Bergoglio lands in Rome and jokes about his next trip: If I don’t go to Vietnam, John XXIV will go
From our correspondent
ON THE POPE’S FLIGHT – Francis reaches journalists while the plane taking him back from Ulan Bator to Rome is still flying over the steppes of Mongolia. Long and intense journey, the Pope looks a bit tired. He walks with a cane and sits down to answer questions. He clarifies that his words about Great Russia, which angered Ukrainians, did not refer to imperialism, but to culture, which, on the contrary, is dialogue, and that Russian culture should not be abolished because of political problems.
On the violence and degradation in the suburbs from Palermo to Caivano, he says that we must go to the suburbs and work there and that governments must ensure real social justice. But he also talks about relations with Beijing, Chinese citizens do not believe that the church is dependent on another foreign power, and about young people’s commitment to the climate, they think about the future, I like that they are good battle. As for future trips to Vietnam: If I don’t go, John XXIV will go, he jokes and then explains that now it’s not as easy for me to go on a trip as it was at the beginning, there are restrictions on going , but let’s see.
Your Holiness, your words have recently led young Russian Catholics to discuss Great Russia and the legacy of figures such as Peter the Great and Catherine II. They greatly angered Ukrainians and were seen as glorifying Russian imperialism and a kind of endorsement of Putin’s policies. Why did you feel the need to make these statements, would you repeat them?
It was a dialogue with young Russians. And in the end I gave them a message that I always repeat: to take care of their legacy. Point one: embrace your inheritance. With this vision, I try to create a dialogue between grandparents and grandchildren: that the grandchildren take over the inheritance. I say that everywhere and that was the message. Secondly, to explain the heritage, I mentioned the idea of Great Russia, because the Russian heritage is very good, very beautiful. Think of the field of literature, of music, of a Dostoyevsky who speaks to us today of mature humanism, of this humanism that has developed in art and literature. The third point was perhaps not particularly pleasant, but when one spoke of Great Russia, not so much in the geographical sense as in the cultural sense, what they taught us at school came to mind: Peter I, Catherine II. Maybe not entirely true, I don’t know what historians tell us, but it was an addition that came to mind because I studied it in school. I told young Russians to accept their inheritance, which means not to buy it elsewhere. And what a legacy Great Russia has left behind: Russian culture is beautiful, very deep and should not be abandoned because of political problems. They had dark years in Russia, but the legacy always remained.
What do you think about imperialism and especially Russian imperialism?
You talk about imperialism, but I wasn’t thinking about imperialism when I said that: I was talking about culture, and the transmission of culture is never imperialist, never, always dialogue. I’ve talked about it. It is true that there are imperialisms that want to impose their ideology. When culture is distilled and converted into ideology, this poison is created. Culture is used, but distilled into ideology. We have to distinguish between when it is about the culture of a people and when it is about the ideologies that then emanate from a philosopher or a politician of that people. And I say this for everyone, including the church. Within the Church, ideologies are often spread that separate the Church from the life that comes from the root and ascends, separating the Church from the influence of the Holy Spirit. An ideology incapable of realization, just an idea. If you get involved in politics, it usually turns into a dictatorship, right? It becomes an inability to dialogue and an inability to move forward with cultures. Imperialism is always consolidated on the basis of an ideology. In the Church too we must distinguish between doctrine and ideology: true doctrine is never ideological, never; rooted in the holy, faithful people of God; Instead, ideology is detached from reality, detached from the people.
They are the pope of the suburbs, and the suburbs in Italy are in a lot of pain. We have experienced episodes of violence and humiliation that are very worrying. Near Naples a priest, Don Patricello, invited them to then go to Palermo… The Italian Prime Minister visited one of these suburbs, there is much discussion. She previously lived in Villas Miserias in Buenos Aires and therefore has experience in this field. What can be done?
We must continue to work there, as was done in Buenos Aires with the priests who worked in these areas: a team of priests with an auxiliary bishop at the head and we work there. We have to be open to it, governments have to be open, all governments in the world, there are some suburbs that are tragic. I return to a scandalous suburb that is supposed to be covered up: that of Royngia. The Royngia are suffering because they have been converted into suburbs, they have been displaced, we need to see the different types of suburbs and also learn that the suburbs are the place where human reality is more obvious and less demanding. A philosopher once said something that impressed me so much: “Reality is best understood from the periphery,” that is where reality is best understood. We need to communicate with the peripheries, and governments need to realize true social justice, communicate true social justice with the various social peripheries and also with the ideological peripheries, because often it is an exquisite ideological periphery that causes the social peripheries. The world of suburbia is not easy.
On Sunday he sent a message to the Chinese people urging Catholics to be good citizens after Beijing authorities barred bishops and believers from entering Mongolia. How are relations with China currently? Is there any news about Cardinal Zuppi’s trip to Beijing?
Cardinal Zuppi’s mission is a peace mission that I have entrusted to him. And he made a plan that included visits to Moscow, Kiev, the United States and also Beijing. Cardinal Zuppi, a man of great dialogue and universal vision, has in his history the experience of searching for peace in Mozambique and that is why I sent him. Relations with China are very respectful. Personally, I have great admiration for the Chinese people, the channels for appointing bishops are very open and there is a commission that has been working with the Chinese government and the Vatican for some time. Then there are some Catholic priests or intellectuals who are often invited to take courses at Chinese universities. I believe that we need to move forward in the religious aspect to understand each other better and so that Chinese citizens do not think that the Church does not accept their culture and values and is dependent on another foreign power. The commission led by Cardinal Parolin is following this friendly path well and is doing good work. Relations on the Chinese side are also in flux. I have great respect for the Chinese people.
