Joseph, and has spent periods such as Holy Week with the community in recent years. During a Pontifical Latin Mass for the Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage celebrated by Cardinal Raymond Burke in St Peter’s Basilica on October 25, 2025, Cardinal Simoni recited the prayer to St Michael the Archangel, describing it as a reminder that “the Devil exists, and the Church continues to fight”. The 2025 gathering represented a significant relaxation of restrictions placed on the Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage. Following Traditionis Custodes , it was commonly understood that no prelates were permitted to celebrate Holy Mass in the Traditional rite for the 2021 and 2022 pilgrimages. In 2023 and 2024, the Traditional Latin Mass was prohibited entirely in St Peter’s Basilica for the pilgrimage. Instead, pilgrims had to content themselves with Eucharistic Benediction and the office of Sext at St Peter’s.

Pope Leo has received Anglican leader Sarah Mullally at the Apostolic Palace, where the two prayed together and renewed calls for Christian unity despite continuing doctrinal divisions between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion Pope Leo received the head of the Anglican Communion, Sarah Mullally, in an audience on Monday at the Apostolic Palace, where the two prayed together in the Urban VIII Chapel during the Easter season. Welcoming the head of the Anglican Communion and her delegation, the Pope recalled the meeting between Pope Paul VI and Michael Ramsey sixty years ago, describing it as a moment that continues to shape relations between the two communions. His Holiness noted that the Archbishops of Canterbury and the Bishops of Rome have continued to meet and pray together since that encounter, adding: “I am pleased that today we continue this tradition.” The Pope also referred to the work of the Anglican Centre in Rome, established in the same period, and greeted its director, Bishop Anthony Ball, who represents the Archbishop of Canterbury to the Holy See. Speaking during Eastertide, Pope Leo repeated the greeting of the risen Christ, saying: “Peace be with you.” He told those present that this greeting “invites us not only to accept the Lord’s gift of peace, but also to be messengers of his peace,” adding: “I have often said that the peace of the risen Lord is ‘unarmed’. This is because he has always responded to violence and aggression unarmed, inviting us to do the same.” The Pope said that divisions between Christians affect their witness, stating: “While our suffering world is in deep need of Christ’s peace, divisions among Christians weaken our ability to be effective bearers of that peace.” His Holiness continued: “If we want the world to take our preaching to heart, therefore, we must be constant in our prayers and in our efforts to remove any stumbling blocks that hinder the proclamation of the Gospel.” Referring to the theological dialogue established following the 1966 meeting between Paul VI and Ramsey, the Pope recalled that both sides had committed themselves to seeking “the restoration of full communion in faith and sacramental life”. His Holiness said: “Certainly, this ecumenical journey has been complex. While much progress has been made on historically divisive issues, new problems have arisen in recent decades, making the path to full communion more difficult to discern.” The Pope added that the Anglican Communion is currently facing similar questions, saying: “I know that the Anglican Communion is also grappling with many of the same issues at present.” He added: “We must not allow these constant challenges to prevent us from seising every opportunity we can to proclaim Christ together to the world.” The Pope cited remarks made by Pope Francis to Anglican leaders in 2024, quoting: “It would be a scandal if, because of divisions, we failed to fulfil our common vocation to make Christ known.” His Holiness added: “For my part, I would add that it would also be a scandal if we did not continue to work to overcome our differences, however insurmountable they may seem.” Concluding the audience, Pope Leo thanked Mullally for her visit and said: “As we continue to walk together in friendship and dialogue, let us pray that the Holy Spirit … will guide our steps as, in prayer and humility, we seek that unity which is God’s will for all his disciples.” He added: “God bless you and your family.” The audience granted by Pope Leo to the head of the Anglican Communion, Sarah Mullally, is a tableau in contemporary ecumenical relations of courteous language, shared prayer and an appeal to unity set against unresolved doctrinal divisions. However, what it shows is the enduring byproduct of post-conciliar ecumenical practice and the Catholic Church’s dogmatic teaching on Holy Orders, authority and the nature of unity itself. While the meeting illustrates the continuation of a diplomatic and theological framework established in the wake of the Second Vatican Council, one which seeks visible fraternity with other Christian communities, it stops short of resolving the fundamental questions that divide them. It is a pattern that has endured for decades and which