Vatican City - Pope Leo XIV continues with determination the work of renewal he initiated, showing with clarity and patience that he has precisely identified the unresolved knots of the Roman Curia he inherited. “Popes pass, the Curia remains,” he reminded everyone on May 24, 2025.
It is a bitter but realistic observation, matured through his own direct experience during his brief yet intense service in the Curia, and confirmed by his previous years as Prior General of the Order of Saint Augustine, where he had already come to know those slow and sometimes lifeless dynamics that creep into certain ways of exercising ecclesiastical power.
“The wheel turns,” murmurs an elderly monsignor in the corridors of Piazza Pio XII, aware that history in the Curia tends to repeat itself with an almost liturgical regularity. And so, just as Pope Francis, with his famously “gentle and courteous” style, dismissed Archbishop Jorge Carlos Patrón Wong, sending him to Jalapa despite his dedication to seminarians and clergy, today an even harsher fate befalls his successor.
Archbishop Andrés Gabriel Ferrada Moreira, current Secretary of the Dicastery for the Clergy, leaves Rome to return to Chile, to a small diocese. The decision comes after years of internal tensions within the Dicastery and seems—hopefully—to mark the end of a long and troubled chapter.
At 56 years old, Ferrada had entered Pope Francis’ inner circle: in September 2021, he was appointed Secretary of the Congregation for the Clergy and shortly after ordained Archbishop in St. Peter’s Basilica during the same ceremony that saw Msgr. Guido Marini, the Papal Master of Liturgical Ceremonies, ordained before being sent to Tortona by the Pope.
Arriving in Rome as a simple official in 2018, his meteoric rise did not foster serene relations - neither with close collaborators nor, above all, with diocesan bishops worldwide, often forced to endure unilateral decisions from the Vatican offices. In recent years, Ferrada adopted a rigid, confrontational, and centralized method of governance, mirroring that of many other “functionaries” who, strengthened by a privileged relationship with Pope Francis, operated in the Curia as if they could override even the authority of their own superiors.
Within the Dicastery, Ferrada gradually concentrated power in his own hands, reducing Cardinal Lazarus You Heung-sik, the Prefect, to a purely ceremonial role. Numerous bishops voiced their deep frustration at his constant interference: cases inexplicably stalled, decisions reversed at the last minute, files left untouched for months without explanation. Thus, an opaque system took root within the Dicastery for the Clergy, where some cases were untouchable - because they concerned “protected priests,” despite obvious scandals - while others were handled with disproportionate severity, often without due process or the right of defense. This double standard eroded the trust of many pastors and cast a long shadow over the Dicastery and over this man who, when invited to parishes or rectories, loves to appear on foot, cultivating the pauperistic rhetoric of the last thirteen interminable years, yet when it comes to living charity, shows a much more selective zeal.
His return to his homeland is greeted as a sigh of relief, both in the corridors of the Curia and in the most remote dioceses. There is now hope and expectation that Pope Leo XIV will soon appoint a successor truly capable of serving priests and seminarians, restoring to the Dicastery a sense of paternity and discernment that has long been lost. It is particularly hoped that the Holy Father will restore the previous practice of dividing responsibilities - a structure abolished under Ferrada. Formerly, there were two distinct figures: one Archbishop dedicated to seminaries, and another Secretary for the Dicastery’s administrative affairs. That balance ensured personal care for vocations, real closeness to formators and students, and a direct knowledge of local realities.
Archbishop Jorge Carlos Patrón Wong, who previously held that position, personally visited seminaries, paid the tuition of poorer students out of his own pocket, and bought books for those who could not afford them. Yet Pope Francis abruptly removed him, without any plausible explanation, replacing him with figures of personal loyalty - often more concerned with maintaining power than serving the Church.
Today, both in the Curia and in the dioceses, there is growing expectation for a change of course: a return of men animated by genuine charity, not of functionaries who, wounded and resentful, seek in the palaces of power a personal redemption, turning their past suffering into a tool of domination.
The return to Chile of Andrés Gabriel Ferrada Moreira thus closes a season marked by sudden promotions and power exercised through allegiance rather than service. Whether the lesson will be learned remains to be seen: the Curia is not a springboard for individual careers, but a mirror of how the Church understands governance. And when that mirror shatters, someone must indeed go home.
f.R.D.
Silere non possum