(ZENIT News / Rome, 08.21.2026).- The Vatican has taken another significant step to regain effective control of the Institute of the Incarnate Word, placing its future increasingly in the hands of a government team selected under pontifical authority and introducing a new official communication structure after questions arose over who controlled the congregation’s existing digital infrastructure.
The latest measures, announced this summer by Bishop José Antonio Satué, the pontifical delegate responsible for the institute’s male branch, do not amount to a suppression of the congregation. Rather, they point to a more demanding strategy: preserve what is considered valuable in its missionary vocation while restructuring governance, formation and institutional accountability.
At the center of the new arrangement is a general council whose members have been approved by the Vatican’s Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. Satué, who has full governing authority over the institute, appointed five principal collaborators:
Father Ervens Mengelle, IVE, as vicar general;
Brother Giampietro Pettenon, SDB, as general treasurer;
Father Diógenes Urquiza, IVE, overseeing the contemplative monasteries;
Father Giampiero Gambaro, OFM Cap., responsible for the procurator’s office;
and Father Paolo Crivelli, FFB, entrusted with formation.
Antonio Munduate and canon lawyer Francisco García Villalobos will also continue assisting the delegation.
The composition is revealing. Only a minority of those now entrusted with the institute’s central government belong to the IVE itself, reflecting the Vatican’s apparent determination to introduce outside experience and oversight into an organization that has endured repeated interventions.
That history stretches back more than two decades. Since its foundation in Argentina in 1984, the IVE has been subjected to six different pontifical commissioners or delegates at various moments. Restrictions began in 2001, when its seminary in San Rafael was ordered closed, before the institute was instructed to move its formation to Italy.
The most serious concerns, however, have centered on its founder, Father Carlos Buela. The Vatican ordered his removal as superior general in 2010 and imposed restrictions on his contact with institute members following findings concerning inappropriate conduct with young adult members. A canonical tribunal established during Cardinal Santos Abril’s oversight later concluded in 2021 that Buela had committed serious offenses against the Sixth Commandment involving five members and former members of the institute. He appealed but died in 2023 before a final ruling on the appeal.
The legacy of Buela remains one of the most sensitive issues in the reform process. Previous Vatican officials complained that some members continued to portray him as unjustly persecuted and questioned the credibility of his accusers. The concern was not merely historical: Vatican representatives also criticized pilgrimages and commemorative activities associated with the founder after his death.
The present delegation has therefore placed particular emphasis on the institute’s ability to acknowledge its failures rather than defend its institutional identity at all costs.
In a forceful 2025 letter, Satué argued that an ecclesial institution must recognize harm caused by its members and by internal dynamics inconsistent with the Gospel. His message was not that the institute’s missionary achievements should be discarded, but that genuine loyalty to its vocation requires a more honest examination of its weaknesses.
That distinction is crucial. The Vatican does not currently appear to be preparing to abolish the IVE. A senior source involved in the reform process has instead described the situation as difficult but potentially successful. At the same time, Vatican officials remain concerned about governance, inexperienced members occupying positions of authority, the exhaustion of priests and unresolved questions surrounding the founder.
Formation has become an especially important test. A three-year moratorium on accepting new candidates into the institute was imposed amid concerns about the initial discernment of vocations, the formation process itself and the preparation of formators. The delegation subsequently established a commission to examine those areas.
There have also been concerns that some provinces sought to circumvent the moratorium by accepting prospective novices as “volunteers” while allowing them to live essentially as novices. Such practices, if confirmed, would illustrate precisely the type of institutional resistance that Vatican intervention is intended to overcome.
The scale of the institute’s internal difficulties is also reflected in figures cited by Cardinal Abril in 2023. With incomplete information, he reported that 275 religious had left the IVE, including 125 who had been returned to the lay state, 52 who had been incardinated into other dioceses, 11 expulsions and five cases before the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, alongside almost 50 exclaustrations involving the contemplative branch.
Abril also questioned the relationship between the institute’s geographical footprint and its actual human resources. The IVE had developed a presence in 44 countries and almost 100 dioceses, with 13 provinces and four delegations, yet many of its approximately 70 smaller communities consisted of only one or two religious. The Vatican’s subsequent decree pointed to a loss of around 40 percent of the institute’s members since its beginnings and identified weaknesses in formation and community life as contributing factors.
The reform is therefore not simply a change of personnel. It is an attempt to confront a structural problem: an organization whose institutional expansion appears to have outpaced the strength of its formation, communal life and systems of accountability.
Even the website has become part of that struggle.
Satué announced that the institute had established a new official website because neither he nor the provincial superiors and general councillors consulted by him could determine who controlled the previous official site, ive.org, or the associated email accounts. Continuing to present those channels as authoritative, he argued, would be irresponsible.
The new website, verboencarnado.org, is now designated as the IVE’s sole official online communication channel. It also includes a reporting mechanism for complaints and, significantly, material addressing canonical proceedings concerning Buela—an element absent from the institute’s former presentation of its founder.
In a modern religious institution, control over information is itself an aspect of governance. The Vatican-appointed delegation is seeking not only to determine who makes decisions, but also to establish which information can legitimately speak in the institute’s name.
The broader challenge for Satué is to achieve reform without destroying the legitimate missionary identity that has attracted generations of members to the IVE. The congregation has sent priests to regions with few clergy, impoverished communities and areas affected by war—work that the bishop himself has recognized as a genuine contribution to the Church.
But missionary zeal cannot substitute for sound governance, nor can loyalty to a religious family become an excuse for minimizing the suffering of victims or resisting legitimate ecclesial authority. For the Vatican, the test now appears to be whether the IVE can learn that distinction.
The new council, the overhaul of formation and the creation of an independent communication structure are therefore best understood not as isolated administrative decisions, but as parts of the same wager: that the institute can survive by becoming more transparent, more accountable and more faithful to the standards of religious life that the Church expects of it.
Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.