Pope Leo XIV has initiated a significant generational change in the Church’s central governing body, the Roman Curia. This change began last week in the Secretariat of State, with the appointment of Anthony Onyemucho Epko as Advisor and of Mihăiţă Blaj as Undersecretary for Relations with States and International Organizations of the Secretariat of State. The process could take time, and even extend well into 2026.
The Advisor assists the Substitute for General Affairs of the Secretariat of State and is responsible for the functioning of the Secretariat of State. He performs various functions, is a member of the Financial Security Committee, and is in charge of supervising its general functioning. Archbishop Epko was chosen for the position, being the first Advisor not coming from the Secretariat of State. His name does not seem to have been proposed by the current substitute, Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra, which some observers interpret as a sign of Peña Parra’s imminent departure from his position. The selection of Epko also suggests profound changes in the Dicastery for the Service of Integral Human Development. Epko was undersecretary, and the current prefect, Cardinal Michael Czerny, will soon turn 80. Czerny was one of the symbols of Pope Francis’s «revolution,» and he himself a guardian of the revolution.
If Peña Parra and Gallagher were to leave, the Secretariat of State would experience profound changes. But it would not be the only body. Leo XIV has already appointed a vice-regent of the Prefecture of the Papal Household, the Augustinian Father Edward Daniang Dalong, in whom he has great trust, and everything points to this appointment paving the way for the replacement of the current regent, Monsignor Leonardo Sapienza. Also Archbishop Diego Ravelli, current Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations, seems willing to move to a diocese, because the Pope would want to choose someone closer to his sensitivity and does not appreciate the idea of an archbishop as «altar boy». It is expected that all these changes will take place after the Consistory of January 7 and 8, 2026, whose theme Leo XIV has not yet announced.
Another important topic today is the publication today of the new General Regulations of the Roman Curia culminates a process started three years ago. On April 12, 2022 , in a Chirograph published a few weeks after the promulgation of the Apostolic Constitution Praedicate Evangelium , Pope Francis recognized that the constitutional text required a profound revision of the entire normative structure of the Curia. One of the most significant innovations compared to the previous Regulations refers to the general structure of the legislation. It introduces a clear distinction: on the one hand, the General Regulations , which govern the structure, procedures, and relations between the entities and official acts of the Curia; on the other, the Personnel Regulations , which deals independently with hiring, promotions, duties, evaluations, and ethics. The Curia thus becomes an administrative body more in line with the standards of modern administrative law.
The previous Regulations established that «the Dicasteries of the Roman Curia shall draw up, as a general rule, their acts in Latin », allowing the use of other languages only « according to needs». The new Regulations radically changes the perspective: «The curial institutions shall draw up, as a general rule, their acts in Latin or in another language ». Another completely new aspect of the new Regulations refers to the relationship between the Curia and the faithful. All requests arriving at the Dicasteries must be registered , assigned to a responsible person and, above all, must receive a response. this protection was simply not provided for in the previous Regulations . The Holy See adopts one of the cornerstones of good administration: procedural transparency; every request enters a traceable, controllable, and verifiable circuit.
We return to the centrality of the Secretariat of State . The entities must share documents, exchange opinions, involve the Secretariat for sensitive matters, and present regular periodic reports and an annual report. It is well known that Pope Francis cultivated a profoundly different vision of the Secretariat of State , and that the prejudice, perhaps more accurately called aversion , generated no few problems for the Holy See throughout the twelve years of his pontificate. This coordination becomes a structural obligation , with specific rules for: the joint signature of documents involving multiple Dicasteries; the management of multiple competencies; the prevention of conflicts between entities; the publication of documents in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis and by the Press Office; the transmission to the Secretariat of State of all documents intended for the Pope. The Curia becomes an integrated body, not a sum of departments.
The new Regulations introduce a series of norms that were completely absent before: administrative acts must be justified , indicating the law or legal principle on which they are based; anyone who receives a document can file an internal administrative appeal; institutions can review their own acts through a review process ; every decision must be recorded in a single register , now also digital; the notification of acts, including electronic notification, becomes a constitutive element of their effectiveness.