remains largely unchanged under the present pontificate. The language employed by Pope Leo, emphasising “unarmed” peace, shared witness and perseverance despite difficulty, fits squarely within what he has inherited. The optimism since 1966 for Anglicans was always constrained by the judgement articulated in Apostolicae Curae (1896), in which Pope Leo XIII declared Anglican orders “absolutely null and utterly void”. That teaching has never been rescinded, and it remains a decisive factor in any assessment of such encounters. Thus, the main question is what these meetings are intended to achieve. If full sacramental unity is not presently attainable, and if the doctrinal obstacles are, in some respects, widening rather than narrowing, then the purpose of continued high-level engagement requires clarification. Pope Leo’s own remarks acknowledged that “new problems have arisen in recent decades, making the path to full communion more difficult to discern”. This is a measured formulation; it points to developments within the Anglican Communion, above all the ordination of women and disputes over marriage and moral teaching, which have complicated, and in the eyes of some rendered obsolete, the earlier trajectory of dialogue. The Pope nevertheless insisted that such challenges should not prevent common witness. “We must not allow these constant challenges to prevent us from seising every opportunity we can to proclaim Christ together to the world,” he said. Yet it is precisely here that unease is expressed, as the use of the Urban VIII Chapel for joint prayer, while consistent with contemporary practice, would once have been approached with far greater caution, lest it give rise to confusion about the nature of ecclesial unity. Earlier magisterial teaching, notably that of Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos (1928), warned against forms of “pan-Christian” activity that might obscure the claim of the Catholic Church to be the one true Church. There is a risk that gestures intended as signs of fraternity may be interpreted as implying a unity that does not in fact exist. There are also more practical implications. The existence of the Personal Ordinariates, established to receive former Anglicans into full communion while preserving elements of their patrimony, rests on the premise that unity ultimately requires incorporation into the Catholic Church. Encounters such as this do not alter that structure, but they do raise questions about how it is to be understood within a broader ecumenical strategy that prioritises ongoing relationship over definitive resolution.

Archbishop Arrieta speaks to AdVaticanum on his retirement, his first impressions of Pope Leo XIV, the Order of Malta, and the ongoing canonical tensions surrounding the SSPX Archbishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru, Secretary of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts, has reached the age of 75, the mandatory retirement age for a bishop, on April 10. To mark the milestone, the Spanish canonist sat down with AdVaticanum to reflect on nearly two decades of service as secretary across three pontificates, his plans for retirement, and the evolving work of the dicastery. He shared his impressions of Pope Leo XIV as he approaches the anniversary of his election, offered a candid assessment of the irregular situation of the Society of St Pius X, and evaluated the 2021 reform of Book VI of the Code of Canon Law, as well as addressing current canonical questions regarding the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, liturgical unity under Traditionis Custodes, and the dubia from priests of the Diocese of Charlotte. Born on April 10, 1951 in Vitoria, Spain, Archbishop Arrieta was ordained a priest of Opus Dei in 1977. A distinguished academic and jurist, he helped establish the faculty of canon law at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome, where he has taught for many years. Appointed Secretary of the then Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, he was ordained a titular bishop in 2008. AdVaticanum: Your Excellency, having just turned 75 and therefore being at the point of submitting your resignation in accordance with canon 401 §1, many in the Church are curious about the next chapter for a canonist of your stature who has served the Dicastery for nearly two decades. After such an intense period of service in the Roman Curia, what would you most like to do in retirement? Archbishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru: We will have to take things one step at a time, always trusting in divine providence. As for me, I have always been involved in the field of canon law, both in the Roman Curia and at the university. I plan to continue living in Rome, also because I am a member of various commissions and working groups within the Roman Curia. Furthermore, if possible, I intend to spend more time in the academic environment, continuing my studies and publications on canon law. I am still teaching courses on canon law and Vatican law, both at the Faculty of Canon Law of the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross and at the Faculty of St Pius X in