The Vatican’s Pro-Life Body Has Lost Its Way

The Catholic Church’s prohibition on the use of contraception is clear and unchanging, yet the tragic demise of the Vatican academy tasked with examining such matters is so great that its president remains unable to say whether he agrees with Church teaching or not.  

In a world heavily permeated by sexual proclivity and the complete degradation of morals and ethics relating to the sanctity of life, the clear guiding hand of the Church is sorely needed. Her teachings on issues such as abortion, euthanasia, and sexuality are widely unpopular but increasingly serve as the last bastion in the defense of life. 

Sadly, in recent years, the very body tasked by the Vatican with being the hub of academic research in this field has disastrously lost its way. 

The Pontifical Academy for Life used to be a center of scholarly research, populated by some of the leading minds united in the fight against abortion, euthanasia, and the particular attacks on life most prominent at the time. For the troubled Catholic doctor or catechist who found himself embroiled in fielding questions on the sanctity of life, the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAV) was the place to turn to with confidence, knowing that the work of the academicians was going to be a reliable resource.  

Established by Pope John Paul II in 1994 with the motu proprio Vitae Mysterium, the PAV had been at the forefront of the Vatican’s bioethical and pro-life activities for many years. But under Pope Francis it came under notable alterations.  

In 2016, the Argentine pope reworked the Academy’s statutes and removed the required oath, intended for medical members of the Academy, by which they expressly promised to adhere to Catholic teaching on the sacrality of life and not to perform “destructive research on the embryo or fetus, elective abortion, or euthanasia.” The following year, he gutted the body of its members and admitted a vast swathe of individuals whose work was often antithetical to the original purpose of the Academy.  Alongside this, he also gutted the Academy’s sister office, the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. 

Veteran Vaticanist Sandro Magister wrote at the time that among the excluded members “are a few scholars of great authoritativeness, who however have distinguished themselves in publicly criticizing the new moral and practical paradigms that have entered into vogue with the pontificate of Francis.” The new roster of academicians, opined Magister, was “indicative of a change of direction.” 

Francis also did away with life membership in favor of five-year terms, which some critics argued would make the Academy just another Roman Curial office rather than a pro-life think tank faithful to its original cause.  

On the face of things, such changes might not appear so drastic. Yet, in a short space of time, they served to completely overhaul the Academy’s reputation as the leading Vatican body on pro-life issues, especially as new members started advocating against Catholic moral teaching on contraception, abortion, and euthanasia.  

Take, for instance, the high-profile case of the economist Mariana Mazzucato, appointed by Pope Francis to the PAV in late 2022, despite being in favor of abortion. Such a move would have been unthinkable prior to Francis’ overhauling of the Academy, yet Mazzucato is by no means alone in being a pro-abortion member of the Academy for Life. It is not for nothing that even among some Vatican officials the PAV is given the nickname “Academy of death.” 

Nor, it seems, is there any real sense of shame amongst the pro-abortion members of the PAV. To my knowledge, I remain the only Vatican journalist to confront Mazzucato about her membership of the PAV, to which she responded by calling it “sad” that her record on the issue was questioned at an Academy event. 

The PAV is currently led by Archbishop Renzo Pegoraro, who assumed the role of president in May last year after long-term president Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia retired due to age. It was under Paglia’s influence that the drastic transformation of the Academy’s nature took place since, in him, Pope Francis found a key ally.  

During his tenure, the PAV published a controversial work which argued for the Church to accept contraception and artificial insemination as morally acceptable. Paglia himself attested in a 2022 interview that he “believe(d) the day will come” when Pope Francis or his successor would publish a text on morality which would be in line with the PAV’s controversial document. He later denied that he made such comments when I questioned him about the remarks in February 2024. The archbishop’s record also includes a similar demonstration of becoming a moral contortionist as he—to widespread condemnation—expressed support for euthanasia, although stating he himself would not practice it.  

But Paglia is just one example among many in the sad decline of the once-great Academy. The offices which had seen medical experts and theologians argue passionately for the Church’s teaching on the sanctity of life at every stage became home to theologians constantly seeking new ways in which to offer approval to practices the Church cannot condone. All this is framed in the language of renovation, as the new intake of officials argued that moral teachings require “continued reflection.” 

This same spirit continues to this day. New statutes for the Academy, which were ratified by Pope Leo XIV in recent weeks, did nothing to change the issues and simply added a new category of supporters to the PAV. 

Archbishop Pegoraro has taken the helm of the Academy after serving as Paglia’s right-hand man for many years, thus ensuring a natural continuity in the PAV’s style and morality. Pegoraro himself declared during a 2022 Wall Street Journal interview—in direct opposition to Catholic teaching—that contraception could be permitted in certain cases, including for the “preservation of a couple’s sex life.” 

The archbishop remained elusively quiet on this point when repeatedly questioned about it last year.  

But recently, unable to physically elude my questioning during a Vatican event, Pegoraro sought to deflect responsibility for his comments and the Academy’s role in commenting on bioethics. 

Interviewed by this correspondent about his 2022 comments supporting contraception, Pegaroro began by saying it was a question for the Dicastery for the Family. When pushed on the matter, the archbishop resorted to the phrase “responsible procreation,” which—under Pope Francis and the revolutionized PAV—has increasingly come to mean limiting children, including by methods of contraception. Once again, he attested that any question about his support for contraception was a matter which should be directed to the Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life.  

This is the current state of the Vatican’s leading bioethical office, in which its president remains unable to say whether he agrees with Church teaching on the sanctity of life—an element which underlies much of Catholic morality.  

The PAV theologians are too verbose and wary to deliver a pithy quote in which they defend abortion or contraception as being always justifiable and thus avoid easily condemning themselves as heretical. Instead, the moral revolution has been conducted by using relativistic terms, questioning every teaching without reserve and prioritizing the role of personal thought over unchangeable truths and teachings.  

Pope John Paul II declared in 1988 that the Church’s teaching on contraception “belongs to the permanent patrimony of the Church’s moral doctrine,” yet, for the PAV, this means nothing. Firm truth is not a concept which they acknowledge when it comes to the realms of morality and bioethics.  

Instead, the Academy for Life distracts itself by an intense focus on researching issues surrounding AI, leaving aside its true purpose in favor of a topic which attracts great interest from international NGOs. Finding a speaker at an Academy event—or even a normal member—who supports abortion is now no longer a peculiarity, a fact which highlights the theological rot which has settled into many parts of once noble Rome.