He announced an update of “Laudato si’,” the encyclical on the integrity of creation. Can it be read as a statement of solidarity for environmental activists of the “last generation” who are carrying out spectacular protests? Will there also be a message for the young activists taking to the streets?
In general, I don’t accept these extremisms, but young people are worried, you know? We had a meeting at the Academy of Sciences and a good Italian scientist concluded his speech with the words: “I don’t want my granddaughter, who was born yesterday, to have to live in such an ugly world within thirty years.” Young people think about the future gradually and in that sense I like that they fight well. But when ideology is involved or political pressure is involved or used, it doesn’t work. Published on October 4th, Saint Francis Day, my Apostolic Exhortation is a review of what has happened since the COP in Paris, which was perhaps the most fruitful so far. There is some news on some COPs and some things that have not been resolved yet and there is an urgency to resolve them. Not as big as “Laudato si’”, but a continuation of “Laudato si’” into the new, and also an analysis of the situation.
Can Ulaanbaatar present itself as a platform for international dialogue between Europe and Asia?
I think so. There is something very interesting in Mongolia that encourages this dialogue: I would like to call it the third neighbor mystique, which is moving the country forward in a third neighbor policy. Ulaanbaatar is the capital of a country farthest from the sea and we can say that Mongolia is located between two major powers, Russia and China. For this reason, the mysticism of Mongolia also seeks dialogue with “close third parties”: not out of contempt for these two, because it maintains good relations with both, but out of the desire for universality, to show them its values throughout the world and also receive their values from others, so that this leads to dialogue. It is strange that throughout history the search for other lands has often been confused with colonialism or an attempt to dominate. The Mongols, on the other hand, have a philosophy of relying on dialogue with their third neighbor mysticism. I really liked this expression on the third neighbor’s face. a wealth.
Relations between Vietnam and the Holy See have made remarkable progress recently. Is there a way to visit Vietnam now? And what other trips do you have planned?
Vietnam is one of the most beautiful dialogue experiences the Church has had in recent times. like a sympathy in dialogue. Both sides had a good will to understand each other and look for ways to move forward. Not long ago we spoke openly with the Vietnamese president; good work has been done for years. I remember four years ago some Vietnamese parliamentarians came to visit, a nice dialogue with them, very respectful. When a culture opens up, there is an opportunity for dialogue; When there is closure or suspicion, dialogue is very difficult. The dialogue with Vietnam is open and progressing slowly. There were some problems, but they were solved. If I don’t go on the trip to Vietnam, John XXIV will definitely go! But I am sure it will be, because it is a country that deserves to move forward and that has my sympathy. On the other trips there is Marseille and then a small country in Europe and we see if we can do that. I’m telling the truth, for me now a trip is not as easy as it was at the beginning, there are restrictions on walking and these limits, but let’s see.
She wants a synodal church, in Mongolia and in the world. How can ideological polarization be avoided? And will participants be able to speak publicly and share what they experience, or will the entire process remain secret?
You talked about avoiding ideological pressure. In the Synod there is no place for ideology, a different dynamic. The Synod is a dialogue between the baptized, between the members of the Church, about the life of the Church, about dialogue with the world, about the problems that concern humanity today. But if you think about taking an ideological path, the synod ends. In the Synod there is no place for ideology, there is room for dialogue. Between brothers and sisters, confront the teachings of the Church. Keep going. Then I would like to emphasize that synodality is not my invention: it was Saint Paul VI. Recognizing that the Church in the West had lost the synodal dimension, the Second Vatican Council now possesses the Eastern Church. For this reason, he founded the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops, which has carried out reflection in a synodical manner and with continuous progress during these sixty years. On the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary, I signed and published a document on what the Synod was and how it continued. And now he has progressed, become more mature, and for this reason I thought it was very good to have a synod on the subject of synodality, which is not a trend, something old, it has always existed in the Eastern Church. But how do you live synodality? live it as a Christian. And as I said before, without falling into ideologies. As far as the assembly process is concerned, we must ensure one thing: the synodal climate. This isn’t a TV show where they talk about everything. No, a religious moment, there is a moment of religious exchange. Do you think that in the introductions to the synod there will be three or four minutes of speech, three speeches and then three or four minutes of silence for prayer? Then three more speeches and a prayer. Without this spirit of prayer there is no synodality, no politics, no parliamentarism. The synod is not a parliament. In a synod we must protect religiosity and protect the freedom of speakers. There will be a commission that will provide information about the progress of the synod.
The synod also met with a lot of criticism from Catholic circles. A book with a foreword by Cardinal Burke says that the Synod is the Pandora’s box from which all disasters for the Church will come. What do you think of this position? Will reality overcome it or will it have an impact on the Synod?
A few months ago I called a non-Italian Carmelo: “How are the nuns, Mother Superior?” The prioress finally says to me: “Holiness. We are afraid of the synod, which will change our teaching.” There is this idea… But if you go further, you find ideologies at the root of these ideas. They accuse the Church of this or that, but they never accuse her of what is true, they never say sinful… They defend in quotation marks a “doctrine” that is like distilled water and tastes of nothing. It is not the true Catholic teaching that is contained in the Creed and that so often causes scandal: just as the idea that God became flesh, that God became man, that the Madonna preserved her virginity is a scandal.
Isn’t there a possibility that the synod could be a little more open to journalists?
But very open! There is a commission that gives news every day. I will greatly respect everyone’s contributions and try not to engage in small talk, but rather to say concrete things about synodal progress that are constructive for the Church. If someone wants the message to be, “This guy is mad at this guy because of this or that,” then that’s political chatter. A different parliament than a synod. The protagonist of the synod is the Holy Spirit.