Venice: two institutions I have seen come into being and to which I feel particularly attached. God willing, in the near future I will be able to carry out these teaching duties with greater peace of mind and collaborate with both faculties. Furthermore, I hope to be able to devote myself a little more to pastoral work, which I have missed for many years. AV: As Secretary since your appointment in 2007, spanning the final years of St John Paul II’s pontificate, the entire Benedict XVI era, the full Francis pontificate, and now the early months under Pope Leo XIV, you have had a uniquely continuous vantage point on the work of what was then the Pontifical Council and is now the Dicastery for Legislative Texts. In your view, what are the most significant shifts you have witnessed in the dicastery’s day to day functioning? +JA: In a way, the major changes the dicastery has undergone in recent years are also reflected in the changes to its name over the years. At the beginning of John Paul II’s pontificate, the dicastery was called the “Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law”; it was later renamed the “Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts”, because, starting in 1990, it also had to deal with the Eastern Code of Canon Law in addition to that of the Latin Church. Subsequently, it was renamed more generally the “Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts”, since the role of “interpreting” universal laws had become rather secondary, and the dicastery devoted itself more to revising the universal norms of the Church or to offering consultative opinions on normative documents of the Holy See or of the Episcopal Conferences. Now, however, the name is “Dicastery for Legislative Texts”, and while retaining all the other functions it had in the past, most of its time is devoted to assisting bishops and superiors in the application of canon law in light of new circumstances arising throughout the world. This is very interesting work, because canon law is a body of law in force throughout the world and is confronted with the legal systems of every country in the world, as well as with vastly different cultures and sensibilities. AV: Having served under several Popes, what are your first impressions of working with Pope Leo XIV? +JA: In addition to his personal qualities, his profound spirituality, practical mind and missionary heart, the Pope has a particular fondness for institutional and orderly governance. I believe this stems from his experience leading a religious institute with a long standing tradition within the Church and a widespread presence throughout the world. Furthermore, I believe that, with regard to his style of governance and, in particular, his attitude towards justice and the law, we must appreciate the fact that the Pope received a university education as a canonist and, above all, that he did not limit himself to studying canon law, but had to teach it as a professor of canon law in Peru and, for some time, also practised it as an ecclesiastical judge in the courts. He therefore possesses a very concrete and comprehensive experience of the law that not everyone has, ranging from the purely theoretical to the didactic, and to the practical exercise and application of the law in the service of justice. AV: The SSPX continues to occupy a unique and, for many, pastorally sensitive place in the Church, with the announcement of the July 1 episcopal consecrations. With the recent proposal from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith for a structured theological dialogue aimed at identifying “minimum requirements” for full communion and a possible canonical status, contingent on suspending the announced July 2026 episcopal ordinations without papal mandate, what is your canonical assessment of the current irregular situation of the Society? +JA: For me, this is a very painful matter, especially because during Pope Benedict’s time I had the opportunity to familiarise myself with their situation and to meet with some of their superiors on several occasions. They feel the need for ministers to celebrate certain sacraments, but I believe it was a grave mistake to have presented this matter as an imposition on the Holy See, announcing directly, as if it were a fait accompli, that they intended to carry out episcopal ordinations. This is the attitude of those who, from the outset, consider themselves outside the Church, a stance that contradicts their own awareness that they do not possess ecclesiastical jurisdiction. In fact, when they had to impose disciplinary sanctions for certain conduct by some of their priests, they turned to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which granted them the authority to do so. Moreover, Pope Francis had directly granted their priests the authority to hear confessions worldwide and issued instructions so that diocesan bishops could grant them the authority to assist at weddings, thereby ensuring that the marriages would not be invalid for the Catholic Church due to a lack of canonical form. Now all of this risks being compromised, which is a heavy responsibility for those who decide not to obey the Pope’s instructions. AV: