A rare insight into the election of a Pope (Opinion)

The election of a pope is one of the most secret elections in the Catholic Church. 

As the College of Cardinals gather into the Sistine Chapel surrounded by a plethora of terms and conditions, rafts of regulations around what to do and what not to do are ringing in their ears. 

Every possible effort is made to ensure that what is regarded as an exercise in finding out who God wants to be the next pope is shrouded in mystery and respect for the holy process. 

Anything and everything that can possibly be done to keep secret the most secret of electoral procedures is not left undone.

That said cardinals talk before and during and after a conclave. And while, during the election, information about how it’s progressing is impossible to decipher, once it’s over the cardinals spill the Vatican beans and all, or almost all, is revealed in forensic detail. 

The story of the conclave is then pieced together bit by bit and a year or so later, seasoned vaticanistas paint the full picture in a few usually best-selling books.

If you, dear reader, picture yourself in that role, anxious to get the full detail of how and why the votes mounted as they did in last year’s conclave that elected Pope Leo, then you need to get your hands on two books out this month: The Election of Pope Leo XIV: The Last Surprise of Pope Francis by Gerard O’Connell and Elisabetta Piqué and American Hope: What Pope Leo Means for the Church and the World by Christopher Lamb. 

Alternatively, if you’d prefer an analytical guided tour of the gist of those two books you can read a stunning account by Austen Ivereigh in the March 7 issue of The Tablet entitled Secrets of the Conclave. 

Or, if you want an even shorter account you will find it in the 600 or so words that make up the remainder of this column. So hold on to your hat!

We often accuse the Vatican - and by extension the Catholic Church - of being incapable of organising anything. But, in this instance, that’s not the case. 

It took the Anglican Church eleven months to elect Sarah Mullally as Archbishop of Canterbury – she will be formally installed this week – but the Catholic Church had a new pope done and dusted in three weeks and the last three conclaves were over in 48 hours!

The trick is what happens before the conclave in the discussions that build the beginning of a clear consensus. If the consensus is matched by the presence of an obvious candidate, what Ivereigh calls ‘the carousel of news, leaks and rumours’ begins to reveal ‘the mind of the Church’.

While the cardinals swear an oath ‘of absolute and perpetual secrecy’ before they enter the Sistine Chapel, and are faithful to not disclosing what happens behind closed doors, they’ll share the atmosphere, their feelings and what Ivereigh calls ‘some choice anecdotes’, for example like the moment Cardinal Prevost put his head in his hands when he knew he had been elected. 

The presumption of many is that the ballot tallies are part of the oath but some cardinals give themselves a moment of grace as they take the view that the tallies should be part of the historical record.

In March 2013, when Francis I was elected pope 115 cardinals voted with 77 votes needed for election. The 2013 election seemed to be a two-horse race between Cardinal Bergoglio (Francis) and Cardinal Scola of Madrid. 

But a later publication based on a revelation by a cardinal elector revealed that Cardinal Marc Quellet, from the Vatican Curia, was a third candidate in contention. 

However the election came down to a tussle between Bergoglio and Scola with Scola ahead on the first ballot 30/26, but Bergoglio consistently moving ahead in the later rounds by 45/38, 56/41, 67/32 and, in the final round, by 85/20.

In the last conclave in 2025, 133 cardinals were voting with 89 votes needed for election. For this ballot there were no exact votes shared afterwards by co-operating cardinals but the picture is clear in the two books (mentioned above). 

In the first vote, the three cardinals in contention – Pietro Parolin (Italy), Peter Erdo (Hungry) and Robert Prevost (American) – each scored between 20 to 30, with Erdo in a narrow lead. 

In the second ballot, Prevost moved into the lead, Parolin came second and Erdo, third. 

In the third vote, Parolin versus Prevost, Parolin picked up Erdo’s votes and Prevost held his. 

And in the fourth and final vote, Prevost swept past Parolin with 108 votes to 89.

Apart from the historic election of the first North American pope, the 2025 conclave was significant in that it was the second election in succession of a Latin Americann pope after two previous elections of two European popes – John Paul II (1978) and Benedict (2005). 

An interesting question is how did the centre of influence in the Catholic Church move from Europe to Latin (South) America in less than 50 years?

Two issues seem significant. 

One is that as the number of cardinals increased, the number of European cardinals (especially Italian) decreased. 

Two, the Church tired of the failure to introduce the reforms of the Second Vatican Council and in less than a generation decided to replace the old, rich, tired, drifting Church represented by John Paul and Benedict’s pontificates with a more reformist Church driven by a combination of European reformers and a Latin American focus on a pastoral Church of the poor. 

Though in 2025 Parolin was the favourite he wasn’t acceptable in that he wasn’t like Francis.

The hunger for change represented by the election of Francis and Leo has now placed the Latin American Church – described by Ivereigh as ‘a united body and brimming with joy and confidence’ – in the ascendant and, hopefully, powering the People’s Church with its focus on serving the poor for generations to come.

Is a Catholic school in Portugal discriminating against poor students?

A Catholic school in Portugal has been accused of discriminating against poorer students by providing them with food of lower quality and variety than it serves to richer students.

But a review from The Pillar suggests the reality is considerably more complicated than suggested by initial headlines, such as the one run by the news agency Lusa, which kicked off the controversy last week: “Salesian school cafeteria has ‘food for the rich’ and ‘food for the poor.’”

At the center of the story is a peculiar arrangement between the Portuguese Ministry of Education and a small number of private schools, known as “association contracts.” Under those contracts, the state subsidizes the integration of local students in private schools in areas where there are insufficient public schools.

Fátima, home to the Marian shrine and international pilgrimage site, is a rare example of a town with no state-run schools. The number of private schools in Fátima — all of which are Catholic — made the construction of a public school redundant. So the government simply subsidizes the schools that already exist for all local students.

The situation in the Salesian school in Manique, Cascais, is similar. But the difference is that it is one of the rare cases where cohorts of private fee-paying students and public system students exist side by side. Currently, the school has 1,587 students, with 790 paying and 797 attending for free, under association contracts.

In mid-March, a group of parents of association contract students wrote a letter complaining that their children did not have access to the same quality or variety of food as the fee-paying students in the cafeteria, leading to the headline by Lusa, and an ensuing controversy.

Questioned by journalists, education minister Fernando Alexandre commented that “maybe what we need is to reflect on whether it makes sense to have the two regimes coexist in the same school.”

