In recent days, and through various media outlets, we have been informed of a confrontation between the executive director of the ACADEMY OF CATHOLIC LEADERS and a member of its international council, who accuse each other of matters related to the “National Anvil Organization.”

This, in turn, and according to various websites, is accused of being a secret, paramilitary, ultra-Catholic, far-right organization of Mexican origin. This confrontation has led to a crisis that affects the Academy’s image.

I will not join the chorus of morbidity, sensationalism, opportunism, cruelty, and malice that often unfolds, especially when it comes to bad news that affects the reputation of Catholic members or institutions.

As interim vice president of the aforementioned Academy, I prefer to share here some reflections on “ideologization,” a characteristic of our time and culture, on Christian identity and belonging to the Catholic Church, on the magnificent work carried out by the Academy for two decades and in more than twenty countries, and on the need for similar institutions in the Church and in society.

Our historical and cultural moment has, among other characteristics characteristic of this juncture toward postmodernity, “ideologization.” By this, in addition to the desire to promote, inculcate, and manipulate, through a certain selective or biased vision of the world, there is another unusual desire: that of labeling, classifying, and pigeonholing human beings as belonging to this or that ideology, creed, ideal, or doctrine.

This desire is used especially in the realm of politics, but it extends to all areas and dimensions of life in society, including—unfortunately—the religious dimension.

Thus, for example, the media strives to categorize Pope Francis as a man of the left at times and, in other cases and circumstances, as a Pastor of the right. This type of pigeonholing paralyzes, stigmatizes, singles out, accuses, and impedes the advancement and progress of individuals and institutions.

In the realm of politics, there is a preference and choice—easily and conveniently—to discuss more the ideology of political actors and less, and cynically, about the common good, about the real and concrete needs of communities, such as roads, schools, aqueducts, etc.

For Catholics, the “label” of being “disciples of Christ” should be enough, called to live his same life, as children of God and brothers and sisters of all; to embrace the same logic, the logic of God, which is not that of the world, and to fulfill the same mission: to build the reign of God, here and now, through the commandment of love, manifested in works, especially for the benefit of our brothers and sisters most in need of spaces of abundant life, in the midst of a culture of death.

And this “Christian” life, that is, a life of authentic following of the teachings and project of Jesus of Nazareth, of his Good News, is the only membership, and no other, by which we profess our belonging to the Catholic Church.

The identity of being Christian is therefore defined by the degree of authenticity or radicality with which we live discipleship, that is, following Jesus of Nazareth and the logic of the Gospel.

Therefore, the boundary that defines belonging or not belonging to the Catholic Church is not geographical or partisan, but passes through the heart of every human being who chooses to live the same life as Christ, to the point of crying out like Paul: “I no longer live, but Christ lives in me” (Gal 2:20), with all the risks, consequences, persecutions, and crosses that this entails.

Here, we must ask ourselves whether the emergence and proliferation of ecclesial movements and organizations, of various kinds, is due to the organized proliferation of gifts, charisms, and ministries for the construction of God’s reign in the world, or whether, on the contrary, it is driven by sectarian and selfish agendas and purposes to manipulate, defend personal or group interests, and impose ideologies—often contrary to the Gospel—within the Church.

Before this scandal, I was never aware of the existence of such an organization: “El Yunque.” Through my years of work and my membership in the Academy’s teaching and management staff, I can, however, attest here to the great work carried out by this institution over so many years and in so many countries.

This work has consisted of bringing together and training leaders from different areas of social work in the main contents of the Catholic faith, and of bringing together and illuminating other fields of knowledge and the human sciences with theological reflection.

Thus, the Academy has filled a very important space in the Church’s evangelizing task. This space and mission consist of the need for religious formation among all believers, but especially among the leaders of our society, so that “we may always be ready and willing to give an account of the hope we have for ourselves” (1 Pet 3:15).

This dialogue between the Church and civil society, this exchange of ideas and visions, this respect for the plurality of human and social knowledge and endeavors, has been carried out by the Academy with abundant mysticism and with faith and hope in the construction of a better world.

Although it is difficult to understand, due to the paradoxical nature of the two directors’ altercation, which led to this crisis in the image of this formidable institution, the same one they both serve on and chair. The Academy’s board of directors, which has always been composed of prominent men and women of the Church and civil society, regrets what happened. We are not unaware of the damage caused, but we defend and reaffirm the great value and work that this institution has for the Church and society, and the need for entities with goals and purposes similar to those of this Academy to support the evangelizing work of the Catholic Church in the world.

This task is a mandate from Jesus himself for all of us who are and are part of the Church: “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel” (Mark 16:15). May God open new paths amid worldly obstacles, so that, once this regrettable matter and moment is resolved and overcome, the great legacy, vision, and mission of the Academy may endure.