Your Excellency, you personally spearheaded much of the work on the 2021 revision of Book VI of the Code (Pascite gregem Dei), which updated sanctions to better address contemporary situations such as clerical abuse, the attempted ordination of women, and offences against the sacraments. With several years of application now behind us, how do you evaluate the effectiveness of these changes in practice? +JA: The dicastery’s reform of Book VI of the Code has been one of the primary tasks since the pontificate of Pope Benedict, who, drawing on his many years of experience as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was well aware of the practical limitations of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which, in fact, was rarely enforced. It was the future Pope Benedict who laid the groundwork for effectively combating child abuse beginning with the promulgation of the Curia’s 1988 law, the apostolic constitution Pastor Bonus. He was the one who promoted, in the final years of John Paul II’s pontificate, the new penal regulations against abuse, assuming jurisdiction over the matter within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which he himself presided over, because the local episcopate was not managing it effectively. However, the reform of canon penal law required more in depth work, because it was necessary to overcome the prejudices and naivety of the immediate post conciliar period, which had in fact influenced the drafting of the penal norms promulgated in the 1983 Code. Now the principle of criminal legality has been explicitly restored, along with the duty of the ecclesiastical authority to act, without thereby losing the necessary humanity that the penal law of the Catholic Church necessarily entails. VA: The reforms of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta initiated under Pope Francis, particularly the appointment of a special delegate, the drafting of a new constitutional charter, and the emphasis on the Order’s religious character, have raised interesting canonical questions about the relationship between a sovereign subject of international law and the Holy See. Some observers have described it as the Vatican effectively “regulating another country”. Canonically speaking, how do you understand the Holy See’s authority over the Order in light of its dual nature as both a lay religious institute and a sovereign entity? +JA: I have little information on this subject, apart from some theoretical reading and study: I am unfamiliar with the practical realities and concrete needs, so I cannot offer an opinion. I have always believed that, in Church law, concrete situations cannot be resolved with “off the shelf” solutions, but must be tailored to fit, like a suit. Since the Church is a spiritual reality, in which it is the Holy Spirit who moves the initiatives of Christians, “copy and paste” or cookie cutter solutions are of little use; therefore, it is necessary to go through an evaluation by the authority that gives the appropriate legal form in accordance with the flexibility inherent in Church law. With that in mind, it has always seemed to me that, from a legal standpoint, the solution under canon law regarding the institution you mention should have begun with the recognition of its international legal personality and, within the framework of that formal recognition, resolved the religious issues and the remaining matters of various kinds. More specifically, since this is an entity that many countries recognise as sovereign, I believe greater consideration should have been given to the instrument of a concordat: a concordat between the Holy See and the Order, similar to those signed with many countries, would have provided a formal framework consistent with how it is actually perceived in the international arena, and within that framework, the various spiritual and charitable issues raised by this important entity could have been resolved with realism and practicality, etc. AV: A question frequently raised by faithful Catholics attached to the Vetus Ordo concerns how recent liturgical norms, such as those in Traditionis Custodes and its dubia, are to be reconciled with the broader canonical framework for divine worship and the rights of the faithful. From your perspective, how does one provide a clear and authoritative interpretation that safeguards both the unity of the Roman Rite and the legitimate spiritual needs of the faithful who find deeper nourishment in the earlier form? +JA: It seems to me that the Holy Father is fully aware of all these experiences and that he seeks to address them in the best possible way by appealing to everyone’s sense of unity and sensitivity, so that we may coexist with expressions of diversity that do not undermine unity and respect for authority. I believe that promoting unity is one of the central themes we find in the Pope’s words throughout these months of his pontificate. It is not permissible, however, to use the banner of the liturgy to shatter unity or the reverence due to legitimate ecclesiastical authority. Balance is needed. It is important to move forward while respecting the rights of the Christian faithful, and