An important part of the new text precisely defines how the Curia should relate to the particular Churches. Every intervention involving a diocese must be preceded by a consultation with the Bishop; every decision regarding an institute of consecrated life requires dialogue with the major Superiors; every provision relating to ecclesial movements must respect the competence of the Bishops and the competent Dicastery. It is intended a true change of mentality that aims to protect the fundamental human rights of those involved. The Curia can no longer act with arrogance or despotic methods, but is called to operate with respect for norms, for people, for their role and for their dignity. With the previous regulations not uncommon for bishops and priests to be trampled , without even being heard or consulted. The new Regulations recognize that the administrative management of the Holy See cannot ignore digitalization with certified IT systems; mandatory digital archiving; scheduled transfer of documents to the Vatican Apostolic Archive; classification of confidential documents into three levels; an access register and procedures for the controlled destruction of documents. Even papal audiences still use paper tickets a practice that has become anachronistic. The Dicastery for Communication , which should be at the forefront in these areas, has proven to be one of the least efficient dicasteries also in this regard. The Vatican is structurally slow, in part due to the fact that many have no interest in working efficiently. The principles of the Apostolic Constitution Praedicate Evangelium are incorporated , but their «objective» is «corrected».
«Restarting the Economy» is the first global event of The Economy of Francis held outside Assisi and without the presence of Pope Francis. It will be from November 28 to 30 in Castel Gandolfo, with the support of the Dicastery for the Service of Integral Human Development «an innovation that does not mark distance, but an extension: the spirit of Assisi approaches Rome and the Pope to continue inspiring an economy capable of serving humanity and creation». «The Economy of Francis is born from this double legacy: Franciscan spirituality and the Church’s social doctrine». «Today this journey continues with Leo XIV, the new Pope, who has chosen a name in continuity with Leo XIII, the pontiff of Rerum Novarum».
It is now official and Leo XIV will present the 2025 Ratzinger Prize to Riccardo Muti on December 12, during the Christmas Concert, which the maestro himself will conduct in the Paul VI Hall. The Vatican Foundation Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI announced the award . Muti always showed esteem with repeated demonstrations of attention and affection, even when Ratzinger, as Pope Emeritus, resided in the «Mater Ecclesiae» monastery in the Vatican. «I have always followed and deeply admired Benedict XVI». The “Ratzinger Prize”, created in 2011, is awarded annually to personalities in the fields of culture and art of Christian inspiration.
No to false mercy in canonical marriage procedures: words that contradict the predominant trend of openness. Pope Leo does not repudiate Francis’s reform, but brings it into harmony with Wojtyla and Ratzinger. In his speech to the participants in the international course sponsored by the Roman Rota , Leo XIV cited Francis four times and Benedict XVI and John Paul II once each, respectively. His speech seems to contradict the openness observed in Mitis Iudex . Another important feature of the papal speech was the attention paid to the process, which is no longer presented as a waste of time: «the judicial function, as a means of exercising the power of government or jurisdiction, is fully inscribed in the global reality of the sacred authority of pastors in the Church», explaining that «a fundamental aspect of pastoral service operates in the judicial power: the diaconate of truth».Pope Francis ended up privileging the administrative route, Leo XIV prefers to emphasize the correct exercise of judicial power. Speeding up marriage nullity procedures is not a guarantee of pastoral charity, since this must always go hand in hand with truth, and often speeding up procedures does not facilitate the ascertainment of truth; quite the contrary. It is to be hoped that procedural rigor based on truth will prevail over the temptations of some justice professionals to be guided by a «false mercy».
In its second provisional report published last week, the Synod Study Group on Controversial Issues continued to speak of a “paradigm shift… in continuity with Vatican II” and described homosexuality as an “emerging theme”. Can the Catholic Church change its mind and its teachings on sexual morality? Has the time come to listen to the progressives and abolish the ascetic elements of Christian morality, aligning Catholicism with the rest of the world, which reduces love to eroticism? Amoris Laetitia seems to allow Catholics in invalid and adulterous marriages to receive the Eucharist, in clear contradiction with Jesus’ instructions on divorce. And Fiducia Supplicans, which sanctioned the blessing of same-sex couples, was an early endorsement of the LGBT agenda. In its preliminary report , the study group on controversial issues, including sexual morality, indicated its preference for a “paradigm shift” that prioritizes personal experience, discernment, and “contextual fidelity” to the Gospel, rather than a set of objective “pre-packaged” norms. In its second provisional report , published last week, the group continued to speak of a «paradigm shift… in continuity with Vatican II» and described homosexuality as an «emerging» rather than controversial theme. However, there were few indications of its specific recommendations .