The Salesians acknowledged the situation in their cafeteria, but said that all attempts to solve the problem had been blocked by the Ministry of Education.

Private students pay six euros (around $7) per meal at the school. But students attending under association contracts are covered by the law that applies to public schools, and so pay only 1.46 euros per meal ($1.70). The government provides an additional subsidy of 1.53 euros ($1.77), for a total of 2.99 euros ($3.47) per child, per meal.

A source from the Salesian school, who asked not to be named as he was not authorized to speak about the issue, told The Pillar this was clearly not enough to provide better quality and variety in the cafeteria.

In addition, he said, “students from families with financial difficulties are either fully or partially exempt from paying.” This further reduces the money the school has for food.

“What is more, the government only began paying this subsidy in October, and they didn’t even warn the schools,” the source said.

“They just transferred the money, as if we were supposed to guess what it was for. That is what communication with the Ministry of Education is like, I’m afraid.”

‘We didn’t have any other option’

For a while, the Salesians asked parents of association contract students to pay the difference, and everybody ate the same food in the cafeteria. But when the Ministry of Education found out, it told the school to stop charging parents and refund them in full. It then fined the school.

“We didn’t have any other option than to reduce the offer for the association contract students,” said the Salesian source. “With the reimbursements and fines we had to pay, it just wasn’t viable.”

Those familiar with the school also bristled at the description of the students as divided between “rich” and “poor,” as if all fee-paying students were from wealthy families and all public system students were poor.

They noted that the criterion for being an association contract student is geographical, not financial, so any student, rich or poor, who lives in the catchment area for that particular school is entitled to attend for free.

Only students from outside of the catchment area are required to pay fees, and these are the lowest among private schools in the area administered by the council of Cascais: around 400-600 euros ($463-$695) per month, depending on the grade level.

Further integration forbidden

Rodrigo Queiroz de Melo, the executive director of the Private and Cooperative Schools Association, said that if the minister were to follow up with what many saw as a threat to end the mixed system in the Salesian school, poorer students would suffer most.

He said: “Supposing there was in fact a problem of inequality, the great advantage of this system is in mixing students from different social backgrounds. The solution cannot be to separate them.”

“Basically, what the minister said was that if the amount provided by the state is not enough to ensure an education of the level demanded by the parents of fee-paying students, then we should separate them and have a poor-quality system for the poor, and a high-quality system for the rich. That is simply absurd.”

Queiroz de Melo added: “The infrastructure at the Salesian school in Manique is incomparably better than that of any other public school. And this is only possible because around half of their students are paying.”

“The public system students only have access to a swimming pool, for example, because a considerable number of students are paying fees.”

According to the Salesian source, the school would have liked to be able to integrate the students further, by mixing private students and association contract students in the same cohorts, but this has also been forbidden.

“For years, we asked the government for this. From an educational point of view, it would have made much more sense for us to mix them, but we were always denied this option. The government funds cohorts, and not individual students,” said the source.

In 10th grade, students in Portugal can choose whether they want to pursue humanities, sciences, economics, or arts studies. There have been several cases where association contract students have had to leave the school, because there were not enough public system candidates to open a cohort in their preferred option, rather than being allowed to join one of the private cohorts as a state-funded student.

Queiroz de Melo said that any talk of ending the association contracts in the Salesian school was a non-starter, because the public system students would be left with nowhere to go, since the public schools closest by cannot absorb them.

In fact, according to statements released by the school itself, the Salesians actually operate at a considerable loss with the association contract.

The school said: “In 2025, the Ministry of Education provided funding of 3,309.60 euros [$3,831] per year on average for each pupil under an association contract, which amounts to 275.79 euros [$329] per month — a sum that is clearly insufficient to guarantee a high-quality service. Human resources allocated to association contracts alone accounted for 101% of the funding.”

Although the school likes to see its service to public system students as a mission, it believes the current situation is untenable. It has announced that if the government does not increase its contributions, it will not open association contract classes in 10th grade in the next school year.

The Salesian source said that, although this was only announced publicly after the cafeteria controversy and the minister’s subsequent statements, the decision was taken earlier and was not meant as a form of pressure. Hopes that the ministry will relent and renegotiate its contributions are slim, said the source.

The Pillar asked the Ministry of Education for clarification on what exactly the minister meant about “reflecting on” the current system. But a spokesperson said the minister would not be making further comments.

Prejudice and anticlericalism

Rodrigo Queiroz de Melo suggested that insufficient funding for private schools with association contracts seemed to be overtly ideological.

“The state pays 88,000 euros [$102,000] for association contracts per class, per year. For years, the ministry refused to say how much each student cost at fully public schools,” he noted.

“But last year they provided figures to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and so we now know that on average the state pays 180,000 euros [$208,000] per class, per year, in its own schools.”

This means the association contracts actually save the state money. Yet for years, despite appeals from the private sector, the Ministry of Education has refused to update its contributions.

“There is no doubt that there is an ideological prejudice against private schooling. But what is worse, it seems to be most prevalent among the political elites,” Queiroz de Melo commented.

“The families themselves who benefit from the association contracts love them. But they are constantly being criticized by the center and left-wing politicians who speak from their high horses, because they send their own children to fully private schools.”

“The best example was the socialist secretary of state for education who terminated several association contracts all over the country, but sent her own daughter to the German School in Lisbon.”

Monthly fees for the German School are close to 1,000 euros ($1,158) per month, if you factor in school books, transportation, and the daily six euros for lunch.

The result is that the association contract system in Portugal only applies to around 2% of students, whereas comparable systems account for 20% in Spain, 15% in France, and more than 70% in the Netherlands.

Queiroz de Melo added that the prejudice against private schools could even be seen as anticlerical, given the vast majority of private schools in Portugal, and especially those with association contracts, are Catholic.

“Historically, this has its roots in the 18th century,” he observed. “At the time, Portugal had a network of public schools that was run almost exclusively by the Jesuits.”

“In 1759, the prime minister, the Marquis of Pombal, expelled the Jesuits, and announced that he was going to start a new state-run public school system.”

“But it was only in 1930 that we managed to have as many pre-university students in schools as we had in 1730. So yes, if you ask me, I think there is definitely an element of anti-religiosity involved.”

Knanaya Catholic marriage rules dispute heads to supreme court

A Catholic archdiocese will appeal to India’s Supreme Court after a state high court issued a long-awaited ruling against its unique marriage rules.