at the same time, we must obey and share in the spirit of unity. AV: Your Excellency, on January 5, 2026, thirty one priests of the Diocese of Charlotte, roughly one quarter of the active clergy and two thirds of them pastors, submitted a formal dubia to this dicastery seeking clarification on whether Bishop Martin’s practices, which explicitly permitted or even favoured by universal liturgical law, such as the use of altar rails, kneelers and prie dieux for the reception of Holy Communion, as announced in the bishop’s pastoral letter of December 17, 2025. The dubia raise fundamental questions about the limits of a diocesan bishop’s liturgical authority in relation to the rights of the faithful and the stability of universal norms. As the dicastery’s Secretary responsible for the authentic interpretation of ecclesiastical law, what is your canonical assessment of the core issues presented in this dubia? +JA: For several years now, our dicastery has been publishing on its website the various opinions and consultations we are asked to provide, omitting, of course, any personal references, whenever we believe they may be of general use to the Church. For us, it is also a way to engage with the legal world and with new situations arising in various parts of the world, seeking to stimulate studies and in depth analysis of specific aspects of canon law. Regarding individual cases, however, as is logical, we are bound to maintain absolute confidentiality, also out of respect for the individuals involved. AV: Thank you very much for your time, Your Excellency, and for your many years of service to the Church.

Pope Leo has reaffirmed that the Holy See does not approve the blessing of same sex couples, as Cardinal Marx advances new pastoral provisions in Munich. Pope Leo has reaffirmed that the Holy See does not approve the blessing of same sex couples, in remarks delivered to journalists on the return flight to Rome on April 23 following his recent apostolic journey to Africa. The Pope addressed the issue directly when asked about the divergence with developments in Germany after Cardinal Reinhard Marx confirmed new pastoral provisions permitting such blessings in his archdiocese. He cautioned against reducing ecclesial doctrinal questions to a single moral issue, stating: “First of all, I think it’s very important to understand that the unity or division of the Church should not revolve around sexual matters.” He added that “there are much greater, more important issues, such as justice, equality, freedom of men and women, freedom of religion”. Turning to the specific question, the Pope said: “The Holy See has made it clear that we do not agree with the formalised blessing of couples, in this case, homosexual couples … or couples in irregular situations, beyond what was specifically … allowed for by Pope Francis in saying all people receive blessings.” His Holiness emphasised that blessings given at the end of Mass or major liturgical celebrations are “for all people”, adding that Pope Francis’s phrase “Tutti, tutti, tutti” reflects that universal invitation. He warned that “to go beyond that today … can cause more disunity than unity”. The intervention follows confirmation earlier in the week, reported by AdVaticanum, that the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising will implement the guidelines Segen gibt der Liebe Kraft (“Blessing Gives Love Strength”) as a foundation for pastoral practice. The text, adopted by the German Bishops’ Conference and the Central Committee of German Catholics, is now to be applied across the archdiocese. In a letter to clergy and pastoral staff, Cardinal Marx wrote: “To all couples who love each other and seek a blessing from the Church for their partnership, I wish that they may feel God’s grace in this blessing.” The directive states that “no couple should be turned away” if they request such a blessing, and establishes that access is not to depend on the personal position of individual priests. The archdiocese has also announced that training sessions will begin in June to prepare clergy and lay pastoral workers to carry out the ceremonies. Those unwilling to perform the blessings themselves are expected to refer couples to another minister. Cardinal Marx acknowledged likely resistance, asking that the “theological meaning” of the practice be explained to those who “still struggle with this blessing”. The guidelines insist that such blessings are not equivalent to marriage, while stating that this distinction should not result in exclusion. “This does not mean that the blessing of a non sacramental union … pushes the couple to the margins of the community and the Church,” the text says, adding: “Couples should be welcomed in the heart of the community. Therefore, the Church asks God to bless and grant good things to these couples.” The developments in Munich come within the increasingly differing trajectory of the German synodal way. The Holy See has intervened on several occasions, including a 2021 declaration from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stating that the Church “does not have, and cannot have, the power to bless unions of persons of the same sex”.