How will Pope Leo react to this study group’s final report if it calls for a substantial change in the Church’s moral principles? In a interview with Crux published in September, Pope Leo hinted that a change in the Church’s teaching on sexual issues might be possible once an attitude change occurs: «I believe we must change our attitude even before thinking about changing what the Church says on a given topic». By leaving the door open to doctrinal flexibility, the Pope fostered complacent optimism among those seeking emancipation from the Church’s moral tradition. Some of these teachings have also been expressed in papal encyclicals such as Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae . The encyclical Humanae Vitae of Pope Paul VI , which represents an infallible teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium, insists that every sexual act must be of a generative nature. Any attempt to modify these ancient moral beliefs by promoting sexual activity outside heterosexual marriage will threaten the integrity of this encyclical and question the entire network of closely related doctrines on sex, gender, and human nature that underpin this teaching.
And we’re wrapping up. The «Heralds case» is not just the Heralds case, it is uncovering an unfair and immoral way of acting in the congregation of religious. How powerful can the open hostility of a dicastery head be, even one as criticized and controversial as João Braz de Aviz? And how persistent and enduring can this hostility be, even when, at least officially, the cardinal is no longer in power? No formal charges have ever been brought against the Heralds, except generic references to «problems»; no explanation has ever been given; that in eight years, despite repeated requests, the Congregation has never received or heard the Heralds of the Gospel; and that, consequently, against all legal norms, whether civil or religious, the Heralds have never been able to defend themselves. From what, no one knows; and this is precisely the Kafkaesque aspect of the matter. They were—and continue to be—punished, subjected to special administration, without this ever leading to the discovery of any crime.
Most likely we are facing another case of intra-ecclesial aversion, motivated by ideology. They have been the target of virulent campaigns by opposition groups that have ended in legal actions, which the Heralds have always won; civil justice demands facts and evidence, and always favored the Heralds. The Vatican, however, does not need facts or evidence and we continue with a persecution that becomes even more absurd as it continues without a convincing explanation and without a single proven accusation before civil or canonical courts. According to Vatican Reporting, more than thirty civil and canonical complaints filed against the Heralds of the Gospel have been resolved with dismissal or acquittal.
It is shameful that since 2019, the Heralds have not been able to ordain deacons or priests, open new houses, welcome new members, and face severe restrictions even to carry out their usual activities. One of the most disconcerting aspects of the case is that the Heralds insist on a crucial point: they were never formally informed of the reasons for the apostolic visitation nor of the subsequent appointment of a commissioner. In any minimally serious ecclesiastical trial, the right to defense requires that the accused be informed of the charges. In this case, not even that. Will Leo XIV be able to address this situation and bring it to a just conclusion? It is feared that the current management of the Congregation, in the hands of the ineffable Brambilla, continues to be strongly influenced by the figure of João Braz de Aviz, the former Prefect, the deus ex machina of this absurd situation.
All this reaches us to add the article published in our Infovaticana Thanks, Heralds of the Gospel. Instead of bowing their heads, asking forgiveness for existing, and discreetly disappearing from the map, the Heralds have done something that only occurs to those who have not lost faith or respect for the truth: they have compiled, documented, and published a complete chronicle of the outrage to demonstrate that there was no process, no evidence, no defense, no dialogue. Only a chain of abuses of authority, dark maneuvers, interested leaks to the press, guilty silences, and an artificial construction of suspicions to justify a commissariat that—if the law were minimally respected—could never have been sustained. For too long, the law has been replaced by the will of those in charge. And that, in the Church, is lethal. One thing is to believe in authority; another, very different, is to justify arbitrariness
«They have silenced veteran and recent religious orders. They have silenced Catholic universities. They have silenced powerful ecclesial movements. They have silenced foundations and congregations that knew very well what was happening, but preferred to look the other way to avoid endangering subsidies, permits, privileges, or simply institutional tranquility. And suddenly, there is an institution that does not remain silent. An institution that, instead of accepting resignedly the role of docile victim, decides to put the entire process in writing, with names, dates, references, and annexes. An institution that dares to affirm, with facts in hand, that what has been done to them is a paradigmatic case of ideological persecution within the Church». «It is not just about ‘defending their name’. It is about something much more serious: defending the very idea that there must be a legal order in the Church. That decrees cannot be falsified. That signatures cannot be manipulated. That a commissioner cannot behave as if he were above the law. That the faithful and communities have rights, not just obligations».
«There will come days when of this that you see not one stone will be left upon another that will not be destroyed».
Good reading.