The Syro-Malabar Archeparchy of Kottayam said March 23 that the high court judgment was unacceptable and it intends to appeal against it, because the ruling contradicted “the traditions, customs, and procedures followed for centuries” by the Knanaya Catholic community.

The archeparchy, founded in 1911, is solely for Catholics belonging to the Knanaya people, an ethnic group tracing its origins to Jewish Christians who migrated from Mesopotamia to India in the 4th century.

Membership in the archeparchy is determined by birth into a family with a Knanaya Catholic father and mother.

As membership is linked to family lineage, young Knanaya Catholics are expected to marry someone within the same community, a norm known as strict endogamy. If they wed a Catholic from another diocese, they relinquish their membership in the archeparchy.

But a 181-page judgment by the Kerala high court, issued March 23, dealt a blow to the norms of the archeparchy, which has around 191,000 members and is based in the southern Indian state.

The ruling, issued in response to an appeal from the archeparchy, said: “The appellants have conspicuously failed to establish that the practice of endogamy attains the character of an essential religious tenet, or that it confers upon them any enforceable authority to regulate the personal choices of members through coercive or non-coercive expulsion or excommunication.”

The court added that “while individuals may, out of personal volition, choose to adhere to endogamous preferences, any formulation — direct or implied — that legitimizes institutional endorsement, regulation, or encouragement of such practice, stands impermissible in law.”

“The autonomy of the individual in this regard is absolute and admits of no ecclesiastical encroachment,” it said.

The judgment came after a decades-long legal battle over the archeparchy’s marriage rules.

The dispute that led to the high court ruling can be traced back to 1989, when layman Biju Uthup was denied permission to marry another member of the Archeparchy of Kottayam, reportedly because an anonymous informant told the Church authorities that his grandmother was not a Knanaya Catholic.

A series of public meetings led to the creation of the group Knanaya Catholic Naveekarana Samithy, known by its initials KCNS, which began to take legal action against what it saw as the archeparchy’s unjust policies.

After the KCNS filed a petition, a district court in Kottayam issued a 155-page ruling in April 2021, saying that members of the archeparchy should no longer forfeit their membership when marrying Catholics outside the community.

Archbishop Mathew Moolakkatt, the head of Archeparchy of Kottayam, sought to overturn the ruling. Kerala’s high court refused to lift the lower court’s order, but agreed to hear an appeal against it.

This week’s high court ruling was also spurred by the case of Justin John, another member of the Kottayam archeparchy. John had sought permission to marry Vijimol Shaji, a Catholic belonging to the Syro-Malabar Archeparchy of Tellicherry.

Believing he would receive permission following the 2021 ruling, John prepared for his wedding. But at the last moment, his pastor refused to give him a vivaha kuri, a document indicating that his archeparchy had no objection to the marriage.

The couple was limited to exchanging garlands in front of the church in front of a reported 1,000 guests.

John filed a contempt of court case in 2023. The archeparchy denied it was in contempt of court. A judge closed the case in September 2024, but John resumed his legal challenge in October 2024.

In addition to the KCNS case and the contempt case, a third case was launched by Biju Uthup, concerning the Kottayam archeparchy’s decision to deny him a vivaha kuri in 1989.

In September 2023, a judge ordered that the Uthup case be heard along with the KCNS case in a joint proceeding.

The high court ruling could have taken several more years, but it was expedited after Justin John made applications to the court.

John described the high court judgment as “a victory for the next generation.”

“It protects families — the spouse and the children — from being rendered stateless by a community they were born into,” he said.

“The court has recognized that the right to marry, the right to dignity, and the right to one’s faith are inviolable. This outcome was achieved because we refused to let delay defeat justice.”

The high court also issued a ruling March 23 in the Uthup case, which dates back to 1989.

The 30-page judgment dismissed an appeal by Church authorities against a lower court decision in favor of Uthup.

Uthup, a retired aeronautical scientist who has pursued his legal battle for more than three decades, said: “This is not just a personal victory, but a vindication of my family’s honor and a triumph for justice.”

“For 37 years, we have lived under a cloud of uncertainty. Today, the court has affirmed what we have always known: that faith unites, but the rule of man cannot divide. I am grateful that the judiciary has upheld the true spirit of the Gospel.”

Commenting on the implications of the high court rulings, Uthup said: “In substance, the court rejected the attempt to use endogamy as a legally enforceable basis for exclusion, denial of marriage related rights, or deprivation of membership rights.”

“The judgments affirm that refusal to follow endogamy cannot by itself justify expulsion, forced exclusion, or denial of rights that flow from recognized membership.”

“Taken together, the two decisions move the issue from the level of an individual grievance to the level of a broader legal principle, with direct consequences for affected members and their families.”

Former Jesuit chiefs (two Spaniards) denounced for alleged cover-up of paedophilia in Bolivia

The Bolivian Community of Survivors (CBS) denounced to the Prosecutor’s Office on Friday four former Jesuit chiefs and a priest for aggravated rape in degree of cover-up and complicity, because they allegedly learned of the aggressions of the Spanish priest Luis María Roma, who died in 2019.

"This complaint has been filed after three victims have appeared who have told their truth and who were seeking justice," whistleblower Juan Arratia told EFE.

The complaint is addressed to the Spanish Ignacio Suñol and Antonio Menacho, in addition to the former Bolivian high commands Osvaldo Chirveches and René Cardozo, along with the religious Arturo Moscoso

The lawyer indicated that, although the alleged assailant is dead, "it is no less true than his environment, which was obliged to report and prosecute this person, what he did was the opposite."

In February 2019, EFE uncovered the case of the Spanish priest Luis Roma from the denunciation of a former member of the order who requested anonymity, based on about thirty photographs in which he recognized the priest in sexualized scenes with minors between six and twelve years old, added to the descriptions that the priest himself recorded in a newspaper.

That year, the Society of Jesus began an internal investigation, without divulging for several years, where it was found in the priest's room "erotic content", which the religious recognized in a written "personal confession", as EFE found.

Rome died months later without the order filing a complaint with the authorities, despite the fact that the internal investigation had concluded that the case was "plausible".

Although the alleged assailant is dead, "it is no less true than his environment, which was obliged to report and prosecute this person, what he did was the opposite".

The complaint filed today indicates that Menacho and Cardozo allegedly knew about the assaults, while Chirveches and Suñol were in charge of managing the previous investigation, which was kept in "reservation" in the Jesuit curia of La Paz, by superior provisions.

