ROME – Pop(e) Quiz: The next modern-day pope gave an attention-grabbing interview to a journalist about a very sensitive subject. The result has been controversy both within and outside the Catholic Church, and Vatican officials and spokespeople have had no choice but to “explain.” Which has had relatively little effect on calming the seas?
- A) Pope Leo XIII
- B) Pope Paul VI
- C) Pope John Paul II
- D) Pope Benedict XVI
- E) Pope Francis
- F) All of the above
As discerning readers have already guessed, the correct answer is “F.” Recent events may give the impression that misconduct surrounding papal conferences is a hallmark of Francis's Curia, but in reality they have a much deeper history.
It's the new interview book that sparked the latest controversy El Sasol A book co-authored with Spanish journalist Javier Martínez-Brocal that focuses on the relationship between Francis and his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, was released on April 3.
As Italian journalist Massimo Gramellini said, reading this book is a bit like watching a reality show. Think “The Real Housewives of Vatican City.” In particular, the pope openly revealed the inner workings of the two conclaves and slammed Benedict's close ally, German Archbishop Georg Genwein, saying that the way Genwein allegedly tried to formulate the pope's opinion was “noble”. He argued that they lacked “humanity and humanity.” Two conflicting popes.
Lucetta Scaraffia, prominent Italian journalist and former editor of the Vatican Newspaper insert Rosselvatore Romano The woman, who is dedicated to women's issues, pointed out the irony that Pope Francis has often warned about the dangers of slander and gossip. But, as she notes, judging from her new book, “I suspect Bergoglio thinks it's okay for the pope not to follow these sound rules.”
Reactions to the new book range from praise for the pope's candor and transparency to nostalgia for a time when popes at least kept one idea in mind. Regardless of how you view the situation, the fact is that Francis is not the first pope to generate at least as much heat as light in response to his press conferences.
In fact, the precedent goes back at least 132 years, when in 1892 Pope Leo And he was the first to force his inner circle and apologists to run for cover.
The Pope's interviewer was a French socialist and atheist named Caroline Remy, better known to readers. nom de plume Severine's. Remy wrote to Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, Leo's Secretary of State, requesting an interview, and said that although he is not in a state of grace, he still retains in his broken heart a deep respect for his faith. He called himself a “socialist”. Similarly, it is a tribute to its dignified elders and sovereign prisoners. ”
(This last phrase was a reference to Pope Pius IX, who declared himself a “prisoner of the Vatican” after the capture of the Papal States by the newly unified Kingdom of Italy in 1870.)
This exchange took place just before the Dreyfus affair exploded in France. At the time, the issue of anti-Semitism and attitudes toward Jews was an important dividing line between European progressives and traditionalists. Remi's aim was to elicit a clear condemnation of anti-Semitism from the Pope.
She believes she was successful, writing in the introduction to the published Q&A: Figaro: “He never said 'condemn,' but he said 'disapprove' ten times in an hour. I leave it to Catholics to draw whatever conclusions they like from this attitude.”
Pope Leo did express his disapproval of “religious wars” and “races,” implying that the forced ghettos of Catholic Europe were actually intended to protect and serve Jews, and calling this enclosure “temperate.” He called it an expression of “brotherly love.” On the other hand, to expect the church to ignore “devout and devout” believers in favor of “ungodly” people who “reject” the message of Christ and represent “burdens and hurts” He also said it was unreasonable. He also suggested that the church has a special responsibility to resist the “rule of money,” and that responsibility lies, at least in part, with “the ungodly,” namely the Jews.
Even these comments alarmed some Catholic commentators who believed that the Pope was participating in a liberal movement against France's Catholic establishment.Father David Albertario, Milanese priest and magazine editor Rosselvatore Cattolicoa newspaper founded to defend the papacy after the fall of the Papacy, quickly claimed that Mr. Remi had misrepresented the Pope “from beginning to end.”
Albertario said it was false to claim that Leo “expressed ideas contrary to anti-Semitism” and that, in fact, the pope “has no involvement whatsoever in Jewish controversies.”
Future popes should have known that even if they chose to sit with members of the press, things would not get any easier.
For example, Pope Paul VI gave a rare interview in 1965 to a prominent Italian journalist named Alberto Cavallari, in which he predicted in an encyclical an earthquake that would occur three years later. Humanae Vitae Reaffirming the church's traditional prohibition on artificial contraception, Paul said, “You can study as much as you want, but we are the ones who decide. We are the only ones who decide.” He spoke using the plural to refer to the royal family.
This line drew immediate criticism, especially from liberal Catholics. They argued that the pope should never make decisions alone and should be guided by the pope. sense fideliummeaning “the sense of the faithful.”
From there, we come to a book about Pope John Paul II's 1994 interview with Italian journalist Vittorio Messori. cross the threshold of hopeIn it, he described Buddhist teachings as “almost entirely negative'', “largely atheistic'', and characterized by “indifference to the world'', causing great controversy throughout Asia. Shortly after, John Paul was met with backlash and protests during a visit to Sri Lanka, a largely Buddhist country, and a coalition of the country's main Buddhist groups demanded an apology.
Or you could look at Pope Benedict XVI's encounter with journalists on his way to Cameroon in 2009. In it, the Pope, responding to a question from Philippe Visalias of French public television station France 2, argued that condom use is not just the solution to the problem. The HIV/AIDS crisis is “on the contrary increasing the problem”. The remarks sparked a storm of protests, and the Belgian parliament passed an unprecedented resolution by a vote of 95 to 18, calling the pope's comments “unacceptable.” This is the first time that the European Parliament has formally condemned a pope.
Giovanni Maria Vian, Professor of Church History and former magazine editor Rosselvatore Romanorecently drew an obvious conclusion from this checkered history. [with popes] By definition, it’s a risk,” Vian said. “It depends on the question. [journalists] Just ask. But they are certainly always dangerous. ”
Bottom line: criticize Francis as much as you like about his freewheeling attitude towards the press, not to mention the surreal frequency with which he does so. Just don't act like he's the first pope to make a splash with a sensational interview. Because he is not, and is unlikely to be the last pope.