The Rome case came to light again after, on April 30, 2023, the newspaper El País revealed the contents of the newspaper of the also Spanish Jesuit Alfonso Pedrajas, who died in 2009, in which he related alleged abuses against dozens of children while directing the Juan XXIII school, since 1971.

After this, the Prosecutor’s Office closed the investigation for lack of complaint of the victims, but reopened it in 2024 after the publication of the details of the newspaper of the priest, in which he also mentioned alleged abuses of indigenous girls in the mission of Charagua, in Santa Cruz (east).

The voice of the victims

Carla (a fictional name at the request of the complainant) told EFE that Rome invited many children to her room, in the Jesuit community in Charagua, to "watch movies", and that he offered them chocolates and cookies.

"We have not realized that with the drink he gave us we lost consciousness ... because when we reacted and met him, he took the photos," she said of the alleged events that would have occurred in the early 2000's, according to her.

He invited many children to his room, in the Jesuit community in Charagua, to "watch movies", and offered them chocolates and cookies: With the drink he gave us we lost consciousness

Carla’s account coincides with that of Paola (a fictional name at the request of the complainant), who told EFE that in the film sessions the children who invited Rome lost consciousness, a situation that the priest took advantage of to record videos and photographs, he said.

Carla mentioned that with the filing of the complaint he seeks to "rest quietly" and that justice also punishes "complicit people".

For his part, Paola mentioned that his complaint is so that this "does not happen to any girl" and that the Society of Jesus is closed in Bolivia after it was known that the allegations involving Jesuits "continue" appearing.Edwin Alvarado, one of the spokespersons of the CBS, who accompanied the women who were victims of Rome, hopes that with this complaint "the impunity will be put to an end" in this and other cases.

In Bolivia, at the end of last year, a first sentence was handed down against the former Jesuit chiefs, Ramón Alaix and Marcos Recolons, to a year in prison for covering up the abuses of the priest Pedrajas.

A Catholic school teacher was fired after he married a man. Now, a church debuts his film.

In October 2021, two months after Matthew LaBanca married his husband, he was fired from his job at a Queens Catholic elementary school, St. Joseph Catholic Academy. 

He was also fired from his role directing music at Corpus Christi Church in Queens, and Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn officials said he violated a "morality clause." Offered a severance package equal to three months' salary, LaBanca may have received more had he signed a nondisclosure agreement preventing him from speaking publicly about his firing.

But he didn't sign an NDA, and on March 26, his film, "Communion," based on the experience, had its world premiere. It was held at another New York City Catholic church, the Church of St. Ignatius Loyola.

"This piece is not about pointing fingers," LaBanca said in an interview with RNS before the screening. "It's about sharing the emotional struggle that somebody goes through, and the freedom that I have to share it because I didn't sign anything."

The hourlong feature, directed by Bill McGarvey, tells the story of LaBanca, its writer, star and producer, who reenacts conversations with community members, priests and students. It highlights his passion as a teacher and musician, and both the gradual and sudden nature of his fallout after he married his husband, Rowan. 

He said he lost not only his jobs and health insurance, but also a community central to his life, despite never being made aware of concerns about his job performance. In the film, he said the final decision to terminate his employment was made by then Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio.

"You signed a contract to abide by church teachings," a recording of LaBanca impersonating church officials plays during the scene in which he is terminated. "Did this wedding happen?"

Since the legalization of same-sex marriage nationwide in 2015 following the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court ruling, dozens of Catholic school teachers and church employees across the United States have reportedly lost their jobs or been forced to resign after entering same-sex marriages or relationships. 

New Ways Ministry, a Catholic LGBTQ+ advocacy group that tracks these cases, reported at least 80 employment disputes since 2007 tied to LGBTQ+ issues within Catholic institutions. The film aims to capture their experience through the intimacy and close connection LaBanca had with the school and the community where he worked. He said he lived three blocks from St. Joseph's and seven from Corpus Christi.

At the end of the film, he recalls, on a walk with his husband, seeing a sign outside the church that read, "Everyone is welcome," and says it made him feel sick. They kept walking for several blocks until he unexpectedly ran into an older priest and a longtime friend who had heard the news of his termination.

"I'm sorry," the priest said. "God is not the church," a sentiment LaBanca said he now carries with him.

As the film's credits began to roll, the names of 127 people who have allegedly been fired from U.S. Christian institutions, presumably related to such issues, were listed, along with the state and year of each case.

Although the production has run as a successful off-Broadway play for the past three years, LaBanca said the screening at St. Ignatius Loyola, a Jesuit church on Park Avenue with a strong LGBTQ+ community, carries new meaning and marks something five years in the making. 

"I found the film painful," said Fr. Dennis Yesalonia, the pastor of St. Ignatius Loyola, after the screening. "I think it puts a spotlight on what we need to address as a church, as a community."

LaBanca said debuting the film there, in the same city that fired him, felt especially significant.

"To be welcomed by a New York City Catholic church after being let go by another is a profound moment," he said. "It reflects goodwill and a desire to foster communion within the church, while building a bridge between LGBTQ+ individuals and the Catholic Church."

An audience of about 150 people gathered, singing along at times, shedding tears and sharing in the music teacher's pain. Roccio Arrigo, a Catholic gay man and New York resident, attended the film after seeing the off-Broadway performance at The Cell theater, where LaBanca and McGarvey filmed most of the feature.

"As someone who is a very proud gay Catholic, to experience this type of story and to see the heartache and the heartbreak that happens at the hands of a church that I love and that I hold dear is really important for me to witness," Arrigo said.

McGarvey said he joined the project as LaBanca's off-Broadway production began development and worked closely with him, using a hybrid style that blends elements of documentary, theater and traditional narrative filmmaking, along with archival footage from LaBanca's family life. He said he was drawn to the project because of its potential impact.

"Matthew's script wasn't a polemic, it wasn't an argument; it was a story," McGarvey said. "And I think stories are what change people."

McGarvey said St. Ignatius Loyola Catholic Church was very open to having the film screened there, an attitude he said he has experienced across the board with trying to get the film screened.

"I think we're feeling a certain level of people being willing to move to talk," McGarvey said.

LaBanca and McGarvey said they wanted to make the performance into a film so that as many people could see it as possible.

"The arts have always made that difference in opening eyes and shifting hearts and minds," LaBanca said. "And to me, our film, our project, 'Communion,' is a way to pursue that eye-opening."

Despite the success of his creative work, LaBanca said what happened five years ago has changed his relationship with faith. He no longer feels comfortable listening to a Catholic homily, and his parents, who were also both teachers, no longer go to a Catholic church.

His goal with the film, he said, is not necessarily to prompt sweeping change within church leadership. Instead, he hopes the story resonates on a personal level, particularly with those who may feel isolated.

"I'm hoping that this is something of a springboard for this story, which is so many other people's stories," LaBanca said. "I'm hoping that it opens the doors to more organizations who want to hear it and see it … parishes, young queer communities, universities, anyone who cares about turning the tides on religious discrimination."

Several additional screenings and events are in development, including at parishes in Los Angeles. LaBanca said he also plans to stage live performances in Provincetown, Massachusetts; Sayville, New York; and Portland, Oregon, in the coming months.

LaBanca now works at a secular middle school in his Queens neighborhood. He said he can still see the bells at St. Joseph from his new classroom.

"It started as a healing process for me, and it's become what I love and I call my theatrical ministry," LaBanca said. "We can hold the mirror (to) the institution to reflect back to them the pain that's inflicted in the hands of religious discrimination."

Inauguration of Bishop Wilmer in Münster postponed

Bishop Heiner Wilmer takes over his new diocese in Münster earlier than thought: "The inauguration of Bishop Dr. Heiner Wilmer SCJ as 77th. Bishop of Münster will be on Sunday, 21. June, be at 2 p.m. at St. Paul's Cathedral in Münster," the diocese said on Saturday. 

Originally, the inauguration was for the 28th. June was planned but it will be brought forward by a week for "scheduling reasons."

On Thursday, Pope Leo XIV had appointed the former Hildesheim bishop Heiner Wilmer as the new bishop of Münster. 

The Chairman of the German Bishops’ Conference (DBK) will thus take over the most member-seeking diocese of Germany in the future. 

Until the inauguration, the previous diocesan administrator Antonius Hamers heads the diocese.

Hildesheim vacant a week early

The postponement of the date also has an impact on Wilmer’s previous diocese of Hildesheim: With Wilmer’s assumption of office in Münster, the Bischofsstuhl in Hildesheim is automatically vacant. 

This is now happening a week earlier than originally planned. 

Wilmer has headed the North German Diocese since 2018.

The originally planned date for Wilmer's takeover in Münster, the 28th. June, is the day before the Solemnity of the Apostles Peter and Paul. 

Paul is patron of the Diocese of Münster and the cathedral there. 

Wilmer's appointment on Thursday already fell on the high festival of the Münster diocese founder Liudger. 

In his inaugural address, the future bishop drew parallels between his life and the life of the first bishop of Münster.

Trump is bad for the church and the world (Opinion)

Historians are cautious when it comes to drawing comparisons between different epochs and events, but at the same time tend to do so professionally – including church historians. 

Hence a look at the role and response of the Catholic Church in the Trump era in the United States and Italian fascism from the mid-1920s to the mid-1940s. 

There are, of course, differences. 

But given the current situation – an authoritarian president attacks democracy at home and wages war abroad – it is helpful to look at some of the similarities.

Relations between the Vatican and the Church in Italy and the Mussolini regime have passed through many phases. Only a few Catholics protested against the arrests and murders of socialist and communist dissidents by the black shirts in the early stages of fascism. 

Only a few were shocked when the People's Party was banned and its founder, Father Luigi Sturzo, fled into exile in 1924. 

The creeping totalitarianism, which became visible in 1925 and 1926 – anti-fascist parties were abolished, the freedom of the press suppressed – did not fail the negotiations on the Lateran Treaty of 1929. In fact, some of these illiberal measures were in line with positions that Pius IX had represented in his "Syllabus Errorum" (1864).

Tensions arose in 1931, when the Church's fascist education policy was seen as an interference with her freedom to regulate her affairs herself. 

But the colonial wars that Mussolini began in East Africa from 1935 sparked enthusiasm among Italian Catholics, because they saw in the new Italian imperialism an opportunity for the mission and the enlargement of the Church. 

The racist laws that Mussolini took over from Nazi Germany in 1938 did not trigger a serious alarm in the Italian Church; but caused a change of mind against racist ideologies in the last months of Pius XI's life. The Vatican and the Italian bishops did not turn against fascism until the war for Germany and Italy was slowly going badly. 

After 1942, Pius XII gave the first speeches in favor of human rights and democracy, and Catholics prepared for the post-fascism period. The Vatican recognized that the regime that had protected the Church from communism and chaos had given the Pope the Vatican state and secured the Church a privileged status has now posed an existential threat to Catholicism and the papacy. 

The Vatican has not been a sovereign, independent state under international law for so long. 

That it continued to exist was by no means guaranteed if Russians or Americans in a post-war order had not been willing or able to continue to pass the agreement on the "Roman question" of 1929. 

Mussolini and the fascism allied with the Nazis had now become a burden of an advantage.

Better than the alternative?

If you put the attack on the U.S. Capitol on 6. January 2021 next to the early Mussolini years, it turns out: It is about the instincts of a strong man. Just as Catholics in Italy accepted Mussolini, Catholics in the U.S. saw Trump as "better than the alternative" that would have been an enemy of the church. 

The first months of the second Trump presidency were comparable to 1938: racist, anti-immigrant measures did not seem to directly threaten the Church. Then ICE went to Minneapolis at the end of 2025. 

The following three months of state-sponsored terror – together with the war-like, expansionist statements about Greenland, the military action in Venezuela and the illegal war against Iran – were a wake-up call for many bishops.  

Cardinals Cupich, McElroy and Tobin made public comments in a joint statement in January on ICE and on morale of U.S. foreign policy, while military bishop Timothy Broglio spoke out against the immorality of an attack on Greenland.

In the second year of the second Trump reign, more individual bishops, as is the U.S. Bishops’ Conference (USCCB), albeit more diplomatically, has taken legal action to counter Trump’s policies, and made public statements to distance itself from the regime. It's not that the USCCB would have become more liberal or the Democrats more well-liked. 

Many bishops have simply realized that, given the collapse of church attendees among immigrants and the violation of religious freedom, Trump is bad for the Church. They have also realised that Trump is bad for world peace, with the war against Iran tragically confirming the arguments the three cardinals had brought in January.

Santa Fes Archbishop John Wester declared in late February that one lives in "a Dietrich-Bonhoeffer moment." Some bishops may do. Others seem to be in a Karl Barth moment: to continue praying and doing God's work without taking a public stand. 

And still others don't seem to have wavered in their support for the Trump administration -- or at least they don't seem particularly anxious to push USCCB President Paul Coakley to publicly challenge the president. 

Nor has the bishops' conference commented on the government's attacks on democracy and the rule of law. One possible explanation: One knows about the government's power of disposal over federal funds for students at Catholic colleges and universities, as well as visa rules for church employees with a migrant background. 

There are also some influential bishops in Trump's presidential commission on religious freedom who have not shown themselves particularly dissatisfied with the current state of affairs. 

And although there may be a number of individual statements on social teaching and Trumpism (especially in terms of immigration), there is no clear and unanimous consensus on Catholic teaching, democracy and constitutionalism. (This is in stark contrast to the clear statements made by European bishops’ conferences in recent years.)

The leadership of the Catholic Church in the U.S. no longer seems ready (or willing) to talk about the future of democracy after Trump. A first step would be to detach the Church from Trumpism – not only in the eyes of the American people, but worldwide – for the sake of the credibility of Catholicism. 

What happened after the Second World War – when the Catholic Church in Europe gained unexpected political significance thanks to the Cold War – is unlikely to repeat itself in the twenty-first century. 

The clergy's silence on Trumpism could lead to a de facto fusion of US Catholicism with Trump's Christian-nationalist movement. Avoiding that will require more than opinions from individual bishops or cardinals, or legal action by the USCCB. 

(It should also be noted that the religious undertones of the Trump propaganda machine damage the moral position of American Christianity, and American Catholics should not assume that people in other parts of the world can distinguish the different currents of American Christianity and Catholicism.)

A response by the bishops to Trumpism, which goes beyond immigration and foreign policy, would also serve U.S.-born Pope Leo XIV. As the pope made clear in an interview six months ago, he wants to avoid American party politics and let the bishops speak. In that interview, Leo said President Trump had "at times made it clear" that issues of human dignity and promotion of peace were important to him, and that "I want to support him in these efforts." 

That seems a long time ago by now, and Leo seems to be aware of how much things have changed since then. There is no doubt that Rome and the Pope – quietly but clearly – support the individual voices who prophetically denounce Trumpism. The question is whether others will join these individual voices or whether they remain a (shrinking) minority faction.

There are further signs of Leo's awareness and his assessment of the situation in the United States, including indirect gestures such as the decision, on the 4th. Juli Lampedusa to visit. In addition, there is the appointment of Gabriele Caccia as Apostolic Nuncio in the United States, replacing Cardinal Christophe Pierre, who emeritus. 

This signals that the United States under Trump is an international issue for the Vatican. Caccia, who has served as the Holy See's ambassador to the United Nations since 2019, arrives at a delicate moment: the tension that had shaped the U.S. bishops' relationship with Francis has been replaced by a tension between the Vatican Leos XIV and a Trump-led Americanism that uses Christian-nationalist rhetoric while waging war on an Islamic country. 

While the first two Gulf Wars had a catastrophic impact on relations between Christians and Muslims in the Middle East and on Christianity itself in the region, the two Bush presidents tried to scale back undertones in the Crusader manner.

Complex international relations

The attempt to portray the current war as one against "a misguided religion" is an integral part of the Trump administration's narrative. 

In addition, Trump and the United States worked with Israel in the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was also the head of a religious tradition with which the Vatican maintains formal interreligious relations (not to mention that the Vatican and Iran have maintained diplomatic relations since 1954, that is, thirty years longer than the Vatican and the United States). This is also a reason to draw parallels with the challenges to which Pius XII faced in the Second World War.

And what about the response to the current variety of Trumpism among other prominent American Catholics – including those associated with institutions in Rome and having sources of funding in the United States? Consider, for example, that Peter Thiel gave lectures on the “anti-Christ” in Rome. 

The event was organized by the "Associazione Culturale Vincenzo Gioberti" in Italy and the "Cluny Institute" of the Catholic University of America (the "investment philosophy" of Cluny reads: "We invest in people who combine intellectual rigour with spiritual depth and creativity, at the intersection of Athens, Jerusalem and Silicon Valley"). The Italian Catholic newspaper "Avvenire" (which is published by the Italian bishops) has described Thiel as "the heart of the darkness of the digital world."

During fascism, the Vatican was able to take care of the Italian Church, not least because there was also an Italian pope. Yet Italy was not the political and military (or even religious) superpower that is the United States. 

And the papacy today will not be able to provide the same protection to America or the international standing of U.S. Catholicism. In fact, it could be the U.S. bishops and influential Catholics who must protect the pontificate of Leo XIV from an identification of American Christianity with Trumpism. 

The Pope should not have to bear that responsibility. 

And it would be far more helpful than the current crowdfunding campaign to give Leo – who has never made a secret of his closeness to the poor – a new papal tiara.

Roche reduces aggressiveness his speech against the Traditional Mass but offers no solutions

The prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship, Arthur Roche, has opted for a prudent and undefined tone in his last public intervention on the Traditional Mass, in contrast to previous more explicit positions.

The remarks came in an interview with OSV News, an information agency linked to the U.S. Bishops’ Conference, on March 17. 

In this context, Roche avoided a direct ruling on possible changes in the application of Traditionis Custodes, focusing instead on general principles such as the unity of the Church and the need not to raise the liturgy in terms of individual preferences or confrontation between rites.

During the interview, the cardinal recognized some elements that attract faithful to the traditional liturgy, such as silence, music or reverence, although without linking these observations to concrete measures or to a review of current practice. He also avoided explicitly opposing the Novus Ordo and the Vetus Ordo, insisting that “confronting one rite against another” does not contribute to the understanding of the liturgy.

The content of the interview does not introduce substantial changes to its previous position. In particular, there is no rectification of what was supported in the document it prepared for the January consistory, in which it defended the liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council and underlined the limited nature of the use of the pre-1970 missal.

In this sense, the emphasis in general categories and the absence of references to specific decisions or policy changes have been interpreted as a lack of definitions at a time when the liturgical debate remains open.

The declarations also occur in a context in which other messages with pastoral nuances have been recorded from the Holy See. Among them, the recent indications of Pope Leo XIV to the French bishops, to whom he has asked to seek formulas to integrate the faithful linked to the Vetus Ordo.

Pending eventual development, the situation remains without policy changes, and the practical scope of these different tones within the Curia remains unrealized.

Canary Islands: Leo XIV will meet with migrants who arrived in pateras while the regularization plan advances with the support of Cáritas

Pope Leo XIV will hold a meeting on June 11 with migrants who arrived by patera in the port of Arguineguín (Gran Canaria), as part of his trip to Spain. 

As explained by the Bishop of the Canary Islands, José Mazuelos, in statements to Europa Press, the Pontiff will listen to testimonies from both newly arrived people and migrants already integrated thanks to the Church’s work, in a gesture intended to offer a message of “hope” and to make this reality visible.

A pastoral gesture in a setting loaded with symbolism

The choice of Arguineguín is not casual. The Canary Islands have consolidated in recent years as one of the main entry points for irregular immigration to Europe, within the framework of a particularly dangerous route marked by thousands of deaths.

Mazuelos emphasized that the Church insists on the need to “stop the Atlantic route with so many deaths,” acting in the countries of origin, without renouncing the commitment to reception and integration.

These symbolic gestures—although well-intentioned—are inscribed in a broader debate about their real effects on the migratory dynamics that have been hitting European borders for years. Frequently, the emphasis is placed on the arrival while the horror of the journey fades.

In this context, the Canary bishop hopes that the Pope’s visit, far from feeding any form of romanticization, will serve as a wake-up call that insists on the search for the common good.

Cáritas informs about the regularization of immigrants

In parallel to this scenario, Cáritas Mallorca has launched several informative talks during the month of March aimed at immigrants in an irregular situation to explain the possible extraordinary regularization process in Spain.

According to the entity itself, these sessions aim to guide on the necessary documentation—valid passport, proof of stay in the country, or criminal records—and to prepare those interested for an eventual administrative process.

Cáritas maintains that this measure responds to a consolidated situation: around 550,000 people could be in an irregular administrative situation in Spain, and more than 56% of the people attended by the organization in 2024 lacked regular documentation.

Denial of the “pull effect”

The organization insists that regularization will not provoke new arrivals. According to its approach, the measure would be limited to people already present in Spain and would not represent an “open door” to new migratory flows.

It also emphasizes that people with criminal records would be excluded and that the process does not imply political rights such as voting.

However, the problem is not reduced to the intention of the measures or gestures, but to their practical consequences: certain messages or initiatives can contribute to reinforcing the perception that Europe remains open, fueling migration routes that are already extremely dangerous and dominated by human trafficking networks.

Between charity and responsibility

The Pope’s visit to the Canary Islands and the initiatives promoted by Cáritas once again place a fundamental issue at the forefront: how to combine attention to migrant people with a realistic evaluation of the consequences of policies and public messages.

While Leo XIV will put a face to the human drama of those who risk their lives at sea, the debate on regularization remains open, especially in territories like the Canary Islands, where migratory pressure is not an abstraction, but an everyday reality.

Vatican puts its financial power in the hands of a former CEO of the Rothschild group

The Institute for the Works of Religion (IOR), known as the “Vatican bank”, has announced the appointment of Luxembourgish financier François Pauly as the new president of its Supervisory Board, replacing Jean-Baptiste Douville de Franssu, in a handover that will take effect at the end of April.

A scheduled handover after a year of preparation

According to an official statement from the IOR itself, Pauly will assume the position after the Board meeting scheduled for April 28, 2026, in which the accounts for the 2025 fiscal year will be approved. Until then, Douville de Franssu will remain in office.

The succession process, carried out over the last twelve months, has been coordinated between the Supervisory Board and the Cardinals’ Commission, with the aim of ensuring continuity in the Institute’s governance.

Pauly’s appointment was approved by said Commission on January 28, 2026, following the formal proposal submitted by the Board on December 12, 2025, in accordance with the IOR’s statutes.

Presence in financial and corporate networks

François Pauly has more than three decades of experience in the European financial sector, with a career linked to institutional banking, public financing, and the management of large banking structures.

He began his career in the 1980s and soon specialized in infrastructure financing and relations with public entities, a key area in the European financial architecture. His time at Dexia Crediop, where he was deputy general manager between 2002 and 2003, placed him at the center of structured financing in Italy.

His consolidation came at the helm of Banque Internationale à Luxembourg (BIL), one of the main entities in the Grand Duchy. Between 2011 and 2016, he served as CEO and president, leading the bank’s restructuring process after the financial crisis and its exit from the Dexia group.

Subsequently, he has held multiple positions on boards of directors in the insurance, private banking, and asset management sectors in Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Belgium. He currently chairs the insurance group La Luxembourgeoise, which strengthens his profile as a manager of assets and complex financial structures within the circuits of high European finance.

A banker from the Rothschild orbit

François Pauly’s international projection was consolidated in the Edmond de Rothschild group, one of the family’s branches focused on private banking and the management of large assets —distinct from Rothschild & Co and with a more discreet and reserved profile.

Since June 2021, he served as CEO of the Swiss perimeter and president of the executive committee of Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse), positioning himself at the core of the group’s operational management. His responsibility extended to a network of subsidiaries in Europe and other markets — including Monaco, Israel, the United Kingdom, and France, with participation in key boards and committees, especially in control and risk areas.

His tenure coincided with a particularly delicate moment for the group following the death of Benjamin de Rothschild. In that context, he participated in the management of the transition and in strategic operations, during a period in which the entity highlighted growth in assets and activity.

His departure was formalized in March 2023. The official version frames it as a natural evolution toward roles as an independent advisor, maintaining a partial link with the group. However, economic press reports pointed to possible internal strategic divergences, a hypothesis not publicly confirmed by the entity.

Previous ties to the Vatican

This is not a newcomer to the Vatican environment. Pauly was a member of the Vatican Pension Fund’s board between 2017 and 2021, which allowed him to integrate into the Holy See’s economic structure before his current appointment.

In addition, he maintains relations with the Church in his country of origin, as part of the Economic Affairs Commission of the Archdiocese of Luxembourg, a key body in ecclesiastical asset management.

Balance of a decade of reforms

The outgoing president, Jean-Baptiste Douville de Franssu, has emphasized in the statement that, since 2014, the IOR has undergone a “profound structural transformation” after years marked by management difficulties.

According to the Institute itself, this process has allowed for the establishment of a more solid governance framework, the strengthening of control mechanisms, and the achievement of international standards in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, recognized by Moneyval.

The IOR currently maintains relations with more than 35 correspondent banks and serves more than 12,000 clients worldwide, including Holy See institutions and entities linked to the Church.

Continuity, control, and financial power

Cardinal Petrocchi, president of the IOR’s Cardinals’ Commission, has thanked Douville de Franssu for his work and highlighted Pauly’s experience as a guarantee of continuity in this new stage.

The handover occurs at a time when the Vatican seeks to maintain the international credibility of its financial system, relying on technical profiles from major European banking.

However, the choice of an executive closely linked to the circles of high private banking - and particularly to the Rothschild environment - highlights the growing weight of technocratic profiles in the economic management of the Holy See.

In a field where decisions are made in small and highly specialized circles, it is worth asking to what extent these appointments truly respond to criteria of openness or participation. At least in the governance of the Vatican bank, the much-invoked “synodality” seems not to have found its space yet. 

When power, money, and international reputation are at stake, the classic governance criteria - hierarchical, selective, and technocratic - continue to prevail, far removed from synodal rhetoric.

A married bishop on the controversy of Prevost's photo: «We can speak to Pachamama as we speak to the saints»

Reinhold Nann was bishop of Caravelí, Peru, from 2017 until 2024, when he hung up his habits to marry a woman. For years, he held responsibilities in ecclesiastical spheres and coincided with Robert Prevost when the latter was bishop of Chiclayo. 

At that time, Nann was directing Cáritas in the country, while Prevost was a member of the same organization.

Nann has published in Religión Digital an explanation of the images from the Pachamama rite in which Robert Prevost participated in 1995 and which was revealed by LifeSite. Amid the thunderous media silence of the most clerical Catholicism, this analysis emerges, which, beyond the disqualifications against Infovaticana, is worth examining.

The starting point of Nann’s article is clear and stated without ambiguity: “the young missionary Robert Prevost…”, although at the time he was forty years old, “did indeed participate in this congress on ecology and theology in 1995 and, in the context of a ceremony to Mother Earth, knelt down.” 

Nann does not dispute the existence of the photographs nor the context in which they were taken. He acknowledges the participation, acknowledges the gesture, and acknowledges the ritual nature of the act. From there, he introduces his interpretation, which consists of asserting that “I cannot see any worship of Pachamama as a goddess either from Prevost or from any of the attendees.”

Nann himself describes the content of the rite precisely by pointing out that “we see an interreligious act, where a representative of Andean culture makes a payment to the earth, an offering and a dialogue with the earth.” 

He adds that, in that worldview, “Andean culture maintains certain pagan beliefs, such as the fact that the earth has a soul like a person (just like water, a hill, a tree),” and he maintains that today “it is seen rather as a creature of God with a certain personality.” 

On that basis, he builds the core of his argument, which he formulates explicitly: “Respecting the earth as a ‘being with a soul,’ it remains a creature of God. Pachamama is the earth or, better said, this soul of the earth. Therefore, we can speak to her, as we speak to the saints. We can kneel before her as before the saints, as long as we see her as a creature and not as a goddess.”

Nann insists that the decisive element is the intention of the subject and asserts that “intention is what matters. The gesture of prayer is not automatically worship, nor is the gesture of kneeling.” In that same sense, he rejects that the rite implies idolatry and maintains that it is a legitimate form of inculturation, going so far as to assert that “this is not syncretism, it is inculturation,” insofar as “different philosophies or cultures can be evangelized without rejecting their cultural and philosophical language.”

The result of his intervention is an explanation that does not deny the facts, but reinterprets them from a specific theological key. The images are accepted as real, the rite is defined as such in its own terms, and Prevost’s participation is taken as certain. 

The defense is articulated exclusively on the basis of subjective intention and on a direct analogy between the relationship with Pachamama and the relationship with the saints, expressed in literal phrases such as “we can speak to her, as we speak to the saints” and “we can kneel before her as before the saints.”

But Nann should know that when a faithful Catholic addresses a saint, he does not attribute inherent power to him nor ask him directly for a result. He asks him to intercede insofar as, by his virtues, he is a soul who enjoys the vision of God. 

The saint is not the origin of grace; he is a subordinate mediator. Therefore, prayer, although it passes through the saint, always ends in God as the only real recipient. That is the basic doctrinal point that structures all devotion.

In the Pachamama rite, the subject changes completely. The petition is not raised to God through another, but is directed directly to the earth understood as an entity capable of giving. When food is buried, drink is poured, or goods are offered “to the earth” expecting prosperity, protection, or fertility, a direct relationship is established between man and that to which it is offered. 

The earth does not appear as a sign, nor as a reminder, nor as a creature that refers to God—how could Pachamama attain the beatific vision?—, but as the immediate recipient of the action.

That scheme—offering something to receive something—is precisely what Catholic theology identifies as undue worship when directed to a creature or idol. It does not need to be explicitly formulated as “goddess” to function as such in practice. The decisive element is that it acts as a subject to whom something is asked and from whom a response is expected. 

At that point, the difference with the intercession of the saints is not one of degree, but of nature. One refers to God; the other stops at matter or the creature. Therefore, they are not comparable. 

Therefore, in Catholic terms, it is not a simple cultural expression: it is an act that, in its own structure, configures itself as worship.

It must be acknowledged that Nann, unlike those who opt for silence, faces the facts and does not try to deny or ignore them. But from there, the analysis is erroneous and moreover introduces a fundamental confusion. 

He himself admits that in those rites there are cases—although he minimizes them—in which “animals or people would have been offered.” 

When speaking of human sacrifices, saying that they are “very few” resolves nothing. How many are few in a matter like this? The issue is not quantitative; it is moral.

The equivalence he posits between Pachamama and the saints is not defensible. It is not a debatable nuance; it is a basic error. 

In one case, there is intercession ordered to God; in the other, there is a direct relationship with a created reality to which something is offered and prosperity is requested. That structure is not Christian.

That said, the Pope himself has introduced clear corrections in recent documents addressed to the episcopate, making it explicit that nature is not worshiped and that everything must be centered on Christ. 

The reasonable thing is to interpret what happened in 1995 as an error conditioned by the confused theological context of those years. Does that mean it should be ignored as if it had not happened? No.

Here no one is in a position to set themselves up as judge. Surely we drag more errors in life than Prevost. 

But precisely for that reason, it is advisable not to add more confusion. If there is something to clarify, let it be clarified. And in the meantime, let Catholics stay away from those Pachamama rituals and their payments to the earth.